For those Following the NAACP/Bruce Gordon Fiasco

Mr. Gordon released a statement on the matter, and it is a MUST READ.

The most telling are the instances in which Mr. Gordon differed with the bloated NAACP board:

I have consistently said that the NAACP is bigger than one individual (me), and I believe that. Rupert Richardson’s quote confirmed the basis for my decision. I did not accept this position to follow orders. I did come here to help the association become more effective.

You should also know that I have spent the past two days trying to contact prospective donors that I have been cultivating for major gifts. I do not want them to “leave the table” in the wake of my departure. I will continue to make those calls but my initial efforts have not been fruitful. I don’t want to set false expectations. I have, however, succeeded at keeping two important Centennial Campaign volunteers involved in that initiative. That is good news.

I have read and received direct feedback from board members questioning what it is that is out of alignment. You deserve a response. Let me mention some examples:

§ Some Executive Committee members want to be directly involved in how I manage the staff. They want to approve organization structure. They want to make hire and fire decisions. They want to influence vendor selection. I view that as micromanagement.

§ Many directors and trustees do not feel that they have an obligation to fundraise. They are offended when I express appreciation for the success of some and the non-productivity of others. I believe that board members have an obligation to “give or get” money, particularly the SCF trustees.

§ I believe that the Centennial Plan (The “Pitch”) presented at last year’s annual meeting was a superb piece of work. It was developed with the consultative support of Booz Allen Hamilton. While it is not perfect, I see no evidence of a better strategic planning effort in recent years. The staff and I have subsequently provided detailed plans of execution for almost every part of the “Pitch” but my failure to stakeholder the effort has resulted in the Executive Committee asking me to develop a new document. I think there are more effective ways to use the limited capacity and resources of our staff.

§ From the beginning of my tenure I have been criticized for actions that I considered to be progressive. For instance:

Ø We initiated a Katrina Relief Fund that raised $2.6M but were chastised for not getting board approval first.

Ø I convened a meeting of national high profile leaders from across the country. The purpose of the meeting was to develop a unified position on post-Katrina government response. Instead of applauding this effort, I was faulted for attempting to “set policy.”

Ø I arranged one-on-one meetings with the President, Secretary of State, and Attorney General and was challenged for violating association policy planning to attend these meetings alone.

Ø We initiated a Medicare Part D enrollment effort and enlisted Bill Cosby and Danny Glover to create public service announcements but were told that this was a service initiative and we are an advocacy organization.

I have come to accept that my view of my role and the association’s role is not aligned with the board. I am willing to accept that our points of view regarding governance and strategic direction are in conflict. This is not about right or wrong…this is about difference. We can agree to disagree. We also could have found a way to blend the best of our respective points of view but in 19 months that did not happen.

Ouch! AAPP's opinion here. I generally agree.

NAACP President Steps Down

Some bloggers are calling this a crisis in Black Leadership. I am inclined to agree, only because of the reason Mr. Gordon chose to step down.

He wanted to move the NAACP into the 21st century, and the NAACP refused to follow.

Gordon also clashed with board members on his vision for the organization, the source said. Where board members wanted to retain social justice activities, Gordon wanted to implement social service efforts, including programs to help African-Americans build wealth, the source said.

Now, its not really my place to criticize the NAACP, so I will try to keep it to a minimum. Apparently, Mr. Gordon's corporate attitude didn't gybe with the civil-rights activist culture at the group. Some in Maryland criticized Gordonfor leading the charge to move the NAACP out of Baltimore to the DC suburbs. Perhaps Mr. Gordon's willingness to make large changes to move the organization forward was what caused the conflict.

Gordon was also apparently trying to move the organization to include public service and assisting in minority business development. The board of the NAACP wanted to remain primarily a social-justice organization. This is where I see the major problem. I am concerned about the relevancy of the NAACP in an ever changing world, one where the power of single issue interest groups is waning and the power of the grassroots over the internet is growing. The Social Justice approach is important, and the NAACP must remain an advocate for the rights of Blacks. However, the NAACP must also be willing to change and to grow in the ways that the community demands. I don't see how it could be a bad thing for the NAACP to expand into realms such as public service and minority business development.

What is most troubling is that the NAACP seems to be rejecting grassroots organizational tools like public service and business development. Now is not the time in history for the NAACP to constricting their mission.

NAACP Leaving Baltimore

Who can really blame them? To be honest, they are only moving their headquarters to Washington DC, but when you look at recent news, Baltimore and Maryland certainly seem hostile to the goals the NAACP wishes to achieve.

Though Maryland elected Democrats statewide, they did so while subtly snubbing the NAACP and the Black community. Ben Cardin famously skipped the NAACP debate vs Mike Steele (please see UPDATE at the bottom of the post). All reasons aside, Kweisi Mfume's Senate run was largely ignored by the Democratic Machine.

Then today, first I see that Governor-elect O'Malley, despite his personal opposition to the death penalty, as well as his knowledge of the University of Maryland Study which indicts the MD death penalty as racist, will still continue to carry out the death penalty in Maryland as long as the courts approve of lethal injection.

That opinion is completely unacceptable. No Democrat should be able to read the Maryland Study and conclude that the death penalty should be allowed to continue in Maryland. I could care less what the court thinks about lethal injection. The death penalty is madness, no matter the method. Parris Glendenning, for all his faults, understood this clearly when he instituted the moratorium. O'Malley must restore this moratorium on the death penalty.

Governor-Elect O'Malley, perhaps Sheila Dixon as well, need to do something to restore some sense of trust in our justice system, particularly in Baltimore City.

The NAACP, perhaps in their final Baltimore hurrah, have alleged that the Baltimore City police have been engaging in illegal arrests. This is what you get when you adopt the draconian policing policies that made Rudy Guliani famous.

Baltimore lawyers said in court documents that that arrests for "quality of life" crimes are not illegal; that City State's Attorney decision not to prosecute some crimes does not mean those arrests were unlawful; and that using a performance evaluation system for police officers based on the number of arrests is not unlawful.

Does anyone else really believe that every loitering and littering arrest was justified? How about every strip search? I think the NAACP most likely has a solid case. When people are judged by quantity not quality, quality obviously suffers. The evaluation system is one of the most troubling things in the suit. Police are being encouraged to make as many arrests as possible, and innocent people are being unreasonable arrested as a result.

I think it will be important to ask who was pushing these officers to get the high numbers. At what level did the order come from? I have a feeling our Governor-elect getting out of Baltimore just in time. Lets see if this case pulls him back into the quagmire of Baltimore crime and punishment.

So I cannot say I am surprised that the NAACP has begun finalizing plans to move to Washington DC in 2007. I am amazed they haven't left already. And yet:

NAACP Chairman Julian Bond has said the organization wanted to move its headquarters to be closer to Congress, government agencies and the many news media outlets in Washington. He said the NAACP loved everything about Baltimore, except its location.

Chairman Bond, speaking diplomatically, to say the least.

UPDATE: Stephanie Dray has correctly pointed out that it was really Mike Steele who intentionally skipped the statewide NAACP debate, and Ben Cardin who only skipped a smaller NAACP sponsored debate due to scheduling conflicts. Senator-elect Cardin had planned on debating Steele in the statewide debate, which Mr. Steele intentionally bowed out of. Thanks Steph. Sorry for the error.

Furthermore, I have no clue why the NAACP has decided to leave Baltimore. I was only making the point that they have every reason to. Though I respect his opinion, I do not agree with The League that the NAACP is abandoning the city. I do agree that Baltimore is losing a part of what made it special.