I've been instructed by an <!font face="Victorian LET">Officer of the Court<!font face="Garamond"> to publish what I have witnessed.<!/font>
<!font face="Victorian LET" size="5" color="#FF0000">all of 17 letters and two periods.
(I chose the name to be instructive)
"I own and control it"
Candidate for Chapter Coordinator of Northern California CHADD
Table of Contents
"I've got letters .." I replied to her Chief of Staff (indicating my folder full of them on her conference table) ".. you want to see their Bylaws?" She just smiled. In fact, she just smiled through it all..
Incomplete Chapter Financial Report
This is NOT about CHADD's published message (6/3/05)
the hell is "the Santa Clara County Bar Association"?
Was it "HAS" or "MUST"? I like to quote people correctly (but my email seemed to bounce the last time). I originally thought it was 'MUST' (but that was 2 years ago). Anyway, it's intensity really impressed me at the beginning of that phone call as soon as I mentioned my Candidacy. Before I even had a chance to ask for a copy of their Election Bylaws. That's one electoral savvy lady I thought to myself, undoubtedly highly perceptive with a sharp and quick thinking mind. Someone who already knows how Incumbents easily win using "vote picking" in an election with a Confidential membership. And is now moving quickly and instinctively to protect her Integrity, By ensuring my candidacy is published to the membership in a timely and expedient manner so as not to be accused of either ignoring it completely, or waiting until the last minute to do so. Someone of obvious keen intelligence. Hearing the trumpet call of the will of the membership about to sound announcing the contest of an election. And as a savvy Incumbent politician, is wisely "stepping back" and bowing before it. Sensing the challenge that lay ahead, by first and above all, protecting her Integrity.
In "the Service of the Court" (proudly)
"Please give me
more of an explanation of what is happening for and during this
Anyone know who the
Nominating Committee not running for office is in this election?
Should I be appointing one? Or when this election will be
published to the membership? Or where it is? I
don't. Anyone heard from our "election team not running for office"
in our last election yet? Or the previous one? Did I win any
of them? Or both of them? Will I be required to step down
this year? Anyone seen any Bylaws (with their approvals)? Are there any?
What's in our Treasury? Who owns that Risograph?
"I'm unable to answer your questions.."
Who controls CHADD?
their "restructuring" in '99 remove control from their
membership in contravention to their 501(c)(3) Bylaws?
"Lew took office as Coordinator of CHADD NorCal on November 6, 1999."
Policy Formation II-B
(kinda a "work in progress" .. it will look a bit confusing for awhile .. hope to complete it 'eventually' .. "stay tuned" .. G.M.)
Table of Contents
(It's an interesting diagnosis)
"..but if mommy had written a letter to her congressman.."
Election Team 2005
An open letter to CHADD's CEO
Confidential Membership = a Permanent Incumbency
(it is sometimes desirable, but an organisation should be honest about what it is and how it portrays itself to the public and its members)
is it so tenacious?
"Because it is my Therapy"
"The Air of Familiarity" "Say 'hi' to Clarke Ross for me" "The Silence of Novartis"
The Questions I sent to Gina (that were never answered)
My comments on the last (2004) Election
My election speech
Announcement of 2004 Candidacy
Election Team 2005
of the Highest Caliber
"..the drawing up of the blueprints.."
Mustard with the Risograph in the Library"
I announced my candidacy
again to their CEO.
I sent this letter directly to Clarke Ross himself, certified and restricted delivery to him personally on 1/4/05.
The Silence of Clarke Ross
Hughes, PhD: "I'm
unable to answer your questions..". (1/12/05)
have as yet had no explanation from anyone for ANY of it:
"didnít even take the time to get to know who I was"
"Plebiscites": is it ALL appointed now? -- "Who controls CHADD?"
"Inattentive" -- "very believing" (easily deceived). Easily spooked. And frightened into silence:
"keep it in the family" (we know this one, eh?)
everyone: if a lawyer ever tells you this, you tell everyone you know
what's just been done to you.
This was the first time I had ever received communication like this from a lawyer and they knew I was naÔve and would be vulnerable to it. From a lawyer, it implies the threat of a lawsuit. This was done to a naÔve Inattentive. "We don't need a lawsuit" is what one hears ("another suppression"). Thatís how it's done. How people are silenced. And it's so easy to do to an Inattentive. I had been "bouncing off the walls" from it all. And was all alone with it. But I knew I had to stand up to it:
It was just plain Wrong. I was steeling myself for a
lawsuit (and I am again). I was scared:
and Wrong"--we call it Integrity.
And there's NO excuse for ANY of it.
It's an interesting
diagnosis (rare in men 1:5).
"Absent-minded professors", "daydreamers", "off-in-the-clouds..",
passivity, wimps--we're not known for our 'heroics'.
Do not expect it of us. Neurologically, we're not built or made of that stuff.
It can't be overcome. It's "how we are".
ADD-ers in general are "easily spooked"--that Hypersensitivity--'thin
skinned' everything hurts. Hypers (hyperactive types) defend themselves (you'll probably hear from them if they're upset or spooked). But not Inattentive's, we
internalise it. "No one knows" (as we suffer
silently, alone with it). Rabbits: they don't cry out when they're
in pain. We're easily beaten down and run and hide from
contention. Assertion (that "pro-active" thing) can become an enormous struggle for
us (even more so with depression).
We're 'wimps' (that hypersensitivity): "easily spooked" and dominated into submission.
Ultimately, you can't win over a dominating personality or environment (on
the distaff side, some think they can handle it: "survivor"
tell me. "Then
why do you have such an extensive history of being abused?"
I find myself starting to think to myself). Survival is about surrounding yourself with Health.
"Surround yourself with the Best and the Brightest"
Hypersensitivity: we're "easily bruised". And "knocked down for the count". We need those who know how to do the constant 'bandaging'--(it is in fact, I expect, a rare skill). Help us 'ventilate' that obsessive negative ideation, build our self-esteem and fill us with energy and hope (to "jump back in that ring each time"). A sense of Humor can be invaluable.
Inattentive's (especially with depression) constantly have to struggle with that assertiveness and "pro-active" thing .. "social isolation" (especially with that low self-esteem). We need constant encouragement and lots of cheerleaders. And "we need it every day" until it holds true.
It's been interesting to learn about ("what
I think is my") ADD. So much of it is simply getting the
Environment right. It's odd, I've probably "known it all my life". But the first time
I had ever heard it put into words was at
the last Hallowell lecture I attended a year ago here (Palo Alto
5/13/04). Environment is a kind of a codeword I suppose. It is not actually often defined.
"What has your environment been telling you?" ..
believing". Have you been hearing that you are a
"failure"?--this is not a healthy environment. "Inattentive"
("very believing")--you may not even realise it.
I've learned that there are certain environments that are unhealthy for people with ADD. And it is wise, if possible, to avoid them. For instance, organisations and people
that are controlling and deceptive. For we are easily abused and
(being socially isolated) vulnerable to capture and exploitation by them. We
are Canaries, so to speak, of our environments (for we can easily
perish when it becomes toxic) and need to find those that bring us
Health. Strengthen us and build our self-esteem. And keep
us Healthy. Encourage and help us to truly
blossom and not exploit, demean or suppress us. Where we are treated with respect.
Listened to. And told what is right with us, not what is wrong
with us. And, by example, taught healthy lessons. Integrity, for instance.
We need to be taught to recognise when we are being deceived. Or
how to defend ourselves and be assertive. For our passivity can
easily become an invitation for predation as we "do as we're
told" waiting patiently for our turn that never comes. We
will need those to help and support us in learning the skills
of assertion. And assertiveness training is never considered
successful until one usurps the authority of the instructor.
Anyone and any organisation involved in working with people with ADD must be of the highest Character.
"Surround yourself with the Best and the Brightest"
An Incomplete Financial Report
"Inattentive" -- we miss it all the time.
I initially skimmed it at our last 2004 Election seeing $25K and
thinking "small potatoes" (figuring it's probably used to
fly out all their branch coach leaders to attend their annual national
conventions). I've looked at it more carefully recently. That was only a half year's "Net Income".
Actually, I was looking for that Risograph. And then I saw it "right in front of my
face". Almost a year later. I couldn't believe what I was looking
"interest on what?"
At current bank interest rates, that means
something like A Million
belonging to the chapter membership floating around in some bank account(s)
somewhere. And unaccounted for. "What's going
Here's an interesting
Without a newsletter (I've never seen one since I joined in 2000), this all becomes hidden. Even more questionable with a 'ghost' membership. Members that come once, twice and never return. It becomes an organisation without a History. Why isn't the leadership motivated to hang on to them? What's their real interest in that constant influx of naÔve new members? Do they really want them hanging around at meetings? For a few years..? By the way, I'm learning there's big money in ADD. Take 'coaching' (typically over $100/hr). After 3 years, the constant commercials become a bloody bore:
"You've had enough!"
We Inattentive's aren't very good at that assertiveness thing. Waiting patiently for our turn that never comes. Thanks for showing me how to do it, Dr. Stubblefield.
Confidential Membership = a Permanent Incumbency
How it is done: "vote picking" (don't know what else to call it offhand). It's very subtle, but it's so easy to do. I myself wasn't aware of it until my first election campaign. It's been quite an education for me at any rate.
"Get out the
can't. When a membership is Confidential.
In elections with
historically low turnouts (in our case "no turnout"), an Incumbent (who also controls the
entire election) simply picks off from a large (e.g. 700)
Confidential membership list (known only
to him and hidden from a challenger) a few sympathetic to him (just
enough to 'tip the balance' in his favor) .
And has them show up at the election to sway it on his
In elections with historically low turnouts (in our case "no turnout"), an Incumbent (who also controls the entire election) simply picks off from a large (e.g. 700) Confidential membership list (known only to him and hidden from a challenger) a few sympathetic to him (just enough to 'tip the balance' in his favor) . And has them show up at the election to sway it on his behalf.
Our treasurer knew it. What I also learned is that a candidacy becomes a public disclosure. And I've just realised why no therapist has ever told me directly that I have it (they generally won't). If someone I do not wish to discuss it with asks me if I've ever been diagnosed, I can tell them that. I can also say "I don't know" or "I'm not sure". Or "what is it?" (heh-heh-heh) they don't know. I've never been Hyperactive. It's a spongy diagnosis anyway. The public sure has a lot of misconceptions about it(the media isn't helping..). I had to go online and research it to find out. Most therapists don't know how to diagnosis all the variations anyway (unless theyíve really kept up in the field .. I've learned the good ones are grateful for the 'update'). BTW, I always like to ask speech therapists how to deal with my 'b' blocks. Only one, Peter Ramig, ever gave me the right answer, totally and completely.
Why is it so tenacious?
Then "why is it so tenacious?"
now a word from our sponsor.."
'hi' to Clarke Ross for me" ..
we were instructed to go along with it)
(It's endemic in our society. And often difficult to eliminate entirely. Sometimes it's benign. When I see it, I want to see something healthy. Or at least normal. But this is "off-the-charts". An organisation that has no interest in its membership or maintaining one. In fact, members who 'hang around' and begin to communicate privately with each other can (when elections occur) contest the incumbent 'Hierarchy' whose primary interest is in that continual stream of naÔve new faces: "Easy Pickens" (as soon as Lisa left the recruitment started: I was, but like my father had no money for it). Maybe it's all just some big coaching business or something. And absolutely nothing is ever done about it. As it all just "rolls on" obliviously)
And then there's that Risograph. Who owns it?
In any event, elections (honest ones) always bring Health to an organisation and its leadership. They serve the dual purpose of legitimising and strengthening leadership as well as returning control back to the membership.
Conflict of Interest
"I'm a Coach" boasts "I'm the Coordinator"
in a non-profit corporation may not run a business off their
position. This means a CHADD officer cannot run a meeting
wherein they recruit members into their (e.g.) coaching ('or
"Because it is my Therapy"
(why I'm doing all this)
Election she was upset with me during lunch sitting next to Mick Terrone as she asked me directly what I expected to accomplish by all this.
I reminded her that she herself had been a witness to it.
"The Air of Familiarity"
"Say 'hi' to Clarke Ross for me"
I heard it just after our first election. As did a
fully suited and authoritative Mick Terrone that
afternoon. As he walked to his parked car for the airport.
After having just ignored our election team not running for office.
I wonder if he knew she was a Notary Public.
"Say 'hi' to Clarke Ross for me"
'99 -- what happened that year? The year they all took office.
The year it was 'restructured'.
"maybe it was forever so" -- for there are more unanswered questions. Met with more Silence. Cold Silence. Ignored questions. Or questions "I am not allowed to ask" -- for I always seem to hear something else dominating the environment.
Chatterboxes .. a video player .. a "speaker" .. et. al. ..
What's the annual funding nationally? Our Board couldnít answer these questions either.
$3 million?--"who knows?" .. where does it all go? .. It's all a Mystery to me. "Who controls CHADD?" Silence. From our election team not running for office. More Silence. "the silence is deafening" ..
My funding questions about Novartis have been raised by what has been discussed publicly in front of me at several meetings last year. Meetings (after regularly attending for 3 years) I have ceased to attend and quite frankly wish to no longer (for many other reasons). For "there is no excuse for ANY of it" as it all just "rolls on" obliviously.
Silence of Novartis
(Paulo still hasn't responded to my questions)
I'm attempting to open up a communication channel with the controlling arm of
Sorry for the intrusion, Paulo
Thought I'd help Paulo out there..
I wish to know how CHADD has actually been controlled, particularly since their 'restructuring' in '99. As well as the annual funding History of CHADD since 1987.
Questions I sent to Gina
All you Pacifists
Candidate for Chapter Coordinator of Northern California CHADD.
I announced my
candidacy for Coordinator publicly at our CHADD Palo Alto meeting April 7.
And hope to encourage other members to contest me in the upcoming
election. I've been involved in the stuttering self-help movement since
1971 (see the following). And involved in the ADD self-help movement for
over 3 years now. Regularly attending both Kitty Petty's meetings as well
as the CHADD ones here locally. I ran for the same office last year in
CHADD. Those who know me, know I have a taste for playful humor,
teasing and satire. It's great if I can do it without my stuttering
stomping on that 'punchline'. And I'll apologise/explain if it goes awry.
It is a deep voice full of authority that fills the room.
"What was your name again?"
It's the gaveling stamp going down on the documents you file at the Election Commission. Turning this wimp into Arnold Schwarzenegger announcing his candidacy on the Tonight Show.
CHADD National used to be located in Florida. Maybe they moved because
they didnít want to have to deal with it all again. Or already knew what
The CHADD Election (2004)
indeed held "Saturday, June 19, 2004, from Noon to 3 pm, at the Epworth United Methodist Church, Berkeley, CA.")
The results I wrote down that Mick Terrone gave us:
Lew: 14 ALL running for uncontested offices
(to which I expect they were all probably appointed to by Lew)
except for Lew of course who I again contested
and one unknown proxy: about a third of those on the ballot never even showed up for their own election.
Geoffrey (me): 1 (I voted for myself this year instead of Lew)
The Election Results from our "Election Team not running for office" do not exist. There are no election results. For there was NO attendence by anyone not running for office (with a secret paid membership of over 700).
And again no Election Bylaws were produced: "The maximum term of office for a Coordinator is 2 consecutive years. After this time the Coordinator must step down" (and I learned during lunch that Mick Terrone himself knows it -- and it was witnessed that he knows it).
Lew's term in office expired on Nov 6, 2001. And no one was ever told this.
Which means CHADD is no longer controlled by its Bylaws OR the membership -- "Was it ever?"
"Who does control CHADD?"
My comments on the whole Election (2004):
Well, "I did my duty".
I don't know, seems the only way to get to know some more of our members is to run for Lew's office every year. Wish they'd have some Bay Area socials sometime.
I announced my candidacy against Lew last April 7.
So two months later, when (a week before the election) Lew asked me for a candidate's statement in 500 words or less, I gave him my website election campaign address: www.mangers.org -- that's 13 letters and 2 periods. I believe in concision. It wasn't acceptable. Lew refused to publish it as my candidate's statement. Mick Terrone followed with an email telling me the only communication with the membership they were going to provide me with was my 3 minutes at the Election itself.
I gave Mick a piece of my mind on this issue.
Website addresses of candidates are published along with their candidate's statements to the electorate in ALL elections: http://www.voterguide.ss.ca.gov/cand/cand.html
Gina and Lew were allowed to have their candidate's statements published (email) to the membership (about 700?) but I wasn't permitted to publish mine: just 13 letters and 2 periods.
In fact, I asked Lew at the Election itself if he had published my website to the membership. "No" he said.
Most of those present were new to me and knew absolutely nothing about me. One asked me to tell her about myself. She was very sweet and curious to know who I was. I tried to explain to her that it would be impossible for me to do so in the 3 minutes I was allowed and gave her my website address. Explaining she'd have to learn about me after the Election. I tried to give her a bit about my background as best I could in the brief time I had.
No one knew who I was. Why should any of them have voted for me? They all voted against me. I don't blame them.
Furthermore, names were required on the Ballots this time. This is how you "keep people in line". There's no excuse for this. Ballots cast by those present at Elections should always be kept secret.
Me: 1 (I voted for myself instead of Lew this time)
And there was 1 proxy ballot (I don't know who).
Well, at least I know how many votes we all got this time.
Attendance of about 14 or so. All running for office.
How do you create "an Election Team not running for office" from that?
Our Notary Public (last year's Election Team was supposed to attend--we'd have had an Election Team, she's not running for office). But she cancelled out. As a Notary, maybe she didn't want to have to witness it all again.
They all seemed pleasant. I don't know why Gina seemed upset. I like Gina. Earlier I had told Lew she'd be acceptable to me to help run the election. Maybe that's why she was annoyed. She wound up on the "Election Team". She was running for office (no one showed up who wasn't). This time *she* had to do it. Instead of our Notary Public.
I quickly skimmed over Judy's financial report. It all looks like "small potatoes" from here. I think Judy's getting comfortable with me. Most people are, if they're allowed to get to know me.
Anyway, I'm planning on moving on with my life so I'm moving my CHADD related items from www.mangers.org over to this website. But I want to leave a record of my experiences so everyone will know why I had to run. I've "done my duty".
I'll let someone else figure out that CHADD "puzzle box". How it's really controlled, those Bylaws ("whatever they are") and "what it is"--it's probably just some big "infomercial" or something. It all just "rolls on". We all do. Why am I wasting my time with it all? Maybe those 700+ paid members felt the same way. They come once, twice, never return. Maybe they're all wondering why I haven't figured it all out yet. Maybe they're all thinking "why's this idiot wasted 3 years of his life tilting at that lonely windmill trying to meet us when we're all over here?" .. "HELLO OVER THERE!" .. "can you hear us?" -- the thing is I can't .. where the hell *are* all of you?
Thanks to all my supporters.