Saturday, November 28, 2009

I went to Solheim Place 27 November 2009 at 5:30 to 6:30 to greet anyone who did not receive word that DERA cancelled the impeachment. Again DERA in its indifference to members did not post a sign that the meeting was cancelled. What unprofessional impeachable conduct.
.
During the day I also came across two more former employees of DERA who told me that both of them were fired by Kim and they walked as they did not want to deal with his paranoid behavior. DERA has only 17 employees and it would seem reasonable that one employee a year would leave, not waves. The first flag of mismanagement is turnover of staff and DERA disposes of staff continuously. I still cannot understand why the Board does not question Kim's staffing decisions. It is totally irresponsible.

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Impeachment 27 November 2009 Cancelled

There was a sign posted on the DERA window at 12 East Hastings yesterday late afternoon (November 26, 2009) advising that the impeachment meeting on November 27th 2009 was cancelled by DERA. As I was not officially notified by the President earlier (not even with an email) I spent all day handing out fliers on the street and meeting members in the DTES asking them to attend. It wasn't a waste of time as I spoke to a lot of people in the neighbourhood: it made me feel good. But at the end of the day I was exhausted. Democracy is hard work.

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

http://downtowneastside.blogspot.com/

See above blog for more information about DERA from March/April 2009....
use blog search for "DERA"

Sunday, November 22, 2009

This is to remind you that the impeachment is on Friday November 27th 2009 at 251 Union Street 9th Floor (gore/union/hastings/georgia viaduct northside) at 6:00 p.m. The boundaries of DERA include the DTES and Upper Granville (clarke/8th avenue/burrard/waterfront). Hope all of you can attend. Remember this isn't about misconduct of a director it is about exposing DERA's mismanagement and its continuing disregard for the law like not giving financial records to directors and access to membership lists.
Addendum 21 November 2009: The fifth reason for my expulsion is for "denouncing DERA publicly including recently at a public seminar put on by Canada Revenue and Tax Services."
Ruth a wanabe DERA employee told Kim that I was there. I asked her for a statement from her of what she told Kim but she has refused to give it to me. The seminar leader said everything in the seminar was confidential so what did she do. So much for confidentiality. I reported on the seminar in this blog earlier.

This whole thing is nothing more than a harassment exercise by Kim to make me resign from the Board like he has done to other directors and many many employees who questioned his archaic management practices. Kim has made it well known that he is in control of DERA and the directors and staff do whatever he wants. Kim should be a mentor not a dictator; he does not know how to work in a dynamic democratic social enterprise.

This is a textbook classic in how a non-profit should not operate. However, I hope my impeachment brings some awareness that the Societies Act has to change. Non-profits cannot continue to be unregulated. The Society Act Registry only files documents; it does not vet them. So there must be thousands of illegal constitutions and bylaws outthere. Non-profits have to be standardized so that we all know how they operate.

Friday, November 20, 2009

Addendum: November 20, 2009. My alledged unprofessional conduct went so far as to publicize personal attacks on the executive-director. I asked for details of these attacks last weekend from the Board and so far I have heard nothing. If I did say anything then I verily believe whatever I said was true. And if not I ask why didn't the executive-director or the Board immediatley bring it to my attention which would seem a rational way of dealing with any untrue allegation. Or are DERA directors under the obligation of not having an opinion and hiding from the members things they should be made aware of.

Addendum: November 20, 2009. Another example of my unprofessional conduct is me contacting the funders and asking them for their files (operating agreements) on DERA. From the beginning I have been asking for documentation from DERA and DERA refused to give anything to me. Under the Societies Act I am responsible apart from the other directors for the good-management of DERA. DERA did not give me information and it would follow that I would seek the information eleswhere and DERA knew I would do this. I was not successful as both of them told me to deal directly with Kim Kerr. The main purpose of directors is to make sure that DERA lives up to its contracts. But then, if the directors are not aware the terms of contracts how can they do their jobs.

I can only speculate that both the funders are protecting DERA as both of them knew a long time before I was elected that DERA was being mismanaged and did nothing and yet when a director (me) wanted to make sure DERA would be managed correctly they refused to give me documents which I consider public knowledge. The funders are BC Housing and the Law Foundation both government agencies that are suppose to be transparent.

Addendum: November 19, 2009. Another example of my shameful behavior is that I defaced the front windows of DERA. What nonsense. I have been been placing information on the front windows of DERA for years. Defacing means causing damage. I never damaged anything. Whatever I put on the windows was easily removed without damage. DERA is using straws to discredit me.

Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Addendum 17 November 2009. I asked for a copy of the Constitution and Bylaws and a copy of the membership list. I sent the request to all of the directors and Kim Kerr last week. When I went to the office on Friday and Tuesday the documents were not there. Kim as well as each of the directors are again ignoring the Societies Act. If this went to court their refusal would be called contempt of court. Remember the impeachment hearing is on Friday, 27th of November 2009 at 6:00 p.m. at 251 Union Street 9th Floor.

Addendum 16 November 2009. I am reading the reasons for my impeachment. Apparently I am a threat as I have undermined the integrity of DERA. What a joke. From my election DERA prevented me from exercising my rights that I have as a Director. DERA is in direct violation of the Societies Act and yet it has the arrogance to say my behavior is not warranted. But then that is what DERA does, it violates laws and common decency and still wants to have integrity. This existing Board is an example of what a Board should not be. I still haven't gotten over the fact that last year Kim harassed ten employees to quit or he fired them outright and the Board did not finch.

Sunday, November 15, 2009

Addendum November 15, 2009. I read the Notice of Meeting to Consider a Special Resolution to thrown me off the Board of DERA. DERA is true to its "harassment" reputation. I received an email from a member of DERA yesterday pleading with me to resign from DERA as I had to consider the 500 lives that are affected. This from a gent who previously supported me. Nothing can be any worse than how DERA is managed now. Being a director is a joke. If a director is prevented from receiving financial information, is prevented from talking to staff, and prevented from entering the DERA office but is only allowed to be abused by staff and the board, there is something terribly wrong. There is no avenue to protect the members from abuse or incompetence by staff. A director's job is to report to members and the community to make sure that the non-profit is well managed. A director's job isn't to sanction the Board with its continuing negligence. Remember if you are a resident of the DTES which includes the downtown core from Clark Drive to Burrard or if you are homeless you are entitled to vote at my impeachment and I ask that you do. I find it ironic that Director Susan Neeves in her self-righteousness accusing me of discussing things in public that occurred in board meetings when the board meetings are in fact open to the public.

Monday, November 9, 2009

How is this possible.

Addendum Novembert 14, 2009. At the meeting on November 12, 2009, one of the things that astounded me was when Chris Slater and Alex Burnip pulled out personal voice recorders. In previous meetings when I asked that all the meetings be recorded every director was against it. I wasn't sure why Chris and Alex did this but I was relieved because I dreaded another harsh verbal attack by them and I was hoping the recorders would keep them in line. Both Chris and Alex believe Kim Kerr is above the law and they would do anything to protect him. And yes Chris is an alcoholic and buys drugs on the street and Alex is a drug addict who get criminally violent on occasion. These are the dysfunctional directors who do Kim's bidding. And these directors can't claim that I am using their personal information as they and all the other directors elected themselves into a public position and what happens is at their peril. Even Kim's behaviour is open to inspection. The rule of non-profits is that they are suppose to be transparent, transparent, and transparent.

Addendum November 13, 2009. I was given the letter of the Special Resolution that I was to be expelled from DERA on November 27, 2009, signed by Patricia McSherry, the secretary of DERA who doesn't even know she is responsible for doing the minutes and looking after the membership list. What impressed me the most about Pat was a statement she made in answer to a potential litigation that she would worry about after it happens. Directors are suppose to worry about things before they happen. I asked yesterday that I be provided with a membership list and Kim refused to give it to me. I need the list so I can contact the members to explain my position and to make sure they vote. If I do not know who the members are so how can I defend myself. DERA is not playing fair and has broken the law from the day I was elected by not providing me information which I am legally entitled to.

Addendum November 12, 2009. There was a hasty meeting called wherein I was advised that I would be thrown off the DERA Board for unprofessional conduct. There will be a general meeting after I am given a list of the complaints either in two weeks or three weeks. I hope that each of you renew your memberships so that you can vote at the meeting : at 12 East Hastings. Unprofessional conduct sounds like something a nun would come up with. Do you want sugar with your tea. DERA is corrupt and instead of fixing up their image DERA is attacking me.

Addendun November 11, 2009. I attended an all day workshop yesterday paid for by Revenue Canada. Responsibilites of directors was the main topic as well as accounting for non-profits and charities.

I asked Richard Bridge, the lawyer giving the workshop, if a director was elected and found that a non-profit was in a governance mess was it the responsibility of the director to cleanup the mess. He said yes. Since I inherited the DERA mess and knew of rumours of mismanagement before I was elected, it is my legal duty as a director to clean it up. But the problem for me is how to do it. Since no lawyer so far wants to enter this fray, the only option I have is to appeal to the members of DERA who can demand change and the only way I can is to report to the members who are all those that live in the DTES via this blog, word-of-mouth, fliers, postering. Membership is open to anyone that lives in the DTES so why isn't there a stampede of the good people that live here to renew their memberships and make sure that DERA follows the rule-of-law. The DTES is full of people including Jim Green and Jean Swanson to PIVOT employees who reside here and know what is happening by nature of their politicalness. So where are they.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I just spoke to the woman who has been harassed for two years by an employee of DERA and instead of the harasser being fired she was. Although she was fired two weeks ago, she still hasn't been told why she was fired. During the past two years the executive-director fired or harassed ten employees to quit. There is something seriously wrong when there is only seventeen employees. Very interesting observation is that whenever he fires anyone confidentiality always comes up.

But then when the boss is a self-professed cocaine addict and with it comes a chemically induced bravado he does what he wants. It doesn't hurt when he is supported by a staff of poverty pimps (ex APCers) and directors who are indebted to him. And to top it all off: the government gives him $4/5million a year to "operate" DERA and DERAH.

Blog Archive