Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2007 13:20:28 GMT -5
Hi Levon. Thanks so much for the education. I knew of the many good things that George had done for goal, but I was not up to date on the finance issues. I can't emagine ever billing Florida LEGAL for a taxi ride. As president of GOAL, I never took money from the treasurey for anything. I have gone to all of the conferences and I did so on my own dime. Patrick Suraci and I went to London, for GOAL, and we paid our own way. I went to Sydney Australia and Hong Kong, for GOAL, and paid my own way. Tommy, Colleen and I paid our own way on many trips back and forth to Puerto Rico defending us in the law suit. No organization can afford to spend it's money flying people around the place. It's our responsibility to protect the groups money. Even the cell phone is a bad idea. How can anyone take advantage of a cell phone in the organizations name. My God, GOAL had it's own private line that was in my house. I paid the phone bill every month and never took any money from GOAL. If I ever had the nerve to ask Charles Slebodnick, Florida LEGALS treasurer, for money for a perk, he would have my head!!! He makes sure that all of us, from the president down, pays our own way no matter where we are doing or what we are going. The membership does not pay it's dues so the money can just be waisted. Anyway, thanks again for the education. Because I live in Florida I was not aware of these issues. I do like George and I think he did a great job under the circumstances. George is a good man who found himself in a pit surrounded by vipers. They kept biting him until he ran out of steam. That's a damm shame. I truly love GOAL and I'm worried now about it's future. Let's all band together now and see what we can do.
|
|
|
Post by burner on Jul 31, 2007 23:03:35 GMT -5
What does one type to show that they are blushing? Best that I just say "Thank you for the kind words" to Prydeguys and Levin and leave it at that. I love you guys.
|
|
|
Post by burner on Aug 16, 2007 0:28:41 GMT -5
WARNING: For those who are just marginally interested in what is going on with GOAL New York, don’t bother reading this. It may read like a boring “insider” bitch fest. For those intimately concerned with GOAL, read it and weep. And have your barf bag handy.
Carroll said, "I don't know what's going on in New York. All I can say is that they had better fix it or GOAL will be going down the toilet.” Carroll, call Mr. Whipple and order a carton of Charmin. After tonight's meeting (August 14, 2007) GOAL NY deserves to be flushed as far away from the rest of us as possible. The miscreants at the helm have put such a stink on our house that we may never recover from its toxicity.
A quick recap is in order.
Carl Locke leads coup that forces George Farrugia’s resignation as GOAL president. Carl Locke assumes presidency. Carl Locke appoints Charlie Blaha as “Acting” Vice President despite lack of authority in the By-laws to do so. Carl Locke is advised that New York State law prohibits the Board from conducting any business whatsoever, as currently constituted with four vacancies. Carl Locke is quoted as saying in response (at the July 10, 2007 meeting), “Nobody’s going to come after us.” Carl Locke fights to defeat motion to fill vacancies that would allow the Board to legally function. Carl Locke calls proposal to have members democratically elect people to fill vacancies “sneaky” and “divisive.” Carl Locke accuses sponsor of the motion to conduct a democratic election of having a “hidden agenda”. Carl Locke has existing Board members appoint a member to the Nominations Committee despite the illegality of such action under New York State law. Carl Locke defends his decision by saying it’s “not really” a violation of the law. Carl Locke’s friends sustain his illegal action by defeating a motion to appeal the decision of the Chair. Carl Lock throws out four valid votes that would have altered the outcome of the vote to hold a special election to fill vacancies, despite having no power under the By-laws to do so. Carl Locke asks members to endorse Alice Muniz as Sergeant At Arms; a “sham” election to produce a quorum allowing the Board to act legally under New York State law.
Previous posts alluded to the coup engineered by self-serving egotistical blood suckers led by Carl Locke that effectively forced George Farrugia to resign from the presidency of GOAL. With the additional resignation of our Sergeant-at-Arms, immediately preceding the July 10, 2007 meeting, the eight member board was reduced to four sitting members and four vacancies. Under New York State’s Not-for-Profit Corporation law, under which GOAL is chartered, “a majority of the entire board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business” and under that same statute “entire board” is defined as “the total number of directors entitled to vote which the corporation would have if there were no vacancies.” Under the law GOAL’s board, as currently constituted, is PROHIBITED FROM TRANSACTING ANY BUSINESS WHATSOEVER. In his posting Tommy mentioned that “one member” brought this fact to the attention of the members. That member was me. I introduced a resolution calling for a special election to fill the vacancies. Locke, who assumed the presidency after forcing George’s resignation, was just short of apoplectic. Without surrendering the chairman’s gavel he entered into debate and discussion and used terms like “sneaky” and “hidden agenda” to describe his feeling about the resolution. If anyone should know about sneaky and hidden agenda it’s Carl Locke. Nevertheless a vote was taken, of sorts. The “unofficial” tally was 18 in favor and 22 opposed.
Because those in charge, i.e. the Board members, were not prepared to identify who at the meeting was a member “in good standing” and eligible to vote, and who was a “guest” or a member in arrears ineligible to vote, they used an unorthodox and unprecedented method. The attendance sheet was passed around. Those voting “yea” were to circle their name, those abstaining were to strike a line through theirs, and those voting “nay” were to do nothing. Corresponding Secretary, Richard Tsai, took the list home with him, compared the names with the membership list to see which votes were valid, i.e. cast by members in good standing, and came up with an “official” tally of the vote.
Fast forward: I’d been in touch with Richard since the July meeting via e-mail. He told me that of the 40 votes cast 10 were considered invalid. Without quoting me numbers, he said “based on what I saw from the eligibility, it is clear that the resolution did not pass.” I did some nose counting of my own. I knew for a fact that five Life Members, including myself, voted “yea”. I knew that five more members who had paid their annual dues earlier this year also voted “yea”. And I knew that four more members who had brought their checks and paid their renewal dues prior to the start of the July meeting also voted “yea”. Fourteen in total. A fifteenth “yea” vote, subsequently confirmed, was not a certainty when I sent an e-mail to Richard the night before the August meeting. I had earlier told him that I intended to call for a roll call of the yeas and nays, as this had not been a secret ballot vote.
I know for a fact that the membership list is a shambles, to put it mildly, and my concern was that some affirmative votes that I had confirmed might not have been counted. Richard felt it would be a breach of confidentiality to name names when there might be non-members in attendance at the meeting. I didn’t feel it useful to wait until the meeting to get into a pissing contest about who of my known affirmative votes might not have been counted, unintentionally, in honest error, so I sent an e-mail to Richard identifying all 15 in my nose count. I figured this would give him a heads-up and a chance to verify that he had included them all in his “valid” column. Even if it turned out that his total of 30 valid votes was correct, and my total of 15 “aye” votes were counted, the proposal for a special election would still have lost as the result of a tie vote. That is acceptable. That’s the way the game is played. My concern was to not have the vote declared lost, based upon bad input.
Forgive the length of this posting. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, “If I had a few days to consider it, I could write this on one page. As I have only one day, it’s much longer.” And believe me, I cannot wait to get this story out and made public.
While the vote on the resolution was the main topic of conversation in my e-mails with Richard Tsai, there were other related items mentioned that I knew were being communicated back to Locke.
Under GOAL By-laws when a president resigns the Vice President assumes the presidency and the VP slot becomes vacant. When a quorum of the board is available, i.e. at least five members, and a majority of those were themselves elected rather than appointed, the By-laws provide for the filling of the VP slot by presidential appointment and board concurrence. In the absence of a quorum the only legitimate way to fill the VP position is by election. Well, at the July meeting, before I raised the issue of the NY State statute, Locke announced that he was appointing Charlie Blaha, currently the Treasurer, as “acting” Vice President, just in case anything happens to him (Locke). Within days Blaha had “updated” GOAL’s Web site to show himself as Vice President, as well as Treasurer. I pointed this out to Richard in my e-mail, advising him that Carl had no power under the By-laws to appoint Blaha as VP, or “acting” VP, or “acting” anything else for that matter, and that the Web site should be corrected. Richard got back to me and said that he had raised the issue and that a correction would be made. Well over a week went by before I saw a change made in the Web site. Blaha did not remove his name; he changed the title shown from “Vice President” to “Acting Vice President”. Once again I contacted Richard, this time pointing out the lack of proper correction AND quoting verbatim from Roberts Rules of Order to the effect that the President has no power to appoint an “acting” VP. [For the curious, the reason all of my correspondence has been with Richard Tsai is because, as I stated to him in writing: (1) he is the Corresponding Secretary; and (2) he is the only one on the Board who I trust.]
Another item: Regular elections are coming up in December. Under GOAL By-laws the President picks a chairperson for the Nominations Committee, the Board members (excluding the president) pick a second member for the committee, and the general membership pick a third. Other than the chairperson, there is really no need for the other two committee members unless no nominations are received from the floor for any given elective position (in which case the 3 committee members are required to choose someone). It’s a minor issue, but to bring the message home I e-mailed Richard on 8/8/07 telling him that, in view of the absence of a quorum as defined by NY State law, the Board could NOT appoint a member to the Nomination’s Committee. I stressed that I hoped they wouldn’t be announcing that they had done so when the August meeting convened.
Up to this point I had bent over backward to quietly alert Locke and the other board members, via my communications with Richard, of the various violations and potential violations that could occur when those in positions of power do not know and understand (a) the law; (b) the By-laws; and (c) Roberts Rules of Order. And none of the four remaining members of GOAL’s board do know and understand. My intent was to seek to have the rules followed without embarrassing anyone, for no good reason, in the middle of a membership meeting.
Fast Forward to tonight’s (8/14/07) General Membership meeting: Here is where the sh*t hit the fan and these reprobates demonstrated how contemptible, malicious and contemptuous they are of the State Law, of the By-laws, and of the membership itself. And they were successful in packing the room with friends who, as I will relate, sided with them in voting, the rules be damned and New York State law notwithstanding.
Minor points, but while I’m at it I may as well include them. Locke opened the meeting and called for the minutes of the July meeting, which were read by Recording Secretary Marc Ridwanto. When finished, Locke looked around, saying nothing. I raised my hand and asked, “Are you going to call for additions and corrections?” Locke recognized me and I proceeded: “Mention was made in the minutes that George Farrugia resigned as president. NO mention was made that he was thanked for his service and presented with a plaque for that service.” At the July meeting everyone in the room was asked to state what they would like to see GOAL do. Scores of suggestions were voiced, copied down, and included in the minutes, as read. I pointed out one glaring omission by saying, “The one suggestion that seems to be missing from the minutes was the one that I made, suggesting that we begin following the rules and the By-laws.” I ended by pointing out that no mention was contained of the final item which had to do with a question as to when the other Board members were first aware that George Farrugia was going to resign. (That inquiry caused embarrassment for Locke when it was raised, as he tried to dance around it, without answering and giving indication to those not-in-the-know, that George was being forced out. His attempted obfuscation caused a heated outburst, and a charge of lying to the members, by the recently resigned Sergeant-at-Arms, Patti Rodriguez.)
After a few other items were discussed, Locke turned to the matter of the regularly scheduled December elections and explained the By-law requirement to establish a Nominations Committee. He announced the name of the person that he, as President, had appointed to chair the committee. He then named the person the Board had chosen as its appointee!!!! That’s when I rose to a point of order. I stated that such action is precisely what the Board is prohibited from doing with its current composition of 4 sitting members and 4 vacancies. I reminded “the chair” that, as constituted, the board is prohibited from transacting any business whatsoever, including the appointment of a member to sit on the Nominations Committee. “Chairman” Locke responded, saying that HE didn’t consider this action as “transacting business”, that as HE interprets it, transacting business means approving the spending of money and things like that and that the appointment of a member to the committee was “not really” a violation of the law. NOT REALLY A VIOLATION OF THE LAW???!!!!!! What part of “law” doesn’t this supposed “law enforcement officer” understand?
Sounding like George Bush, “the decider”, Locke said that HE decided the action was ok. I then claimed the floor and said, “In that case I appeal the decision of the Chair and call for a vote to overturn your decision.” This caused another stir and discussion. Mind you, now, all of this over a ridiculous appointment that means NOTHING unless no candidate is put forth from the floor for one of the elective positions! A simple backing off on Locke’s part would have lost him nothing. But no. He had to show he was the boss and was going to do whatever he damn well pleased. A vote was called and you could see the deer-in-the-headlights looks from all the friends gathered round as they blindly voted to support Locke, his deliberate and direct violation of State law notwithstanding. The man’s arrogance knows no bounds whatsoever.
Locke then called upon the person he’d chosen to chair the Nominations Committee to proceed with the ritual calling for the reading of the duties of each office followed by the acceptance of nominations from the floor. At one point an Associate Member submitted a name in nomination. Locke did nothing to challenge it, nor did Richard Tsai who I had told (less than a day before in an e-mail) that Associate Members have the same rights and privileges as Professional Members EXCEPT they are neither allowed to NOMINATE, run for nor hold executive office.
Not choosing to make a scene I waited until the nomination process was over, at which point I and two other members (one a former GOAL president, the other a former Corresponding Secretary) got up and left the meeting. It was the first time in 13 years as a member that I have ever gotten up and walked out of a meeting. And for as long as any of these charlatans remain involved in GOAL and its direction, I will not be going back.
But wait, there’s more.
George Farrugia remained at the meeting until, finally, the “official” results of the resolution I submitted in July were announced. He called me later at home and told me that the number of “yeas” and “nays” quoted indicated that the resolution to hold a special election to fill the vacancies on the board was defeated. And then when he pressed further, he elicited from Carl Locke that “they decided” NOT to count the votes of the four people who had paid their renewal dues before the start of the July meeting! George further got them to admit that if they HAD counted those votes, the resolution to hold the special election would have passed!
Who the hell does Carl Locke think he is that he can arbitrarily discount valid votes at will? Do the rules, the By-laws and common decency mean NOTHING to him? Has he no shame whatsoever? His actions speak for themselves. Perhaps he believes in the divine right of kings, and thinks he is one.
And then, to compound his arrogance, he decides… HE DECIDES!.... that since the Board is prohibited from acting to fill vacancies on the Board (all of a sudden, now, he’s worried about following the law?) he will recommend that the members assembled accept his nomination of Alice Muniz to be Sergeant-at-Arms, thereby providing a fifth seated member of the board so that the board can then have a quorum and act without violating NY State law!!! So, he fights like hell to make sure that we do NOT have a democratically conducted special election, no doubt afraid that if the “wrong” persons were elected he would lose his strangle hold on power, and then he decides, well, yeah, we SHOULD fill one of the vacancies… with MY choice of rubber stamp. And he selects Alice Muniz.
Alice Muniz. A pleasant woman, but the same women who, when seated as Corresponding Secretary, failed for such an extended period of time to discharge the simple responsibility of picking up mail from GOAL’s Post Office box. And unfortunately for us, it seems that one of those pieces of uncollected mail just happened to be the U.S.P.S. bill for the post box rental! As a result of her total lack of responsibility to discharge even the simplest of duties, GOAL ended up losing the postal box it had had for over 22 years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And of course, like rats following the Pied Piper, the “friends” of president Locke cast their lot with him and approved her. That is when George Farrugia got up and walked out of the meeting in total disgust, vowing never to return again.
Hmmm. Rats following the Pied Piper. I didn’t realize how apropos the visual was until after I typed it, thinking of the NYPD’s Internal Affairs Bureau…derogatorily referred to by most as “the rat squad” … to which president Locke is attached as he spies undercover on his fellow officers. Just some more food for thought. Cheese to be exact.
So in conclusion: To Tommy and Annie and Tony and, in particular, Jimmy, I apologize for having doubted you when you said this thing is dead and that my efforts to fight to save it were a waste of time. You were right. I was wrong.
|
|
|
Post by hoosiercop on Aug 16, 2007 4:48:02 GMT -5
Well if the things he is doing are violations of state law and if people feel that the organization is on its deathbed, then how do you go about holding him accountable? I.E., how do you go about bringing him up on charges for violating those laws? Can just the violators of the specific laws be charged, with the organization itself not being held liable? If things are really that bad, then why not go there? Draw the line in the sand and make all guilty parties pay for their violations.
I know I'm totally outside of this whole thing, but at least in this area of the country, when you get caught violating the law, you are punished as prescribed by the law. I can see not going there if your concern about the organization being damaged outweighed the need for justice, but it sounds like the need for justice far outweighs organizational damage concerns. Its like having a vicious, deadly, spreading cancer in your legs. If you dont take action, you will die. However drastic, but if you cut off your legs, at least you survive and have a shot at a better life. Sounds like time for surgery.
|
|
|
Post by bluepride on Aug 16, 2007 9:08:07 GMT -5
I'm not surprised at anything that took place at the latest meeting. They're only going to get worse. I don't have the time today to post what I'd like to but I did look at GOAL's website earlier. They don't waste any time. Most of the time it would take months for a slight change to happen on the site. When it suits them though, presto!! I cropped the screenshot pretty small for space purposes but through the fuzziness you can see the changes....
|
|
|
Post by maxwelldaemon on Aug 16, 2007 15:35:52 GMT -5
No apologies necessary, Frank. We all come to these realizations in our own time. Just look back and realize we have a few great people in our lives that we met in GOAL's heyday.
Stop attending the wake each 2nd Tuesday of the month. Move on and use the time for more productive, FUN stuff!!!
|
|
|
Post by bluepride on Aug 17, 2007 14:50:47 GMT -5
burner wrote: <<<Richard Tsai is because, as I stated to him in writing: (1) he is the Corresponding Secretary; and (2) he is the only one on the Board who I trust.] >>> That's a big mistake on your part. I hope you reconsider that thought. Anyway, it's a shame that these miscreants disregard the law and the followers (rats, as burner described them) are being lead down a false path. Much the same as some of the members were about 10 years ago. Will things get better?? I seriously doubt it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2007 16:16:17 GMT -5
I feel really bad about this whole thing. In fact, I'm sick to my stomach. I have always loved GOAL, It's proud history, what it stands for, and the brave people who worked so hard and put their jobs, lives and careers on the line to create this wonderful organization. Remember when the cops on horseback used to turn the horses asses to us as we marched by? Remember when we posted GOAL flyers on Rikers Island only to have officers spit on them and tear them down? Remember when after giving a lecture to recruits at the NYPD traiing academy when they threw our materials in the tash can after we left? Remember when GOAL had it's first meeting in the basement of a church and how scared everyone was.? Remember when Charlie Cochrane stood up and said "I'm Gay"? Remember how proud we all were when we were able to march in uniform, in the pride parade, for the first time? Remember how the Puerto Rican gay community welcomed us to San Juan by displaying rainbow flags in the baggage claim gallery and outside the terminal as we came in? Remember how we all stood up and faught like men? Remember standing at police headquarters out and proud as we opened the first ever "Pride In Policing Display? Remember our joy at finally being accepted into the "COPS" organization? Remember how we hosted the first ever International Conference Of Gay And Lesbian Criminal Justice Professionals and we did it without the permission or consent of the NYPD? Remember the days when if a gay person got into trouble, they would not call the police, they would call GOAL? Remember the love and admiration the gay community shows us as they scream, yell and cheer when we march down Christopher Street? These are the reasons why I love GOAL, and why I will be there always to pick up the pieces. As long as there is breath in my body.
|
|
|
Post by burner on Aug 21, 2007 0:20:56 GMT -5
Well if the things he is doing are violations of state law and if people feel that the organization is on its deathbed, then how do you go about holding him accountable? I.E., how do you go about bringing him up on charges for violating those laws? Can just the violators of the specific laws be charged, with the organization itself not being held liable? If things are really that bad, then why not go there? Draw the line in the sand and make all guilty parties pay for their violations. Hoosier, I hear what you're saying and quite honestly I'm on the fence. The matter could be brought to the attention of the state's Attorney General but, let's face it: In the scheme of things, this violation of law would not rank very high on his list of priorities. One has to wonder: (a) Would anything be done at all; and (b) if something were done, would the organization be harmed more by it than would be the culprit? Perhaps if a dozen or more of us filed and signed a joint complaint, it might produce some results. A single person complaining would go nowhere in my opinion. But is it worth the time and effort?
Carroll is indefatigable. I wish I knew how he does it. But the rest of us, or most of us oldtimers anyway, are just damned tired of the war, of the battles, of the drama. Maybe the best thing, at this point in time, is to let it crash and burn. Maybe then those members who just pay their dues and then ignore what's going on within the organization will sit up and ask, "What happened?"
Hoosier, you said you were looking to establish a group in your state. I think it's a great idea. But let me offer this one bit of unsolicited advice: Draft your By-laws, have them adopted by the organizing members, and then follow them religiously. Get the members USED to following even the simplest rules, and call people on it when they do not. Incoming members will see from day one that rules are important, and they are. Their purpose is not to obstruct, but to protect the legitimate interests of the members. To quote from the introduction of my copy of Robert's Rules of Order:
"Robert's Rules of Order, published in 1876, soon became a handbook for organizations, clubs and schools all over the land. In a constructive way, it exposed the uselessness of attending meetings which began late and dragged on. It gave enlightenment and comfort to frustrated members who, without knowledge, were easily victimized by overbearing chairmen and ruthless small cliques. And it armed the general membership with the know-how to combat those seeking to push through controversial resolutions without proper consideration."
There are many reasons for the condition that GOAL finds itself in today, but failure to follow the rules over an extended period of time is, in my view, one of the major ones. Most members don't even know what the rules are, because they've not been exposed to them. They become so accustomed to "following the leader" that when someone who KNOWS the rules dares to question or challenge the leader, as I did, it is the challenger who is looked upon as the malcontent. And that is what's happened with GOAL. Rather than recognizing that the challenge was aimed at protecting their rights from a power grab by an unscrupulous egoist, the majority attending simply followed the leader.
Let's face it. When you have good, honest and honorable people leading your organization, the need to dot every "eye" and cross every "tee" seems superfluous. You know they are doing the right thing, and are open to suggestion if something unintentionally is done in error. And over the years GOAL has been fortunate in that almost all of its presidents and board members have held the interests of the organization as their primary objective. But then along comes the autocrat who will do anything and everything to consolidate his or her power, subsume the interests of the organization to his or her own, and use the organization merely as a platform and as a means to enhance his/her resume. Members, used to following the rules, will not allow such a person to get away with outrageous behavior; members unfamiliar with the rules won't know any better. Let what has happened here in New York be a lesson.
|
|
|
Post by hoosiercop on Aug 22, 2007 8:40:24 GMT -5
So if people decide to let GOAL NY go, then do you guys do like in California, and just decide to start a new group? Is it time for NY LEGAL? NY GLEA (NY Gay Law Enforcement Association)? NY GALOP (NY Gays And Lesbians On Patrol)? How hard would it be for a new group to be taken seriously by anyone around there, since GOAL has been the recognized standard for YEARS?
Side thought: It would be funny if Illinois started a LEGAL group. It would be IL LEGAL. hehehe Sorry, random thoughts often pop into my mind.
|
|
|
Post by bluepride on Aug 22, 2007 11:23:01 GMT -5
<<It would be funny if Illinois started a LEGAL group. It would be IL LEGAL>>
Jon, promise me that when you die you'll leave your brain to science!! ;D
During the years of approximately 1991-1995 there were a few attempts to start other groups. ALL FAILED MISERABLY. There was the Triangle Association which was run by 2 people who thought they could take on GOAL and be a threat to them. It didn't succeed because, well, GOAL was successful and the 2 guys were closeted. (Although EVERYONE they worked with knew they were gay) It faded out after a few months. Then there was the Housing GALA organization. There were a few NYC Housing Police Officers who I was friendly with and also worked with. Eventually some of them joined GOAL. Some did some meaningful work for GOAL but for the most part, they whined and complained that GOAL wasn't doing anything for them. As if GOAL owed them something. They became disgruntled and formed their own organization but they didn't tell me about it. Months later, they told me about the group and the leader finally asked me if I'd like to be a part of it. I went to one meeting at a members apartment and there were about 6 people there. I knew most of them. A few were notorious closet cases in my department. Again, everyone knew they were gay but they acted as if no one knew. Toward the end of the meeting, they all literally surrounded me as I sat there. From every direction, they started pummeling me with questions like, "What is GOAL going to do for Housing?", "Why are you a member of GOAL when this group is here?", "Who's side are you on?" and stupid questions and statements like that. Needless to say, I walked out. I was with GOAL before they even came on the job and it took years for them to grow enough cajones to join. And before they joined they used to ridicule me for being a GOAL member. Until they joined. Then it was OK, I guess. Anyway, they fizzled away too.
During the 1995 Heritage of Pride Parade in NYC, someone started circulating fliers throughout GOAL's marching contingent. The flier was advertising a new group that one of our members, Don Jirak, was forming. Jerry Cox, another member was helping him pass out these fliers. The name of the group: NYPD Pride Alliance. It was to be only for uniformed officers of the NYPD. No civilians, like dispatchers or administrative aides. No Correction Officers, nor Probation or Parole. Or Court Officers, Port Authority Police, MTA Police, New Jersey Police Officers or any officers from any other jurisdiction.
This created a firestorm within GOAL and let some of us know exactly the type of people some of them were. Sad to say, they had a decent number of supporters from GOAL who were willing to jump ship to NYPD Pride Alliance. And there are one or two who are actually members here on BP. But that's water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned. Anyway, there was a major confrontation at the next GOAL meeting. Carroll was President and I was Vice-President at the time. It was one of the most heated meetings in GOAL's history. Some members including Don, showed their true colors. But they couldn't effectively and believably state exactly why they wanted to form this new group. But some did state that they didn't want civilians or Corrections and some of the other agencies mentioned above. They wanted it to be exclusively NYPD ONLY. And they wanted official recognition from the NYPD. Police Commissioner Bratton assured GOAL that GOAL was and will be the only gay and lesbian oriented fraternal organization within the NYPD, even though we are inter-agency. Little by little, most of the members of NYPD PA either came back to GOAL with their tails between their legs or just faded away, too embarrassed to come back.
The group died a natural death even though Jirak insisted it still existed almost up until the time he became President of GOAL. He had to admit to the fact that NYPD PA was dead before he became President. And he became President only because the previous President had screwed up GOAL so badly that, basically, no one wanted the position. Otherwise, someone who had actively worked against GOAL's interests would never have become it's President. A hobo on the street had as much chance of becoming President as Don did. (Nothing personal against Don. I've been friends with him since he joined in 1989, but the truth is the truth)
There was another group that almost formed in 1998. But it didn't. I lost the GOAL election for President in 1997 and by then I had had enough of the hypocrisy, back stabbing and all of the other negative crap that had gone on with the campaign. I can't believe the depths to which some people will sink just to get elected to a fraternal organization in our community. I was happy having my life back and working at my command by 1998. But there were other GOAL members who were justifiably dissatisfied with the way "ER" was running the group into the ground. The phone calls started coming. "We have to form another group". Uh-oh...not again... I tried to tell these friends of mine that a rival group is not going to work and to just ride out the storm. But they were adamant and finally, I relented and we had a preliminary private meeting of about 5 or 6 people as I remember it. The purpose of this meeting was only to explore the possibility of forming another group, not to rival GOAL but to just exist as a separate social organization.
We had the meeting and we took notes and threw ideas around. I was only really half-heartedly into it because I knew that it probably wouldn't get off the ground. I went through the motions and helped with ideas and suggestions because I knew that my friends were frustrated and angry at what GOAL was becoming at the time. (GOAL - all drama, all the time!!) At the time, I could care less. If the membership was stupid enough to elect who they did and not me...why should I care about them??
Anyway....we had our meeting and we may have had a second one, if I remember correctly. But after that, I just couldn't find the enthusiasm for doing it and the idea faded. You don't need an official group to be with your friends anyway!
The bottom line to this long, long, long post is.....
Any time there has been an attempt to form another LGBT law enforcement organization in New York it has failed. The participants were usually lightweights and disgruntled people. I will say this though: If the people who are angry at the current mob, who forced George out of office, tried to form a group, it would be viable and successful based on the fact that the ones who put it together would be extremely experienced and knowledgeable about how to do it correctly. And it would succeed because it would most likely attract hundreds of members who've felt disenfranchised over the last 10 years and have abandoned GOAL. Now...having said that...let me be clear....I have no intention of forming a group! I'm just relating some of the history of other instances of forming separate groups from GOAL in New York.
Oh...by the way...an interesting anecdote. In those preliminary exploratory meetings in 1998 one of the things that came out of it was a name for the group. Obviously, you need a name to go by. After thinking about it for a while, I had come up with a name that was generally liked and agreed upon. It had a nice ring to it! When the idea faded and we all went on our merry way, whether to GOAL or our jobs or...whatever...the name and the minutes and notes we took remained on the shelf, as it were. I had put all of our information on a disk and there it sat for years and years. In 2005 while I was putting this board together, not knowing anything about how to go about doing it, one of the things that held me back from putting this board on line for a while was the fact that I couldn't come up with a name for it. I must've stressed out for a week before coming up with a name for this board. Then I remembered something from back in 1998 and I had a brilliant idea. (They don't come along too often, folks!) I decided to call the message board....BLUE PRIDE. Maybe the exploratory meeting served some purpose after all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2007 13:08:33 GMT -5
Hey Admin. thanks so much for the great history lesson. Most folks have no idea of the struggles GOAL has been through down through the years. So the name "Bluepride" has some history as well. Thanks for saving the name and bringing it to life. I remember that heated meeting with Don Jirak when he was going on about having only NYPD members. I told him, "Our enemies are too numerous to count. When they look at you and look at me, they see the same thing. If they ever come in the night, to take us all away in the boxcars, they will put you in the same boxcar with me" Those words were true then, and are still true today. GOAL has thrived through all these years because of people like you who have always been a powerful support beam constantly holding the organization up. All of us love, admire and respect you because of it.
|
|
|
Post by hoosiercop on Aug 23, 2007 3:38:17 GMT -5
Well Tommy, you have at least given me another idea for a name if/when I start a group here. hehehe
|
|
|
Post by bluepride on Aug 23, 2007 10:27:21 GMT -5
<<Well Tommy, you have at least given me another idea for a name if/when I start a group here. hehehe>>
|
|
|
Post by hoosiercop on Aug 24, 2007 9:41:55 GMT -5
Oh my, that looks just like you Tommy!!!!!!
|
|