Historical December 1982 report or notice. Original dates, prices and contacts describe the source period; current availability has not been established.
The SDCC held its monthly meeting in its own office at 6008 Kingsbury on Nov. 8. Among those attending was the nominee for executive director, Ann M. FitzGibbons. Karleen Hoerr, the chairperson of the Selection Committee, described at great’ length the process used to select Ms. FitzGibbons. Hoerr explained that the Selection Committee reduced the 20 applicants to three finalists.
These three candidates had an opportunity to prepare comments on objectives and goals for SDCC prior to being interviewed. Reportedly, the finalists differed in style and experience “relevant to the work of SDCC.” Ms. FitzGibbons emerged from this process as the choice of the majority of the committee members.
The task of the Board this evening was to vote either approval or disapproval of the Committee’s choice. (In the latter case, the search for an executive director would be reopened city-wide.) Ms. FitzGibbons, a resident who has already worked on civic issues in the neighborhood, and is currently director of the West End Arts Council, presented some introductory comments and responded to questions from the Board members. Mr. Riley asked for an estimate of how much outside money could be raised. Ms. FitzGibbons hoped to raise $10,000 based on related cases. Mr. Williams asked about maintaining better “communications” between neighborhood associations. Ms. FitzGibbons suggested co-sponsorship by the different associations of projects that served goals they had in common.
In answer to additional questions, Ms. FitzGibbons responded that she is a self-initiator and, although she has mainly supervised youths, she has also organized adult volunteer workers.
She admitted to limited housing experience but displayed strong credentials in education and an obvious self-confidence. Mr. Burke raised the fact that the husband of the candidate owns the building that houses the SDCC. Ms. FitzGibbons ‘ countered that SDCC rented its space prior to her husband’s purchase and, regarding landlord-tenant conflicts, she said, “I know of no one who has more influence over the owner of the building (than I have).” After the candidate departed, a motion was made to hire.
In the discussion that followed, Mr. Williams, president of the Washington Heights Neighbors Association, expressed to the Board his feelings that the selection committee’s choice did not represent Washington Heights’ interests, and that another candidate (not named) was available for selection who would have better represented those interests.
Because everyone, it seemed, sensed deeper, unspoken undercurrents at this point, the discussion continued, although there was no procedural basis for a minority report from the Selection Committee.
To this listener, the issue appeared to be rooted in past history and was not a discussion against the merits of the proposed candidate, Ms. FitzGibbons, per se. Mr. Breun, with some emotion, referred to the historically distinct nature of the Washington Heights group in SDCC. Why not pick a candidate who could best ameliorate those problems, Breun asked, then countered his own suggestion with an argument regarding the need for a person to handle the overall tasks confronting ‘a Community Council.
We picked on “style” rather than “content;” Breun stated, but we need some “glue” to keep SDCC together.
The vote, by secret written ballot, was 9-5 to hire.
This was surprisingly close for a candidate selected by committee on a 5-1 vote. Jim McLeod suggested that decisions regarding starting date, salary, and staff be made by the Executive Committee through its president, Frank Burke.
At this point, several Board members representing Washington Heights departed. I left the meeting to discuss the preceeding issue with Mr. Williams.
In the cool night air, Harold Williams explained to me his concern that Washington Heights concentrate its efforts to put its own house in order.
The problems of Washington Heights differ somewhat from that of the other neighborhoods comprising SDCC.
In Williams’ view, the continuation of Washington Heights in SDCC means that it will always be out-voted and thereby will be required to participate in issues that do not address its own problems. “We need to consolidate our efforts on local issues instead of diffusing our energies,” he noted. Williams confided that the Executive Committee of Washington Heights had voted on Nov. 9 to withdraw from SDCC if Ann FitzGibbons was appointed executive director.
The final decision to withdraw must be made by the residents of Washington Heights.
The issue is scheduled to be debated at the Dec. 14 meeting of the Washington Heights Association, 7:30 p.m., at the Hamilton School. Williams said the Board’s recommendation to withdraw could be voted on that evening, but he does not anticipate that a decision will be made until the Jan. 11 meeting. Mr. Williams expects the resident vote “to be close.” The remainder of the SDCC meeting was expectedly anti-climactical.
The latest draft revision of the Constitution and By-Laws is available for viewing at the SDCC office weekdays during business hours.. Amendments to the BY-Laws will be addressed at the December meeting with a final vote anticipated at the January meeting.
However, the big question is— Will Washington Heights be voting on that Constitution?
Originally published in The Neighborhood Paper, December 1982.
Read this article in the original newspaper issue.
Archival transcription note: The report describes a November 8 meeting but also mentions a November 9 committee decision. The sequence is retained as printed; proposed withdrawal is not reported as completed.
Original source: SD_Times1982_12.pdf, printed page(s) 6; PDF page(s) 6.
