Blogsphere commenters say that the fact that SunCal’s Measure B failed does not mean that Alamedans do not want SunCal to develop our Point. Because so few voted in that election, the 85% that voted against it comprises a minority of Alamedans, an insufficient number to draw the conclusion that Alamedans don’t want SunCal, and therefore, Alamedans do want SunCal. To these people, Measure B’s failure should not impact our city’s going forward working with SunCal. We don’t want to impede our mayor.
Back up the trucks for a minute here: corollary thinking lead us to dismiss Gilmore’s position as our Mayor: she had 36.45% of the total vote, which is extremely low in and of itself (lowest ever for a mayoral winning bid?), but—using that same logic—as a percent of all Alamedans (who voted and did not vote both), it’s miniscule. She’s not the mayor!
Oh but wait, she has the keys to City Hall. Dang. We have to work with her. As we should: it’s our job to manage up regardless who our democratic system placed into the elected positions. Which means: if we do our job, she has to work with us.
Yet again in Alameda: someone suffers and it gets discovered that a group of someones in positions of authority have been managing an organization and its facilities in a way that has the potential to cause harm because procedures go against common sense and industry standards of practices. When brought to their attention, what is the response? The Alameda Martyr rears his/her head. OMG is the response: why is anyone complaining about them? Don’t they deserve your accolades for their selfless service? The complainer is a horrible person because the managers of the organization deserve admiration and nothing else!
Argumentum ad hominem, or Shoot the Messenger, pervades the culture in all organizations in Alameda. What is up with that?! Is this why Alamedans are so afraid to speak up/out?
To those of you in positions of authority:
I simply do not understand how your ego is your priority, all important, over your having any concern whatsoever when your actionsare shown–by objective criteria— to presage harm! I know, I know: Alamedans say, but we’ve been doing it this way for years/decades—show me the harm! I refer back to my question: Alamedans are afraid to speak up/out, and they do not. For the most part, people in charge do not get held accountable…open, factual dialog to optimize anything is not the norm here because people take everything personal here, and then no one wants to be the one who made someone feel bad, or be the one who is The Bad One Who Complained. Wakeup call: IT’S NOT PERSONAL. All we ask is that you simply do your job correctly.
It’s time for a change folks. If your leadership, decisions, strategies and programs are not consistent with contemporary and best standards of practices, move your ego out of the way, re-orient your focus to consider potential harm to real people who suffer, and do whatever it takes to ensure that everything under your jurisdiction, and anything you can laterally influence, is done correctly, thoroughly and as safely as possible, optimizing conditions for everyone.
How can you live with yourself for wanting it any other way?