Board Member responds to Recall Organizer.

Kent Clawson wrote: (at Gazette.com -used by permission of the author) Tom, I'm sorry if I have hurt your feelings. Why should you be so concerned what I think about you? >> "And what does Kent have as facts to base this statement on or to back up his claim." [related to Liberal Democrat] - As to the Democrat, I'm sorry I guess the statement "Yes, Harold is young at least by City Council standards. Yes, he's a Democrat and proud of it but he figured that would add votes..." in the April 5, 2007 Indy piece threw me for a loop (http://www.csindy.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A20437), - Then there is the conversation that we had about the Stormwater Enterprise (tax) where you stated to me that "it had to be done because the people of Colorado Springs won't vote for a tax increase to address this problem" To me this is the epitome of liberalism. An unwillingness to let people make the choice because you know better. - Once when I asked you for advice on what you felt would make the Board more transparent, the response was a very constructive "You got yourselves into this, you can get yourselves out." - When Amy McClleland's seat was vacant and you were campaigning for it you felt it appropriate to take me out to lunch to express why you thought I should pick you, but yet when Martin meets with Poore before the superintendency slot is open he is unethical. No double standard here? >>"I will put my credentials and community service up against Kents or yours." Your resume is great. I won't even contest it, but with all your angst and disgust with the Board, the direction (or lack there of), the "fear" among administrators, and all of the issues that you profess to be concerned about where was your name on the 2007 Ballot, what about the 2005 ballot? Were you waiting for your handlers to encourge you to run (http://www.csindy.com/colorado/dems-miss-an-opportunity/Content?oid=1327992)? You and I know that I won the seat as much on lack of alternatives, as on message, yet when it came time for Mr. Harold to put his hat in the ring you chose not to, and I did. Finally when Amy resigned you at least made an attempt, but you and I both know you did it to be the martyr because it gains more “relevancy” without actually having to place in the election. Will we see your name when we see the ballot this Fall? Petitions come out on August 5th. Even with all of this recall business you don't even have the courage put your name to the committee. Why is that Tom? You have been expressing concerns over a recall since shortly after I got on the Board. I thought since you are "...far more relevant than..." me that you would want the District to know that a voice they could trust is there for them and you wouldn’t even do that to add legitimacy to the matter. Yet when there is a camera in the area you are there to get your little piece of the action. Why is it when a reporter leaves a Board meeting that you run after them? Why is it when your violation of Board policy got you banned from publicly addressing the Board you never issued an apology or tried to have the privilege reinstated? Why didn't you ask the whole Board to consider the matter? Because by law you are still entitled to address the Board through other means (email, fax, etc.), why didn't you use these methods to relay your concerns, insights, or recommendations? Because it is easier to be the martyr. Then you don't have to actually encourage change because its the Board's fault and not just poor ideas. >>"you need to shut up" You end on this? I will admit that the 4300 signatures is a very impressive feat, again a matter that I will not contest. I would be more impressed if you had done it on FACTS! Who do you attribute that first statement "..the board was caught on tape making fun of the community members and hoping they would leave so they would not have to deal with them."? (http://www.d49community.org/downloads/Recall_Sheet.pdf) Was it me? Was it Dave Martin? Our pictures are on the top of the sheet so it must be one of us right? A community member would have to assume this because it "THE D49 Community" is committed to transparency. Unfortunately the statement was made by a Board member who resigned over a year ago. Obviously Kent is just "mad" and is taking one segment out of context. Right? So of course the second one is more factual, "On one occasion the board tried to hold a short notice board meeting at a board member’s house. " Tom do you recall how I voted on this matter? Oh yeah I wasn't on the Board!!!! Then you pass this around to community members with my picture on it and get incensed with me when I out you for what you are? Sorry. By the way how did you guys address the question when people said "I know Kent and that doesn't sound right". ... ...In the end I see this recall as all upside for me. Either my ideas are validated or they are not. Either I get my time with my family back, or I go forward with a mandate silencing your shrill cries. To you and others I apologize if my candor is mistaken for arrogance. The difference is now I can be frank and don’t feel compelled to be measured in my response. Regards, Kent Clawson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------