Mountain or mole hill?

Well I am wondering whether to let the "push me or pull you" side win this morning as far as latching on to the article in the newspaper concerning a group in our town.  On one side of the battle is the fact that the matter is essentially an issue for a private entity.  Indeed the only public concern is the status of that entity as it pertains to its use and occupancy of a public building. that being the sticky wicket that encompasses the other side.

I use the word "entity" loosely here.  Until or unless the not for profit corporation is revived there might be some issue as to whether there is any entity at all.  that is some of the stuff that makes the wicket so sticky from the public perspective.

As to internal politics for the people involved well good luck with that one.  Someone needs to get a hold or the articles of organization, by-laws and either force the issue either through the mechanisms provided there under or quite simply where push comes to shove, that nasty little thing called a court battle.

Must be an interesting set of documents that allows a B of D to meet and sit in apparent perpetuity with no annual meetings of membership or elections.  

The coup analogy being used is actually very appropriate.  Whether there is justification for a coup is what needs to be assessed.  

The not following procedures statement recently made though is, well baffling to some people. Mainly because it is not known what the procedures are.  Thus the rationale behind the coup.  Are procedures for say annual meetings, election of officers and directors being followed?

If anyone has a copy of the by-laws, might make for some entertaining reading.  Feel free to send them to me.

I only hazard wandering into this quagmire for two reasons: 

The first being this has all the ear markings of one of those nasty little things that will spill over into a much larger arena; and, the first big splash being today's piece in the daily coupled with a smaller one recently in a weekly paper. 

The second reason: Allowing the continued use of the building by a entity which has been issued an involuntary revocation by the S of C possess issues to the town which should be addressed, and which should have been addressed some time ago.  Not the least of which is if the legal premise under which an entity existed has been revoked, just what does that do to the "proclamation" issued to the entity? 

The town's involvement in this one should be focused with laser beam precision, i.e. goop remover for the wicket.  No assistance, no mediation, no association.  

The other precise laser beam, the one I am going to aim with exact precision, will be comments to this piece.  Extremely tight focus required, be on target.  No expanded four corners on the topic today. Strict town meeting protocols will be adhered to.

In the event you can't figure out what this piece is about today, or it just doesn't float your boat, "Open Line" is also in play.

Be safe.