NIMBY

[Michael Bacon]

Nick,

I could understand giving Boarman some credit if this were his first 
offense.  But as anyone who reads this list should know, it's clearly not.

As for whether he was confused, well, there's pretty incontrovertible 
evidence that his office had an official memo from the Durham City-County 
Joint Planning Department.  With that memo in hand, he sent out a letter to 
alums and donors with incorrect information.  If the man listened to WHHNA 
and took their version of the story while ignoring the official word from 
the only source that mattered, I suppose that doesn't make him a liar, but 
it does make him one spectacular idiot.

(It doesn't help that in his gripes Boarman said, "We just want what the 
other Durham high schools have, like Northwood."  Um, sir, that's Northern, 
not Northwood.  Way to be in touch with local issues.)

On a side note, I'm all for NCSSM having plenty of athletic opportunities 
for students, but is it really a good idea for S&M students to be playing 
tennis after 9 at night?  Has tennis really become such an unbelievably 
popular sport all of the sudden that all the slots are full before first 
check, even though most tennis courts in the country have seen a dramatic 
decline in usage over the past couple decades?  I mean really.

Michael

--On Sunday, March 19, 2006 11:19 AM -0800 Nick Gorton 
<nickgorton at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think re-reading the editorial is a pretty good suggestion. From the
> tone and statements in that, it can pretty much be summed up that the
> WHHNA (or at least Ned Kennington) really doesn't give a rats ass if the
> school is able to provide the best for its several hundred students if
> that comes at the expense of an occasional annoyance for about a dozen or
> so homeowners.
>
> The fact that the man is perseverating about tennis courts being lit
> until 2145 speaks loudly to that sentiment. I can certainly understand
> feeling slighted that you were not kept well informed that the school
> changed the policy to have the courts available to students 45 minutes
> later... but calling the school immoral, dishonorable, and unscrupulous
> because they didn't send you a memo? Just that histrionic tone of his
> editorial and the fact that he's worried about NCSSM's 'moral values'
> (red flag! red flag! red flag!) screams: malignantly entitled nutjob to
> me.
>
> And that's precisely the reason that I suspect the school is not really
> keen on engaging them. If you have a neighborhood association that is
> reasonable when you want to have lighting for a tennis court, you might
> be more willing to negotiate something more contentious like what is
> proposed. However, if people are unreasonable about smaller issues, it
> can fairly well be assured that they are going to be even less reasonable
> about bigger ones. Given that, its not surprising that the administration
> might not actively seek out their participation and might try to
> circumvent the WHHNA altogether.
>
> With regard to Boarman in particular, I think his actions should be taken
> in context. In the article to which you linked, when the error (about the
> zoning rules changing) was brought to his attention, Boarman admitted it
> was a mistake. The article then says he: "brought up worries about a
> rezoning after contentious discussions with neighborhood representatives
> who led him to believe designation under the university district would
> limit what could be built." So if you believe the article: the WHHNA
> misleads him to think that the zoning rules would change, he cites this
> as a reason to urgently address this, then the WHHNA derides him for
> using the information they misled him about as a means of fundraising.
>
> So Boarman's mistake in this incident was that he didn't question the
> veracity of the WHHNA? Or that he made a factual error (which he admitted
> was a mistake)?
>
> Now, I certainly do not claim that I know this guy or even that he is to
> be trusted. However, the information in Kennington's letter and the N&O
> article do not seem to indicate that his actions in this regard are
> reasonably inappropriate. Furthermore, its not like he's the CEO of Enron
> who's only out to make a buck. Michael Bacon said this was about:
> "Boarman being dishonest and misleading to all parties in order to get
> what he wants." However, 'what he wants' is to build an athletic stadium
> for a high school, and while the ends don't always justify the means,
> they sometimes do.
>
> Last week I saw an actively psychotic and violent person (who was *huge*)
> in the ER. He refused all oral medicines that we wanted to give him, so
> we had to use an injection (which he also refused.) So instead of getting
> half a dozen cops to hold him down, I lied and told him that I was giving
> him a tetanus shot (since he'd gotten injured earlier.) He accepted this
> and let me inject a nice slug of haldol. Was this dishonest and
> misleading? Sure. Was it the right thing to do? Also sure. So have a look
> at Boarman's actions in this light. 'What he wants' is to build a high
> school athletic stadium, not to swindle elderly women out of their life
> savings.
>
> Nick
>
>
> --
> R. Nick Gorton, MD
> Diplomate, American Board of Emergency Medicine
> 808 F Street #311
> Davis, CA 95616
> (504) 261-8379
>
> The plural of anecdote is 'not data.' - Roger Brinner.
>
> Few arguments are more dangerous than those that "feel" right but can't
> be justified. -Stephen Jay Gould
>
> <<< CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE >>>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential, and
> intended only for the named recipient(s) above. If it has been sent to
> you in error, please notify the sender by replying to this email and
> delete this message immediately from your computer. Any other use,
> retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail
> is strictly forbidden.