The DMS board voted 4 to 1 to ban Andrew LeCody for 9 months for “Release of confidential email from Puretax Resolution resulting in damage to Dallas Makerspace”
It was 70 minutes of discussion starting here
The assertion by several board members that the email contents were ‘confidential’ is simply false. (Attorney client privilege doesn’t apply to the client talking about the information, the email contained a standard boiler plate email footer that they are citing as meaning it can’t be shared with anyone). The idea that it was somehow improper to share with other DMS members in a private discussion board is also false.
What does the board hope to accomplish with this ban? To send a message to volunteers that DMS should be an organization shrouded in secrecy where no one asks any questions or tries to hold leadership accountable to the membership?
Here are my guesses on the real reasons why they voted to ban LeCody
Revenge for LeCody investigating potential fraud, including Kris Anderson using DMS money to pay for uhaul pickup trucks and potentially using them as a personal vehicle
To deter anyone from saying anything the board doesn’t like
To scapegoat LeCody for the failure of the board to successfully manage expansion, they want someone to point to as the trouble maker when asked how they failed so much at getting anything accomplished (we have wasted $50k+ so far, and pay over $500 every day in rent for a significant amount of floorspace we can’t currently use)
To prevent anyone from looking into expansion Architect or GC selection process, Kris Anderson has previously threatened other members besides LeCody with retaliation for asking questions on that subject.
@Brandon_Green I appreciate you posting this for our members who could not attend but I ask that you please remove the mention of ‘Dallas Makerspace’ from the title of your YouTube video or tag the video as link only making it unsearchable as this has the potential to damage DMS by possibly discouraging new member signups as well as future corporate donations.
Although I don’t have the authority to tell you to do so, I would highly encourage you to also remove Andrew’s name from the title as I’m sure he would not want this to be the first Google result associated with his name.
This post is being moved to member’s only category for the reasons mentioned above.
I myself don’t have an opinion on this matter however it seems clear that four out of five people who were empowered in the last BoD election to make this kind of decision disagree with you.
It’s good to work toward expanding awareness of these things however it’s also important to try and prevent further harm while doing so.
I desperately wanted to come last night but I had a kiddo in bed.
I believe it was Bruce (sorry Bert @bertberaht ) talked so very eloquently and purely about moving forward TOGETHER with the greater good of the space in mind. I yelled at the empty air around my phone for everyone in the room to take a moment and really digest the clear beauty of what he was saying for the future.
I believe a massive opportunity for DMS to remain human and accessible was missed last night and it simply made me sad for all of us.
I wish we had a lawyer on the side of Andrew and Ken at the meeting. It would of been hilarious to see the moment when one lawyer looks at the other and knows they are completely full of **** and just dancing because their client is forcing them to. When Griggs started to claim Ken was not the client, but then just stopped and said well it is up to the BOD.
Also, Kris constantly claiming the email that was released was miss information, while having the full knowledge that a second email from Pure Tax exists which states that the suspected issues on the first email have now been documented by Pure Tax.
Ken said I can’t wait for the audit. I can’t wait for it either. I hope Kris continues to pay back the funds linked to her. Because, it will make the DMS whole and also give us reason not to follow up with legal action. I wish the new board a smooth transition and I hope they can rebuild the trust lost in this group by the current BOD.
I was infuriated by the number of times Kris chastised people for talking out of turn but then spoke over others, including the lawyer when he wasn’t giving her exactly the answer she wanted.
Thank GOD I didn’t go, they would have throw me out for laughing in the first 5 minutes. Watch the video people, it speaks for itself. When Bert says EVERYONE is to blame including the board,notice certain reactions and posture. The MAJORITY of membership KNOWS that Ken and Andrew are innocent, and I am certain the next board will overturn the ban.
Here’s where the Board’s justification for banning Andrew falls apart for me. Specifically in two key areas:
The Board’s position citing email comments from canceling members over ‘expansion drama’. If there were direct references from cancelling members citing Andrew’s actions as the basis for canceling their membership, those specific examples were not presented as evidence at the Board meeting. There has been plenty of expansion-related drama on Talk emanating from multiple sources (including members of the Board and members of the Expansion Committee). To set the precedent of banning Andrew is to call into question the actions of several other individuals who could be rightly accused of similar ‘damage’ to DMS.
The Board never quantified the materialty of the supposed damages to DMS as the result of Andrew’s action. If the Board was able to present material data-driven information that supported their decision to ban Andrew, then maybe I could get behind their decision. However, no convincing data on membership reduction numbers was presented that demonstrated any material loss in membership dues revenue. In fact, when members of the audience queried the Board on this materiality, before the Board’s vote, there was no material member reduction cited which could justify the basis for ‘serious and material damage’ to DMS.
To put it simply, regardless of what Andrew did or did not do, the impact of his actions did not rise to the level of materiality required to ban him using the bylaw wording cited repeatedly during the Board meeting.
Based on the above two points, I can only conclude that the Board’s specific basis for banning Andrew was incorrect and unjustified.
And when I made my comments on removing my credit card from the system before renewal it was 100% based on the shit show from the board and insanity around their part in expansion plus all the secrecy from the expansion committee related to budgets, costs, and lack of liquidity affecting payments. It was 100% NOT about anything Andrew or anyone outside the board brought up about expansion. It was based in frustration as a member about things NOT being transparent and nobody in the know being truthful.
I felt rewarded to be able to spend time with so many old friends last night. Seeing you all again was a gift, and each of you will always have a special place in my heart.
