Bill Quinn, former HAP Board liason, and then Shelley Marchesi, Public Affairs Director, were sent and agreed to forward exactly fourteen (14, no 13) public policy related email messages from me to the HAP Board between March 1, 2002 and September 5, 2003. It takes about one minute to forward an email to a list of nine recipients. So, over a sixteen month period I requested and presumably got thirteen minutes of staff time to forward email messages to HAP's board of directors.

"When his monthly emails to the HAP board started sucking up too much employee time..."

On the BS meter, with 10 = Whopping Pile of S..., HAP's complaint about taking "too much employee time" ranks 11.

On the WW Staff Gullibility meter where 10 = accepting everything Jason Blair and George W. Bush have to say as gospel then WW Rogue writers get - well, you fill in the number.

I have praised Shelley Marchesi's work in the past:

From: Richard Ellmyer <ellmyer@macsolve.com>
Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 12:16:57 PM US/Pacific
To: "Shelley Marchesi" <ShelleyM@hapdx.org>
Subject: The Value of High Credibility

Hi Shelley:
Your reputation for promptness and honesty is well earned. I appreciate being kept up to date on your efforts. I believe that are doing your best to get the information as soon as you can. Thanks.

Richard

WW received a copy of this:
From: Richard Ellmyer <ellmyer@macsolve.com>
Date: Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:20:12 AM US/Pacific
To: Shelley Marchesi <shelleyM@hapdx.org>
Cc: Steve Rudman <stever@hapdx.org>, Paul Parker <paulp@hapdx.org>, Margaret Van Vliet <Margaret@hapdx.org>, Nick Fish <nf@meyerwyse.com>
Subject: Who's Responsible?

Hi Shelley:
I am bewildered and considerably surprised by your atypical lack of response to my simple albeit important question: Did you forward my email of September 5th to all of HAP's board members on or before September 11th? Your silence is leading me to the logical and inescapable conclusion that your answer is NO. This is now my working assumption.

Your cooperation and professional behavior in the past make me very reluctant to make you the sole focus of any public comments I might express on this matter. However, you will leave me no choice if you do not affirm that you have passed on my messages in a timely fashion, as has been our long time understanding, or that some superior of yours ordered you not to perform this task.

Please correct any misconceptions I may have about your role in this matter before 5 PM today. Thank you.

Richard Ellmyer


Praise when it's warranted, condemnation when it's appropriate. I like Shelley Marchesi. But, Shelley Marchesi committed a dishonest and unethical act when she refused to pass on my email to the board and then refused to tell me. You call it what you will. I call it dishonest and unethical. She had every opportunity to tell me that she was ordered not to pass on my emails. She didn't.

WW did a service to our community by talking about this issue. For that you deserve credit and my personal thanks. I'm sorry that your colleagues at the Oregonian haven't yet risen to your level of enlightenment.