Questions For Spencer

I spoke with VP Spencer several times about the questions posted by members and with his assistant Mike Capelli. On April 11, Mr. Capelli told me "UBC lawyer Brian Quinn, is drafting an answer to the questions and I should have them in a few days."

I spoke with Mr. Capelli at Wednesday’s May 7th meeting and he told me “UBC lawyer Quinn is still working on the answers.”

An outraged member that is familiar with the issue, and wishes to remain anonymous said, “In the amount of time that has past since the membership has asked Spencer questions…Extreme Makeover Home Edition has built 12 houses, and the membership of local 157 still have not received an answer to six simple questions raised regarding this trusteeship.”

Below is six questions posted on this blog and sent to VP Spencer on March 4th, on behalf of the membership of local 157, which Spencer has refused to answer...

1. General President McCarron's letter to local 157 members dated December 3 cites section 10H of the constitution that granted full supervisory authority. Specifically where in section 10H does it state that the General President has the "authority to remove elected officers" of a local? This would seem to bypass Section 52, which guaranties the right to a fair and impartial trial.

2. Where in section 10H does it give the General President the authority to appoint officers to fill the vacated positions in a local? Section 10M gives the General President the right to appoint interim officers in NEWLY, CONSOLIDATED and MERGED Locals, which does not apply to local 157.

3. Why is Section 32D being bypassed, which gives the recording Secretary of the Local the right and duty to call a meeting to order and in the absence of a President and Vice President those Present shall elect a "President Pro Tem"

4.Why is the District Council involved in the supervision by appointing business reps, business manager and involved with the locals finances and books? This right, under supervision is the Internationals not the District Council.

5. Why is the District Council paying the bills when the only thing the LMRDA limits is the ability of the Councils or International to move money out of the Local to either one of them? It does not require the International to freeze the local’s accounts and stop them from paying their own bills.

6. What is the reason for the continued supervision? If Hanley and Kennedy resigned on November 21 and the District Council fired Dilacio and no accusation of financial impropriety or other fraud was found isn't the problem solved?