Dokiman ki tache

EXHIBIT #1 COUNCIL MINUTES 05/29/2007 Prepared Statement to address the Dover City Council, May 29, 2007: [wish to correct the false impression made by Mr Thomas J Leary, Chairman of the Charter Review Committee, relative to the 1989 Court Consent Decree as was quoted in the May 16, 2007 issue, pg [0A of the Dover Post. In an interview with Jeff Brown, re: the 1989 Consent Decree with the NAACP, Mr Leary said: We invited parties interested in the consent decree, but it was pretty clear to me they were not interested in discussing it. That is an inaccurate and misleading account of the transaction of that meeting. I recently consulted with Mr Wilson and reexamined my notes of that event. Both Mr Wilson, my notes and my memory describe a very different scenario of that meeting. Log entry of our meeting with the Charter Review Committee: Feb 16 Charter Review Committee meeting on the NAACP Consent Order. Cecil and I showed up with Leon Lewis, Pres of NAACP, Central DE. The Committee graciously greeted us. At Mr Leary’s request, we introduced ourselves and briefed members on our backgrounds, re: our interest and role in the Law Suit and Consent Decree. Cecil and I did so. Leon began by expressing his concern toward the Committee for not inviting him to the meeting. Leary explained that the City Clerk made several efforts at contacting him by phone without success. She left messages on his answering machine, but he didn’t return her call. Members asked if we had some suggestions to offer with respect to changes to the Charter- that is, did we have anything to add. Cecil told them that he believed it was the Committee’s job to make suggested changes and that we were there to monitor those changes to see if any of them were inconsistent with the Consent Decree. Mr Leary said he was expecting us to make suggestions. Cecil and I asked why the City Attorney wasn’t at the meeting, given that he had been an active participant in creating the Consent Decree in 1989. Leary said that he expected Rodriguez to be at the meeting but he called and said his colleague would come instead. Later however, the colleague called to say he couldn’t make it. Cecil and I told the Committee that since there was nothing for us to comment on, we would return when they have completed their suggestions and the City Attorney is present. All tolled, we stayed less than 10 minutes. Afterward, Cecil and I discussed the event outside the City Hall and agreed on two points: 1) The Committee had not done it’s job and was looking for us to do it for them and 2) that outcome was unlikely to happen.” End of Log entry We were never invited back to review and discuss the recommended changes to the City Charter nor were we made aware of the City Attorney’s review and report of the Committee’s recommended Charter revisions. Furthermore, if such a report exists, Mr Wilson and | would tike to review it prior to its submission to the City Council. Whether Mr Leary’s inaccurate comments were simply inadvertent or the result of memory loss, | understand. I too, have memory loss from time to time. That’s why I maintain a journal. Dr. Margaret McKay Researcher and Expert Witness, NAACP v City of Dover Mr Cecil Wilson, Plaintiff NAACP v City of Dover