Take Care
Recent events amply demonstrate why we, as bloggers, need to take the utmost care in trying to document what we assert and, if we cannot document, make sure that surmising is clearly identified as such.
Not too long ago, local animal activist and recall proponent, Susan Overfield, posted the following concerning funding for the Great Falls Animal Foundation:
McLean [sic] in her will donates $400k, I believe to be allocated by the lawyer, in 2002 I believe. It’s offered to the HSCC, they state they cannot with the limited manpower do the fund-raising, and to issue it to their fund-raising arm, the Foundation, as seed money. [Emphasis added]
Yesterday, the personal representative of Ms. MacLean’s estate, local attorney Dale Schwanke, printed the following in the Great Falls Tribune:
Setting the record straight
I want to set the record straight regarding the $400,000 that, as personal representative of Margaret Maclean’s estate, I determined should be given to the Animal Foundation to carry out her wishes to help animals in north central Montana.
I spent considerable time researching the possible ways I could fulfill her wishes. Although the Humane Society of Cascade County (HSCC) made a proposal, I did not find it satisfactory as the HSCC was advised.
I later determined to award $400,000 to the Animal Foundation believing its project, as outlined in its very thorough proposal and elaborated upon by certain of its trustees, would be a project Margaret would have wanted to support. Through hard work, dedication and determination, the Foundation raised the matching funds that were required, and the estate in turn has paid the Foundation the $400,000 as promised.
The finished product, a facility well-planned, thought out, and named in her honor will be a fitting tribute to Margaret and her love of animals. Margaret would be both happy and proud to have been a part of this, and it is personally rewarding to me having known her for many years.
— K. Dale Schwanke, Great Falls
This just shows that sometimes people who are sure aren’t and that people who tell us things are wrong. Let’s all try to keep the rhetoric fact-based.
Good post GeeGuy,
that is the information that I discovered by going some research on the subject. That the money was given to the foundation to construct a new animal shelter. Not HSCC. I am glad that the personal representative set the record straight. Now I only wonder (and still researching) how many other things the individuals calling for a recall have, shall I say mislead, the public. Mislead is probably not the correct word to use, help me out here with the proper word>>>>>
MJefferson01
Click on January 2 on the calendar on the left side of this page and you will see the “Animal Shelter Report” post, which is another example of a statement made by Ms. Overfield that was disputed.
I wouldn’t use the term “mislead” as that implies a guilty scienter and an intent. My take on this is that there are some people who have predefined notions of what has happened, and ‘interpret’ evidence accordingly. I think that there is an awful lot of “I was told” and “it seems to me” and “isn’t it odd that” and “numerous people think,” without a lot of “here is the document and look at p. xyz.”
GFGIRL,
yes I remember that post. My biggest question on that was “why would the report go to the Animal Foundation when they were not the ones who paid for it?” That did sound funny to me, I have never know any organization to send a copy of a report to another agency that did not hire or pay for the report. So I figured that statement as inaccurate. The city hired the agency to conduct the inspection and produce a report, therefore the city would be the only one that the agency would provide the report to. Now if the city wants to distribute it to other agencies that is their call.
Geeguy- You are awfully tolerant. At some point people who are constantly on the wrong side of the facts need to be held accountable for their misstatements. Overfield started much of this with her city hall groping incident.
pudgepack, let a jury decide the overfield case. That is if the city even allows this case to proceed. As you say, some people are constantly on the wrong side of the facts. Here is your mirror.