One Guilford at Guilford
The second One Guilford leadership symposium today at Guilford College did not attract the numbers of the first.
But what it may have lacked in glitz and sheer quantity it made up for in quality and energy.
The 100 or so who attended were engaged and thoughtful, a fact that became clear when they split into breakout sessions to discuss four key areas:
1. The region's economic potential as an "Aerotropolis."
2. . The impact of the High Point Market and potential for High Point's development as the intellectual and creative center of the furniture industry.
3. The UNCG-A&T Millennium Campus' ramifications for the future of Guilford County.
4. "Opportunity Preparedness" -- as in equipping students to thrive in a more knowledge-based economy.
As Doug notes, the speakers (Commissioners Chairman Paul Gibson, UNCG economist Andrew Brod, N.C. A&T Chancellor Stanley Battle, school board Vice Chairman Amos Quick and Bennett College President Julianne Malveaux, who provided closing remarks) were superb and Guilford College was an excellent host.
Bottom line: A lot of exciting opportunities await this county if we connect our efforts and better leverage our collective strengths.
We need to move faster. We need to put aside petty differences. We need to invest in education. We need to empower all of our citizens to succeed. And we need to embrace and exploit our diversity.
Some room for improvement:
Julianne Malveaux pointed out the glaring lack of young people.
Stanley Battle noted the lack of women among the keynote speakers.
So far as I could tell, High Point wasn't as well represented as we'd hoped it would be.
We need to keep working to encourage more grass-roots participation.
But we're encouraged. And we're already looking forward to the next One Guilford.
Incidentally, it's at UNCG on March 12, 2008. And after that, at GTCC.
Each breakout had a notetaker, so you'll hear more about this in the future.
Comments (3)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Allen,
What was the point in adding the following to your editorial today about gangs. This was done just to take another poke at the David Wray episode that your paper has riden so hard for years. These two paragraphs add nothing to the editorial, but it does reveal your bias against Wray that has been so obvious for a long, long time. I wonder where we would be today, if Jedrry Bledsoe hadn't come along to get the story straight?
"But police Chief Tim Bellamy and city leaders should be mindful. Even gang units formed with the very best of intentions can lose focus and ultimately lose their way. Experts say gang units frequently have fallen victim to muddled missions, maverick mentalities and even corruption.
Arguably, that happened here. A special intelligence unit whose mission originally was as an anti-gang and anti-hate group squad was used to investigate other officers."
Posted on October 19, 2007 4:23 PM
It's a fact, and it is germane to the editorial. Experts say gang squads often stray from their missions. It would be disingenuous not to note that it happened before here.
Posted on October 19, 2007 5:00 PM
Allen,
It may be factual and germane to your article, but it's also a fact and germane that since the departure of David Wray, GPD's gang unit has essentially been disbanded (one officer) and the gang situation has gotten much worse (talk about lost or muddled mission!). But, you didn't mention those details did you? Those are facts and germane to your editorial as well. Why no mention of that? As a matter of fact, isn't it true that the effectiveness of the entire department has decreased since the departure of David Wray, and suffered a loss of almost all of its experienced command structure? What of the declining morale of the department? What effect do you think that these germane facts have, but weren't mentioned?
Posted on October 19, 2007 7:25 PM