The leadership crisis in the Liberian community in Minnesota has now reached an explosive level, with both groups, the Executive Committee and Board of Directors of the Organization of Liberians in Minnesota (OLM), unleashing scathing critiques on each other’s performance and intents.

Although the President has sought the approval of the board to legitimize the heads of committees and to pursue a legal action, he has quite lately conveniently changed the rules and insisted that the only role the organization’s Board needs to be play is to look on as he does what he often defines as “actions in the interest of the community”.

The board seemed not to be impressed, as it has emphasized on countless occasions that the President has failed the community and has now resorted to “character assassination and malicious gossips to hide his dismal leadership qualities”.

Quite recently, the board accused the President Dwanyen of engaging in corrupt practices, when he draw funds from the organization’s account, without the approval of the board, to pay for office services he voluntarily offered the organization.

The President replied in kind, charging that the Board has not raised a penny to help the organization sustain its programs. The President would not say which program he has designed to serve the community, except as the Chairman Zakama said, “Using TPS/DED for political purpose”. Click Here to Read Full text of President Dwanyen’s Letter to the Board.

To understand how terrible things have become, look no further. The Board recently issued to The Liberian Journal a full-throated response to what it called “The President’s confused letter published in a local media”.

See Below Full Text of Chairman Zakama’s Response to President Dwanyen…

On February 05, 2009, Mr. Dwanyen took to the media to reject the Board’s recommendations that were intended to mitigate alleged financial impropriety in OLM. In continuation of Mr. Dwanyen’s rejection, he gave reasons for his incorporation by using the 1986 Constitution to justify his position. Such proposition, we believe, is precipitous and re-ignites a historical conflict between the Board and the Executive.     

' 

Based on this backdrop, the Board of Directors of the Organization of Liberians in Minnesota finds Mr. Dwanyen’s narration to be disappointing and it sends a wrong message to our folks about the roles and responsibilities of the two organs (the Executive Committee and the Board of Directors). We also find Mr. Dwanyen’s commentary to be filled with contradictions and hollow details that are mutually exclusive from the financial mismanagement alleged against him. Not only did Mr. Dwanyen struggle to compose an embellished commentary to switch topic; as of today’s date, he continues to wobble between the board’s function and expectations– today, he says the board has the power to do this; but tomorrow, he will come up to say, the board does not have the power to do that. Where does Mr. Dwanyen stand? First and foremost, Mr. Dwanyen needs to know that he is not the God Father to dictate to the board what the roles and responsibilities of the board of directors are but the constitution. Consequently, it is amusing to say the least for Mr. Dwanyen to even think of interpreting provision of the constitution as a working definition for the board.

Such changeable stance on the part of Mr. Dwanyen can only be associated with individuals who are agents of paralytic incompetence, conning manipulation and are dogmatically imbued with tyranny. Let it be known that Mr. Dwanyen’s attempt to seek sympathy and to exonerate himself through his unfounded commentary demonstrates desperation and extreme anxiety to circumvent what is now being seen as a stupefying ineptitude that have besieged his administration since he took over OLM. His mantra, in practicality, has always been to insulate himself with sycophants and crush dissenting perspectives.

Because of this detested mantra, it is incumbent upon members of the board to distance themselves from Mr. Dwanyen’s unpopular mantra in our community. Especially, when we have less than 10 months to the end of our term, Mr. Dwanyen has adapted a new modus operandi that focuses on sharing failed responsibilities on every creature that passes by.

Recognizing such desperation on the part of Mr. Dwanyen, it is noteworthy for the board to discern the difference between the board’s responsibilities and Mr. Dwanyen’s calculated scheme that is geared towards extricating himself from being OLM’s worst President. To not bore our audience on the list of approvals, which was published in previous article, we challenge Mr. Dwanyen to tell the public, other than the draft constitution that we raised serious concern about, what did he present to the board as project(s) and was/were denied? Not a single project was denied. Instead of him taking advantage of the available resources on the board, which had been availed to him since our inception, he is bent on castigation of anyone who disagrees with him.

With castigation comes his so-called stricter interpretation of the 1986 Constitution by Mr. Dwanyen. In the last seven months, Mr. Dwanyen has switched gear to becoming the new constitutional expert. This new approach must be applauded by everyone; mainly, members of the board. However, what he has not done in its entirety is to objectively interpret the constitution to its fullest. Based on this background, we have provided an attachment of the 1986 Constitution that Mr. Dwanyen so espoused (sorry for the appearance) and some interpretations of the 1986 Constitution; specifically the board.

Article VI Board of Directors: Section I: Count 1 (pages 3 & 4)–

The Board of Directors shall advise the executive committee on the general management of the organization, and shall exercise all laws subject to the provisions of the article of incorporation and all appropriate State and Federal Laws.

While it is true that the constitution provides a wording to establish a continuous working relationship by employing the word Advise, it also defines the oversight responsibility of the board by subsequent sentences connected by a conjunction word; and, which is to exercise all laws subject to the provisions of the organization’s article of incorporation and all appropriate State and Federal Laws. So, where does the role of the board comes to be just an Advisory Board?

Article VI Board of Directors: Section I: Count 4 (pages 3 & 4)

The Chairman of the Board of Directors shall be a signatory to the organization’s account.

As is now, the Chairman of the Board does not have his signature on the organization’s account and his name has never been submitted to TCF Bank to become a signatory to the account. Because of the flagrant violation of the 1986 Constitution and the lack of internal control procedure, the board recommended temporary mitigating process to put a stop to the bleeding and the deliberate cashing out of the people’s funds.

Article II Executive Committee: Section II: Count 1 – The President:

A: Shall be the chief Executive Officer of the Organization. He shall exercise general supervision of all operations of the organization upon the approval of the Executive Committee and the Board of Directors.

In the abovementioned provision of the constitution, it provides once more inter-dependent working relationship and approving power to both organs and not one over the other. This is what you called “Accountability” to both organs. Hence, it is incomprehensible to conjecture that only the Executive Committee can put its proposal together at the same time approve it without the Board’s approval. Based on these provisions of the constitution, we find the role of the board to include but not limited to the following:

a.       Advisory role

b.       Approving power

c.       Oversight responsibility

With that said, let us take a panorama review of Mr. Dwanyen’s continual inconsistency of where the goalpost should be whenever it does not affect him:

 1.  Appointing power:  

Mr. Dwanyen stated in the last sentence of paragraph 9: “How does the board reconcile its failure to appoint a simple committee for more than 9 months while going on this campaign to demonize the executive which has many constituted and functioning committees?” in this quote, Mr. Dwanyen strongly believed then that the board had appointing power; however, in subsequent paragraph, Mr. Dwanyen redefined where the goalpost should be when it came to auditing him: this is what he gets to say: “That the board does not have appointing authority to constitute an audit or any other committee as you suggest.” The question that comes to our mind is where was the constitution 9 months ago, Mr. Dwanyen?

It is important to fathom herein that because of the gravity of financial impropriety on his part and the likelihood of potential conflict of interest, Mr. Dwanyen will need to recues himself from the appointments of prospective auditors. This is what we call bringing integrity to financial transparency and accountability.  As the saying goes, “You can’t have your cake and eat it too.”

2. Authorization/Confirmation hearing:

To begin with, Mr. Dwanyen claimed that his administration is doing this board a favor by bestowing power that should not have been in the first place. Please read: “While this administration envisions constitutional reform to create a true governing board and welcomes good faith efforts at a collaborative working relationship with this advisory board in light of the deficiencies of the 1986 constitution, we are disheartened that those gestures have been met with abuse and indignation.” By his definition, he, Mr. Dwanyen, does not need authorization or is not accountable to the board to do the people’s business. This is one of Mr. Dwanyen’s deliberate patterns of multiple violations and attempts to usurp the role of the board: What he failed to add in his diatribe was that members of the board were elected just like him. Only in Dwanyen’s world can an elected position be relegated to nominal.

Based on the aforementioned, below are contrasting perspectives of Mr. Dwanyen when the board is important:

a.       Authorization to seek legal Action:

March 2008 - Mr. Dwanyen sough authorization from the Board to take legal action against the former Elections Commissioners – Please note herein that Bill Lubov & Associate being informed by Mr. Dwanyen that OLM is a 501c (3) organization, requested that members of the Board affix their signatures on the resolution before he, Bill Lubov, could take up our case. In fact, at one point in the Month of June 2008, members of the board along with the President met with Mr. Lubov in his office to discuss litigation proceeding on this matter. Now, you might wonder why Mr. Dwanyen will sell OLM as a tax Exempt organization to our partners but refuse to recognize the board as a governing board? You be my guest. We believe that this is duplicity at best and it highlights a willful calculation of deception and conning manipulation on his part. What this man needs to know is that he can not go to prospective donor(s) or partner(s) in progress and say OLM is a 501c (3) but whenever he comes to the board, he puts on his iron fist by saying to the board, you know what? “Screw you” I am not accountable to you.

Please note herein that unlike Mr. Dwanyen who wrote OLM’s checks to himself, members of the elections commissioners were sued purposely because they refused to turn over OLM’s property.

b.       Authorization to establish Liberia Community Action (LCA):  Mr.Dwanyen again sought Board’s authorization to establish LCA. The board deliberated extensively on this proposal and passed it in May 2008. For over ten months, LCA registration was shelved until in January 2009 when it was finally dusted off the shelf and registered after numerous appeals by the board for the President to show something as a legacy. Note: prior to registration, the Chairman had to arrange with Mr. Dwanyen to meet with him at a location to have the Chairman’s autograph on the document. The question that comes to our mind is that why the Chairman’s autograph was important since Mr. Dwanyen does believe that the board is an advisory board? As we all know now by Mr. Dwanyen’s definition of Advisory board is that it requires him to reset the terms of reference for board as he wants.

The board rejects in the strongest term such definition and promises to remain steadfast in exercising every ounce of its roles and responsibilities as inscribed in the Constitution. 

c.       Confirmation hearing:

March 2008 – Mr. Dwanyen presented to the board five Standing Committee Chairs along with their Co-chairs for confirmation hearing. Without hesitation, the board deliberated and confirmed all nominees. Please note herein that these standing committees are not elected positions. Considering this as a fact, our legal and elected Vice President, Mr. Andrew Tehmeh, resigned his post to seek new opportunity in our motherland, Liberia. Mr. Tehmen’s resignation brought to the microscope another test of Mr. Dwanyen’s leadership skills.

In his search for VP, Mr. Dwanyen’s picked his second choice for Vice President, Mr. John Jenkins Bartee, Jr., Initially, Mr. Dwanyen decided to send his nominee for confirmation hearing since he recognized then that the position was an elected office and it carries more weigh than the Standing Committee. After Mr. Bartee was tapped by Mr. Dwanyen, he, Bartee, called the Chairman of the Board to declare his interest in the position and needed the Chairman’s support on the board for confirmation. During this call, the Chairman guaranteed Mr. Bartee his support, which meant that Mr. Bartee had one solid vote in his favor. All he needed to do was to lobby with other board members to garner more votes.

Here again, Mr. Dwanyen opened his contrasting roll book: 

Ironically to the Chairman’s surprise, Mr. Dwanyen and his supposed nominee seemed to have failed to muster enough votes for confirmation. Failure on their part to muster enough votes on the board, Mr. Dwanyen turned to his usual route “my way or the hard way” by stating: “That your recommendation that the Vice President, Mr. John Bartee come to the board for confirmation is neither supported by OLM constitution or precedent as you allege. The letter and spirit of the OLM is that all members of the Executive committee are on a team selected and headed by the President.” It so disappointing and frustrating that Mr. Dwanyen does not still get it that the world does not revolve around him along.

Considering that the Vice President Position is an elected position, what does the 1986 Constitution say?

Article 1 Authority: Section II:

The Executive Committee shall have the right to appoint any and all members to serve all committees of the Organization of Liberians in Minnesota, Inc, and fills all other non-elected positions within the organization.

So, where does the President have the power or authority to appoint a Vice President that is an elected position?

Article IV Meetings: Section VI Annual Meeting:

The annual meeting of the organization shall be held on the fourth Sunday of October of each year or on such other date during the calendar year as may be directed by the Executive Committee and Board of Directors in written notice. At the annual meeting, the members shall elect members of the Board and Executive members of the organization.

We again believe that the appointment of Mr. Bartee is another flagrant violation of the constitution by Mr. Dwanyen and we ask him to desist from this unacceptable practice. We ask Mr. Dwanyen to respect the rule of law by either sending his nominee for confirmation or wait till the fourth Sunday in October.

d.      Community Center:

Let it be known that at no time did Chairman Zakama or the board communicate with Mr. Dwanyen about switching over the Community Center to the board. This is another willful act of desperation on the part of Mr. Dwanyen to switch some of his dismal failures after 13 months of his administration.  All of his multiplicity of committees has vanished in thin air because as many have said that Kerper is too controlling and can’t stand seeing themselves working for him. So, the rise and fall of the various (other than finance & Sports) committees were the day Mr. Dwanyen appointed them.

Fellow Liberians, for a man like Mr. Dwanyen who is ingrained in pageantry and always seeking credit for everything, it is unfathomable and frivolous to assume that such an iconic project like the community center will be turned over to the board. If Mr. Dwanyen strongly believes that he did attempt to turn over the Community Center project, we are asking him in this public manner to turn the project over to the board.

In conclusion, as elected officials of the board of directors and with the mandate to advise, approve and serve as oversight of our dear patrimony, it is our ardent hope that Mr. Dwanyen will recognize and embrace stricter interpretation of the constitution and zoom out from the land of isolation and join us in a collaborative partnership to serving our people.

As always and in the name of OLM for which we all claim to love, the board, in this public manner, extends an olive branch to Mr. Dwanyen and members of the Executive Committee (if any) to re-affirm our commitment to the promises made during 2007 elections.