Page 10, RAIN, June 1978 Dear Tom: I received the most recent issue of RAIN and enjoyed reading "NCAT, Where Ar~ You At?''. As can be expected, I have a different analysis on certain aspects of the article. I think it is ·only fair that you distinguish the two-year planning process from the year's operation of NCAT. The , staff, now working in Butte, were not involved in the twoyear process, were not responsible for what occurred during this period, nor in fact were.responsible for the final decisions in the structural establishment of the Center. There are iwo areas in which I disagr{'.e with the article. The first area is in the grant-making processes. N<:;:A T today has received over 500 proposals and we have funded over 100 organizations totaling $1,000,000. There was no mention of our work with people in the lower east side of New York or involvement in Crystal City, and the many programs funded both to a. t. and CAA organizations. Regardi'ng the funding of newsletters, four of the newsletters were ddayed in funding b~cause they either did not ret:urn their signed contract, and/ or they were operating within a university structure and the delay was within the un1versity. That is not to say that we have not had problems with CSA and the Board·. I agree that the requirements for small grants need to be closely scrutinized, and we must avoid requiring a great deal of people's work and people's time just to protect "the integrity.of Federal dollars." The other area is what you envision as.the maximum size of the NCAT staff. For your information, the Grants and Outreach Component is handled by five people and the Information/Research Component has been ·operating with six people. The purpose of NCAT is not just to funnel monies t,o a.t.s or CAAs, nor·is it just to provide information on approp.ri3:te technology. • NCAT's chief responsibility.is to.give a national focus to appropriate technology and to remove a. t. from the backyard tinkering arena and to put it into a more political and economical framework. A.T. must become a viable alternative to the capital-intensive and capital-concentrated economy that now exists. A.T. must become a viable alternative to lowincome and minority organizations. Much of what I have witnessed today regarding a.t. is pretty middle-class an~ white oriented. I certainly cannot argue with the sections dealing with CSA and the Board. I agree that the Center needs to be "turned loose," and NCAT must evolve a process that will not restrict cooperation and accessibility to the many organizations involved in appropriate technology and community ' development. I believe the differences between your concep-. tion of NCAT and rriy vision of NCAT are healthy. I wo1;1ld like the opportunity to have you visit the Center and to share with us your ideas and your concerns. Maybe in the future RAIN article, I could wri\e an article ei:i,titled, "NCAT, What )s It and Where We Are." . , My best regards to you and the staff. Sincerely, James F. Schmidt , Executive Coordinator National Center for Appropriate Technology Dear Tom: . As an addition to my last letter I thought you would be interested in knowing that the· Executive Committee of the Board is recommending to the full Board that I be terminated as of Friday, April 21. It now appears that the Board will •terminate me by a very narrow margin. My termination is of little significance; what is important is what will happen to the National Center. Regardless of the reasons given by Maggiore and Dick Saul, my termination is becau$e of three basic issues. These are: 1. The Cepter is worker managed·. 2. The Center is diversifying its funding, which means less control for Dick Sal;ll. ' 3. The staff wants the Center to be a National Center for Appropriate Technology, not~ CSA Weatherization Center. ' ' I Regardless of your personal feelings concerning the "appropriateness" of a National Center, there is an extremely fine staff here who are dedicated to the advancement of appropriate technology and the Center has been successful. There have been numerous proplems, many related to the Board and CSA's control, but given a chance the Center could be of benefit. Lastly, your recent article was incorrect in its attack on ' MERDI. During my one year with the Center, Jerry Plunkett ,has been extremely cooperative and supportive. He has not exerted any control or influence over the Center. Our relationship with MERDI has been extremely positive. The problem ' of control is with Dick Saul. My best to you. Jim, Sincerely, James F. Schmidt Executive Coordinatdr National Center for Appropriate Technology I We didn't mean to imply any present problems between NCA T and MERDI. As our article stated, however, MERDI was a real problem during the planning of NCA T. This was partly because of the lack ofhonesty about precommitments between CSA and MERDi in regard to NCA T. It was partly because any rel~tion between NCA T and MERDI was un-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz