Friday, August 2, 2013

A member of the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People says Jackie Wagstaff remains censured: The war continues

A member of the Executive Committee of the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People says Jackie Wagstaff, despite the opinion of many at last night’s meeting, remains censured as head of the groups Political Committee.

The Executive Committee members says the General Body of the Durham Committee voted to suspend indefinitely conversations regarding Wagstaff’s status as Chair of the Political Committee.

The Legal Redress Committee contends a lack of a vote failed to remove the censure of Wagstaff.  An official statement will be released regarding the Executive Committee’s position within the next week.

A document written by the Legal Redress Committee, claims that Wagstaff executed a state document to reserve the name of “The Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People.

”At no point over more than a month did she notify any other officer of this action or seek professional guidance from those in the organization professionally qualified to do such work,” the documents states

Wagstaff addressed the accusation during a July 25, 2013 meeting. 

At that meeting, Wagstaff  “a) admitted to having filed said document; b)made negative characterizations about the professional capabilities of the current chair of the Legal Redress Committee and alleged that for 75 years this organization has not ‘taken care of business’ as a justification for her unilateral action; c) disrupted the July 25, 2013 meeting by raising her voice and using inappropriate language for the setting within which the meeting was being held; d) immediately after the meeting had to be restrained from initiating a physical encounter with the General Body Chair,” the document reads.

The Executive Committee has concerns regarding Wagstaff taking unilateral actions and in making statements to the “press without consultation with the General Body Chair.”  The document holds Wagstaff to task for refusing to allow the Chair of the General Body to review questions to be submitted to candidates to the fall election before being issued.

In addition, “Ms. Wagstaff has engaged in roles on behalf of the Committee that fall outside the mandate of the Political Committee or that of the Chair of the Political Committee and has done so without gaining permission prior to doing so or even as a matter of courtesy informing the General Body Chair after the fact,” the document states.

“Examples of this include playing the role of a condolence committee of the Committee by attending funerals and providing correspondence again without notice to the General Body Chair either before or after such events.”
The Legal Redress Committee’s document stressed an attitude of divisiveness that defines Wagstaff’s involvement as a member of the Executive Committee.

“In nearly every presentation that Ms. Wagstaff has made she attempts to create a straw man that she describes as “Ya’ll.” Typically she uses the straw man as an example of inaction by the organization. For example, when questioned about filing the document with the secretary of state she stated in an open meeting that “ya’ll haven’t been taking care of business” Further, she has typically sought to divide the organization instead of attempting to unify the organization.”

Wagstaff is accused of slamming books on tables, raising her voice, using unacceptable language and behaving in a threatening and uncontrollable way during Executive Committee meetings.

Divisiveness may have escalated after last night’s ambiguous vote.  Supporters of Wagstaff believe she’s still in charge of the Political Committee, while members of the Executive Committee maintain the vote forces a change in leadership.

This isn’t over yet.


  1. Only in The Durham Committee could an officer get away with going to Raleigh, and though not authorized, filing a document on behalf of the entire organization to reserve its name as a Business Corporation, refuse to inform anyone, put her name as the official agent of the organization, and instead of using the organization's PO BOX, using her own? That is fraud and she should be charged. If anyone did that on their job, you'd be f-i-r-e-d.

    Who are these individuals that think Jackie Wagstaff is more important than an entire 78 year old organization?

    This is not about race and class. This is about an officer being allowed to so whatever she wants and not being held responsible.

    Watch the Black Community REJECT her pay-to-pay line-up of Omar Beasley, Pam Karriker and Sylvester Williams.

    We've seen this show before folks...and it never ends well for Jackie. LOL

  2. Robert's Rules are pretty clear: the chair proposes the agenda, but decisions are made by votes.

    "I move that we incorporate the name."

    It gets seconded, debated then voted upon, and ONLY THEN may someone designated by the committee act in the committee's name.

    Is there anything in the minutes that indicates Robert's Rules were followed? They are a civil an civilized way an organization works. Isn't that the way this organization wants to be viewed?

    If it was a private company the state in general demands to see the minutes, signed by the secretary, before accepting anything like this. Does NC have the same requirement for incorporation? Was the state provided an authorizing document?

  3. That is the point. Wagstaff lied. People are missing the obvious points that you have just raised; the woman went out and did everything described in the 1st post on this thread. If someone lived in my house, and saw me everyday, went and filed an official state document on behalf of my family, and used their name as the authorized agent (which gives them authority to open checking accounts in my name), and is a standing committee chair of one of my subcommittee's that collects money....and doesn't tell me about it? But I find out 36 days later and the person's response is to start cursing, turning over tables, slamming books and yelling "you're not going to fucking micro manage me!!!!!!", and then attempts to jump on the Chairman (who is 76 years old and is wearing a boot because he just had foot surgery)....this would make me want to remove her from office too.

    I thought the crazy behavior from Jackie had stopped.

    I used to be one of her biggest supporters but I can't keep making excuses for her. This behavior is ridiculous.

  4. " the crazy beahavior from Jackie had stopped...."

    It had slowed down just a bit since the forgery and fraud and the contempt charges, perhaps...?

  5. What did she lie about?

    She did not file any documents on behalf of the organization. She simply reserved the name, Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People-- which anybody (black, white or other) could've done.

    What would the leadership of the Durham Committee have done if a person not connected in any way to the organization had reserved the name or actually incorporated an organization under that name?

    It is apparent that there are a few folks leading this witch hunt and that the Chair of the General Body, Randal Rogers, has been ineffective as the head of this organization? What has the Durham Committee done for black folks lately? Outside of the political committee, the Durham Committee has done little to move the African American community forward in Durham County.

    It's time for a changing of the guard. The Durham Committee is no longer the playground for the elitist old guard where folks have held positions for years because of their last names while doing absolutely nothing for Durham's most needy.

  6. amazing.I remember when she used taxpayer $ on a nonprofit and acted like she didn't know what was going on.I've met several ppl over the years that say jackie accepted $ from them on the council to help get the projects and the deals never came thru.sad that a smart lady like jackie just can not operate in any structure.the committee is not for her she just needs to advocate by herself

  7. Damn

    Jackie strikes again

  8. I thought it was a witch hunt too until I found out what she actually did.

    A witch hunt is when ppl make up things on you and try to tarnish your reputation.

    1. Did Jackie slam tables and constantly use profanity in church? Yes. I am not a member of the Durham Committee but after all this negative press I called St. Joseph's AME. The secretary confirmed that this information is true and that the Pastor witnessed this behavior himself. So this is a fact and not a witch hunt by any upperclass black folks.

    2. Did Jackie file a document to reserve the name of The Durham Committee? Yes. She admitted this and according to the Legal Redress report Mr. Kenney has verified, Wagstaff not only admitted to it, but talked trash, threw books and attempted to assault the Durham Committee Chair for calling her on her behavior.

    3. Was Jackie authorized to file the document with the State of North Carolina, on behalf of The Durham Committee? No.

    With #3 in mind, why did she not tell anyone? This really makes her behavior suspect. 37 days and she didn't say a mumbling word? I'd not think too long about this if it weren't for my next point:

    4. On the document Jackie put herself as the agent. She is not Chair of The Durham Committee. She is a standing committee chair. She filed a document with the State, not on behalf of her subcommittee but on behalf of the entire organization. What rational person would think they can just up and do something like that? This is very strange behavior and for anyone to try to say "all she did was reserve a name" .....that really shows how ignorant you are about business matters. You are clearly not a professional of any sort, nor involved in any structured organizations because anyone knows that violates any basic risk management practices.

    5. Jackie used her po box and not the organization's po box. Along with #4 this really puts the whole case together for me and reveals this woman's motive. She had no intention of telling these ppl what she had done.

    I hear that she has been cutting deals with Republicans so that would explain her behavior.

    I know she was caught by Durham Committee leadership last year in a pollworker pay scheme, to deceive Andre Vann and Keith Bishop. I also know that Bob Etheridge's folks have it out for Jackie because she got money from them to work polls in Durham and they caught her passing out Bill Faison campaign material.

    This lady is a fraud. If she was a young adult or a teenager I'd be more forgiving because we all have bumps growing up.

    But this is a woman almost 60 years old!

    Jackie Wagstaff needs to get out of Durham. Why doesn't she realize she and her family will NEVER, EVER, succeed here. Isn't it obvious? This is sad. She wants a title so bad she'd hang around people that don't like her, have drug her through the mud and has her looking like a circus clown. Jackie, please, get the picture: YOU DO NOT FIT IN HERE! GO GET A JOB.

    The Durham Committee MUST have some money somewhere for clowns like Wagstaff, Hughes and Peterson to keep hanging around....

  9. She called me a stupid cracker at the BOE poll just bc I disagreed with her about 751.

  10. lol, cracker? typical wagstaff. like somebody said here earlier the lady is almost 60 and still behaving this way?