“Fear grows in darkness. If you think there’s a boogieman around, turn on the light.”

- Dorothy Thompson

We’re not sure if you know this, but the Gay & Lesbian Times has a reputation for calling community-based organizations and leaders out on the carpet. Heck, our masthead even says: “Who shall stand guard to the guards themselves,” just in case you haven’t heard our publisher quote it, I dunno, say, a million times. And that’s what we do: We stand guard. This use of the weekly editorial page is, for the most part, met with applause. But not everyone appreciates the spotlight.

This week Stepping Stone is in the hot seat. For those of you who aren’t familiar with the organization, Stepping Stone is a nonprofit alcohol and drug recovery agency serving the GLBT community. And even though we’re devoting some ink to Stepping Stone this week, we’re big-time supporters. Believe it or not, it’s because we care about Stepping Stone that we’re going to give it a swift kick in the… well, let’s just say it may not be all that pleasant.

Let’s start by stating the obvious. Stepping Stone is an outstanding organization that saves countless lives and provides essential recovery services to a community that is at greater risk for substance abuse. Stepping Stone’s leadership in the fight against crystal meth abuse and its pioneering efforts to address the relationship between sexual behavior and recovery are laudable, and we applaud the organization for the good it does every day. Fortunately for us, we here at the Gay & Lesbian Times can clap and criticize at the same time.

With the retirement of former executive director Cheryl Houk, Stepping Stone announced it would conduct a national search for a new executive director. Craig Knudson, former board president, said in press release: “The Stepping Stone Board of Directors is committed to conducting a thorough search for a new executive director to head our vitally important organization. … We believe it is critical that we find the best person for the job so that we can continue our long and proud tradition of service to the LGBT community.”

Since Stepping Stone sent out its announcement back in December, they said they’ve received “a couple hundred” applicants and, according to the current board president Gil Eastham, these applicants were narrowed down to about 12 “A-level” candidates. However, not one of these “A-level” candidates was interviewed for the position. Instead, director of operations Marc D’Hondt was named the new executive director.

D’Hondt may very well be qualified; he’s worked with the organization for nearly 10 years. But in light of the recent settlement of a sexual harassment claim against him and Stepping Stone by former employee Eric Martin, not to mention other various allegations, is D’Hondt really the “best person for the job”?

Let’s be realistic. If a school district, for example, paid out a settlement because a vice principal allegedly threatened a student, would he or she then be eligible to serve as principal the following year? If the Gay & Lesbian Times were to pay out a settlement on the claim that our assistant editor committed plagiarism, would we promote him or her to editor? It’s a no-brainer. We would interview additional applicants.

Stepping Stone never had any intention of hiring someone from the outside. This so-called search was nothing more than a ruse and does little to propagate public trust in an organization so many of us lend our financial support to. This passing of the torch is a missed opportunity to bring in someone with a fresh perspective. Perhaps it’s exactly this perspective that Stepping Stone fears.

A couple of weeks ago, the Gay & Lesbian Times tried to attend a Stepping Stone board meeting. Instead of a warm welcome, the board repeatedly demanded that we leave, stating their board meetings are not open to the public. Feeling it was our right to be there, we held our ground and informed them that they would have to call the police and have us removed. The meeting was initially shut down. Then, after the board’s reconsideration (and us threatening to call the local news media), they tolerated our presence.

In a letter to the editor on page 13 (attempting to preempt this editorial, no doubt), Gil Eastham writes, “If anyone in the community would like to attend a regular board meeting to address the Board, please let us know so that we can make arrangements.” Thanks for the welcome matt, Gil, but it’s still only under your terms. Transparency should neither be controlled nor convenient. This community has a right to drop in on nonprofit organization board meetings. We have the right to know how our money is being spent and how decisions are being made. And we extend this challenge to all nonprofits. “Tear down this wall,” open your doors, post board-meeting times and locations, and invite us – the community – in. Prove to us that there’s no boogieman.