Dear George,

At the request of several fellow democrats, I feel a brief explanation of my response to Lloyd Snook is in order.

To some, my comments seemed to come out of the blue, but this is not the case. Almost a year ago, Joan Fenton approached me about helping her run for council. I agreed, and in August she made her announcement. The early announcement was because several party members suggested that if she was really serious, she should announce as soon as possible.

Approximately one week or so after she publicly declared her candidacy, I ran into Blake at the Mudhouse. I will not quote him directly, but lets just say that his attitude about Joan's candidacy was not, in my opinion, friendly. Blake likes to pride himself as an "equal opportunity offender," so I took his comments with good humor and went about the business of setting up shop.

Around this time, I called Lloyd to try to arrange coffee with him. I was wanting to seek his advice about the campaign, just as I did with several other past chairs of the party. He did not return my call.

Soon after, an e-mail appeared on George's web page from Lloyd.

I was quite puzzled as to why the chair of the party was coming out publicly in this manner. I said to myself, "Self: It seems that Mr. Snook has allied himself with Mr. Caravati. The best thing to do is take the high road." And so I did.

Instead of responding, I called Lloyd ( again) and attempted to set up coffee to clear the air privately. He did not return my call.

I went about my campaign business and focused on running a very above board and positive campaign for Joan. And we did.

Over the course of the fall, I continued to leave messages for Lloyd. I received one returned call from someone in his office who said he was out of town and would be back the following week. I called Lloyd the following week. He did not return my call.

I hadn't received this degree of unresponsiveness from any other official in the party. (Even the ones who openly despise me). Rus Perry, Erin Garvey, Tom Vandever, George Loper, and Pastor Edwards, just to name a few, have always been open, prompt, responsive and helpful.

In February, as the race heated up, I again placed a call to Lloyd which, again, was never returned.

Then Lloyd went public with his endorsement. I was disappointed. Not because he endorsed two candidates other than the one I was working for, but because he endorsed any candidate at all.

Out of respect for Joan, I kept my feelings to myself and again, took the high road.

I did however, speak in private with several other party officials to ask how appropriate this was and I was told that it was rare, within his rights, but had violated an unwritten code that was accepted around the state - that party chairs generally did not endorse candidates for democratic nominations.

Around this same time, Lloyd was approached about providing childcare at the convention. He was not supportive.

After the convention, Lloyd came forward with his public comments about the convention process and stated, quite clearly, that if people had concerns, he wanted to know.

So, as is well substantiated here, my call for his resignation is not about being negative, or about being a sore loser, or about assigning blame.

I tried very hard to approach Lloyd in a very respectful and private manner over the past seven months to state my grievances and try to pass the olive branch, but to no avail.

I want a party leader who is open to any Democrats who wish to become active and dedicate their time and energy towards making Charlottesville a great place for the people who live here.

I want a leader who cares, who is open to new ideas and who is responsive to the very legitimate concerns of my neighbors and friends.

I hope that this allows some understanding and gives those of you who questioned my position, the needed perspective.

Sincerely,

Camille Cooper (electronic mail, March 21, 2002)