Integrity Meets Incomplete Information: A Response to Tim Elder’s Statement
- Andrew Moore
- Dec 3
- 4 min read
Earlier this week, LightHouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired (LightHouse) board member Tim Elder did something rare in this crisis: he spoke publicly, transparently, and forcefully about the proposed Lighthouse Guild International (Guild) takeover. He put his reputation on the line to defend blind-led governance, local accountability, and the values that have shaped the Bay Area blind and DeafBlind community for generations.
That is what integrity looks like. That is what fiduciary responsibility demands — standing up for what is in the best interests of the organization and the community it serves, rather than abandoning it in a moment of crisis. For that, we applaud Tim.
But speaking truth to power, as Tim courageously did, does not resolve the fact that he — like many current board members — entered this situation with incomplete information about LightHouse’s internal culture and management history. And that incomplete picture has consequences. Understanding the structural realities inside LightHouse is essential to any meaningful rebuilding.
The Limits of What Tim Has Been Told
Tim’s commitment to the community is genuine. His values are real. But as his video illustrates, his understanding of LightHouse’s internal operations is shaped primarily by what has been reported upward — not by the lived experience of the employees who worked within LightHouse for years or the community members who depended on its services.
In his remarks, he praises past CEOs and board leaders as “highly qualified blind professionals” and describes internal systems as though they operated responsibly. But he was not present when blind and DeafBlind employees were retaliated against, when complaints were ignored, when discriminatory practices were normalized, and when HR processes were weaponized to silence critics and push out workers viewed as inconvenient.
Thus, when Tim praises Brandon Cox, who first joined LightHouse in 2016, it reflects a filtered and incomplete narrative — not the reality that former employees lived through, and not the consequences the community continues to bear.
Former Employees Know the Real LightHouse Because They Lived It
Our Campaign is supported by former LightHouse employees — blind, Deaf, and DeafBlind workers who endured systemic discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. Many women did not feel safe. Former staff describe an organizational culture where leaders like Brandon Cox tolerated and, at times, participated in abusive conduct. A workplace where Board Chairs such as Sharon Sacks and Jennison Asuncion were repeatedly informed about a hostile environment yet failed to act — choosing instead to protect the very leaders who were perpetuating the harm.
The contributions of these former employees, with firsthand knowledge of internal operations, are the reason this Campaign exists. They provided the information the board should have acted on long ago. Had the LightHouse Board fulfilled its fiduciary duties — by listening to the people responsible for carrying out its mission — this Campaign would not have been necessary.
Why Board Members Cannot See the Full Picture
The LightHouse board receives curated presentations, selective updates, polished summaries, and management-controlled narratives. They may or may not receive internal complaints or retaliation reports. They may receive watered-down versions of employee concerns. Or management may downplay or spin serious allegations. And in some cases, as former employees told us, board members simply chose not to believe frontline workers.
Board Chairs, too, have ignored serious allegations against leadership — whether due to lack of courage, misplaced loyalty, or self-serving motivations.
To be clear: some past and current board members have wanted to act in LightHouse’s best interests. They genuinely believed they were protecting the organization. But integrity cannot compensate for information that has been filtered, distorted, or withheld. This is why well-intentioned board members often speak passionately about values while remaining unaware of the harm that LightHouse leadership has inflicted for years.
The Campaign Rejects the Notion of Collective Responsibility
Tim suggested that “we as a community” were collectively irresponsible with LightHouse’s finances. The Campaign respectfully but firmly disagrees.
Blind and DeafBlind community members did not cause LightHouse’s fiscal crisis. Reckless executive decisions and board-level fiduciary failures did. For years, community members questioned LightHouse’s financial decisions and were dismissed. The $120 million bequest was spent without meaningful community input. Had oversight been left to those who actually rely on LightHouse — the blind and DeafBlind public — the organization would be in a far healthier place today.
LightHouse Cannot Survive Without Leadership Change
Tim believes LightHouse can be saved through community input and new budgets. We agree. But rebuilding LightHouse requires more than community vision — it requires removing the leadership team responsible for its internal, cultural, and ethical collapse.
You cannot reform an institution while keeping the same people who retaliated against employees, promoted a discriminatory and retaliatory culture, suppressed healthy dissent, misled or deceived the board, and enabled toxicity to reach a breaking point in 2025.
If LightHouse is to remain independent and regain community trust, it must begin with a leadership transition:
- Jennison Asuncion must go.
- Brandon Cox must go.
- Diana McCown must go.
The future of LightHouse must be determined through an open, transparent process grounded in blind and DeafBlind community leadership. Former employees and frontline staff must have input, and new accountability structures must be built to prevent future misconduct.
A LightHouse rebuilt by its community will always be stronger than one controlled by an isolated board or entrenched managers. This is the path to justice, accountability, and a future worthy of LightHouse’s mission.
Please sign the petition: Not in the Public Interest: Stop the Takeover