November 2010 Board Minutes

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Does anyone know if the Nov Minutes are posted yet? I have seen that some people think they have been posted on e-services, but I can't find it. If you know where the post is, could you please post the link here?

[IceNine]

Nothing from Nov yet

http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/forms_publications__regulations/meeting_minutes.cfm

[caphornbuckle]

September's National Board Meeting hasn't shown up yet either.  Looks like it's gonna be a while for November's NEC meeting to show up.

[jimmydeanno]

I thought the minutes from the previous meeting were either approved or disapproved at the next one.  So wouldn't the summer NB meeting minutes be approved and distributed after the winter national board meeting?  Same with the NEC?

[caphornbuckle]

I think they put out a "Draft" form of the meeting results until they are approved.  Not sure though.

[FW]

^That's true.  The draft form will be posted first.  It does take a while for them to be posted.  Look for the summer NB minutes to be posted in the next week or two.  The draft NEC minutes will probably be posted by the end of the year.  I don't think it is a high priority.

[RiverAux]

Does anyone know who is actually responsible for taking the minutes and writing them up?  I really don't understand the delays in getting draft minutes on the web site.  It really shouldn't take more than a week given that all they have to do is add in the extremely limited details on the discussion of the item and votes. 

[CAP Producer]

There are 1-2 members of the NHQ Staff who are resonsible and they all have other duties to perform. Putting together these minutes can take time.

Minutes of these meetings do not need to be published until about a month or so before the meeting to allow the participants to review the minutes before they approve them.

A summary is sent  to National Board Members a few weeks after the meeting.

Please be patient.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

The entire meeting should be recorded and transcribed. It doesn't take long to transcribe audio documents, and that is how it should be done, there is nothing that they discuss that should be kept from anyone. If nothing else they should keep the feed that they make live on the website up until the transcription of the meeting is completed. Every member deserves to know what is going on and many of us are unable to watch the whole thing while it is live.

[PHall]

The entire meeting should be recorded and transcribed. It doesn't take long to transcribe audio documents, and that is how it should be done, there is nothing that they discuss that should be kept from anyone. If nothing else they should keep the feed that they make live on the website up until the transcription of the meeting is completed. Every member deserves to know what is going on and many of us are unable to watch the whole thing while it is live.

Okay, we'll have National hire a Court Stenographer and we'll have them send YOU the bill.
It's about $100 an hour.

You still want those minutes RIGHT NOW?

[RiverAux]

There are 1-2 members of the NHQ Staff who are resonsible and they all have other duties to perform. Putting together these minutes can take time.

I'm somewhat sympathetic to this, but even a cursory review of the minutes of most of these meetings shows that on the vast majority of topics the only thing added to the material that is in the agenda isn't much more detailed than "Col. Smith motioned and Col. Jones seconded and motion was approved".  A couple of sentences maximum. 

On most topics you could get all of it on the laptop during the meeting and after a few edits they'd be ready to go immediately.  Sure, there are a couple of topics with more complicatd minutes, but even so, it shouldn't take more than a couple of hours to get a draft out. 

This post, for example is longer than about half of the write-ups for topics in most of these meeting minutes. 

[JeffDG]

There are 1-2 members of the NHQ Staff who are resonsible and they all have other duties to perform. Putting together these minutes can take time.

I'm somewhat sympathetic to this, but even a cursory review of the minutes of most of these meetings shows that on the vast majority of topics the only thing added to the material that is in the agenda isn't much more detailed than "Col. Smith motioned and Col. Jones seconded and motion was approved".  A couple of sentences maximum. 

On most topics you could get all of it on the laptop during the meeting and after a few edits they'd be ready to go immediately.  Sure, there are a couple of topics with more complicatd minutes, but even so, it shouldn't take more than a couple of hours to get a draft out. 

This post, for example is longer than about half of the write-ups for topics in most of these meeting minutes.

There's a difference between "minutes" and a "transcript"

Minutes are like "SER/CC moved, seconded by NER/CC that all current uniforms be changed in some minor and inconsequential way that can only be sourced from Vanguard at a huge markup.  Carried Unanimously"

Transcripts have the actual discussion that took place, but you have to wade through a lot of stuff to find the actual decision that was made.

If anyone is taking actions based on the results of the meeting (like the ICLs that the National Commander has issued around the safety briefings), those actions should be backed up by draft minutes to show authority for the action taken.  IMHO.

For the most part, the Agenda simply needs the "NEC Action" section filled in, and becomes the minutes.

[CAP Producer]

I understand your frustrations with the processes. I would like them out sooner as well, but what we have (in terms of the  transparancy of our governance) is in my view a lot better than many non-profits our size.

If you have ideas for to make things better please take them up with the chain of command.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Stenographers are expensive as heck, I never recommended the use of a sten. I would use an audio recording and a transcription specialist. Use a member who is a volunteer, not a paid corporate employee and give them benefits for doing the work. I would gladly do the work were I given the opportunity. Now I am not saying that they should have them transcribe every quote from every member of the committee or board, but to have the current topic respoken as a findings report after the topic has  been discussed and dissolved, that is what should be transcribed.

[flyboy53]

I understand the time delay. Perhaps, NHQ should consider having one of the PA guys do a bullet round-up, one paragraph in summary form, of what happened and release it internally to the membership. They send us live web streaming stuff, which I've only watched once or twice because it conflicts with my work schedule, sp why not a follow-up with a summary?

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Exactly the scheduling conflicts with most members work and school schedules. There fore, those of us who have lives have to wait dang near six months to find out what a hand full of members already know. If someone knows what went on, without adding hearsay to the posts, why don't you post what you know?

[Pylon]

Exactly the scheduling conflicts with most members work and school schedules. There fore, those of us who have lives have to wait dang near six months to find out what a hand full of members already know. If someone knows what went on, without adding hearsay to the posts, why don't you post what you know?

This is why usually for most NEC and NB meetings, one or several CAPTalk members take the time to update a live "play-by-play" thread of the meeting and what agenda items were passed/defeated/sent to committee/etc. based on the live feed.  Then at least you have the CAPTalk thread as just an informational piece until draft minutes are posted.


Would I take any actual actions based on what I read in a CAPTalk thread account of the NEC meeting?  Of course not, but it does go a long way to satisfy curiosities and at least give members an idea of what went on and what might be coming in the following weeks or months.


We haven't had to officially organize people to volunteer to do the play-by-play threads before -- they just sort of organically happened because there was enough interest.  Maybe in the future we'll gather volunteers ahead of time and organize it a bit better. 

[manfredvonrichthofen]

I have read the entire NEC feed topic, there was zero information other than there is little to no feed available online. The feed was horrible, no one could get any intel on what was going on. So therefore other than those who are on the NEC, no one knows what is going on. I know, we have no input on what happens at those meetings, other than some of the members of the committee do sometimes ask for input or use CAPtalk thread posts to influence what they say and propose at these meetings. Even though we don't have input to give to the boards and committees, it really helps the squadrons know what is being changed so that we can make steps to prepare for a change in policy or regulation instead of being hit with a change six months before implementation. That extra four to six months really helps to make change smooth.

[FW]

While I've heard much about the recent NEC meeting actions, I don't think it is wise posting this "hearsay" on CT.   However, I do look forward to the draft minutes.  When they are published, I look forward to a good CT discussion on the decisions.

[caphornbuckle]

^Agreed

We aren't going to stop what we're doing just because of a few changes in policies.  My suggestion would be to just roll with it until you get word of what has happened or is happening through your chain of command (as it really should be).

[flyboy53]

While I've heard much about the recent NEC meeting actions, I don't think it is wise posting this "hearsay" on CT.   However, I do look forward to the draft minutes.  When they are published, I look forward to a good CT discussion on the decisions.

Exactly why I believe NHQ should send bullet summaries to the field of the topics covered. Silence builds misinformation and rumors. I'm patient, I can wait for the minutes to be published, but it would be nice to know what was decided. Afterall, these are the corporate officers who are shaping policy and we are the stake holders.

[RiverAux]

I can understand that the NHQ staffers might have a lot on their plate and can't get the minutes out soon.  The obvious solution would be to find a volunteer attending these meetings do it as their only reason for being there.  They would be expected to have a draft back within a week.  No big deal. 

No, we don't need a transcript of the actual play by play, but personally, I would be interested in seeing a little more of the discussion recorded than is normally done.  Thats why I tend to watch the feeds when I can so that I can get a real feel for the way things go. 

[EMT-83]

A recent example from the NB was the implementation of the new safety policy. Reference was made to a new policy in the Knowledgebase and the Safety Beacon, but there was no policy to be found... anywhere.

A brief summary of the meeting would have headed off a lot of speculation and confusion.

[RADIOMAN015]

I understand your frustrations with the processes. I would like them out sooner as well, but what we have (in terms of the  transparancy of our governance) is in my view a lot better than many non-profits our size.

If you have ideas for to make things better please take them up with the chain of command.

Don't we have Public Affairs folks both paid & volunteer attending these sessions
I don't think it would be that difficult to write a news story to reflect what was discussed and the disposition and post it to the members only section.   That's why at the local government level reporters attend town & city council meetings and report the "news". 

Also I too would like to see the video recorded and placed on the website at least until the minutes come out in draft form.  Most members don't have the time during the week to watch these meetings.   I would also offer an option to actually buy a video cd of the meetings.
RM

[Ned]

As a general rule I favor more transparency and openness for BoG, NB, and NEC meetings.

But if it were up to me I would discontinue the web streamng of at least the NEC and probably the NB meetings, simply because of the costs involved.

Typically, it takes a couple of full time employees to get the stream up and running, and NHQ has to pay the outrageous hotel prices for the bandwidth to get it out.

When you add up the costs for shipping the equipment back and forth, hotel and per diem for employees, and the hotel gouge, we are talking about multiple thousands of dollars, every penny of which comes from member dues and could be better spent on airplanes, safety, or cadet programs.

And for what?  One need only look at the threads here on CT, arguably the most involved and web-savvy folks amongst the membership, and it is hard to find much value added.  Sure it is nice to know who is wearing what uniform, or listen for interesting things said when officers believe the mikes are dead when they are still live.

But I'm not convinced that CAP gets good value for the money spent on techno-wizardry like that.

Similarly, I'm not sure I would ask any NHQ employees to put aside any other duties to expedite creation of the minutes.  Which aren't going to be official in any event unitl the next meeting of the NB/NEC which is six months away.  Any new policies have to be codified into regulations or other directives before they really affect the membership in any event, and that always takes time (and has its own "public comment" and ratification cycles.)

If web-casting were free, I'd be all for it.  But it isn't.  It is pretty darn expensive.

And somehow we managed to be successful as a corporation for well over half a century without it.

Somehere I'm sure some poly sci majors have earned their Ph.Ds by documenting the effect that C-SPAN has had on the political process, but having sat in the Capitol watching lone reps and senators speaking before an otherwise empty chamber in a way that is calculated to look good on C-SPAN, I am not sure that having live cameras really advances the goal of open proceedings and transparency.

[RiverAux]

Or they could look at trying to have some of these meetings at locations where there wouldn't be such high costs.  This would not be at all difficult for the NEC (not aware of BoG doing any streaming). 

[DakRadz]

arguably the most involved and web-savvy folks amongst the membership, and it is hard to find much value added.

No, that won't work. Ned is merely trying to butter us up so we agree with his plan, and no stream is available when he gets himself elected Grand National Emperor Comptroller of the City of CAPtonia, Archipinedan Islands.

That, sir, is my title and you know it.



If they were to eliminate streaming (which maybe could get some cadets their uniforms faster? or shoes even? Or just airplanes and such, still important uses that are being passed over), would it still be financially sound to have the meetings recorded via cameras and posted to the web as video files?

I still think some sort of visual record is nice- as mentioned before, the minutes don't exactly reveal the mood and enthusiasm and such of a member. EDIT: Hard to capture the spirit of the meeting, that what I was trying to think of; it's been a long day..

[manfredvonrichthofen]

arguably the most involved and web-savvy folks amongst the membership, and it is hard to find much value added.

No, that won't work. Ned is merely trying to butter us up so we agree with his plan, and no stream is available when he gets himself elected Grand National Emperor Comptroller of the City of CAPtonia, Archipinedan Islands.

That, sir, is my title and you know it.

I seriously hope that is sarcasm. I am sure it is though. I think the NEC and BOG try their best to give us members the clarity that we want and need about the topics of discussion at their meetings. I know I have high hopes and expectations of CAP. I think that is mostly because of my experience as a cadet. I had no knowledge of what went on in the chain of command higher than wing level, and I wish that were not true. I would like to see (and I expect to see) sometime in the not so far off future that cadets would become more aware of what goes on in their organization. Cadets spend as much time and sometimes more time that some senior members to ensure that their squadron is performing the best that it possibly can. The only thing is that many cadets don't know what goes on higher up than their squadron and even less know what goes on above their group or wing. I just want to see this change and part of that is clarity and availability of regulations (which is very available) and mew items of topic such as those things at the NEC and BOG.

[RiverAux]

I too would be perfectly satisfied with video posted after the meetings (soon after) though I'm sure there would be some cost associated with the very large file sizes.  They don't necessarily need to be streamed live and it sure would be a lot more convenient for folks to watch them at their leisure (especially for the weekday sessions).

[FW]

Or they could look at trying to have some of these meetings at locations where there wouldn't be such high costs.  This would not be at all difficult for the NEC (not aware of BoG doing any streaming). 

It is interesting that the Nov NEC meeting was held at NHQ.  There were no extra costs added on for videoing this meeting.  For some reason, there was a decision made to stop the streaming for the meeting.  I was also informed there were major decisions made which, to date, have not been made public.  I know of at least 1 region commander's call where the NEC agenda was discussed however, there seemed to be a disconnect about information disseminated and actual actions decided on.  I am also for better transparency but, .....

BTW; the BoG does NOT stream their meetings to the membership.

[NIN]

Probably wouldn't hurt to have someone "live blogging" the meeting instead, much like the blow-by-blow you see here on CAPTalk from the multiple individuals watching the stream.

Way cheaper.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Probably wouldn't hurt to have someone "live blogging" the meeting instead, much like the blow-by-blow you see here on CAPTalk from the multiple individuals watching the stream.

Way cheaper.

Again, the problem is that no one was able to see and hardly able to hear what was going on at the NEC meeting, so no one is able to do that. That is why we are discussing that we know nothing, not discussing what happend.

Now, am I right Ned, that you are on the NEC? Or am I mistaking for the BOG? If you are NEC, could you enlighten us? I don't think that would be against the rules, being that it was shown on the web we just weren't able to see it.

[bosshawk]

I can't pretend to answer for Ned, but he is on the Board of Governors(at least for the next few months) and he is also the National Cadet Programs Officer.

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Thank you for the clarification, I couldn't remember which Ned was on, NEC or BOG. Thank you. Never Mind Ned.

[NIN]

Again, the problem is that no one was able to see and hardly able to hear what was going on at the NEC meeting, so no one is able to do that. That is why we are discussing that we know nothing, not discussing what happend.

No, I meant live-blogging FROM the meeting, not watching an expensive, trouble-laden video feed.

[Eclipse]

No, I meant live-blogging FROM the meeting, not watching an expensive, trouble-laden video feed.

Live bl-whating now?  I suppose we should have our personal robots drive us to the conference in our hover cars, too?  How are you going to send that many faxes out?

Maybe in your ivory tower of R&D there exists some free service that would allow someone to send
snippets of information to the general public, but not out here in the "real" world.

I suppose next you will suggest we can all carry a hand-held computer that will communicate with anyone on the planet?  You're watching too much Star Trek, kids!!!

[SarDragon]

It's easy. Someone sits in the meeting close enough to hear what's going on, and sends text messages to an outsider, or even right to CT. Piece o' pie.

[RiverAux]

Its so easy to listen, take notes, and then write them up that it would just be simpler to get the darn minutes out in draft form in a few days! 

[flyboy53]

You know, it just struck me. The idea of the live-streaming was to keep people informed. Yet, most of the membership can't watch because of our schedules. So, why doesn't NHQ record the event for playback whenever on the NHQ website? That way the meeting can be viewed in at the member's leasure.

In NYS, the public portion of meetings of public entities are recorded via a camera mounted on a laptop computer and then posted on the agency's website for public view. The directive is about three years old and relates to those agencies were public money or tax dollars are used in order to comply with the state's open meetings law.

[NIN]

No, I meant live-blogging FROM the meeting, not watching an expensive, trouble-laden video feed.

Live bl-whating now?  I suppose we should have our personal robots drive us to the conference in our hover cars, too?  How are you going to send that many faxes out?

Maybe in your ivory tower of R&D there exists some free service that would allow someone to send
snippets of information to the general public, but not out here in the "real" world.

I suppose next you will suggest we can all carry a hand-held computer that will communicate with anyone on the planet?  You're watching too much Star Trek, kids!!!

Watching too much Star Trek?  Bob, don't be a total ass clown.  I would have expected a little more out of a technophile such as yourself.

Liveblogging is the process by which people blog from within events.  It involves nothing so more than a laptop with a connection to the Internet, and someone typing updates into a blog.  It tends to be short snippet updates (almost like a Twitter update).

Much the same as people do here in CAPTalk during NB or NEC meetings that have video feeds (ie. they're watching the video feed and typing updates into a thread here), you could have someone easily doing the same actually FROM the meeting and bypassing the expensive and troublesome video feed altogether. 

The downside to live blogging is that you're only going to get the "big" items, not all the nuances of the sidebar discussions, and such like that.  You need someone who can type quickly, capturing the essence of whats being said.  Much like the way CAPTalk'ers post during the NB/NEC live feeds, maybe it would help to have 2-3 guys doing it (might be a good use of some of the back-benchers and straphangers they have in those meetings).

I was going to give an example of live blogging, but it was from an Apple event (either Engadget or Gizmodo's coverage of the iPad launch) and we all know that Bob won't accept anything related to Apple as a "fact" or "evidence" since its just a bunch of "toys for fanboys."  I'll have to find another example that wouldn't contain Steve Jobs mug..

[ColonelJack]

^^  Yeah!  And quit raggin' on Star Trek, too.

Jack

[Eclipse]

Watching too much Star Trek?  Bob, don't be a total ass clown.  I would have expected a little more out of a technophile such as yourself.

Is "duh" too harsh here?   Did you actually read my post?

If you took it seriously then I'm not sure how to respond to that...

and we all know that Bob won't accept anything related to Apple as a "fact" or "evidence" since its just a bunch of "toys for fanboys."  I'll have to find another example that wouldn't contain Steve Jobs mug..

We do?  I make a considerable part of my living supporting Apple products, in fact I am writing this from an Expo center in TX as I audit
survey comments being taken on iPads.  Apple products are what they are - beautiful engineering of other people's work, locked down and laden with Job's idea of what his customers are capable of.  Either they are the right tool or they aren't.

I have personally sat and watched the live blogs and followed live SMS streams from the release events for a number of major Apple products, the fact that I haven't sipped the kool-aid doesn't mean Apple isn't a major industry factor.

If you really thought I was saying a live-twitter or blog from the floor is too advanced, well...

[a2capt]

You know, there's always the concept of ditching these ritzy hotel extravaganzas and their ballroom like conference facilities and having the regional meetings at other venues. There are lots of cities with public facilities that have hotels near by.  Use the (Air) Force, Luke.

[NIN]

If you really thought I was saying a live-twitter or blog from the floor is too advanced, well...

If I missed your sarcasm, then an apology is in order.

I'm usually pretty good at that.

My apologies.

[Ned]

You know, there's always the concept of ditching these ritzy hotel extravaganzas and their ballroom like conference facilities and having the regional meetings at other venues. There are lots of cities with public facilities that have hotels near by.  Use the (Air) Force, Luke.

Gosh, do you honestly think that the various committees that select conference sites (all composed of volunteer members like you and me) do not work very, very hard to find the best value for our members?

Or perhaps it simply never occurred to them to have wing/region conferences at anything other than a "ritzy hotel"?

Sounds like you need to volunteer for a committee and help out.  They could sure use your insight.

Ned Lee

[RiverAux]

You were the one saying that we were being charged outrageous fees for use of these venues..... seems to me that it isn't unreasonable to suggest we do something differently..

[Smokey]

Since we have gotten slightly sidetracked.....Has anyone ever checked on using an Air Force Base for the National Conference......I know most bases have conference centers and AF Lodging is pretty cheap inexpensive and the food costs are minimal.  For PCR Staff College we stayed in the VOQ and ate at the dining hall.  Room cost was under $40 day, and the meals totalled about $12. 

After all...we are the AF Aux....

[RiverAux]

Judging by hard it sometimes is to make arrangements for encampments and other cadet activities its probably not as easy as you would think. 

[SarDragon]

In my narrow experience with convention type events, I have learned a few things along the way. This experience is direct involvement with 200 person events, and on the periphery of and attending 1500 person events. Our NB meetings split the difference.

1. The hotel makes its major profit on the meeting rooms, equipment rentals, and food. The rooms are self-supporting, and little more, when looking at events, since the rates are usually negotiated for a discount.

2. The number of venues that can handle a 600 person event isn't as big as you think. F'rinstance, there are exactly three places in San Diego that can handle the 1500 person event I might be involved with a couple of years from now.

3. Military bases do not typically have the facilities and manpower for large events like ours. Large meeting areas with A/V capabilities are expensive, no matter who owns them, and the military doesn't do huge events like ours often enough to make them worthwhile. Hotels pack 'em every week; that's their business.

Someone mentioned a region staff college. How big was it? I'll bet nowhere near even 300. How many military bases do you know that have spare billeting for 600 people? I don't know of any. The encampment example comes to mind. The probably average less than 300 people, and facilities to support just that many are frequently hard to come by.

YMMV.

[jimmydeanno]

I suppose that would be OK if the intent of the national conference was to have only CAP members or people with base access.  IMO, our conferences should be like other non-profit's conferences where industry leaders, vendors, guest speakers, etc come and attend.  Invite congressmen, governors, possible benefactors, etc.

Sometimes you have to spend money to make money - but you can't spend money like that without the possibility of return on your investment.

[Chief2009]

Easy way to get "Blow by Blow" Approved/Denied on the agenda items... Twitter. Doesn't cost that much to just bring a laptop and use the WiFi that most hotels offer to guests anyway.

Heck, I've seen sports teams do play-by-play on Twitter.

DN

[Ned]

You were the one saying that we were being charged outrageous fees for use of these venues..... seems to me that it isn't unreasonable to suggest we do something differently..

The point was that the "suggestion" was unnecessary and phrased in patronizing and insulting language.  The current committee members are highly dedicated volunteer members who have all of our best interests at heart.  To suggest that these hard-woking members were so dense as to not think of holding a meeting at an AFB or so cold-hearted as to deliberately soak our members when a reasonable lower-priced alternative was available does them a disservice, and does not comport with our Core Value of Respect.

It is always easy to sharpshoot the hard work of other members anonymously on the internet.

Hence my suggestion for the poster to join the committee where the actual work is done.

Ned Lee

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Ok, we need to stop the harsh attitudes. Are we not professionals? Instead of slamming and bashing our corporate leadership and superior officers how about we try to honestly help everyone by finding a cost effective alternative to the live news feed? Is it too much to ask that everyone take the core values (especially respect) to heart and follow through with them? What about the cadets that we are here to mentor, teach, and coach into becoming healthy (physically, emotionally, and mentally) adults and members of our communities? Are we setting them good examples of how grown professional adults?

Let us sincerely try to help our boards come up with a suitable alternative to help information get out to the members in a timely  and cost effective manner. I think that a recorded video of the meetings being posted to the NHQ website would be more cost effective than a live feed and would also allow the members to view the meeting at their convenience would be  a suitable alternative.

[RiverAux]

Several alternatives have been proposed already. 

[manfredvonrichthofen]

Several alternatives have been proposed already.

I know, all that I am saying is that lets keep the ball rolling and try to come up with something really viable. Stop bashing people and work together. It isn't just one person arguing and bashing it is several. We need to stop the arguing especially with cadets looking at what is being posted.

[Chief2009]

I was serious suggesting Twitter, doesn't National already have a Twitter account?

DN

[CAP Producer]

Here is the Executive Summary. Unofficial Minutes will be out in December.

http://forums.cadetstuff.org/download/file.php?id=200

[Chief2009]

Awesome, thank you!

DN

[a2capt]

Do we as an organization though, need to *make* money on our conferences? One could certainly get the impression from the NB that they just don't give a care about the Member in all of this.

If it wasn't for us, they wouldn't be here.

[bosshawk]

tony: don't forget that CAP stands for Come And Pay.  Of course, they plan on making money at the National Boards.

[Ned]

Do we as an organization though, need to *make* money on our conferences? One could certainly get the impression from the NB that they just don't give a care about the Member in all of this.

If it wasn't for us, they wouldn't be here.

Of course not.

Nor, however should we *lose* money on our conferences.  And sometimes it is pretty close one way or another.

And no one should get the impression that the leadership does not care about the members.

That would be very, very wrong.

Ned Lee