2011 CAP Annual Conference and Winter National Board---NEWS

[researchdoc]

Well... I didn't have any issues.  It was like watching TV actually.. but then again I was on a T1.  It appeared they were using HD cameras.. that is nice, however, it takes a bit more bandwidth.  I would drop the camera resolution a little.. it should help move it down the pipe faster. 
Could be that one of the reasons that the stream attendance is not real big, is that this is during work hours.  I watched it in my office, but still had to contend with phone calls, emails, lab formulations and folks coming in.  It was a good advertisement for folks that came in to see me.  All of them became very interested in what it was all about after seeing it on my screen. 
Another reason could be that a lot of folks are just not that net savvy.... which is a shame, cause Web 2.0 is a great thing!
Just my $.2 worth.

[FW]

We are informed that around 15000 (try) to watch the stream every meeting.  I think it is impressive that so many want to see the action....  even with all the flaws of transmission.

BTW; does anyone even care about what they are doing at the meeting?

[Al Sayre]

Spill it Fred, they ran us all out and went into closed session.

[FW]

Wait till you hear what they are discussing in closed session.  All I will say is that every governance issue we were warned about is true..... 

So far, they requested the BoG change the MARB, establish a conflict of interest policy, and required corporate officers to sign non disclosure agreements. 

Nothing of any consequence....

[NCRblues]

Wait till you hear what they are discussing in closed session.  All I will say is that every governance issue we were warned about is true..... 

So far, they requested the BoG change the MARB, establish a conflict of interest policy, and required corporate officers to sign non disclosure agreements. 

Nothing of any consequence....

Fred, some of us care very very deeply what they are doing at the meeting. I for one would like more information.

[Ned]

There isn't a deliberative body in the world that doesn't have closed sessions from time to time to discuss sensitive issues of internal governance, personnel matters, litigation, etc.

Legislatures, city councils, corporate boards, 501c3 boards, and even . . . our favorite 501c3, CAP.

Remember, if they take any official actinons, it must still be recorded in the minutes.

Nobody gets to pull a fast one.

There is literally nothing to see here.  Move along.

[NCRblues]

There isn't a deliberative body in the world that doesn't have closed sessions from time to time to discuss sensitive issues of internal governance, personnel matters, litigation, etc.

Legislatures, city councils, corporate boards, 501c3 boards, and even . . . our favorite 501c3, CAP.

Remember, if they take any official actinons, it must still be recorded in the minutes.

Nobody gets to pull a fast one.

There is literally nothing to see here.  Move along.

Every dictator in the world has also said the same thing...nothing to see here, move along. Are you going to post the official minutes right after Ned, or are we going to have to wait months like normal to see what they changed?

I have 12 years invested in CAP, the people that I also serve with have 20-30-40 or more years invested, not to mention the cold hard cash we shell out every year for this organization. We want to know whats going on. I don't think that is to much to ask for...

[Westernslope]

Things that have to be discussed behind closed doors and away from the eyes of the dues paying membership cannot be good.

You're right, there is nothing to see because most people in the organization are not being allowed see it.

[arajca]

Personnel issues, legal action report, real estate issues are normally discussed by governing bodies in closed sessions. Not all of these are bad.

Any actions discussed in closed sessions require recording in open sessions to become official.

[Ned]

There are sound legal reasons for closed meetings.  Things like attorney-client privilege require that our attorneys only speak with the cororate officers (and no one else) present when discussing current or potential litigation.

Things like personnel issues - investigations, evaluations and bonuses for our paid employees are private.

Again, there is nothing very new or exciting here.  The Microsoft Board has closed sessions.  So does the American Red Cross.  And, as I pointed out, so does you local city council and Library Board.

This is a mainstream practice literally done by every corporation in the US.

There are no black helicopters here, folks.

Just hard-working volunteer leaders who deserve your respect and the benefit of any doubt regarding their efforts on your behalf.

[NCRblues]

There are sound legal reasons for closed meetings.  Things like attorney-client privilege require that our attorneys only speak with the cororate officers (and no one else) present when discussing current or potential litigation.

Things like personnel issues - investigations, evaluations and bonuses for our paid employees are private.

Again, there is nothing very new or exciting here.  The Microsoft Board has closed sessions.  So does the American Red Cross.  And, as I pointed out, so does you local city council and Library Board.

This is a mainstream practice literally done by every corporation in the US.

There are no black helicopters here, folks.

Just hard-working volunteer leaders who deserve your respect and the benefit of any doubt regarding their efforts on your behalf.

Just like the vast majority of CAP members gave pineda the "benefit of the doubt" Ned? 

If they are discussing governance issue, than it should be open, public and streamed to all of us who pay due's and play the games for those "hard working volunteer leaders"

[James Shaw]

Seems like some folks are looking for problems to exist before any actually happen. Board Meetings are private for certain reasons and speculating about trouble before it happens causes more trouble than its worth.

A solution looking for a problem.

[FW]

Closed sessions have a purpose; as stated by Ned and Jim.  We just need to wait until the NB makes a decision on what they are discussing for it to be public.  I have no idea what the outcome of their discussions will be.  We must be patient.

[NCRblues]

So, its 8pm on the east coast...any updates? Are they out of the closed door meeting? What happened? anyone....anything?

[RiverAux]

Jeez, there are always closed sessions.  Big deal.  Like was said, if it was anything directly affecting most members it would be in the regular open meeting. 

[FW]

I understand the Governance Committee report was rejected (either in total or, in part) by the National Board.  It will still go to the Board of Governors however, for consideration.   

[Mustang]

I understand the Governance Committee report was rejected (either in total or, in part) by the National Board.  It will still go to the Board of Governors however, for consideration.

Now see, THOSE deliberations would've been good to be able to watch.

[clubview1950]

I understand the Governance Committee report was rejected (either in total or, in part) by the National Board.  It will still go to the Board of Governors however, for consideration.

Now see, THOSE deliberations would've been good to be able to watch.

What happended to the big transparency movement.  Governance issues are not personnel issues.  They are issues that have a direct affect on the entire membership and the organization.  Does anyone think it's strange that members were told to sign a confidentiality and non disclosure letter just prior to the closed session.  Someone really wants to keep the working of the NB secret.  We had all better beware...total control behind closed doors is never good.

[a2capt]

It matters not what the intent is, but rather what impression it leaves.
Some might say they are leaving a bad impression with the order of events.
Others say it's SOP like any other organization.

Time will tell, and either way, some will say "I told you so".

[RADIOMAN015]

There are sound legal reasons for closed meetings.  Things like attorney-client privilege require that our attorneys only speak with the cororate officers (and no one else) present when discussing current or potential litigation.

Things like personnel issues - investigations, evaluations and bonuses for our paid employees are private.

Just hard-working volunteer leaders who deserve your respect and the benefit of any doubt regarding their efforts on your behalf.

I think many of us just wonder IF all of the items discussed in executive session really needs to be in a closed session   Especially the report on Governance that was rejected.  Furthermore, I would like to see that on EVERY vote a "recorded" vote of EACH board member be in the minutes, versus the show of hands type activity that now goes on.  Additionally, I would like to see ALL of the boards adopted a specific resolution that any agenda items NOT result in more costs (actual money OR time) to the unpaid volunteers.

Regarding 'deserving' respect -- I would think that subsequent events will determine the respect each will get as determined by each individual member that are entitled to their opinions -- Remember this isn't the military (although I'm guessing there's some on the boards that love to dress us and play make believe military commanders).  The issue really becomes when it is too far out of line what the membership is comfortable with and this is the challenge of any volunteer governing body.  Although realistically it is the Air Force that is going to call the shots on this via the Board of Governors since they are picking up the tab for most of the organization's activities.

I know our wing commander at a CLC presentation basically stated that it is impossible to please everyone (especially on resource allocations), and I do agree with him. 
RM