VSAF Uniform

[Ned]

Ned, the issue here isn't what's happening. It's perception.

George, I can only agree that perception is an issue.

The issue is whether it is appropriate post wild speculations on the internet based on some sort of biased perception, as opposed to some reasonable discussion based on facts.

Really, it is that simple.

The NB was presented with some basic facts -- that despite our best efforts by talented folks, we were losing significant amounts of money with our Bookstore and CapMart operations.  As in tens of thousands of dollars of your dues money (and mine.)

So they contracted with an outsider for the services, and the outsider with the most experience with providing uniforms and insignia turned out to be Vanguard.  Now they had a further choice -- Vanguard could sell the members  CAP insignia for a given price and keep it all themselves, or we could negotiate a contract where Vanguard was required to return a portion of the sales to us, for uses that directly benefit the members..

Just like the Boy Scouts, Girls Scouts, and AAFEES (which returns money to the MWR funds).

So, the NB turned a significant deficit into a significant profit without raising your dues a nickel.  Maybe Vanguard charges more for widgets than they would have, maybe not.  We can never really know.  We do know that Vanguard is subject to the same sort of supply and demand on non-CAP specific items as everyone else.


How you get from the rational, reasonable decision by the NB done in public with full disclosure of the terms to

There is, in my opinion a case for possible misappropriations and possible wrongdoing when it comes to the way this money is acquired and spent. If nothing else, it isn't the most ethically correct way of doing it. If nothing else, it's poor treatment of members. At worst, it can be illegal.

is simply mind-boggling.


And then you have the temerity to write

I'm not accusing our leaders of any wrongdoing.

within three sentences of saying that our leaders "misappropriated" funds, were unethical, treat the members poorly, and committed potentially illegal acts.

Or did I misread your declaration as quoted above?


How exactly do these kinds of baseless public accusations of misappropriation, unethical behavior, and illegality square with our Core Value of Respect?

Really.  Do you think the average Boy Scout has any idea how much money their national organization budgets for each of their training facilities and precisely where those funds came from.  Can any soldier walk up to her company commander and demand to see an audit for how MWR receives, allocates, and spends the funds that come from the percentages of AFFES sales?

If you would like to know how much Vanguard is returning to CAP and how it is spent, may I gently suggest you ask your wing commander.  After you have done that, feel free to share it with us. 

Ned Lee

[afgeo4]

Yes... you did misread it. What I'm saying is that there is a possibility that such things may be happening.

Consider the facts:

1. A contract with Vanguard was made to allow it to be the sole vendor of CAP uniforms.

2. A letter went out to membership at the end of 2007 introducing a great opportunity in the agreement between Vanguard and NHQ where a part of Vanguard's proceeds would be donated back to CAP to fund Regional Training Facilities. The letter talks about how great that would be.

3. Members pay a higher premium for uniform items with the understanding that a part of that money goes to the above stated cause.

4. An article in the Volunteer (Jan-Feb 08) talks about how money donated by Vanguard through the sales contract paid for a new training site at the Hawk Mountain Ranger school and will be paying for improvements to the Blue Beret as well (those are National Cadet Activities, not regional training centers).

So... your pick:

a. Volunteer article is wrong (I personally doubt it due to the apparent research that went into it).
b. NHQ is confused about what constitutes a Regional Training Center and what is a National Cadet Activity (G-d, I hope they know this by now).
c. NHQ decided to change allocation of assets without notifying the membership of such change thereby misleading membership about where THEIR money is going (thereby opening the chance that the money can go anywhere else too).

By the way... the money donated by Vanguard does NOT go into the CAP National Budget at large. It was said to be allocated SPECIFICALLY for Regional Training Centers.

What Vanguard does is of no issue to us here. I'm not questioning their practices. That's for another thread. I'm saying that there is a situation which may serve as motive for NHQ to:
1. Create as many new uniform items as possible, thereby requiring as much purchasing through Vanguard as possible, thereby acquiring as much funding as possible through this means (funding that isn't capped or completely controlled as it does not pass through the main budget) for what seems to be whatever activity or support system at whatever level they choose. That to me is fertile soil for misappropriations. I'm not saying those misappropriations are taking place. I'm saying NHQ is in position where those actions are possible and likely.
2. Change allocation at will to appease anyone they like for any reason they choose to without having to dip into the CAP national budget (thereby not upsetting the NB). I'm not saying they're doing this, I'm saying there's now a possibility.

This isn't an upfront and transparent way of fund-raising and to me it is apparent that NHQ are taking advantage of the members' inability to control acquisition of CAP specific uniform items and turning it into a purse that could be used to gain favors with wing/region/activity commanders.

The end problem is that NHQ is saying one thing and doing another. That IS a fact my friend. Can they do it? According to our charter, they can. Is it ethical? Well... I think it isn't, but that's up to everyone to decide for their own.

[RogueLeader]

^^This contributes to the VSAF uniform how?

[ddelaney103]

^^This contributes to the VSAF uniform how?

Really.  Just take your slander over to Ray Hayden's place - I'm sure he can put it to use.

[MIKE]

Take the drift to PM guys.