Main Menu

Georgia Wing Banking

Started by ADCAPer, November 27, 2006, 05:18:19 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TankerT

Quote from: ADCAPer on November 29, 2006, 09:14:45 PM
Well, I guess that's an option, and in some cases it could possibly be justified, say if you're washing cars or selling donuts, and you advertise it as supporting the CAP.

However, If you approach an individual, a company, a government entity, etc., and request money from them, ethically you would have no option but to:

1) advise them that CAP as a corporation actually owns everything and that ultimately these funds will be the property of the corporation (I believe thats straight from a regulation) and...

2) that even though you are soliciting the money locally, to support either your local squadron or local personnel, that the money will actually be transferred to the Wing Banker, and...

3) that locally you will not be able to physically control, account for the disbursement of, or absoloutly guarantee that you will be able to obligate the funds, because you will have to request them from the Wing Banker, and...

4) they need to be advised that there is the possibility that those funds could, even if it's inadvertantly, be used for something that is not affiliated with the support of either your local squadron or personnel.

I don't believe that there's any need to insinuate anything. Under the WBP the squadrons will not control their funds, they will simply have the ability to request them.

If someone is going to donate funds to you, you have an obligation to enure that they understand how they could be used. Unless there is a National Regulation that spells out what is legitimate, the Wings are going to be free to revise their "Guides" at any point to say whatever they need them to, and unlike a regulation, there won't be a need for any of those pesky reviewing procedures.


Huh?  What?

Yes... every time I donate to the Salvation Army Bell Ringer I have them explain to me how their financial processes work... and ask for them to ensure that all my money is spent in my community... ? You don't have to tell them a darn thing of the sort!  They may request it, and you can tell them what the funds will be intended for.  You can tell them that NHQ can take the money.  (Come on... NHQ isn't going to do that... we all know that would be a death sentence to membership... they know it too...) If you make that statement up front... nobody would ever donate... because you would sound disgruntled...

FYI -

The WBP does not change the control of Squadron funds at all. 

Period.

Again...

The WBP does not change the control of Squadron funds at all. 


It is still their money to do with as they see fit within regulations.  (As it was before.)  You want to throw a $5,000 pizza party for the cadets... you can.  It's still the Squadron's money.  It's not the wings money.  It basically just changes who signs the checks, who holds the checkbook, and the bank.  The Squadron (or Group) Finance Committee still controlls the funds as before. 

Period.

Again...

The Squadron (or Group) Finance Committee still controlls the funds as before. 

/Insert Snappy Comment Here

JohnKachenmeister

Quote from: TankerT on November 29, 2006, 07:15:48 PM
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on November 29, 2006, 07:06:07 PM
Quote from: arajca on November 27, 2006, 08:13:56 PM
Colorado has implemented it already. So far, it seems to be working well. The wing administrator writes the checks and the authorized signers come in twice a week to sign. The average turn around is about a week, including mailing time. The wing administrator is not one of the signers.

OK, If I understand it correctly:

1.  Unit identifies an expense that must be funded.

2.  Unit submits a voucher with 2 authorized signatures to wing?

3.  Wing writes check, but doesn't sign it.

4.  Wing sends check to unit for signing, and distribution?

I can't say how it works in Colorado, but your understanding isn't how it is done in my wing.

1- Correct

2- Possibly no.  (This is more dependant on how your voucher system is set up.)  If it is under a certain amount, it can be submitted by any member that has already been designated by the Finance Committee as an authorized submitter.  No more than 1 signature is required.  However, if the dollar amount is over $250 (per regs) it must be accompanied by a Finance Committee authorization.  (This would be required locally anyway before cutting a check over that amount already, so it's not something new.)  If your voucher system requires two signatures, then you could be correct.

3- No.  Wing cuts the check.  Then some Wing Staff member(s) (or other authorized member(s)) sign it.  (The Wing Administrator can't sign checks, as it is prohibited by regs.)

4- No.  The Wing mails the check to wherever you asked.

Thanks.  It hasn't worked its way down here yet, and I was wondering how it worked.
Another former CAP officer

Eclipse

Quote from: ADCAPer on November 29, 2006, 09:14:45 PM...that locally you will not be able to physically control, account for the disbursement of, or absoloutly guarantee that you will be able to obligate the funds, because you will have to request them from the Wing Banker, and...

4) they need to be advised that there is the possibility that those funds could, even if it's inadvertantly, be used for something that is not affiliated with the support of either your local squadron or personnel.

At best this is a mischaracterization of the WBP, at worst just an effort to make it look evil for the sake of some other agenda.

Do you advise potential benefactors that there is a possibility your Finance Manager may steal all the money from the account?  Or that there is a possibility you might use the money to take the cadets to Chuckie Cheese?

Shoot yourself in the foot if you like, but barring malfeasance or program abuse, the local unit has control over the expenditures and disbursements.  Anything less and IG's and maybe even DA's will be involved.

"That Others May Zoom"

TankerT

Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on November 29, 2006, 10:25:44 PM
Thanks.  It hasn't worked its way down here yet, and I was wondering how it worked.

Again, my information is on how my Wing has it set up.  Your wing may have the desire to do it differently.  I'm not sure where the actual mandates from NHQ stop and what my Wing set up begins for all areas.

/Insert Snappy Comment Here

DNall

Tanker, I appreciate your insight, honestly I do. I'm just not very happy about this program overall. I very much understand that it is not intended to change anything about how money is spent, but merely the way it is accounted & distributed.

We had something like this in another org I worked with. It was a central educational fund where local chapters could put in savings, but it could only come out for justified educational items, but you could take a no-interest loan against the acct for non-educational items. You parked it there cause it was group invested at much higher return rates, but guaranteed against loss by the national educational endowment. In other words MUCH better than the wing banker program. However we didn't use it much cause the hassle to get at our own savings was a nightmare. We just used it for a couple narrow specific items & to hold long term funds, and it worked great for that. It would have been insane to manage all local funds that way though. I grant that your average CAP Sq per month is spending maybe a few hundred bucks versus 5-10grand, but it'll still be a hassle & put more burden on the people at the bottom in exchange for a possible marginal return that no one's bothered to sell me on as of yet.

I maintain that locally raised & expended funds have no bearing on national/state grants or appropriations, and can easily be accounted as NON-corporate funds to avoid this all together, and in fact in taking them off the page you show a contributor a compilation study of local expenses & state no local income (as there is no local income). I'd be much more comfortable with this if Sqs were allowed to keep a petty cash fund up to that $1500 mark (not actual cash, a local acct) for recurring & day-to-day expenses.

RiverAux

Folks, the way this system sounds to me is exaclty how most businesses and government agencies are run.  Each little field office (squadron) doesn't have its own bank account.  When it gets its lighting bill it slaps some accounting codes on it, someone local signs off on it, and they send it up to headquarters where a check is cut.  That same local office has a budget that is part of the master budget for that agency and the lighting bill is subtracted from what is in its budget for that year.

The only difference here is that the squadron has a permanent account rather than an annual budget. 

Yes, this system is vulnerable to mistakes as is anything, but most people are familiar with using something similar in their normal "real" lives. 


ADCAPer

Quote from: Eclipse on November 29, 2006, 10:42:55 PM
At best this is a mischaracterization of the WBP, at worst just an effort to make it look evil for the sake of some other agenda.

I haven't mischaracterized anything. I can agree with the basic premise behind the WBP, I just think it is being implemented in an extraordinarily inept fashion. As for agenda's, I just wanted to try and separate some of the fact from the fiction about this program. I've asked question, wrote messages, and made phone calls, and so far the only information I've got back through official channels is incomplete, inaccurate, or changes from day to day. And that doesn't begin to address the different things I've heard from other members in other wings.

There is plenty of room for disagreement on this subject; however, if National had taken the time to research this plan, to properly write, and then put a good financial regulation through the appropriate vetting process, most of these conversations wouldn't be happening. Basically, I don't have to try and make this program look evil, National has a done a pretty good job of that on their own.

Quote from: TankerT on November 29, 2006, 09:31:50 PM
Yes... every time I donate to the Salvation Army Bell Ringer I have them explain to me how their financial processes work... and ask for them to ensure that all my money is spent in my community... ? You don't have to tell them a darn thing of the sort!  They may request it, and you can tell them what the funds will be intended for.  You can tell them that NHQ can take the money.  (Come on... NHQ isn't going to do that... we all know that would be a death sentence to membership... they know it too...) If you make that statement up front... nobody would ever donate... because you would sound disgruntled...

Now I believe that this qualifies as a mischaracterization. What I said was if you're selling donuts or washing cars then ok, but if you approach an individual, a corporation, or a government agency and solicit funds then you should be prepared to fully disclose how they are going to be managed and controlled.

And now we really have a major issue. The mere fact that anyone would be afraid to discuss this program while trying to raise funds speaks for itself. If you think that telling an individual, or a company about this program will cause you to lose a donation then there is something wrong.

We are a national volunteer organization, and now we have a program that apparently makes people feel that they have to hide, or obscure the way we do business just to raise funds. We obviously have a problem.

TankerT

Quote from: ADCAPer on November 30, 2006, 01:37:05 AM
Now I believe that this qualifies as a mischaracterization. What I said was if you're selling donuts or washing cars then ok, but if you approach an individual, a corporation, or a government agency and solicit funds then you should be prepared to fully disclose how they are going to be managed and controlled.

And now we really have a major issue. The mere fact that anyone would be afraid to discuss this program while trying to raise funds speaks for itself. If you think that telling an individual, or a company about this program will cause you to lose a donation then there is something wrong.

We are a national volunteer organization, and now we have a program that apparently makes people feel that they have to hide, or obscure the way we do business just to raise funds. We obviously have a problem.

No.  I'm not saying hide anything.  What I'm saying is, we don't have to go and tell them everything if they demand it.  Really, it isn't their business unless we decide to make it their business.  I don't think that we should say... "Hi.  I'm with CAP.  We have all these internal issues and the money could be used for something that we as members here in City X don't like because it could be in City B.  So, would you donate money?"  Guess what, that shoots you in the foot.  (Or cuts off your nose like Bob said.)  Because, if you state it the way you are presenting it, I wouldn't donate money.  Presenting the facts are one thing.  It's all about how you present them.  (I won't donate to a disgruntled person... as I think they'll be taking my money...)

And, not everyone that wants this information may be on the up and up.  I didn't say hide anything if someone asks.  My point was that you don't have to say anything.  It isn't their right to know, which you imply.   There is no law that says (that I am aware of) they have to be given a detailed list of the bad things that can happen with the $5 they are giving you.  Overall... if someone asks... yeah... I'd probably answer their questions.  It is the right thing to do.  But, don't paint a black sky when it is actually fairly sunny.

And, in the 19 years I've been in CAP... how many times have I seen NHQ take my money?  None!  (I've only seen money taken from those people being naughty... such as Fraud.)

CAP as a corporation decides when we apply for things that make us disclose our procedures/funds if it is in our interest to disclose that information.  Some grants require this information.  Face it, it's a corporate type decision when playing with the big boys.  (That's one of the reasons fundraisers must be approved by the Wing CC... because he is a corporate officer!)

And, my question is... if this program makes people think they have something to hide... then... why are the worried?  Is someone going to catch them skimming money or something?  I have no problem with Wing HQ handling all my unit's money.

In all honesty, your posts are coming off as we should tell the public things because you aren't happy with something.  You're saying NHQ has made this program evil.  Really?  You seem to be making it evil.  Are you currently working with the program? 

I am, and it's a darn good one.  And, the way NHQ worked with my wing to get this going... they are far from inept.  Have you worked with them on this?  If not... how can you make such an all encompassing statement?  (Sure... there could be some things done better... but... hindsight is always 20/20.  But inept?  I completely disagree.)

You've already made some comments which show that you are not educated about the program.  (Comments like those are what fuel incorrect rumors mind you.  Instead of making incorrect disgruntled statements, or assuming things... why not ask?)

You seem to make accusations that NHQ is deliberately hiding information.  They've published new regs, and information has been distributed to wings.  (Especially those implementing this.)  So, NHQ doesn't have all the information on the website.  They might have a good reason for it that we're not privy to.  (Just because you pay your annual dues, doesn't mean you get to be in on all the decisions made by the higher-ups. That's the way both the Military and Corporations work.)

Every time my wing has asked NHQ for information, we've received it.  Every time I've asked my Wing CC or Wing FO for information, they've passed it on.

I don't see anyone hiding anything.  (Not being on the website doesn't equal hidden.)  Have you made a formal request to your Wing CC through channels to get your questions answered?

As a person that has been around other non-profits... guess what... every chapter's money technically belongs to the "corporation"... unless their structure allows them to be formed as their own corporation.  (It's that whole tax/legal thing... the IRS and Government seem to get pickey about it.)

/Insert Snappy Comment Here

carnold1836

I like DNalls concept of having a petty cash account of no more than $1500 for each sqdn. Reason is simple, sometimes I can't wait for a couple of weeks to get reimbursed for writing a check for $150.00 to pay for renting tables for a wing function at the last minute because I'm the only one that has their wallet on them. I live pay check to paycheck sometimes and I can't be laying out that kind of cash at the drop of a hat. If the sqdn has a petty cash account they can reimburse me then get reimbursement from their funds in the WGbank a couple of weeks later. Keep in mind I live in Austin, Texas, it's a minimum of 3 hours to wing HQ or atleast where the individuals controlling that stuff are.
Chris Arnold, 1st Lt, CAP
Pegasus Composite Squadron

RiverAux

I'm not sure my squadron has ever had much more than $1,500 in the its bank account for very long over the last 5-10 years.  I've got no clue if we're typical n that or not, but it would really defeat the purpose of the whole system if we could exclude that much from the Wing system. 

Anyway, I wouldn't call $1,500 petty cash.  Petty cash is for taking care of tiny little items not enough to pay for a new engine for your car.  I could go up to $100. 

carnold1836

Quote from: RiverAux on November 30, 2006, 03:15:29 AM
Anyway, I wouldn't call $1,500 petty cash.  Petty cash is for taking care of tiny little items not enough to pay for a new engine for your car.  I could go up to $100. 

But there again $100 doesn't solve my problem, maybe $500.00 then could be an amount that you could actually get something done with. $100 just doesn't seem like a lot to get day to day stuff done.
Chris Arnold, 1st Lt, CAP
Pegasus Composite Squadron

DNall

Quote from: BlackKnight on November 27, 2006, 11:00:27 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on November 27, 2006, 08:03:36 PM
Barring malfeasance, Wing bankers will have no more (or less) say about how the money is spent then they do today.
Not true in GAWG.  Wing approval will be required for squadron expenditures above a certain amount. Currently set at $1500, but that can be changed with a memo since it's not defined in regs.
I took the 1500 amount from here, I'm sure that policy means individuals transactions, but that's fine. Remember the point of this policy is NOT to seize control of Sq bank accts, but rather to create a well-documented accounting system. Therefore, if you have to document the expenditure locally to get it reimbursed from the Wg controlled acct, then you will do so & they'll have the records they need. If almost no Sq has over $1500 then that's fine too cause the amounts are so small - in terms of someone looking at a hundred grand grant - that they won't bear on the accounting situation. There's a lot of ways to do things. You could turn in a monthly or quarterly operating budget ot have expenditures pre-approved & then have a small petty cash fund for things that crop up. What I really don't like about this is that the Wg actually takes full control. They don't need to gatekeep the checks to get records for accounting, we could have all moved our accts to some big chain & granted Wg read access to the records, or even made them an additional signer for that matter, but still preserve the local signers. It's just not realistic what they're trying to do here. Maybe in NatCap Wg with their 7 Sqs or something, but my Gp commanded by a Major is bigger has more members & aircraft than most wings & is the size of the state of Iowa. It's gonna get out of control at some point somewhere, and it's going to get there fast & screw people on the ground

...AGAIN, I have yet to be sold on the real return we stand to gain as an organization, not to mention what I might feel locally, in exchange for this risk I'm being forced to assume. That's BAD leadership. You never give an order unless you are forced to. You ALWAYS explain to your subordinates & build trust so that in that rare emergency case where you do have to order an action, they KNOW it's in the best interest of the org & that they won't burn you for nothing. BAD BAD BAD. I don't care if you're President, a four-star general, or a cub scout leader, you ALWAYS always follow this & the other core principles of leadership or you don't deserve the job & no one will ever respect or listen to anything you ever say, even if they're bound by law.

RiverAux

I work for an organization that has about as many employees as there are CAP members in my Wing.  The budget for this organization is probably 500 times that of the CAP Wing.  The budget for my part of the organization is probably 50-75 times as big as the CAP Wing and almost all the accounting is done by one person.  Our organization handles the banking essentially the same way as what CAP is doing and it works fine. 

I have an extremely hard time believing that there would need to be more than a couple of checks a day (if not a week) that would have to be cut for squadrons.  Heck, when I was involved with this at my squadron we probably wrote 5-10 checks a year, if that.  So, I'm fairly confident that this heavy workload can be accomplished without too much problem.  Now, for the larger Wings it will be more of an issue, but hey, thats what we're paying all those new Wing employees we got this year to do, right? 

ELTHunter

TankerT,

I don't think any one is saying that NHQ is evil, or that this is some kind of an evil plan hatched to get the squadron's money.  What I see is people getting a little tired of "the corporation" putting more and more of a burden on the membership on an increasingly frequent basis.

All of us PAY dues to be members of CAP because we have a desire to help our country/community, or feel we have something to offer that can help CAP and the USAF perform the mission.  What we get for our dues and efforts is an increasing amount of administrative work to do IN ADDITION to meeting, planning, training, and actually performing our missions.  In order to do all of these, a lot of time and quite a bit of our OWN money is spent on supplies and equipment that the "corporation" doesn't provide.  We also get uniform changes on a quarterly basis that cost money out of our own pockets.  We work missions that may take us months to get reimbursed for, providing we made sure and followed the letter of the regulations to insure we get paid (were corporate vehicles available, did you fill up on the day of the mission even though it was 0300 and all you really wanted to do was go to bed, did the proper paperwork get submitted in time, and to the proper person, etc., etc, etc.).

We also see CAP contracting with a commercial company to supply items that often can't be purchased anywhere else, and these items are now two or three times more than they should be, and the "corporation" is profitting from these sales, instead of operating a member run store that only covers the cost of operations.

In order to fund all of these things that we need to do but don't get any help with from the AF or CAP, we (the squadrons) spend additional time working to raise money.  Now NHQ says that in order to help the "corporation" with getting funds that won't likely ever be sent down to the squadrons, we need to send our money to them to administer.

I don't think there is any evil plan, but I certainly think that folks have a right to be skeptical.

In the end, we don't have to like it,we only have to do it.  However, we don't have to go to a lot of trouble raise squadron funds at all.  I'm not saying the program isn't well thought out, but most things designed by large companies and government bureaucracies aren't the most user friendly and efficient things.  If NHQ doesn't think this thing through and involve the membership all along, they may end up with more of a problem than they started with.

Maj. Tim Waddell, CAP
SER-TN-170
Deputy Commander of Cadets
Emergency Services Officer

carnold1836

Quote from: RiverAux on November 30, 2006, 04:06:20 AM
Heck, when I was involved with this at my squadron we probably wrote 5-10 checks a year, if that.

Did your sqdn have a van? If yes how was the fuel purchased?
Did your sqdn host events such as ALS or FTXs? If yes how was the food purchased?
Did your sqdn ever need office supplies? If yes how did that get purchased?

My sqdn has/does all of these things and it counts on the members to make those purchases and get reimbursed in a time frame no longer than 6 days. Also I'm not sure I like the idea of having to send to wing the $250.00 a month my sqdn gets from the generosity of individuals that have their $125.00 gift matched by their employer. Or the several thousand dollar grant my sqdn received or the large cash donation that was given to us because of what OUR sqdn does for the LOCAL community.

I know it is supposed to still be our money, I just don't like not having control of it. And from what it looks like the sqdn won't have direct control of their money any more. Whose to say the wing FM won't authorize a request for reimbursement because it doesn't seem to be a legitimate expenditure in his/her eyes, even when it is completely legitimate? I don't like it, my finance officer doesn't like it and I know many others in my group don't like it. But we will live by it if that is what is sent down from wing, we just won't like it.
Chris Arnold, 1st Lt, CAP
Pegasus Composite Squadron

DNall

River,
I think a more typical Sq writes maybe 3-5 checks a month on bills, could be significantly higher than that during an activity (how many of those won't happen now because of the hassle). I don't doubt that your company can do it with a full time professional accountant/financial manager & the right infrastructure, plus everyone being together in one place versus geographically seperated by hundreds of miles which creates more of the us-vs-them attitude. For CAP you're going to be talking about a volunteer with probably not the best background for the work & they'll likely be saddled with other stuff too & also not have as much authority as the guy you're talking about. It's going to be a problem man, trust me on this, it's way too far away from teh KISS method w/ no good reason for being there & minimal benefit, plus there's a couple other ways they could have VERY easily accomplished their objectives w/o remotely this much hassle.

ELT,
yeah that's at least a part of it. We see XYZ problems, pattern of behavior, a whole LOT of actions taken that are very obviously not thought thru & end up making everyone look stupid, then they roll this pain in the butt thing down like I don't already have enough problems holding things together with my own two hands (and every bit of effort from my staff) just to keep our heads up & moving forward at all, and when there's MANY examples from other non-profits (from which we hire NHQ staff) of how to deal with this in a MUCH LESS intrusive way to accomplish the stated goals w/ MUCH less difficulty. That's not even amateur, that's somewhere out beyond incompetent. We bust out butts down here as members & pay out the ass to keep things going, and I tell ya I haven't had fun in CAP in a lot of years, I care about the kids I can help & screw the BS. That's not even mentioning the jacked up retention stuation & the extent to which policies like this impact it, nor the way good people are being priced out of the opportunity to serve with BAD BAD BAD management. I think I've earned the right to have expectations of our leaders to step up in their jobs to the same extent I do in my jobs, and maybe that they should work to support me by making my job eaiser to do so I can push further out. So far, not every single thing, but the majority of what comes down is the complete opposite of that, & really steals a chunck of your soul every time your disappointed again, you can almost feel it drain out of you sometimes. It sucks man, and I don't like it one bit. I want people that will step up & lead like never before, just like I try to do with my people.

ELTHunter

I blew off the steam now and feel a bit better.  Like I said, if that's the policy, I'll salute and follow orders whether I like it or not.  We'll probably get that new DF unit we've been wanting, and updating our maps though before we turn in the money.
Maj. Tim Waddell, CAP
SER-TN-170
Deputy Commander of Cadets
Emergency Services Officer

DNall

Quote from: ELThunter on November 30, 2006, 04:48:00 AM
I blew off the steam now and feel a bit better.  Like I said, if that's the policy, I'll salute and follow orders whether I like it or not. 
Second... just hope they take note of the trend & make some changes before the NEXT thing I have to pile on this camel's back.

fyrfitrmedic

 What little I've seen of this 'improvement' up-close-and-personal has left me a little underwhelmed thus far.
MAJ Tony Rowley CAP
Lansdowne PA USA
"The passion of rescue reveals the highest dynamic of the human soul." -- Kurt Hahn

capchiro

It would appear to me that the people that are unhappy or questioning this are probably the squadron commanders and squadron finance people.  We do need some type of slush fund or ability to run day to day business, such as refilling cake machine, giving change, etc.  It is wrong for National and Wing to assume or require the local commander to use his personal funds and wait forr reimbursement.  There is also the question fo weekly or monthly dues.  What does the commander/finance person do with a handle full of change or small bills that are turned in weekly for dues by the cadets, etc.?  Do we make weekly deposits to wing?  Do we carry the money around for the rest of the week until we can get to the bank of their choice?  Do we deposit the cash in our own accounts and write Wing a check from our accounts to  cover the cash amount?  the members handling the money on a day to day basis are going to be more inconvenienced by this than they know.  Someone also mentioned not telling donators where their money was going or at least not making a big deal out of it.  some of the grant forms we fill out ask very detailed questions and want the money kept in the local community (bank) and used in the local community.  there has been some talk that if wing does anything to the money without our permission, they will be confronted with IG's, DA's, etc.  Considering all they have to do is change a memo and that will change the status of their/our control, it appears problematic.  I think a few people trusted Enron also and see what happened.  If a wing is $30,000.00 in the hole and has lost $48,000.00 worth of communications equipment, why should they be trusted?  And why aren't heads rolling over that?  As usual, just my opinion, but for the record, I am 100% CAP and have 30 years in.  This doesn't mean that I can't question what I consider to be poor decisions.  There is also the question of legality of this matter.  If I recall correctly, before a regulation can be changed, there is supposed to be a 60 day period for members to consider and respond to the matter.  I don't believe that this happened in the immediate situation.  Again, we are asked to trust a situation, wherein proper procedures have been ignored or not followed.  Why wouldn't this arouse suspicion and questions?  A healthy suspicion and need for solid regulations are part of being a good leader in my opinion.  Wing is here to support the squadrons and not the other way around.  National and wing should have some good hard regulations for the commanders to hang their hats on and they just aren't there.
Lt. Col. Harry E. Siegrist III, CAP
Commander
Sweetwater Comp. Sqdn.
GA154