Winter 2008 National Board Agenda

[JC004]

Attached.

[Major Carrales]

Boonie Hats and Blue Sleeve Braid for the Corportate Service Coat...youse guys need to check this out!!!

[CASH172]

I've been waiting for the NB to finally approve the nametapes and command patch.  I get the distinct feeling many will abuse the boonie hat rights if approved. 

[arajca]

They tried the same rationale for the boonie a couple years ago and the AF not only said no, they said Hell NO! I don't see the point in continually bringing the same item up.

To avoid confusion with very senior AF officers, CAP should change the silver sleeve braid to blue on the sorporate service jacket. Interesting logic.

Has anyone seen the design for the Achievement Award?

[PhoenixRisen]

Wasn't the CAP Achievement Medal a CAPTALKer's idea?

[FW]

Is there any reason we can't go back to the pre-Aug 2006 command patch?

[jimmydeanno]

You know, I think that this is just plain dumb.

I don't understand why simple decisions like 90% of the ones in this agenda are even brought to the NB.  Are there no other issues in the organization that need to be dealt with that we need to have 80 people decide whether or not we come up with a comm training plan or record mission pilot hours?

Most of this crap is administrative stuff.  "Hey guys, let's vote on whether or not to change the NHQ phone number in this regulation - because changing regulations requires a vote."

What a bureaucratic waste of time.

[mikeylikey]

To avoid confusion with very senior AF officers, CAP should change the silver sleeve braid to blue on the corporate service jacket. Interesting logic.

Are these people on crack?  The rationale for making some of these changes appear to be dreamed up by five year old kids.  

I don't agree with the majority of the proposals!  When they actually put together a coherent and logical reasoning for changing things, I would then support it.  

Boonie Hats won't fly (thats what sunscreen is for).  Changing the sleeve braid won't fly.  Adding NCO chevrons to the blackwindbreaker won't fly.  

Did anyone from the Uniform Committee put these suggestions across?  Wasn't that the whole reason for creating that committee??

I am glad to see them creating more awards, more PD requirements....but not rationale that makes sense!

[dwb]

I do like Stan Skrabut's suggestions about putting more stuff in e-Services for approval, like the professional development awards.

Having an NHQ uniform committee isn't going to prevent Wing CCs from introducing agenda items, as evident by this agenda.  I support removing the silver braids from the corporate service coat, I think they look terrible.

And I wish they'd just return to the original command patch design.  I still have mine, I bet a lot of people do.  If the NB is interested in helping the volunteers save some money, then going back to the original design is the way to go.

[0]

I've been waiting for the NB to finally approve the nametapes and command patch.  I get the distinct feeling many will abuse the boonie hat rights if approved. 

'

The way I read the agenda item the boonie hat wouldn't be authorized for everyday wear.  It would only be an option at the discretion of the project commander. 

[Pylon]

I don't agree with the majority of the proposals!  When they actually put together a coherent and logical reasoning for changing things, I would then support it. 

Actually, contrary to what people posting here might imply, there's only about 4 uniform-related items on the 58-page agenda.  How we always manage to skip right past the non-uniform proposals and bring up the few things related to bling, I don't know.

I do like Stan Skrabut's suggestions about putting more stuff in e-Services for approval, like the professional development awards.

Absolutely.  I saw the NHQ/IT comment about cadet awards being online on E-services soon.  Very exciting.  Makes complete sense now that you can email a SIMS-generated CAPF 52-X, which really only contains the members name/CAPID and the dates they completed their achievements for that phase.  You effectively remove the step of the squadron generating the CAPF 52-X, making it a PDF and emailing it and NHQ manually processing that info and entering it into CAPWATCH.  Squadrons enter into CAPWATCH interface, which checks data against a set of rules, and if accepts it processes the award puts the onus on the squadrons and reduces an already high burden on the hard-working staff at NHQ.  You have the love it! 

I hope, however, that an ICL gets issued to formally change the regulated process.  Right now, there's no formal changes for things like E-Services promotions, specialty ratings, etc.

Having an NHQ uniform committee isn't going to prevent Wing CCs from introducing agenda items, as evident by this agenda.

You're right, having a committee doesn't stop board members from directly submitting agenda items.  However, a committee can give their recommendations on proposals and the board often forwards new business items to the appropriate committee for consideration, investigation and comment before voting on them. 

Ideally, uniform changes proposed directly to the NB would be deferred to the uniform committee for consideration - meaning a full year before it can be considered again.  A wise NB member would instead recommend it to the committee first, so it can be voted on at the next NB meeting.

[arajca]

I've been waiting for the NB to finally approve the nametapes and command patch.  I get the distinct feeling many will abuse the boonie hat rights if approved. 

'

The way I read the agenda item the boonie hat wouldn't be authorized for everyday wear.  It would only be an option at the discretion of the project commander. 

How many members will keep their boonies with the bdu's all the time - to have ready for missions - and convienently forget to bring their bdu cap the the meetings? "Oops, I left my bdu cap on the counter. [darn], I'll just have to wear my boonie, since I need to wear headgear with the bdu." I've heard that about berets even BEFORE they were authorized through out CAP and when they were PROHIBITED by wing policy!

[arajca]

I don't agree with the majority of the proposals!  When they actually put together a coherent and logical reasoning for changing things, I would then support it. 

Actually, contrary to what people posting here might imply, there's only about 4 uniform-related items on the 58-page agenda.  How we always manage to skip right past the non-uniform proposals and bring up the few things related to bling, I don't know.

Uniform items are the easiest to comment on. I don't think most us have had the time to thoroughly think through the other items. After all, the agenda hasn't even been up for 12 hours yet.

[Hawk200]

Line of succesion item is definitely needed. An issue like we had shows that it needs to be addressed.

I think that requiring some further PD for other promotions is a good idea too. Got a member in our unit that's a retired ArNG colonel, but he's chosen to move through the PD program. Says he enjoys the classes, and the opportunity to meet other members.

I like the addition of additional permitted courses for Level IV and V completion. Now, if they would allow encampment attendance in place of a wing conference, it would be great. Always found it ironic that a Saturday afternoon counts for PD, but a week at an encampment in a staff position didn't.

The online PD award processing is pretty practical too. Gotta log it there anyway, why use a separate method of processing?

I'm a little leery of the "Achievement Award". The concept is a good one, but I can see some people wearing a half dozen of these things inside of a few years. If there is a stipulation that only a certain number can be earned in a certain time period, I'd be okay with it. It needs some limits.

I am glad to see the limit on ribbons and badges removed. Mini ribbons would be nice, we could use them considering some our members have more than the typical Air Force member does. Reducing the size of the rack with smaller ribbons would be nicer in that you can wear more with less real estate being used.

A few good things in there. Hope we get some positive changes.

[Eeyore]

^ We could just make the CC more difficult to achieve, those are already handed out like candy. Make the Achievement Award as "difficult" as a CC is to get now, and only give the CC's to actions that are actually deserving of it.

[arajca]

The CC is not supposed to be easy to get, it's that it is consistantly misused. The current options are:
1. Commander's Commendation
2. Certificate of Appreciation
3. swift kick in the can Pat on the back

Many times the commander wants to give someone an award that they can show off easily, but doesn't really meet the requirements for the Commander's Commandation. Usually, a wing commander can be talked into approving it because of the lack of lower level awards.

The most constant misuse of the Commander's Commendation is to staff members at the end of a commander's term. I had proposed, a few years ago, a Staff Service Ribbon. This would be awarded using the same scheme as the Red Service ribbon, just only for staff service time. As you can see, it went nowhere.

[0]

I am glad to see the limit on ribbons and badges removed. Mini ribbons would be nice, we could use them considering some our members have more than the typical Air Force member does. Reducing the size of the rack with smaller ribbons would be nicer in that you can wear more with less real estate being used.

I've only had a chance to glance over the agenda where was that listed? 

[Pylon]

I am glad to see the limit on ribbons and badges removed. Mini ribbons would be nice, we could use them considering some our members have more than the typical Air Force member does. Reducing the size of the rack with smaller ribbons would be nicer in that you can wear more with less real estate being used.

I've only had a chance to glance over the agenda where was that listed? 

It's not on the agenda.  I believe Hawk was offering it as his alternate suggestion for members with large ribbon racks.

[0]

I am glad to see the limit on ribbons and badges removed. Mini ribbons would be nice, we could use them considering some our members have more than the typical Air Force member does. Reducing the size of the rack with smaller ribbons would be nicer in that you can wear more with less real estate being used.

I've only had a chance to glance over the agenda where was that listed? 

It's not on the agenda.  I believe Hawk was offering it as his alternate suggestion for members with large ribbon racks.

Ok I thought I might have missed something.  I'm going to sit down and read this whole thing tonight. 

[ßτε]

I am glad to see the limit on ribbons and badges removed. Mini ribbons would be nice, we could use them considering some our members have more than the typical Air Force member does. Reducing the size of the rack with smaller ribbons would be nicer in that you can wear more with less real estate being used.

I've only had a chance to glance over the agenda where was that listed? 

Agenda Item 22

[JohnKachenmeister]

I like the idea of a group-commander awarded achievement medal.  ALL of the RM branches have one, and in the Army it was a very useful award to promptly reward excellent service.

I do NOT like the idea of withholding earned rank from RM folks coming in to our organization pending more PD classes.  These guys have already earned a rank, and making them jump through CAP hoops to get a rank they aalready held will needlessly impair our recruitment of these valuable folks.  We already require them to pick up that which they missed in order to get promoted, so what is the point of this change?

I like the idea of dumping the silver braid for the blue on the TPU, but not for the reasons cited.  Can't we just say that it's ugly?

The new patch is worse then the last one.  Can't we go back to the old one that said "US Air Force Auxiliary?"  I plan to wear mine as long as I can get away with it.  If the PAO in Nevada can show up on National TV with the old round patch on her flight suit, I can keep the old command patch until I lapse into senility.  That's only a few years away, anyhow.

[Psicorp]

Am I the only one who's getting tired of seeing how much new "stuff" people want added to our regulations as opposed to fixing/updating what we already have?

It's just....grr.

[bosshawk]

I know that the majority of the posters on this site don't care for the blue polo shirt, but it appears that somebody on the National Board heard the plaintive cries of folks like me for the long-sleeved blue polo.  I don't wear blues and only wear the white aviator shirt/gray slacks when absolutely driven to it, so my polo shirts get a good workout.  I will encourage my Wing CC to vote for that one.  Don't really care much about the braid and ribbons and the patch comes and goes with the flow of the wind(or so it seems).

[Bluelakes 13]

The new patch is worse then the last one.  Can't we go back to the old one that said "US Air Force Auxiliary?"  I plan to wear mine as long as I can get away with it.  If the PAO in Nevada can show up on National TV with the old round patch on her flight suit, I can keep the old command patch until I lapse into senility.  That's only a few years away, anyhow.

She also had gawdy large earingas the first day.  Are you going to wear those too?

[DNall]

[former mil officers]...have a greater investment in... a CAP officer corps more in tune with the CAP Corporation.

I'm really not sure I like the way that's worded. We bring these folks in at grade for a couple reasons. One of those is to draw the CAP culture closer to a professional military one where things like discipline & core values rule. The other is the massive leadership & mgmt experience they have that can never be matched at any level of CAP.

The justification used in this item talks about these folks missing out on networking opportunities, and being unfamiliar with leading volunteers versus under UCMJ.

It mentions waivers of training based on their military PME. I'm not sure I recall waivers in the reg. I recall a cross-walk of mil courses that exceed the trng provided at the CAP versions & are counted automatically (not at discression) as equiv. The mil courses by the way are far below the mil course level. RSC is taught by NCOA instructors using NCOA & ASBC material. That's 2Lt stuff, not field grade.

I'd note here that non-mil CAP members complete the lower quality distance learning versions of that same PME, bypassing those same networking opportunities, and no one is complaining there. As I recall, that has been long protected because not all members can afford to attend CAP specific courses. That argument doesn't hold any water at all.

I'd also note that there are several simliar & superb courses available from DoD & FEMA on managing & leading volunteers. It seems to me that course would be more helpful than providing a disincentive to membership for people we really need.

Out of respect for the substantial differences between CAP and USAF officers, and to minimize the chances of CAP officers being mistaken for very senior military officers, and in order to foster consistency ("uniformity") in appearance with our own Air Force-style...

I do support blue braid over silver on the alternate service coat, but that sentence makes absolutely no sense whatsoever!!!! In order to distinguish btwn AF officers we want to make the braid consistent w/ AF-style service dress. You gotta be kidding me.


I'm fine with or don't care about anything else in there. It's almost all trivial admin that should never have req'd NB action.

[jimmydeanno]

Just another thing, looking at the "Logging Pilot Hours" item.

It drives me crazy when uniform policy changes are put into other regulations.  If you only want one pair of wings worn, put it in 39-1.

By placing uniform rules in 35 different regs and pubs it can only lead to more confusion later on down the road.  Or when an update needs to be made you need to (according to current practices) get NB approval to change the wording in all those affected regs, rather than just fix 39-1.

To me, 35-6 should state the requirements to earn the badge.  39-1 should tell you how to wear it.  It shouldn't be 35-6 states requirements and how to wear it, 39-1 also states how to wear it.

[RiverAux]

Of course this agenda isn't even posted on eservices yet -- why let the members know what is going on after all.  Heck, they're still 2 national meetings behind in telling us what has already happened.....

From Agenda Item 3 (NIMS)

Staff officers and leaders at all levels have
reported that their units, wings, or regions either already are or will soon be NIMS
compliant.

What a crock of bull.  This makes it seem like we're pretty close when that surely isn't the case in most places.  

Ground Team of the Year award (Agenda item 14)

Ironically, almost half of Civil Air Patrol's emergency services missions in the
last several years did not involve flying operations.

Thats right, you Civil AIR Patrol snobs....

BDU Name tapes (item 18):

At the 2007 Winter National Board meeting, the NB approved the change of the "Civil Air Patrol" tape on the BDU and field jacket to "U.S. Civil Air Patrol". This change has caused problems with cadets of smaller stature, and would seem to be redundant, as CAP is not generally involved in international operations. It is also somewhat confusing as the official name of the organization is defined as "Civil Air Patrol" in Article II of the CAP Constitution.

Ah, sweet vindication for us valiant few who thought that the CAP Constitution should mean something....

[notaNCO forever]

Why can't they make choices that matter and are helpfull instead of just costing us money and boonie hats really just were sunblock.

[DNall]

From Agenda Item 3 (NIMS)

Staff officers and leaders at all levels have
reported that their units, wings, or regions either already are or will soon be NIMS
compliant.

What a crock of bull.  This makes it seem like we're pretty close when that surely isn't the case in most places.  

I notied that as well. If they're just talking 100-800, they're still full of it. Not even close to the credentialing standards that'll actually be necessary (ones we discussed at length last fall) to get on missions:
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nims/sar_jobtitle_111806.pdf

Glad they're moving in the right direction though.

And what's up with 187k for a GT comp? Did I read they're actually considering that? That's a waste in a big way.

[0]

And what's up with 187k for a GT comp? Did I read they're actually considering that? That's a waste in a big way.

Why is a competition a big waste?  It gives us a chance to learn how other people are doing the job at the same time as we try and see who's the best.  A little competition never hurt anyone.

[notaNCO forever]

And what's up with 187k for a GT comp? Did I read they're actually considering that? That's a waste in a big way.

I find GT comp keeps GT's on their top game.

[CASH172]

And what's up with 187k for a GT comp? Did I read they're actually considering that? That's a waste in a big way.

Why is a competition a big waste?  It gives us a chance to learn how other people are doing the job at the same time as we try and see who's the best.  A little competition never hurt anyone.

I think a lot of CAP members feel that the money could be better spent elsewhere.  187K in CAP can go a long way, and many others would use the funds for other needs.

[mikeylikey]

And what's up with 187k for a GT comp? Did I read they're actually considering that? That's a waste in a big way.

Why is a competition a big waste?  It gives us a chance to learn how other people are doing the job at the same time as we try and see who's the best.  A little competition never hurt anyone.

I think a lot of CAP members feel that the money could be better spent elsewhere.  187K in CAP can go a long way, and many others would use the funds for other needs.

That is a HUGE amount of $$.  I just am so upset with most everything that is being proposed in the agenda.

[LittleIronPilot]

And what's up with 187k for a GT comp? Did I read they're actually considering that? That's a waste in a big way.

Why is a competition a big waste?  It gives us a chance to learn how other people are doing the job at the same time as we try and see who's the best.  A little competition never hurt anyone.

I think a lot of CAP members feel that the money could be better spent elsewhere.  187K in CAP can go a long way, and many others would use the funds for other needs.

Such as? I know there are a ton of worthy things...but one thing I have noticed is that Ground training is given a lot of short shrift.

I am a pilot, and am getting my Form 5 and working towards my MP status. However I am also a former ground pounder who sees how much MORE we can do with ground teams.

[sardak]

The proposed competition was incorrectly referred to as a "GT comp" earlier in the thread.  The proposal made to the NB was for a SARCOMP similar to what was held in the 1980s and into the early 90s.  The competion was three separate parts - GT, incident staff and aircrew.  Let's not mistakenly think this proposal is only for a GT competition.

Now, having been on two of those SARCOMPs in the 80s, once on a ground team and once on incident staff, I think they were of little value. 

The FY08 CAP Corporate Financial Plan shows the Ops budget at $85,250.  The estimated cost of the proposed national SARCOMP is $187,000, which, according to the  August NB minutes, could be paid from USAF appropriated funds.  I still give it a thumbs down.

I do like the idea of the proposed ground team and incident staff awards.  However, since the aircrew award is from 1st AF, I think some coordination will be required to make sure the award criteria and "stature" of the awards are more or less equal.

Mike

[SamFranklin]

The discussions above are interesting, but what disappoints me most is that once again 90% of the board's agenda deals with trivia. If you were king of CAP for a day, how many of these issues would you place in your Top 20 challenges?

Here's what one expert has to say about the role of non-profit boards. Do your own research and you'll find this guidance is representative of the industry standard.

---------------------------------------------------------------
"The role of a non-profit board member is comprised of only three activities:

    * Fundraising (80 percent): Fundraising is the most important responsibility of a board member, yet many board members are reluctant to engage in this activity. Board members are expected use their connections to spur interest in and support of the organization they serve. Board fundraising activities may include major donor solicitations, sponsorship solicitations, membership recruitment, and efforts to boost event registrations.

    * Oversight of Programs (10 percent): The non-profit board is responsible for general oversight of the organization's programs. This role does not extend to the operations behind the programs, but does include fiduciary oversight.

    * Strategic Planning (10 percent): The board is the primary force behind the organization's strategic planning decisions. Board members create or update the strategic plan and evaluate the implementation plan presented by staff."

(Source: http://www.idea.org/board.html)
------------------------------------------


We need a board that focuses on their core responsibilities! That said, Gen. Courter's bio shows she has considerable real-world board experience, so I'm rooting for her to transform CAP's way of thinking about the role of its boards.

And now back to the debate about boonie hats, US CAP tapes, and the like.

[RiverAux]

That description is probably more representative of what the Board of Governor's should be doing -- a small group of people at the top of the organization who are generally divorced from the day-to-day responsibilities of running it. 

The National Board is more like a committee of top-level executives within the organzation, each of which has an important role in routine operations. 

[SamFranklin]

^   I agree with you about the BoG. And I think your view of the NB/NEC is representative of the conventional wisdom.  But my larger point here is that CAP continues to struggle precisely because people see the 60+ member National Board as having "an important role in routine operations."  The issues on the agenda hardly qualify as operational concerns; they are about as far down into the weeds as one can get.

[DNall]

I think a best ranger style SaRComp would be absolutely great. However, I know you can run a massive amount of training for that amt of money. We run maybe one or two massive real world missions in that price range, and that's several weeks of constant flying plus GT/etc. I mean if you're going to do it, why is half the budget for lodging? Everything else in CAP is on you, but this is going to be free? And, there's no place in the country you can put those folks up? Give me a call, you can run that thing here & I got 300 cots & a big honkin armory drill hall.

It's just with all our many desperate needs & members going heavily into their pockets to cover so much, this is really a bad use of funds. That it'd be considered - to me - potentially demonstrates a disconnect I'm not happy with.

[RiverAux]

I've been involved in a regional aircrew SAR competition before and I think the competition didn't really teach me anything.  However, the multiple training sorties done prior to the competition were worthwhile. 

I see this as a luxury item and considering AF and resulting CAP budget issues, we just shouldn't be considering it at this time.

[NEBoom]

And what's up with 187k for a GT comp? Did I read they're actually considering that? That's a waste in a big way.

Why is a competition a big waste?  It gives us a chance to learn how other people are doing the job at the same time as we try and see who's the best.  A little competition never hurt anyone.

I was a Cadet back in the '80s, and a young S'Member in the early '90s, and remember SARCOMP well.  Was all for it when it first came about.  Figured just like you do.  Sharpens everyone up, etc.  I found that the opposite actually occurs.  You don't get to see how anyone else does things because you're working through all the various problems yourself all weekend.  At the same time other teams are going through other problems, and "never the twain shall meet."  It's just a function of how the schedule has to be set up to get everyone through all the problems.

I also noticed that everyone gets very tight-lipped about their tips, tricks, techniques, etc because they want to keep whatever advantage they might have for competition.  So it actually stifles the free flow of information and ideas.  

Along this same line, people also had trouble understanding where competition between units began, and more importantly where it ended.  "Competition mentality" constantly crept into the other non-comp SAREXes and even operational ("real") missions!  Issues with the comp itself (fairness, judging, rules, etc.) led to a lot of bad blood between some of us that took years to rectify.  I know it sounds all over-dramatic but yes, all this and more actually happened between units and individuals in my Wing back in the day.

Bottom line, "SARCOMP suck" (think Superbowl ad, "Wheel suck.  Bottle opener suck."  ).  They were fun to go through, but the issues they caused were not worth it.  All this is IMVHO, of course.

I did actually like the idea of putting a team through a set of problems over the course of the weekend, and I even don't object to being scored on how well you do.  That part of it was very instructive to me as a SQ/DOS back then.  Gave me a great reading on where I needed to put emphasis on training for the next year.  But I do feel that any scores tallied should be for the team's use only.  We got into trouble when we started trying to determine who was "best."  ES isn't a game afterall.

As for the $187k, IMHO it could be better spend on almost anything else (if we even have the $187k to blow).  Like funding for training to get us all NIMS compliant maybe?  Everyone seems to think this will cost next to $0, but the skeptic in me doubts that.  If not for initial NIMS training, how about funding a large-scale exercise or two so we can get some experience using the full Incident Command System?  Both would be far more beneficial than a SARCOMP.

Again all this is IMHO and YMMV and all the other caveats and disclaimers people use to avoid being flamed.  Just want to share some hard-won experience, that's all.

[Smokey]

As I recall hearing while listening to the NB when the SARCOMP was proposed, they seemed to have likened it to the Air Force's RED FLAG which is held at Nellis AFB.

Well, although there is a bit of competition attitude, it's really about training....to quote the Nellis website....414th Combat Training Squadron (Red Flag): The 414th CTS conducts exercise scenarios that maximize the combat readiness and survivability of participants by providing a realistic training environment. Since combat is no place to train aircrews, Red Flag provides a peacetime "battlefield" within which our combat air forces can train. Inside this battlefield, aircrews train to fight together, survive together and win together.

Transferring that to CAP....we should conduct exercise scenarios that maximize SAR readiness and survivability  of participants by providing a realistic training environment.  Sounds like a SAREX but it would be on a bigger scale involving numerous Wings and each exercise progressively more difficult in the same vein as Red Flag.

[FW]

I also agree it would be better to spend our limited funds on large scale guided training exercises than a national SARCOMP.  

We could use the lessons learned from previous large scale missions and experiment with new techniques and technologies without the pressures of evaluations or compitions with other "teams".  

It would probably cost less to send our best trainers/educators to sites than sending everyone to a single site.  However, even if the cost were similar, we're looking at an average expense of $3600 per wing or $23,000 per region.

I think the NB will be spending some time on this issue.  

[JohnKachenmeister]

The new patch is worse then the last one.  Can't we go back to the old one that said "US Air Force Auxiliary?"  I plan to wear mine as long as I can get away with it.  If the PAO in Nevada can show up on National TV with the old round patch on her flight suit, I can keep the old command patch until I lapse into senility.  That's only a few years away, anyhow.

She also had gawdy large earingas the first day.  Are you going to wear those too?

Only on Saturday Night.  Besides, don't ask, don't tell!

[cnitas]

Does anyone have the 'attached copy' of the auditor's memo for agenda item #7?

I am an accountant and Col Weiss's recommendation has merit.  I am not sure how it would jepordize an unqualified audit.

The memo would perhaps help enlighten me.

[sarmed1]

LT Col Abegg discusseed this "SARCOMP" idea when we were getting spun up for the SARSCENE games in Canada.  The theory was that each wing would hold its own competeition, then each region, and the region winners would go to the national SARCOMP, the winning team going onto the SARSCENE games and conference as the CAP representitive.  I dont know if that $187,000 is supposed to involve the cost of teams going from the Wing level up through the National level, including the SARSCENE games.

mk

[mikeylikey]

^ Lets take that $187,000 and split it up between everyone and lower membership dues! 

Everyone would save just around $4.00 per year!

OR lets use that money to buy every member one new patch from Vanguard.

OR lets use that money to get every Corporate vehicle inspected.

Or lets use that money to buy every SQD 4 orange safety vest

The possibilities are endless. 

WHAT would you DO with $187,000

[RiverAux]

$4 each, eh?  How about send us all the fancy new ID card for free?

[mikeylikey]

^ That would work great!

[JohnKachenmeister]

I don't want a photo ID.  I got plenty of photo ID.  Put my $4 toward a beer after a mission. 

THAT would improve my morale and attitude!

[Tubacap]

^now that's a tough call!

[FW]

^
WHAT would you DO with $187,000

That kind of cash would go pretty far.  Maybe an RV or a M20J, a nice winter palace in Florida,  A garage in California....   You're right the options are endless...
Unfortunately, since the money is part of our annual "grant", the Air Force won't allow it.
neither will they allow the photo id's, the beer (well, maybe the beer), or patches from Vanguard.  But we can dream now, can't we?

[JAFO78]

How about using some of that money to help start new squadron's around the country, sort of seed money. It could be used to off set costs of membership and uniforms for kids who could use a little help.

Just my .2

[ColonelJack]

How about using some of that money to help start new squadron's around the country, sort of seed money. It could be used to off set costs of membership and uniforms for kids who could use a little help.

Just my .2

It'll never happen that way.  The idea makes sense, therefore, it'll never fly.

Jack

[mikeylikey]

Has anyone sent up proposals directly to their Wing Kings for inclusion in "New Business"?  I sent a freaking ass huge list.  I will see what kind of lame commander he really is. 

Some things I suggested......

1)allow "other than black" boots to be worn with BDU's and BBDU's
2)all of the uniform suggestions in the now defunct NHQ uniform committee thread
3)getting rid of all Hawk MTN bling except for the school patch (and mandate its wear on the pocket, not the sleeve)

I hope others do the same!  If we get enough pressure on OUR leadership perhaps they will do what we want for a change!

[John Bryan]

WOW.....all this issues facing CAP and so many people want to focus on hats, boots and hawk mtn patches. I hope the wing commander and national leadership will focus on the real problems facing CAP

[Dragoon]

Has anyone sent up proposals directly to their Wing Kings for inclusion in "New Business"?  I sent a freaking ass huge list.  I will see what kind of lame commander he really is. 

Some things I suggested......

1)allow "other than black" boots to be worn with BDU's and BBDU's
2)all of the uniform suggestions in the now defunct NHQ uniform committee thread
3)getting rid of all Hawk MTN bling except for the school patch (and mandate its wear on the pocket, not the sleeve)

I hope others do the same!  If we get enough pressure on OUR leadership perhaps they will do what we want for a change!

Not sure what you mean by "lame commander."  I hope you don't mean that if he disagrees with you, then he's automatically "lame."

[arajca]

WOW.....all this issues facing CAP and so many people want to focus on hats, boots and hawk mtn patches. I hope the wing commander and national leadership will focus on the real problems facing CAP

Amen.
Here's a crazy idea - a blanket approval on regulation updatesNOT involving policy changes e.i. laws change so the regs need to be updated, or updates incorporating policy changes made by the NB/NEC. The new CAPR 35-5 is being changed to incorporate the cahnges made at previous NB/NEC meetings. Why should it have to be approved? This approval would probably cut down on 30+% of the NB routine stuff.

Here's another one: Electronic approvals for other routine stuff. Picture a special website restricted to NB and NEC members. They receive a monthly email or snail mail packet of proposed simple changes. For the four week period following the mailing, the changes are up for comment. After that period ends, the changes are up for a vote for one week. This could easily cover the routine, administrative type stuff. Majorpolicy decisions would be reserved for the in-person meetings.

[mikeylikey]

Has anyone sent up proposals directly to their Wing Kings for inclusion in "New Business"?  I sent a freaking ass huge list.  I will see what kind of lame commander he really is. 

Some things I suggested......

1)allow "other than black" boots to be worn with BDU's and BBDU's
2)all of the uniform suggestions in the now defunct NHQ uniform committee thread
3)getting rid of all Hawk MTN bling except for the school patch (and mandate its wear on the pocket, not the sleeve)

I hope others do the same!  If we get enough pressure on OUR leadership perhaps they will do what we want for a change!

Not sure what you mean by "lame commander."  I hope you don't mean that if he disagrees with you, then he's automatically "lame."

YOu don't know the situation in PAWG so I will let your comments slide 
The guy has not sent one email,  held one open meeting, or visited any SQG or GRP.  He is lame in terms of he does NOTHING. 

[DNall]

One of the key suggestions in that uniform cme thread was to extract the uniform process from NB/NEC to a seperate appointed uniform board. The NB/NEC would just have to vote up or down on one package every 4 years. Chgs to the AF reg would tranistion automatically with admin of wear out dates & such taken care of at NHQ.

That takes the issue off the table so they are forced to focus on other things.

[Dragoon]

Has anyone sent up proposals directly to their Wing Kings for inclusion in "New Business"?  I sent a freaking ass huge list.  I will see what kind of lame commander he really is. 

Some things I suggested......

1)allow "other than black" boots to be worn with BDU's and BBDU's
2)all of the uniform suggestions in the now defunct NHQ uniform committee thread
3)getting rid of all Hawk MTN bling except for the school patch (and mandate its wear on the pocket, not the sleeve)

I hope others do the same!  If we get enough pressure on OUR leadership perhaps they will do what we want for a change!

Not sure what you mean by "lame commander."  I hope you don't mean that if he disagrees with you, then he's automatically "lame."

YOu don't know the situation in PAWG so I will let your comments slide 
The guy has not sent one email,  held one open meeting, or visited any SQG or GRP.  He is lame in terms of he does NOTHING. 

Based on that, sounds like you've already confirmed his "lameness."  No need to worry what he does with your proposals.

Commanders ignore suggestions from the field for two reasons - either they don't agree with them, or they are too busy (or lazy) to deal with them.  It's often impossible for the guys at the bottom to tell which motivation is at work.

Good luck dealing with your situation - I've had a couple of.....introverted.....wing commanders through the years.  Makes it hard to figure out what's going on.

[afgeo4]

"Lame commanders" are sometimes a necessity of CAP (I hate it too). We often face situations where the current commander steps down for one reason or another and no one who has the time, desire and ability to lead steps up. A commander is still needed to sign paperwork and take up space on the MML. So... that's who they hire. The only one that's available.

I think we should all do our hardest to train up and step up when a call for leadership is made so that we, the active few, end up taking the rigns.

[RiverAux]

FYI, here is the official agenda that is now posted on eservices: Here is the agenda for the Feb 29-March 1 National Board Meeting: http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_Feb_NB_Agenda.pdf 

Don't know if it is different than the one at the beginning of the thread. 

Still no minutes from the November NEC or the December BoG (actually, they don't even have the agendas for those meetings posted yet. 

[Cecil DP]

FYI, here is the official agenda that is now posted on eservices: Here is the agenda for the Feb 29-March 1 National Board Meeting: http://level2.cap.gov/documents/2008_Feb_NB_Agenda.pdf 

Don't know if it is different than the one at the beginning of the thread. 

Still no minutes from the November NEC or the December BoG (actually, they don't even have the agendas for those meetings posted yet. 

Maybe the NEC and BofG held super secret meetings!! I noticed the missing reports also. I hope they get the minutes out soon.

[Michael]

I know it's not on the agenda, but I hope that Hawk Mountain Ranger tabs will eventually be allowed again.

[CASH172]

I know it's not on the agenda, but I hope that Hawk Mountain Ranger tabs will eventually be allowed again.

Just my opinion but, I would prefer if they never come back out.  While not all Hawk grads are like this, the item can turn into elitism if taken too far.  Also, it creates a non traditional design onto the BDUs that the military never had, as far as I know. 

[SJFedor]

I know it's not on the agenda, but I hope that Hawk Mountain Ranger tabs will eventually be allowed again.

Why? What's the justification for them?

[Michael]

I think it would please all the people who have worked to earn those Ranger grades, not just in PAWG, but all around the nation.

[DC]

Hawk Mountain grads can wear their LL patch, and within PAWG they can wear all the bling they are entitled to. Isn't that enough? Seeing as how the whole ranger thing isn't very organized outside of PAWG..

Personally I think that uniform variation needs to be kept to a minimum, I think the most that should be allowed is a beret for NBB, and a whistle for Hawk. I think it is rediculous when a 14 year old cadet is walking around with patches and whistles and funny colored web belts and scarves and keystones and whatever else HM awards... The point in uniform is to be just that, uniform. While I am not one of the uniformity nazis that thinks we should only wear CAP alternate uniforms so we are inline with those that cannot/choose not to wear USAF style uniforms, I do think that each uniform should be kept pretty much the same across the organization. Not to turn this into another uniform thread though...

[/soapbox]

[MIKE]

Cease topic drift.

[0]

Do we know if the board meeting will be broacast over the net?  And if so do we know if there will be enough bandwith so that we can all listen?

[arajca]

According to an email sent out by my wing/cc, they are planning to broadcast the meeting. Bandwidth, however, is another story. Hopefully at least one CAPTalker can keep us updated...

[afgeo4]

I think they should release a report on how much money they've spent on creating and issuing all the different changes in the recent like graphics for aircraft and vehicles. Given that we've had to change everything then change everything to go back to what it used to be... wouldn't it be smarter and less expensive to give ALL ideas a very thorough rinsing before they're fielded?

I think about how many O-Flights for cadets and teachers we could have funded and how many uniforms/field gear we could have given away. About how many NCSA scholarships we could have issued. It's just sad.

[mikeylikey]

Reading what came from the Board......nothing much at all!

This National Board meeting thing is a waste of OUR money.  They could have easily done it by telephone conference. 

[FW]

I think they should release a report on how much money they've spent on creating and issuing all the different changes in the recent like graphics for aircraft and vehicles. Given that we've had to change everything then change everything to go back to what it used to be... wouldn't it be smarter and less expensive to give ALL ideas a very thorough rinsing before they're fielded?

I think about how many O-Flights for cadets and teachers we could have funded and how many uniforms/field gear we could have given away. About how many NCSA scholarships we could have issued. It's just sad.

The decals for vehicles/aircraft won't be changed until they need too.  I think the phrase was "as needed".  The cost for graphics design is negligible as it is done "in house".  Vanguard pays the price for making the patches and we don't need to purchase them for another 2 years.  Total est. extra cost for the whole thing to CAP: <$500.  Total est. cost for member:  about $5/patch.  

And Yes, it would be much smarter if all ideas went had a "very thorough rinsing before they're fielded".  That is why the NB is creating an "Agenda Committee"  to do that very thing.

BTW;  $500. is:  Cadet O'Flights are funded by our annual grant from congress (not affected).  We fly teachers with dues money (about 5 flights).  NCSA scholarchips are funded by our investments (1 scholarship) and, I understand, no cadet will ever be refused attendance because of cost.  Basicly, IMHO, only our pride gets hurt from this expierience.
I think it's time we just moved on.

Just my $.02  

Oh, and Mikey, Teleconferenced NB meetings would be nice, but the meeting needs to be open to the public/membership.  Maybe NHQ can figure something out.  This would be something they have responsibility for.