Structural Change

[DrJbdm]

 Lt. Col. Critelli,

   First let me say that I think what you guys have done with the Iowa Wing is nothing short of miraculous. I love some of the "out of the box"  thinking you have done with the program. I wish we could all have those same job protections thru out the Nation.

  My weigh in on the structure change question you have asked, is to stay with the USAF and specifically be under 1st AF. We would need to change our image and remake ourselves more in the AF standard to really fit in and be seen as a true force multiplier rather then a group of "boy scouts with airplanes" that I fear we're seen as in some circles of the AF.
 
  The other option I would support would be a move under the NG, specifically tasked under the NGB as an asset to the Air Guard. Once again this would require the same changes as we would need to make if we stayed with the Air Force. Either way, no matter where we decided the best fit for CAP was, we would need to remake ourselves completely to be taken seriously.

  I look very forward to a round table discussion via Webinar Teleconference.  I think the presenters may very well come up with some wonderful ideas or even solutions that may help us reshape CAP into the 21 century. Please let me know when you are able to bring it together, anything I can do to help please ask.

[Nick Critelli]

I am surprised that other than two members, no one is interested in a Webinar.  I guess they'd rather let their fingers do the talking.  If I don't hear from the other proposed co-presenters, e.g. DNall and others, I'll assume there is no interest and we'll let the webinar idea die.

Nick Critelli

[Al Sayre]

I personally like the webinar idea, and am looking forward to hear all of your proposals.  I would like to see all of them laid out side by side with "cost/benefit" type of analysis.  I'll offer my meager help with the caveat that I am no expert on the workings of the upper echelons of the Air Force and National Guard.  In real life, I'm an Engineer, and my job is to figure out what is broken and then fix it.  My experience tells me that we are starting to get to the root of "what's broke".  Once we get our arms around that (and can raise the awareness level of our membership), then we can work on the fix.

[JohnKachenmeister]

I got your mesage, Nick.

Maybe instead of a webinar, anybody interested could present a more detailed, thoughtful proposal as a new thread here on CAPtalk.  That would allow for some attachments if graphics were needed, such a organizational charts.

By the nature of these proposals, the length of the original post to the thread would be long.  As a suggestion, the paragraphs should be numbered, so reference can be made to "The provisions of your paragraph 10 a," rather than making use of quotes.

[Hawk200]

I am surprised that other than two members, no one is interested in a Webinar.  I guess they'd rather let their fingers do the talking.  If I don't hear from the other proposed co-presenters, e.g. DNall and others, I'll assume there is no interest and we'll let the webinar idea die.

Nick Critelli

Actually, I'm interested. I just don't know what to present, what to gather together. Many of the ideas I had were reformed as new opinions presented themselves.  My own thoughts are constantly being modified. A lot times my opinions only change a little, a few times they've changed a lot.

When might this conference occur? Need time to put together everything I had in a manner that would be presentable.

[JohnKachenmeister]

We would ALL need some time, Hawk.  But whatever we have is a work-in-progress, and we all might change our views after hearing from others. 

But the topic is "Structural Change" and if you think that the proper change can be achieved without major modifications to the overall structure of CAP, than explain your position and recommended improvements.  Everything can be on the table, from tear it down and start over to minor changes in regulations.

The question I have is, what happens IF we achieve a consensus?  Do we want to cook up a formal proposal, write an article for publication, or just hope somebody important is monitoring the boards?

[fyrfitrmedic]

 Add me to the list of those interested in a webinar.

[NEBoom]

Schedule permitting, I'd like to participate as well.  Don't know for sure what if anything I'd have to contribute, but would like to see what everyone else has.

[Nick Critelli]

Q.  Why are we doing this?

A.  to gather the views of those in the field regarding their experience and reasoned opinions concerning the governance structure of CAP and its effectiveness regarding CAP's statutory missions.

Q.  What are we going to do with the information?

A.  Ascertain if there is consensus regarding the CAP structure and operation and if so prepare and file a written report witih the NB. 

Q.  What assurances do we have that the NB will receive our report?

A.  I am confident that if presented in the correct manner and  in the right spirit the NB will receive and process  the report. 

Looks like the webinar is ON.  I'll be working with the co-presenters, studying the materials and working on the presentation.  Stay tuned.

Nick Critelli

[ZigZag911]

Count me in

[Major_Chuck]

For the record, I am very much interested in a restructuring of our governing bodies, however I don't have the answers. 

A change is needed in how CAP selects it next National Commander as well as the NEC members.  I know how I would like to see it done but the answer is usually not as simple as saying "Have the SECAF make the decision."  That just passes the buck and relieves us of any responsibility in the matter.

Add one more member to the webinar idea.  It is easy to propose change but those in the position of power have to be willing to change.

[ELTHunter]

Lt. Col. Critelli,

I can echo the comments of Hawk.  I'd certainly be willing to contribute anything I can, I just don't have a lot of well thought out ideas, just things that have come to mind as I read others posts here on the forum.  I do believe that a good discussion amongst the members here might yield something constructive.  I'll drop you my e-mail.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Part of my proposal will necessarily include a significant legislative change, based on information I recently learned.

But I'm starting a new thread to discuss it.

[Nick Critelli]

The Webinar to discuss structural changes regarding the governance of CAP and the need for and identity of a governmental strategic partner for CAP will be held Thursday, 4 January 2007 at 7:00 PM CST. 

The Webinar works like this:

1.  Send me your personal e-mail at ncritelli@iawg.cap.gov. By return e-mail you will sent an invitation to the Webinar containing the call in details, number etc.

2.  At the appointed time be at your computer logged into the teleconference website.  You will also need to place a telephone call to the teleconference center.   Unless you live in Ohio, this will be a long distance call for you.  This will be your only expense. 

3.  As the Webinar begins, you will only be able to hear the presenters but not be able to talk to them.  From the Internet website you will be able to send a text message to the presentor who will see it on his screen and answer your question. 

The presentors will be  myself as moderator, DNall, ZigZag911, ELTHunder and JackKachenmeister. 

NICK CRITELLI

[DNall]

Do we want to cook up a formal proposal, write an article for publication, or just hope somebody important is monitoring the boards?

You'd be suprised, what kind of strategic thinking on CAP gets highlighted to the AF side. I know I was when it came back around to me. Formal proposal sounds great. Even if we can't agree we can devils advocate for each other & present a series of strong ideas in need of further study at all levels. I also think a decent article should make the rounds. That's critical to getting a fair look on the proposal. There's several sources that'll need to get a copy. Yeah I think we can do a good job with this. At very least it makes clear that there is strategic thinking going on around CAP & the need for a strong strategic vision & good communication of it to the troops.

Okay now for the presentations... is this free-for-all, we staking out positions, what's the plan? You want slides or something, cause that may take a little more time. What kind of format are you looking for: couple minutes from each presenter followed by discussion, just discussion... whatever you want is fine, I just don't want to be unprepared. I can work something up, but I wouldn't expect anyone to be too suprised what direction it'll come from.

[Nick Critelli]

There's still time to register for the Thursday 4 January 2007 7:00 PM CST Webinar on this topic.  Simple e-mail me at ncritelli@iawg.cap.gov and I'll send you the invitatiion form with all the details.

Nick Critelli

DISCLAIMER:  The opinions and positions expressed during the teleconference are not sanctioned or approved by CAP, the IAWG or any other wing , person  or the owners and operators of the CAPTalk BBS and are simply those of the presentor.    This is an unofficial teleconference seminar the result from which may be used to form the basis for strategic planning or a report and recommendation to the NB. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

Nick:

How about each presentor post a read-ahead document with his/her proposal?

DISCLAIMER:  This opinions expressed by Major Kachenmeister are his own, and are not sanctioned by CAP, the Florida Wing, any other wing, the US Air Force, the air force of any other country, or the King of Sweden.  The opinions expressed by Maj. Kachenmeister may or may not be rational, and may or may not represent the cumulative effects of drug or alcohol abuse, the effect of prescribed medications, or the acceptance of opinions expressed by voices in his head, that cannot be heard by others, but which may or may not be the actual Voice of God.   

[DNall]

Nick:

How about each presentor post a read-ahead document with his/her proposal?

That's a good idea. quick talking paper (some bullets).

DISCLAIMER:  This opinions expressed by Major Kachenmeister are his own, and are not sanctioned by CAP, the Florida Wing, any other wing, the US Air Force, the air force of any other country, or the King of Sweden.  The opinions expressed by Maj. Kachenmeister may or may not be rational, and may or may not represent the cumulative effects of drug or alcohol abuse, the effect of prescribed medications, or the acceptance of opinions expressed by voices in his head, that cannot be heard by others, but which may or may not be the actual Voice of God.   

[Earhart1971]

Part of my proposal will necessarily include a significant legislative change, based on information I recently learned.

But I'm starting a new thread to discuss it.

I read your proposal ref the National Guard.

Civil Air Patrol can raise itself to the status of nearly a National Guard, without the association with the National Guard.

We have clout in both the Senate and Congress. We have members in both houses of the Congress, and the missing element is we have no plan or focus on how to promote and sell the program.

First we need a vision for the future.

Is SAR going to give us the horse power for further Growth?

No, my opinion is Search and Rescue Operations are declining and the Sheriff Departments are taking over that.

Is the Cadet Program going to be the driving force?

My opinion is the Cadet Program is the growth opportunity.

We can expand our membership further faster by enhancing the Cadet Program, and starting to acquire local training areas that we in fact own, real estate and all, and additionally, utilizing Air Force and Army facilities.

Also, promoting the Middle School Elective Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program.

We could double the membership in a very short time by focusing on the Cadet Program.

As far as structure, membership wide votes for the Boards that elect the National Commander, cuts out the old boys club.

Also, give the National Commander authority to execute the plan.

As far as I can tell now, the National Commander is not required to have a vision or a plan, and even if he did, he cannot carry out any execution of a vision without constant votes of approval.

The Command of Civil Air Patrol should come from within CAP, and there are people with a vision in our ranks now.

[Nick Critelli]

Earhart...

No, my opinion is Search and Rescue Operations are declining and the Sheriff Departments are taking over that.

Sheriffs, i.e. law enforcement, are not taking over SAR...they always HAD control over SAR.   CAP is a support asset to to the authority that is responsible for SAR.   This is what Congress meant in Title 36 when it talks about support to state and local authorities for emergency services. 

Nick Critelli