SSA Leadership after 12/31?

[Bullwinkle]

Fellow soaring fans,

Early in the course of the SSA crisis, involving embezzlement and fraud on
the part of the SSA's CFO, the entire Executive Committee committed to
resign before the end of this calendar year (except Phil Umphries, who was
too new to have been tainted by the scandal).

Since they are all honorable people, I'm sure they will follow through with
the commitment they made (unless they choose to act like politicians, who we
all know have never heard of "honor"). It would be disgraceful for them to
stay in their posts.

Anybody know who the next Chair will be? Who else will be stepping into the
SSA leadership vacuum happening at the end of this month?

Apologies to the non-US readers of RAS, for whom this sad saga is probably
of little interest.

Respectfully,
Bullwinkle

[[email protected]]

Bullwinkle:

At the Board of Directors meeting in Elmira Dianne Black-Nixon was
asked to stay on as Chair to give continuity to the society and the
Board of Director. Fred

[Bullwinkle]

On 12/5/07 11:24 AM, in article
,
" > wrote:

> Bullwinkle:
>
> At the Board of Directors meeting in Elmira Dianne Black-Nixon was
> asked to stay on as Chair to give continuity to the society and the
> Board of Director. Fred

Thanks for the update.

Like I said: disgraceful.

[Tim Taylor]

On Dec 5, 11:35 am, Bullwinkle > wrote:

>
> Thanks for the update.
>
> Like I said: disgraceful.

Have you ever been on officer in a national volunteer organization?
Did you run for office?
Are you willing to take on the responsibility?
Are you willing to take on the expense of being an officer?

Then what you say means very little, epically without being willing to
put your name behind it.

Tim

[Bullwinkle]

On 12/5/07 12:05 PM, in article
, "Tim
Taylor" > wrote:

> On Dec 5, 11:35 am, Bullwinkle > wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks for the update.
>>
>> Like I said: disgraceful.
>
> Have you ever been on officer in a national volunteer organization?
> Did you run for office?
> Are you willing to take on the responsibility?
> Are you willing to take on the expense of being an officer?
>
> Then what you say means very little, epically without being willing to
> put your name behind it.
>
> Tim
>
Question 1: Yes, at significant personal expense in both time and money. I
am doing that currently, in my national (indeed, international) professional
organization.

2, 3, and 4: In the SSA? No. I prefer to spend my available soaring time
soaring, but as a dues paying member of the SSA, I think I'm entitled to
express my opinion about the current officers and how they do their jobs.

I hope I'm still entitled to think that someone who pledges to do something
should do so, even if I'm not willing to take their place. And even if you
disagree with me about that.

Not interested in a dogfight: just expressing my opinion. Sorry if I
offended.

[[email protected]]

Dear Bullwinkle:

It is common for members of the SSA to have strong opinions on this
subject (and many others). Those opinions are often quite different
from member to member. As a matter of courtesy, I believe you are
entitled to your opinion and I believe you have the right to post in
on this forum.

My opinion however, is quite different and I feel the need to post it
behind yours. Dianne Black-Nixon specifically has done an excellent
job in trying to contain the damage done in this situation and she has
my total support. I have communicated that to her personally and I
(like many, many others) have encouraged her (and the ExCom) to remain
in office to see this though. Other members of the ExCom, BOD and
Restructuring Task Force have also put forth their best efforts to
contain, define & resolve the SSA's current financial situation.

Most (if not all) of these people are not disgraceful, nor are they
seflish or self-serving. They (as volunteers) are working hard, long
hours to resolve a bad situation in the hope of creating a strong,
viable SSA for the future. They have not only my support...they also
have my respect and my sincere thanks.

Steve McLaughlin (PSU)

[Dan G]

On Dec 5, 3:17 pm, Bullwinkle > wrote:
> Early in the course of the SSA crisis, involving embezzlement and fraud on
> the part of the SSA's CFO

Out of curiosity, what's the back story on this? Sounds juicy!


Dan

[Bob Whelan[_2_]]

Dan G wrote:
> On Dec 5, 3:17 pm, Bullwinkle > wrote:
>> Early in the course of the SSA crisis, involving embezzlement and fraud on
>> the part of the SSA's CFO
>
> Out of curiosity, what's the back story on this? Sounds juicy!
>
>
> Dan
Hi Dan,

No offense intended, but (assuming your return e-address is real), I
gather you're not an SSA member. Thus (to my way of thinking) sharing
the details would fall more into the category of vicarious gossip than
usable information.

That noted, fairly complete history of/answers to your question can be
found on the members-only portion of SSA's website (LOTS of reading).
If you fly sailplanes in the U.S. I'd encourage you to join SSA for any
of a number of reasons, regardless of how bad or juicy the SSA situation
has been/may be.

Feel free to contact me off-group if you'd like additional insight
regarding why I think the way I do about SSA, soaring in the U.S., how
U.S. soaring relates to NAA/FAI/FAA/etc. Stultifyingly dull stuff, but
of genuine importance for all U.S. soaring participants.

Regards,
Bob - occasionally stultified - W.

[[email protected]]

INTEGRITY...TRUST...HONOR...ACCOUNTABILITY

Some of you just don't get it. The issue with the retention of Ms
Black is about integrity. The entire board agreed to resign as of
the end of this year. They should be held accountable for this
decision. If they are not, then when is the next time they will not
honor their word? As such, can we now trust any decisions of the
board? Unfortunately, this is a continuation of the original problem.
This is all about keeping your word.

For those who will now flame me for my comments:

I have served the SSA at the national level

I have served the SSA at a local club level

I have made significant contributions and support to local not for
profit organizations

I know Ms Black personally and DO appreciate the true sacrifices she
has made for the SSA and the sport in general and In no way feel that
she has personally acted in other than the best interest of the SSA
(This is not a personal attack)


The original decision was made to provide a clean start for the SSA.
It is now time to execute that plan. No person or persons are that
important to this, or any other organization, that the organization
will cease to exist without them. If you do not believe this, then
you are sending a vote of no confidence to the Regional Directors that
YOU elected.

[Vaughn Simon]

> wrote in message
...
> INTEGRITY...TRUST...HONOR...ACCOUNTABILITY
>
> Some of you just don't get it. The issue with the retention of Ms
> Black is about integrity. The entire board agreed to resign as of
> the end of this year.

I don't know about everyone on the board, but it seems that Ms Black has
overwhelmingly been asked to please not resign. Why would we want to leave the
SSA without any leadership?

Vaughn

[Papa3]

On Dec 5, 1:35 pm, Bullwinkle > wrote:
> On 12/5/07 11:24 AM, in article
> ,
>
> " > wrote:
> > Bullwinkle:
>
> > At the Board of Directors meeting in Elmira Dianne Black-Nixon was
> > asked to stay on as Chair to give continuity to the society and the
> > Board of Director. Fred
>
> Thanks for the update.
>
> Like I said: disgraceful.

As a point of information, I'm posting the following verbatim from the
final recommendations of the Future Restructuring Task Force, availble
to all SSA members for review. I'm assuming you read the report?

[Begin Quote] Transition
Recommendation 4 -- Transition from Current Board to New Board
The Society needs a smooth transition from the current Board structure
to the
new structure proposed in this report. During the transition period
all directors should continue to serve until the end
of the terms for which they were elected. The Executive Committee has
stated that those of its members who were elected
prior to February 2007 intend to resign en masse at the end of 2007.
It cannot be stated too strongly that the entire membership of the
FRTF feels this would be a major mistake. There is a strong need for
organizational memory within the
Executive Committee. The Board should follow existing practice when
determining how the next Chairperson and other ExCom members are
chosen. ExCom members should feel free to continue to serve the needs
of the Board and
continue to serve on the Executive Committee. However, any who
disagree with our viewpoint on this issue should follow their hearts
and resign. The bottom line is that the routine departure of a small
minority of members is tolerable, but
the mass resignation of the entire ExCom would be detrimental to the
best interests of the SSA, and is unacceptable.

Erik Mann
LS8-18 (P3)
Member, FRTF

[309]

On Dec 5, 10:35 am, Bullwinkle > wrote:
>
> Like I said: disgraceful.

As the well known quote goes:

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat
it." (Socrates).

Keeping at least SOME members of the board during the transition is
the BEST way to teach that history to the new board, and IMHO is the
best way to help the SSA from repeating any of the past mistakes. To
throw the new members of a board into the water just to see if they
will sink or swim is also disgraceful.

I too serve as a volunteer on the board of directors of TWO
international professional societies, and have served on the BoD of
organizations in decline.

When nobody else volunteers, would you prefer that the organization
fold up when there are no directors left??? That would be most
disgraceful. If that's truly your wish, please feel free to resign
from the SSA.

I for one am grateful for the directors that discovered the problems
with SSA, brought them into the open, effected some change to IMPROVE
the SSA, and are still volunteering to help rebuild, reinforce and
reestablish a viable organization that serves the sport (or hobby, if
you want to draw that distinction). There are some directors that
should find it appropriate to resign -- there are some that I support
and sincerely hope will continue their (volunteer) service to SSA.
Some "sub-organizations" (e.g., Region 12/SoCal Soaring) have put
together fund raisers to help defray the cost of a board members'
service to the region and SSA, and I have gladly contributed to these.

Yes, you're entitled to your opinion. Rather than yell "FIRE" in the
theater, pull together some facts, apply a little reason and ask
yourself if throwing them all out would really be the best thing to
do. Yes, I find myself feeling that way about our all to parochial
lawmakers...but putting in a 100% new batch of people that have no
idea how sausage is made is a recipe for instant disaster, IMHO.

-Pete
#309

[[email protected]]

On Dec 5, 5:52 pm, Papa3 > wrote:
The bottom line is that the routine departure of a small
> minority of members is tolerable, but
> the mass resignation of the entire ExCom would be detrimental to the
> best interests of the SSA, and is unacceptable.
>
> Erik Mann
> LS8-18 (P3)
> Member, FRTF

Agreed.
I am please that they all offered to resign.
I am more pleased that some were asked to stay to provide continuity.
I am very pleased that someone would accept the request, for the good
of the society.

I don't get to fly often, and even less so in gliders. But I sorely
wish the best for the SSA, for the good of soaring and aviation in
general.

[FreeFlight107[_2_]]

Dear Bullwinkle et all:

I agree with Eric & Pete.

I think the statement "All directors to resign" was made in haste, as
was Dennis's resignation. I believe all our Directors are good,
honest, honorable men and women that were deceived and very, very
embarrassed by it.

Mr. Gleason deceived the organization and Dennis for 2 years; he was
eventually caught and is now undergoing due process for his crimes.
Good, done, move on.

It makes no sense to get rid of all our directors for the reasons
pointed our above.

It does make sense to follow the FRTF recommendation on Transition, no
matter what the earlier, hasty statements of intention. I also feel it
will be a long time until we find a new Executive Director that will
just equal what Dennis has done in membership and new vitality to the
SSA. IMHO I think he never should have resigned. He was deceived by a
crooked CFO that plotted to deceive him, the BOD, and the Ex
Committee. The deed was identified, corrected and the guilty party
punished (or soon to be). Now we must move on, but we don't need to
throw everything out with the dirty bath water.

I too apologize for taking this domestic matter to an international
forum, but we really don't have a better place to air our laundry to
the rest of the SSA membership.

Sincerly,

Wayne Walker

[Jack[_4_]]

I tried to teach my kids to think with common sense instead of
emotion. There seems to be a lot of emotion tied to this. In my
opinion, this should be transitioned. That seems to be the will of the
majority of SSA members who have expressed their opinions to me.
Unfortunately in any organization, about 5% of the people do about 99%
of the work. Sadder, yet, the ones that do the least gripe the
most.That's from long years experience running baseball organizations,
model clubs, board positions at soaring clubs, etc. What's disgraceful
to me is to impune these hard-working, honorable people, many of whom
I know. In fact, in my opinion, other than the 1 bad guy in all this,
it's the only disgraceful thing I've seen. Mistakes were made. I've
made plenty in my life. There's no disgrace in being duped by someone
that is disgraceful. The current board has my support. I hope they
continue.

Jack Womack

[gliderman]

On Dec 6, 7:06 am, Jack > wrote:
> I tried to teach my kids to think with common sense instead of
> emotion. There seems to be a lot of emotion tied to this. In my
> opinion, this should be transitioned. That seems to be the will of the
> majority of SSA members who have expressed their opinions to me.
> Unfortunately in any organization, about 5% of the people do about 99%
> of the work. Sadder, yet, the ones that do the least gripe the
> most.That's from long years experience running baseball organizations,
> model clubs, board positions at soaring clubs, etc. What's disgraceful
> to me is to impune these hard-working, honorable people, many of whom
> I know. In fact, in my opinion, other than the 1 bad guy in all this,
> it's the only disgraceful thing I've seen. Mistakes were made. I've
> made plenty in my life. There's no disgrace in being duped by someone
> that is disgraceful. The current board has my support. I hope they
> continue.
>
> Jack Womack

I could not agree more with Wayne and Jack.

I would especially like to voice my support for Dennis. It's too bad
it's already a done deal with him. We let a good man get away.

Paul Gravance

[1LK]

On Dec 7, 9:18 am, gliderman > wrote:
> On Dec 6, 7:06 am, Jack > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I tried to teach my kids to think with common sense instead of
> > emotion. There seems to be a lot of emotion tied to this. In my
> > opinion, this should be transitioned. That seems to be the will of the
> > majority of SSA members who have expressed their opinions to me.
> > Unfortunately in any organization, about 5% of the people do about 99%
> > of the work. Sadder, yet, the ones that do the least gripe the
> > most.That's from long years experience running baseball organizations,
> > model clubs, board positions at soaring clubs, etc. What's disgraceful
> > to me is to impune these hard-working, honorable people, many of whom
> > I know. In fact, in my opinion, other than the 1 bad guy in all this,
> > it's the only disgraceful thing I've seen. Mistakes were made. I've
> > made plenty in my life. There's no disgrace in being duped by someone
> > that is disgraceful. The current board has my support. I hope they
> > continue.
>
> > Jack Womack
>
> I could not agree more with Wayne and Jack.
>
> I would especially like to voice my support for Dennis. It's too bad
> it's already a done deal with him. We let a good man get away.
>
> Paul Gravance- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I would hope that at least some of the present board and executive
committee members will stay on to apply the lessons they have learned
during the unfortunate events of the recent (and not so recent)
past.

Regarding Dennis Wright, I find it hard to understand how the
resident, hands-on Executive Director of a small organization like SSA
could be clueless for so long as to what was happening. At the very
least, it speaks to his awareness and competence and provided
sufficient justification, IMHO, for discharging him.

Raphael H. Warshaw
1LK

[fred]

On Dec 7, 4:58 pm, 1LK > wrote:
> On Dec 7, 9:18 am, gliderman > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 6, 7:06 am, Jack > wrote:
>
> > > I tried to teach my kids to think with common sense instead of
> > > emotion. There seems to be a lot of emotion tied to this. In my
> > > opinion, this should be transitioned. That seems to be the will of the
> > > majority of SSA members who have expressed their opinions to me.
> > > Unfortunately in any organization, about 5% of the people do about 99%
> > > of the work. Sadder, yet, the ones that do the least gripe the
> > > most.That's from long years experience running baseball organizations,
> > > model clubs, board positions at soaring clubs, etc. What's disgraceful
> > > to me is to impune these hard-working, honorable people, many of whom
> > > I know. In fact, in my opinion, other than the 1 bad guy in all this,
> > > it's the only disgraceful thing I've seen. Mistakes were made. I've
> > > made plenty in my life. There's no disgrace in being duped by someone
> > > that is disgraceful. The current board has my support. I hope they
> > > continue.
>
> > > Jack Womack
>
> > I could not agree more with Wayne and Jack.
>
> > I would especially like to voice my support for Dennis. It's too bad
> > it's already a done deal with him. We let a good man get away.
>
> > Paul Gravance- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I would hope that at least some of the present board and executive
> committee members will stay on to apply the lessons they have learned
> during the unfortunate events of the recent (and not so recent)
> past.
>
> Regarding Dennis Wright, I find it hard to understand how the
> resident, hands-on Executive Director of a small organization like SSA
> could be clueless for so long as to what was happening. At the very
> least, it speaks to his awareness and competence and provided
> sufficient justification, IMHO, for discharging him.
>
> Raphael H. Warshaw
> 1LK- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

After serving two terms (long ago) as a director, the good (very good)
people on the board held the best wishes for soaring pilots all over
the world. How many bad worms have I seen in life? Not enough to stop
me from eating apples. In very long years of accepting checks from
soaring pilots and even just glider riders, I have only received one
bounced check. God bless the SSA... all it stands for and the world of
good people it represents. Let me cast my vote now...They all stay
with grattitude expressed. Love Y'ALL. Fred Robinson.

[Vaughn Simon]

"1LK" > wrote in message
...
> I would hope that at least some of the present board and executive
> committee members will stay on to apply the lessons they have learned
> during the unfortunate events of the recent (and not so recent)
> past.

I agree 100%
>
> Regarding Dennis Wright, I find it hard to understand how the
> resident, hands-on Executive Director of a small organization like SSA
> could be clueless for so long as to what was happening. At the very
> least, it speaks to his awareness and competence and provided
> sufficient justification, IMHO, for discharging him.

Again I agree. I have never met Dennis, but by all accounts he is a very
nice fellow who under more favorable conditions might have stayed on with SSA
for the rest of his working years. Unfortunately, it was exactly that
"niceness" that may have been his downfall. When your position is that of
"Captain of the ship" you must consistantly "trust but verify", even if it bends
some egos. It looks to me (from what little I know) like a simple monthly scan
of the SSA's bank statements would prevented the worst of the disaster.

Vaughn

[[email protected]]

On Dec 8, 7:49 am, "Vaughn Simon" >
wrote:
> "1LK" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > I would hope that at least some of the present board and executive
> > committee members will stay on to apply the lessons they have learned
> > during the unfortunate events of the recent (and not so recent)
> > past.
>
> I agree 100%
>
>
>
> > Regarding Dennis Wright, I find it hard to understand how the
> > resident, hands-on Executive Director of a small organization like SSA
> > could be clueless for so long as to what was happening. At the very
> > least, it speaks to his awareness and competence and provided
> > sufficient justification, IMHO, for discharging him.
>
> Again I agree. I have never met Dennis, but by all accounts he is a very
> nice fellow who under more favorable conditions might have stayed on with SSA
> for the rest of his working years. Unfortunately, it was exactly that
> "niceness" that may have been his downfall. When your position is that of
> "Captain of the ship" you must consistantly "trust but verify", even if it bends
> some egos. It looks to me (from what little I know) like a simple monthly scan
> of the SSA's bank statements would prevented the worst of the disaster.
>
> Vaughn

I agree Vaughn. You have it right. Being on a BOD in a union, we do
the samething with expenses each month, but Pres. has day to day and
has caught an office manager doing creative bookkeeping. They were
released by end of the week. "Trust but verify" is good to run SSA by.

larry

[Chip Bearden]

Those who haven't repressed the memories of last year's SSA financial
scandal may recall I was somewhat outspoken at the time. I was pleased
that the SSA Board ultimately created entities to monitor their and
the ExComm's actions and to recommend changes for the future. I wasn't
happy that it took so much pushing and shoving to get these entities
chartered--some directors didn't seem to "get it" regarding what the
real issues were. But I was just as unhappy at the unseemly behavior
of some SSA members and other critics on this forum who either
couldn't or didn't want to understand. But in the end, the process
worked and I think we're on the right course.

Will this debacle and subsequent turnaround mark the beginning of a
dynamic resurgence in U.S. soaring and the SSA's fortunes? Probably
not. We're a tiny, expensive, difficult-to-learn, time-intensive,
weather-dependent, fundamentally individual sport in a highly
regulated environment at a time when most Americans have less
available time and myriad other ways to spend it, preferably with
their families. But thanks to the efforts of a few volunteers and SSA
staff, our interests are fairly well served. Having spent almost a
decade on the SSA Board (part of that time on the ExComm) before the
recent scandals, I'm well aware of (a) the difficulty of getting
anyone to serve at all, and (b) ensuring that at least some of those
who do serve possess the right skill sets for critical Board-level and
staff positions.

In a perfect world, I'd make a few changes to the current structure
and staffing. But in the real world, if (as is my impression also) the
majority of SSA members wish the majority of our leadership to at
least effect a smooth transition if not continue in place, then I'm
all for it. If skilled, dedicated candidates with time, patience, and
funding (the latter either from their own resources or their regions')
wish to run for election to the Board, I doubt seriously if they will
have any difficulty winning. Prior to that, they can approach the
Board for consideration as a director at large (a position I once
opposed but learned was absolutely necessary to bring needed talent
into the Board). I'm sure there are directors who, for all of their
"I'd love to give up this job and let someone else do it" will fight
tenaciously to retain the privilidge of spending their own time and
money to attend boring meetings and listen to themselves pontificate.
I suspect more would, as is the case with Dianne Black-Nixon, like
nothing better than to retire but feel a true obligation to finish the
work they started.

It's very easy to be absolute: "they promised to resign so they must."
It's much more difficult to assess the situation rationally a year
later and determine what is the right decision considering all that
has transpired since then. A year ago I wanted a clean break, too. But
at this point, I can wait for the evolution to continue.

Chip Bearden

[[email protected]]

On Dec 8, 8:36 am, Chip Bearden > wrote:
> Those who haven't repressed the memories of last year's SSA financial
> scandal may recall I was somewhat outspoken at the time. I was pleased
> that the SSA Board ultimately created entities to monitor their and
> the ExComm's actions and to recommend changes for the future. I wasn't
> happy that it took so much pushing and shoving to get these entities
> chartered--some directors didn't seem to "get it" regarding what the
> real issues were. But I was just as unhappy at the unseemly behavior
> of some SSA members and other critics on this forum who either
> couldn't or didn't want to understand. But in the end, the process
> worked and I think we're on the right course.
>
> Will this debacle and subsequent turnaround mark the beginning of a
> dynamic resurgence in U.S. soaring and the SSA's fortunes? Probably
> not. We're a tiny, expensive, difficult-to-learn, time-intensive,
> weather-dependent, fundamentally individual sport in a highly
> regulated environment at a time when most Americans have less
> available time and myriad other ways to spend it, preferably with
> their families. But thanks to the efforts of a few volunteers and SSA
> staff, our interests are fairly well served. Having spent almost a
> decade on the SSA Board (part of that time on the ExComm) before the
> recent scandals, I'm well aware of (a) the difficulty of getting
> anyone to serve at all, and (b) ensuring that at least some of those
> who do serve possess the right skill sets for critical Board-level and
> staff positions.
>
> In a perfect world, I'd make a few changes to the current structure
> and staffing. But in the real world, if (as is my impression also) the
> majority of SSA members wish the majority of our leadership to at
> least effect a smooth transition if not continue in place, then I'm
> all for it. If skilled, dedicated candidates with time, patience, and
> funding (the latter either from their own resources or their regions')
> wish to run for election to the Board, I doubt seriously if they will
> have any difficulty winning. Prior to that, they can approach the
> Board for consideration as a director at large (a position I once
> opposed but learned was absolutely necessary to bring needed talent
> into the Board). I'm sure there are directors who, for all of their
> "I'd love to give up this job and let someone else do it" will fight
> tenaciously to retain the privilidge of spending their own time and
> money to attend boring meetings and listen to themselves pontificate.
> I suspect more would, as is the case with Dianne Black-Nixon, like
> nothing better than to retire but feel a true obligation to finish the
> work they started.
>
> It's very easy to be absolute: "they promised to resign so they must."
> It's much more difficult to assess the situation rationally a year
> later and determine what is the right decision considering all that
> has transpired since then. A year ago I wanted a clean break, too. But
> at this point, I can wait for the evolution to continue.
>
> Chip Bearden

There is really no point in addressing the issue of the resignation of
the board until after we learn the decision of the IRS in regards to
the penalties and interest (which is in excess of $200K). I was amazed
that the Board thought that the IRS would waive this since it was the
result of internal fraud. The IRS, from my experiences, will NEVER
waive the interest, as it is required by law. They have some
discretion to the penalties, however. Generally, they are pretty hard
nosed about that, too, and waive it only if THEY made a proveable
mistake. This amount will bankrupt the SSA, so resignation of the
Board will be moot. I think that a bankruptcy plan should have ALREADY
been prepared, but I know of no such actions.

Professionalism on both the part of the board and the management of
the SSA has been sadly lacking. I tried to get financials in the past
from my regional director and was rebuffed. He ask WHY I WANTED
THIS!!! My reply: concern that the SSA was going bankrupt. He did send
me some financials that wouldn't pass muster with a Girl Scott troup -
I never did get anything more detailed. I have served on the board of
a multimillion dollar non-profit for over 10 years and we would NEVER
had accepted this state of affairs from the management.

I think that the SSA is in high probability of going bankrupt and we
are in urgent need of a post-bankruptcy reorganization plan.

Tom Seim

[Frank Whiteley]

On Dec 8, 2:31 pm, wrote:
> On Dec 8, 8:36 am, Chip Bearden > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Those who haven't repressed the memories of last year's SSA financial
> > scandal may recall I was somewhat outspoken at the time. I was pleased
> > that the SSA Board ultimately created entities to monitor their and
> > the ExComm's actions and to recommend changes for the future. I wasn't
> > happy that it took so much pushing and shoving to get these entities
> > chartered--some directors didn't seem to "get it" regarding what the
> > real issues were. But I was just as unhappy at the unseemly behavior
> > of some SSA members and other critics on this forum who either
> > couldn't or didn't want to understand. But in the end, the process
> > worked and I think we're on the right course.
>
> > Will this debacle and subsequent turnaround mark the beginning of a
> > dynamic resurgence in U.S. soaring and the SSA's fortunes? Probably
> > not. We're a tiny, expensive, difficult-to-learn, time-intensive,
> > weather-dependent, fundamentally individual sport in a highly
> > regulated environment at a time when most Americans have less
> > available time and myriad other ways to spend it, preferably with
> > their families. But thanks to the efforts of a few volunteers and SSA
> > staff, our interests are fairly well served. Having spent almost a
> > decade on the SSA Board (part of that time on the ExComm) before the
> > recent scandals, I'm well aware of (a) the difficulty of getting
> > anyone to serve at all, and (b) ensuring that at least some of those
> > who do serve possess the right skill sets for critical Board-level and
> > staff positions.
>
> > In a perfect world, I'd make a few changes to the current structure
> > and staffing. But in the real world, if (as is my impression also) the
> > majority of SSA members wish the majority of our leadership to at
> > least effect a smooth transition if not continue in place, then I'm
> > all for it. If skilled, dedicated candidates with time, patience, and
> > funding (the latter either from their own resources or their regions')
> > wish to run for election to the Board, I doubt seriously if they will
> > have any difficulty winning. Prior to that, they can approach the
> > Board for consideration as a director at large (a position I once
> > opposed but learned was absolutely necessary to bring needed talent
> > into the Board). I'm sure there are directors who, for all of their
> > "I'd love to give up this job and let someone else do it" will fight
> > tenaciously to retain the privilidge of spending their own time and
> > money to attend boring meetings and listen to themselves pontificate.
> > I suspect more would, as is the case with Dianne Black-Nixon, like
> > nothing better than to retire but feel a true obligation to finish the
> > work they started.
>
> > It's very easy to be absolute: "they promised to resign so they must."
> > It's much more difficult to assess the situation rationally a year
> > later and determine what is the right decision considering all that
> > has transpired since then. A year ago I wanted a clean break, too. But
> > at this point, I can wait for the evolution to continue.
>
> > Chip Bearden
>
> There is really no point in addressing the issue of the resignation of
> the board until after we learn the decision of the IRS in regards to
> the penalties and interest (which is in excess of $200K). I was amazed
> that the Board thought that the IRS would waive this since it was the
> result of internal fraud. The IRS, from my experiences, will NEVER
> waive the interest, as it is required by law. They have some
> discretion to the penalties, however. Generally, they are pretty hard
> nosed about that, too, and waive it only if THEY made a proveable
> mistake. This amount will bankrupt the SSA, so resignation of the
> Board will be moot. I think that a bankruptcy plan should have ALREADY
> been prepared, but I know of no such actions.
>
> Professionalism on both the part of the board and the management of
> the SSA has been sadly lacking. I tried to get financials in the past
> from my regional director and was rebuffed. He ask WHY I WANTED
> THIS!!! My reply: concern that the SSA was going bankrupt. He did send
> me some financials that wouldn't pass muster with a Girl Scott troup -
> I never did get anything more detailed. I have served on the board of
> a multimillion dollar non-profit for over 10 years and we would NEVER
> had accepted this state of affairs from the management.
>
> I think that the SSA is in high probability of going bankrupt and we
> are in urgent need of a post-bankruptcy reorganization plan.
>
> Tom Seim

Please refer to the 11/6 ExComm minutes for part of the answer.

Frank Whiteley

[[email protected]]

On Dec 8, 11:57 am, Frank Whiteley > wrote:
> On Dec 8, 2:31 pm, wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 8, 8:36 am, Chip Bearden > wrote:
>
> > > Those who haven't repressed the memories of last year's SSA financial
> > > scandal may recall I was somewhat outspoken at the time. I was pleased
> > > that the SSA Board ultimately created entities to monitor their and
> > > the ExComm's actions and to recommend changes for the future. I wasn't
> > > happy that it took so much pushing and shoving to get these entities
> > > chartered--some directors didn't seem to "get it" regarding what the
> > > real issues were. But I was just as unhappy at the unseemly behavior
> > > of some SSA members and other critics on this forum who either
> > > couldn't or didn't want to understand. But in the end, the process
> > > worked and I think we're on the right course.
>
> > > Will this debacle and subsequent turnaround mark the beginning of a
> > > dynamic resurgence in U.S. soaring and the SSA's fortunes? Probably
> > > not. We're a tiny, expensive, difficult-to-learn, time-intensive,
> > > weather-dependent, fundamentally individual sport in a highly
> > > regulated environment at a time when most Americans have less
> > > available time and myriad other ways to spend it, preferably with
> > > their families. But thanks to the efforts of a few volunteers and SSA
> > > staff, our interests are fairly well served. Having spent almost a
> > > decade on the SSA Board (part of that time on the ExComm) before the
> > > recent scandals, I'm well aware of (a) the difficulty of getting
> > > anyone to serve at all, and (b) ensuring that at least some of those
> > > who do serve possess the right skill sets for critical Board-level and
> > > staff positions.
>
> > > In a perfect world, I'd make a few changes to the current structure
> > > and staffing. But in the real world, if (as is my impression also) the
> > > majority of SSA members wish the majority of our leadership to at
> > > least effect a smooth transition if not continue in place, then I'm
> > > all for it. If skilled, dedicated candidates with time, patience, and
> > > funding (the latter either from their own resources or their regions')
> > > wish to run for election to the Board, I doubt seriously if they will
> > > have any difficulty winning. Prior to that, they can approach the
> > > Board for consideration as a director at large (a position I once
> > > opposed but learned was absolutely necessary to bring needed talent
> > > into the Board). I'm sure there are directors who, for all of their
> > > "I'd love to give up this job and let someone else do it" will fight
> > > tenaciously to retain the privilidge of spending their own time and
> > > money to attend boring meetings and listen to themselves pontificate.
> > > I suspect more would, as is the case with Dianne Black-Nixon, like
> > > nothing better than to retire but feel a true obligation to finish the
> > > work they started.
>
> > > It's very easy to be absolute: "they promised to resign so they must."
> > > It's much more difficult to assess the situation rationally a year
> > > later and determine what is the right decision considering all that
> > > has transpired since then. A year ago I wanted a clean break, too. But
> > > at this point, I can wait for the evolution to continue.
>
> > > Chip Bearden
>
> > There is really no point in addressing the issue of the resignation of
> > the board until after we learn the decision of the IRS in regards to
> > the penalties and interest (which is in excess of $200K). I was amazed
> > that the Board thought that the IRS would waive this since it was the
> > result of internal fraud. The IRS, from my experiences, will NEVER
> > waive the interest, as it is required by law. They have some
> > discretion to the penalties, however. Generally, they are pretty hard
> > nosed about that, too, and waive it only if THEY made a proveable
> > mistake. This amount will bankrupt the SSA, so resignation of the
> > Board will be moot. I think that a bankruptcy plan should have ALREADY
> > been prepared, but I know of no such actions.
>
> > Professionalism on both the part of the board and the management of
> > the SSA has been sadly lacking. I tried to get financials in the past
> > from my regional director and was rebuffed. He ask WHY I WANTED
> > THIS!!! My reply: concern that the SSA was going bankrupt. He did send
> > me some financials that wouldn't pass muster with a Girl Scott troup -
> > I never did get anything more detailed. I have served on the board of
> > a multimillion dollar non-profit for over 10 years and we would NEVER
> > had accepted this state of affairs from the management.
>
> > I think that the SSA is in high probability of going bankrupt and we
> > are in urgent need of a post-bankruptcy reorganization plan.
>
> > Tom Seim
>
> Please refer to the 11/6 ExComm minutes for part of the answer.
>
> Frank Whiteley- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Perhaps you can either post those minutes or direct me to where I can
find them. It seems that ALL information about this important matter
have been REDACTED from the SSA web site.

Tom

[ZL]

wrote:

>> Frank Whiteley- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Perhaps you can either post those minutes or direct me to where I can
> find them. It seems that ALL information about this important matter
> have been REDACTED from the SSA web site.
>
> Tom
Still there. Look under The SSA | Governance | SSA Board and Executive
Committee meeting minutes

Nothing has been redacted. Hours of minutes reading available to members.

-Dave

[Raphael Warshaw]

Tom Seim wrote:
>
> There is really no point in addressing the issue of the resignation of
> the board until after we learn the decision of the IRS in regards to
> the penalties and interest (which is in excess of $200K). I was amazed
> that the Board thought that the IRS would waive this since it was the
> result of internal fraud. The IRS, from my experiences, will NEVER
> waive the interest, as it is required by law. They have some
> discretion to the penalties, however. Generally, they are pretty hard
> nosed about that, too, and waive it only if THEY made a proveable
> mistake. This amount will bankrupt the SSA, so resignation of the
> Board will be moot. I think that a bankruptcy plan should have ALREADY
> been prepared, but I know of no such actions.

Per this AM's SSA newsletter: the IRS has, in fact, waived the
penalties and will settle for collecting just the interest owed. They
(the IRS) are focused on collecting as much as possible of what is
owed in a timely fashion, something a bankruptcy would interfere with
and will often negotiate reductions to prevent one. Facilitators,
often former IRS employees, have created an industry to assist
delinquent taxpayers in such negotiations. If all else fails, a
friendly congressperson will often intervene on behalf of a well-
connected constituent.

Ray Warshaw
1LK

[ras comment]

On Dec 8, 12:36 pm, Chip Bearden > wrote:
> Those who haven't repressed the memories of last year's SSA financial
> scandal may recall I was somewhat outspoken at the time. I was pleased
> that the SSA Board ultimately created entities to monitor their and
> the ExComm's actions and to recommend changes for the future. I wasn't
> happy that it took so much pushing and shoving to get these entities
> chartered--some directors didn't seem to "get it" regarding what the
> real issues were. But I was just as unhappy at the unseemly behavior
> of some SSA members and other critics on this forum who either
> couldn't or didn't want to understand. But in the end, the process
> worked and I think we're on the right course.
>
> Will this debacle and subsequent turnaround mark the beginning of a
> dynamic resurgence in U.S. soaring and the SSA's fortunes? Probably
> not. We're a tiny, expensive, difficult-to-learn, time-intensive,
> weather-dependent, fundamentally individual sport in a highly
> regulated environment at a time when most Americans have less
> available time and myriad other ways to spend it, preferably with
> their families. But thanks to the efforts of a few volunteers and SSA
> staff, our interests are fairly well served. Having spent almost a
> decade on the SSA Board (part of that time on the ExComm) before the
> recent scandals, I'm well aware of (a) the difficulty of getting
> anyone to serve at all, and (b) ensuring that at least some of those
> who do serve possess the right skill sets for critical Board-level and
> staff positions.
>
> In a perfect world, I'd make a few changes to the current structure
> and staffing. But in the real world, if (as is my impression also) the
> majority of SSA members wish the majority of our leadership to at
> least effect a smooth transition if not continue in place, then I'm
> all for it. If skilled, dedicated candidates with time, patience, and
> funding (the latter either from their own resources or their regions')
> wish to run for election to the Board, I doubt seriously if they will
> have any difficulty winning. Prior to that, they can approach the
> Board for consideration as a director at large (a position I once
> opposed but learned was absolutely necessary to bring needed talent
> into the Board). I'm sure there are directors who, for all of their
> "I'd love to give up this job and let someone else do it" will fight
> tenaciously to retain the privilidge of spending their own time and
> money to attend boring meetings and listen to themselves pontificate.
> I suspect more would, as is the case with Dianne Black-Nixon, like
> nothing better than to retire but feel a true obligation to finish the
> work they started.
>
> It's very easy to be absolute: "they promised to resign so they must."
> It's much more difficult to assess the situation rationally a year
> later and determine what is the right decision considering all that
> has transpired since then. A year ago I wanted a clean break, too. But
> at this point, I can wait for the evolution to continue.
>
> Chip Bearden

I think that the surviving problem is the issue of getting the correct
skill sets working on the Board. The idea of Mr. Bearden's struggle
to have Board members "get it" is an illustration of that problem.

It does appear to me that while the Board is not resposible for any of
the related alleged illegalities, it has brought to light some other
problems for which the Board and for which various Board members and
the Board as a whole are responsible.

I think that the problem of getting good and appropriate people to
serve on the Board is a chicken and egg problem. Good Boards will get
good people.

I am sure that Ms. Black-Nixon and the others all have the best
interests of the SSA at heart. I also think that they probably
inherited a problem already established. I think we should look at
the original source and implementation of the idea that audits should
not be done. However, Board members should have been insisting on
seeing audited reports and copies of the IRS returns. This is not
Management 101, but remedial Management 001.

I do not think that continuity is the real reason of asking Board
members or Officers to stay. There are other more limited methods
that would ensure that continuity. therefore, I must wonder what are
the other (even unconscious) resons for doing so.

TheBoard can do a much better job of getting the right skill sets.
First, I think that the Board is looking at credentials that do not
ensure getting those skill sets. Second, let us go out and get people
with the skill sets needed.

Didnt Harris Hill have a director some years back that kept asking for
reports and when he actually got an audited report, he brought to the
Board some bad things? Couldn't all of this have been prevented if
SSA had picked up this person to contribute to the Board?

[fred]

On Dec 8, 4:42 pm, ZL > wrote:
> wrote:
> >> Frank Whiteley- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Perhaps you can either post those minutes or direct me to where I can
> > find them. It seems that ALL information about this important matter
> > have been REDACTED from the SSA web site.
>
> > Tom
>
> Still there. Look under The SSA | Governance | SSA Board and Executive
> Committee meeting minutes
>
> Nothing has been redacted. Hours of minutes reading available to members.
>
> -Dave

Oh dear God! Please do not destroy the very thing that does so much
good for all soaring pilots. We can afford to survive this only
experience of theft. What the hell,
How many of us has gotten great benefits over the years from
membership in SSA. If we need to, carefully select a person that is a
business manager, that knows how to manage money and make reports that
are understandable and verifiable. He/She does not be a glider pilot.
The directors are not the problem. They just need information and
guidance, Fred

[Frank Whiteley]

On Dec 17, 3:42 pm, ras comment > wrote:
> On Dec 8, 12:36 pm, Chip Bearden > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Those who haven't repressed the memories of last year's SSA financial
> > scandal may recall I was somewhat outspoken at the time. I was pleased
> > that the SSA Board ultimately created entities to monitor their and
> > the ExComm's actions and to recommend changes for the future. I wasn't
> > happy that it took so much pushing and shoving to get these entities
> > chartered--some directors didn't seem to "get it" regarding what the
> > real issues were. But I was just as unhappy at the unseemly behavior
> > of some SSA members and other critics on this forum who either
> > couldn't or didn't want to understand. But in the end, the process
> > worked and I think we're on the right course.
>
> > Will this debacle and subsequent turnaround mark the beginning of a
> > dynamic resurgence in U.S. soaring and the SSA's fortunes? Probably
> > not. We're a tiny, expensive, difficult-to-learn, time-intensive,
> > weather-dependent, fundamentally individual sport in a highly
> > regulated environment at a time when most Americans have less
> > available time and myriad other ways to spend it, preferably with
> > their families. But thanks to the efforts of a few volunteers and SSA
> > staff, our interests are fairly well served. Having spent almost a
> > decade on the SSA Board (part of that time on the ExComm) before the
> > recent scandals, I'm well aware of (a) the difficulty of getting
> > anyone to serve at all, and (b) ensuring that at least some of those
> > who do serve possess the right skill sets for critical Board-level and
> > staff positions.
>
> > In a perfect world, I'd make a few changes to the current structure
> > and staffing. But in the real world, if (as is my impression also) the
> > majority of SSA members wish the majority of our leadership to at
> > least effect a smooth transition if not continue in place, then I'm
> > all for it. If skilled, dedicated candidates with time, patience, and
> > funding (the latter either from their own resources or their regions')
> > wish to run for election to the Board, I doubt seriously if they will
> > have any difficulty winning. Prior to that, they can approach the
> > Board for consideration as a director at large (a position I once
> > opposed but learned was absolutely necessary to bring needed talent
> > into the Board). I'm sure there are directors who, for all of their
> > "I'd love to give up this job and let someone else do it" will fight
> > tenaciously to retain the privilidge of spending their own time and
> > money to attend boring meetings and listen to themselves pontificate.
> > I suspect more would, as is the case with Dianne Black-Nixon, like
> > nothing better than to retire but feel a true obligation to finish the
> > work they started.
>
> > It's very easy to be absolute: "they promised to resign so they must."
> > It's much more difficult to assess the situation rationally a year
> > later and determine what is the right decision considering all that
> > has transpired since then. A year ago I wanted a clean break, too. But
> > at this point, I can wait for the evolution to continue.
>
> > Chip Bearden
>
> I think that the surviving problem is the issue of getting the correct
> skill sets working on the Board. The idea of Mr. Bearden's struggle
> to have Board members "get it" is an illustration of that problem.
>
> It does appear to me that while the Board is not resposible for any of
> the related alleged illegalities, it has brought to light some other
> problems for which the Board and for which various Board members and
> the Board as a whole are responsible.
>
> I think that the problem of getting good and appropriate people to
> serve on the Board is a chicken and egg problem. Good Boards will get
> good people.
>
> I am sure that Ms. Black-Nixon and the others all have the best
> interests of the SSA at heart. I also think that they probably
> inherited a problem already established. I think we should look at
> the original source and implementation of the idea that audits should
> not be done. However, Board members should have been insisting on
> seeing audited reports and copies of the IRS returns. This is not
> Management 101, but remedial Management 001.
>
> I do not think that continuity is the real reason of asking Board
> members or Officers to stay. There are other more limited methods
> that would ensure that continuity. therefore, I must wonder what are
> the other (even unconscious) resons for doing so.
>
> TheBoard can do a much better job of getting the right skill sets.
> First, I think that the Board is looking at credentials that do not
> ensure getting those skill sets. Second, let us go out and get people
> with the skill sets needed.
>
> Didnt Harris Hill have a director some years back that kept asking for
> reports and when he actually got an audited report, he brought to the
> Board some bad things? Couldn't all of this have been prevented if
> SSA had picked up this person to contribute to the Board?

I would recommend that SSA directors and regional organization and
chapter board members, or those considering serving on non-profit
boards in voluntary organizations, read the following, in the order
presented. Indeed, from reading the excomm minutes, I would say at
least one excomm member has read O'Connell's book, or some of the
resources he cites. From the FRTF final report, I'd say none had read
either or related works, at least recently, as I sense a lack of
certain appreciations. Both should be available in local lending
libraries. Familiarity with the SSA board and excomm minutes is a
must to get the most from these. I suspect many members volunteering
to serve in SSA leadership positions may not have significant
experience in such matters. Most of us deal primarily with private
enterprise and government in our daily experience, though several I'm
sure have served on local non-profit boards, but perhaps without
understanding some of the underlying requirements and concepts. Non-
profit organizations are those special entities removed from both
'private' and 'government' and require a different mind set for
effective stewardship. Indeed, a proper appreciation is the
necessity to defend a vibrant non-profit culture of voluntary
organizations. Neither are omnibus works, nor 100% current in the
shifting paradigms of the non-profit world, but are the best topical
presentations I've found to date. This comes on the heels of a couple
of stints on my own club's board and leading a second non-profit to a
successful 501c(3) determination. I'd rather have discovered these
before a lot of the hand ringing and teeth gnashing that comes from
boards behaving badly, usually through ignorance. Like funerals, we
often learn the best lessons or secrets after someone has died. How
wonder it would have been to have learned these beforehand.

Hopkins, Bruce, R., Starting and Managing a Nonprofit Organization, A
Legal Guide, Wiley, 4th Edition, 2005
O' Connell, Brian, The Board Member's Book, Making a Difference in
Voluntary Organizations, The Foundation Center, 3rd Edition, 2003

Frank Whiteley