Not only is it behind closed doors, it's behind our backs!
Hiring a new person before resolving the present problems seems premature at
best and not publishing their (the board's) intent to do so is just another
demonstration of their arrogant disregard of the interests of and input from
the membership. I was willing to wait to see if there was a change in
attitude toward regarding open communication with the members on the part of
the board but this surely is beginning to this look like it's going the same
way as "Sanderson" and "Computer purchase". We will never get the full and
complete story. I am truly disappointed.


"Mike Schumann" wrote in message
ink.net...
If the board wanted to hire a new CFO, why wasn't an e-mail sent to the
membership looking for candidates?

Mike Schumann

"5-BG" 5-bghatesspam @ fake.com wrote in message
...
to tom seim.. your points are on the mark. The issue of "behind closed
doors
" is crucial and a root cause of the current problem.

Today and tomorrow the board, Which has already announced its intention
of resigning ( at least the chair and excom) is meeting to " address the
issues" ( per 9-25 note). They announced that they have hired a
replacement
cfo. They have BORROWED a significant amount of money from the trust fund.
They are silent on the issue of seeking reimbursement from insurance
company.

and much more..

Basically, a LAME DUCK ( by her own satement) chair is leading an
effort
to address issues ( which i take to mean to make decisions) which will
probably restructure the SSA. The problem is major, so the decisions will
probably have to be major. The decision to borrow from the trust was a
major
decision.

I believe that it is not only arrogant, but improper for this board to
make any decisions that will bind the society at this time.

A very thin case could be made for them meeting to discuss and to
identify
possibly courses of actions and restructuring alternatives for
presentation
to the membership.

BUT NOT TO MAKE BINDING RESTRUCTURING DECISIONS which could be tainted by
conflict of interest .

The fact that they announced the hiring of a new cfo is a perfect
example.
The SSA now PROBABLY ( depending upon the terms of his employement
contract)
has an obligation to this guy which will bind us in the future.. This
board
DECIDED that the model going forward requires a cfo.. DOES IT REALLY???
is there another business model that could be implimented that would save
the 100k or so that this guy will cost us each year??? did they consider
outsourcing seriously???
were alternatives presented to members for discussion and approval??

The board had several options when confronted with the problem. They
chose to "manage" the problem in closed session and to make important
policy
decisions on our behalf. This board is tainted by past bad judgement, in
conflict and, in my opinion, should not be making decisions that bind the
ssa into the future. Especially in a hurry and behind closed doors.
What was the behind closed doors reasoning behind hiring an attorney
suggested by the accountants who were a part of this situation? why did
the
board not hire an impartial auditor to do the forensic accounting? To save
money?? that sounds like familar reasoning..

What i believe is that we really have a large group of well intentioned
volunteer directors who are geographically distant from one another and
from the action. What i believe is that the excom is working on something
which they will present for approval to the rest of the board. A closed
meeting, that preceeds a closed meeting. This MAY be ok when things are
running smoothly, but is absolutly NOT OK during a period of trauma which
demands major changes that will impact the membership.