CF Online E-Board Meeting Minutes

                                        FEBRUARY-2010
Opened on February 15^th by CFP Pat Householder.

 The CF Feb Board Meeting is now open

So that everyone is on the samepage, the Roberts Rules flow for meeting progression is as follows.

1.  A member makes a motionregarding an item they wish a CF Board Decision on.

EX:  "I make a motionthat the Board salaries be tripled in 2010"

2.  Another member secondsthe motion if they feel it is worthy of consideration.

EX:  I second the motion.

3.  The Chair acknowledgesthe motion and second, restates the motion and calls for discussion.

4.  In the course ofdiscussion, the motion may be tabled, amended or withdrawn.

5.  Following thediscussion, a vote on the motion is called.

Each board member can then voteyea, nay or present (to show he is aware of the vote but chooses not to vote.)

6.  When the vote isresolved yea or nay, the results are announced.

If the item has been discussed ina previous meeting without resolution, it should appear under the OLDBUSINESS thread.

If the item has not previouslybeen discussed, it should appear under the NEW BUSINESS thread.

If the item is of a informationalnature only, it should appear under GOOD OF THE ORDER.

When the meeting is closed,the CF Secretary reviews the postings and creates meeting minutes, whichare then posted under the CF Meeting Minutes thread.

OLD BUSINESS

Brotherhood Fund Guidelines

There is a lack of clarity in the rules for disbursingBF money that we need to resolve now.  There is a well established CFBrotherhood procedure for  non-emergency funding requests, but there noagreement on what a emergency is, and what amount can be disbursed by the CFBrotherhood Fund manager without consulting the CF board for approval. 

There is further confusion caused because one person,John Peters, is wearing two hats, that of CF Executive Director and that of CFBrotherhood Fund manager.  We need to set down our rules based on theposition(s) and not the individuals currently holding the positions.

The CF President is the presiding officer of the CFand traditionally has been the USSVI National Commander.   The‘Executive Director’ really is the Vice President and manages the day to dayaffairs of the CF.  We have not yet codified the term “Exec Director” or"Fund Manager "in the bylaws and we can save that discussion foranother day, but he is the VP and they are the men who run the funds.

The issues to be resolved now are,

a.  Who should have funding release authority foremergency requests.

a. CF President?

b. CF Executive Director?

c. CF Brotherhood Fund Manager?

d. Some combination of the above?

b.  What should be the upper limit of emergencyfunding under these circumstances.

a. $ 500.00

b. $ 750.00

c. $ 1,000.00

d. Other

c.  What, generally, constitutes an emergencyrequest?

a. _____________________

b. _____________________

Let’s take these on the first two, then discuss thethird to see if we can come to some agreement later.

Would someone care to make a motion as to who shouldhave funding release authority for emergency requests? 

Several possible alternatives might be…

“I make a motion that the CF President have fundingrelease authority for emergency Brotherhood Fund requests not to exceed $xxx.00 dollars.  The CF President will immediately advise the CF Board ofthe nature of the emergency and the funding disbursement.”

“I make a motion that the CF Executive Director havefunding release authority for emergency Brotherhood Fund requests not to exceed$ xxx.00 dollars.  The CF Executive Director will immediately advise theCF Board of the nature of the emergency and the funding disbursement.”

“I make a motion that the CF Brotherhood Fund manager,with concurrence of the CF Executive Director, have funding release authorityfor emergency Brotherhood Fund requests not to exceed $ xxx.00 dollars. In the absence of the CF Executive Director, he will seek concurrance from theCF President.  The CF Brotherhood fund manager will immediately advise theCF Board of the nature of the emergency and the funding disbursement.”

“I make a motion that the CF Brotherhood Fund managerhave funding release authority for emergency Brotherhood Fund requests not to exceed$ xxx.00 dollars.  If the same person holds both the Fund Manager positionand the Executive Director Position, he will gain concurrence from the CFPresident first.  The CF Brotherhood fund manager will immediately advisethe CF Board of the nature of the emergency and the funding disbursement.”

CFT JohnA Andersen

I am not making a motion,just starting a discussion

regarding brotherhood Fund I am thinking theExecutive Director or, in his absence, the CF President, should have access to$6,000 immediately for emergencies but no more then $1,000 to any oneindividual (if that). This  money should be used for emergency food,shelter or clothing for shipmates displaced or injured in a disaster (like aKatrina).

 Since the current or future CF Treasurermay not be available I also think a separate checking/savings account should beaccessible by the CF Exec Director or the CF president.

 Full Board approval would be needed todo more

 For distribution of the funds the localbase would need to be involved or if the local base is underwater, soto speak, the nearest unaffected base.

CFPPat Householder

Here is some information from theNational Office

CFContribution Receipts from 2/1/2009 to 2/1/2010

General(Non Earmarked) Funds Received: $6,172.81

BrotherhoodTotal Funds Received: $7,028.45

a.  Non EarmarkedBrotherhood:  $ 1,528.45

b.  Caring & SharingDesignated: $ 5,500.00

CF Brotherhood Fund manager motion:

JohnMarkiewicz

Imake a motion that the CF Brotherhood Fund manager, with concurrence of the CFExecutive Director, have funding release authority for emergency BrotherhoodFund requests not to exceed $ 1,000.00 dollars. In the absence of the CFExecutive Director, he will seek concurrence from the CF President. The CFBrotherhood fund manager will immediately advise the CF Board of the nature ofthe emergency and the funding disbursemen

CFS Al Singleman, Jr.

I think we need to amendJohn's motion to state, "That if the the CF brotherhood Manger and the CFExecutive Director are the same person, or in the absence of the CF ExecutiveDirector, that he has to have concurrence from the CF President."

JohnMarkiewicz

I withdraw my previous motionand submit the following amended motion:

I move that the CF Brotherhood Fund manager, with concurrence of the CFExecutive Director, have funding release authority for emergency BrotherhoodFund requests not to exceed $ 1,000.00 dollars. In the absence of the CFExecutive Director, he will seek concurrence from the CF President. Further,that if the the CF brotherhood Manger and the CF Executive Director are thesame person; he must seek concurrence from the CF President. The CF Brotherhoodfund manager will immediately advise the CF Board of the nature of theemergency and the funding disbursement.

Carl Schmidt

 Seconds John M’s motion.

CFPPat Householder

The motion is made and seconded that that theCF Brotherhood Fund manager, with concurrence of the CF Executive Director,have funding release authority for emergency Brotherhood Fund requests not toexceed $ 1,000.00 dollars. In the absence of the CF Executive Director, he willseek concurrence from the CF President. Further, that if the CF brotherhoodManger and the CF Executive Director are the same person, he must seek concurrencefrom the CF President. The CF Brotherhood fund manager will immediately advisethe CF Board of the nature of the emergency and the funding disbursement.

Discussion now, vote later on 18th.

JohnMarkiewicz

Brotherhood Chair currently has authority butno second check is required - my understanding of the need for the motion is torequire concurrence of the Executive Director or if they are the same person torequire concurrence of the CF President. This is for every one's protection asat least two people of authority (Fund Chair and Executive Director or CFPresident) would have to concur before funds are disbursed and no oneindividual can be chastised for the disbursement if someone does not agree withit.

CFPPat Householder

After going through the CF meeting minutes, Ifound that at the 2008 POST ABM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION MEETING, 2008 FORT WORTH CONVENTION, John Andersen made thefollowing motion:

"The Library and Memorial Funds be ableto spend their fund balance as appropriate. TheBrotherhood Fund be allowed to spend their money as appropriate. TheScholarship Fund be authorized to spend up to 5% of its total assets or atleast $30,000 for the time being. Seconded by Jon Jaques; a short discussionfollowed. Motion seconded and passed."

Just as a point of interest, the Brotherhoodfund currently has $ 7,028.45, of which $ 5,500 is committed to the Caring andSharing part of Brotherhood.

The motion on the floor, if passed, willsupersede this previous passed motion.

Thank you for your comments and discussion onthis motion.

Please vote on the motion that

"The CF Brotherhood Fund manager,with concurrence of the CF Executive Director, have funding release authorityfor emergency Brotherhood Fund requests not to exceed $ 1,000.00 dollars. Inthe absence of the CF Executive Director, he will seek concurrence from the CFPresident. Further, that if the the CF brotherhood Manger and the CF ExecutiveDirector are the same person, he must seek concurrence from the CF President.The CF Brotherhood fund manager will immediately advise the CF Board of thenature of the emergency and the funding disbursement."

Yea, Nay, or Abstain?

The Vote!

NJVC-yes, WRD-yes,IPNC-yes, NSVC-Yes, LIBFC-yes, CFS-yes, CRD-yes, ESRD-yes, ENRD-yes, CFT-NO,CFED-NO, NT-yes  The Motion passes!

LIBFC Ron Martini

I make a motion that theBoard discusses the new Building Fund and its leadership, plans, and goals.

Since we spent most of the last on line CFmeeting discussing the Building Fund, I highly suggest we table this issue foranother time and move on to higher priority issues like the CF PPM and policystatements just to  name a few of themore important issues that need to completed.

LIBFC Ron Martini

I disagree with my esteemed colleague fromthe Empire State.  It seems nothing was doneat the November meeting except argue about putting CF business before themembership which seemed to be an idea by one person who was immediately, andrightfully so, questioned by two esteemed members. 

I'm also not saying the CF PPM (is that a new document? I don't see it listedunder CF Documents) is not important.

But nothing was settled on the Building Fund which everyone who attended theE-Board Post ABM meeting and subsequent "special" CF meeting votedfor. 

If a PPM is going to be added to our document list, should not a Building Fundpreparatory document be written first?  Who is the Building FundChairman? 

I am going to stand by my motion.  

TomConlon

An item for discussion does not require amotion.  You can request that the chair entertain the discussion.

CFPPat Householder

A motion to discuss' is out of order. The intent of a motion is to request a action (Ex:  I make a motion todouble the pay of the members of the board) Following a motion and a second,discussion ensues.

There is a place to have free flowingdiscussions on this topic, which is under the CF Building Fund thread. When an actionable motion is ready, it should be brought to this meeting.

RECAP:  The Building Fund is establishedas of the Post ABM CF meeting in San Diego.  John Jaques is chairman.  It is alsocalled the "Submarine Legacy Society."  The next actions will bea article in American Submariner authored by Jon Jaques, several POCnotices, and a ballot referendum question to the membership.

LIBFC Ron Martini

Ok, I'llyield on the motion to discuss....

In the interest of giving Jon more time for study and for the word topromulgate itself.

 I make a motion that the ballot referendumquestion to the membership be tabled until 2012. 

TomConlon

Isecond the motion!

CFPPat Householder

A motion and second have been made to tablethe 2010 ballot referendum question asking the members if they wouldfinancially support the acquisition of a CF Building to house the assets andcollections of the CF.

Discussion now!

TomConlon

IIRC a motion to table does not requirediscussion.

CFPPat Householder

Point of Order to Ron Martini's motion to Table

In reviewing the Nov Boarddiscussion thread, there seemed to be a consensus for the ballot referendum,but as best I can tell, no formal vote was conducted, so there is no ‘action’to move on.

As a point of order, thecurrent motion on the floor ‘to table’ is invalid.

Carl Schmidt Central RegionDirector:  "I move to include the question about the acquisition of aCF building as part of the 2012 National Ballot as a referendum, following theform of a proposal with a pro' and con' statement included to be included inthe voting issue of the American Submariner magazine so that the member canmake an informed advisory vote up or down. The pro' and con' statement will belimited to approx 150 words each, written by two different shipmates appointedby the Chairman of the CF, and edited for maximum clarity."

 Michael Bircumshaw

NJVCseconds the motion made by Carl CRD

CFPPat Householder

Motion and second made. 

I suggest consideration of a minorchange to the motion to state "President" where it says"Chairman" to comply with the actual terminology in the CF Bylaws.

Carl Schmidt

Iagree remove the word Chairman and add President to the motion.

LIBFC Ron Martini

“Imove to include the questionabout the acquisition of a CF building as part ofthe 2010 National Ballot as areferendum, following the form of a 'proposal' witha 'pro' and a 'con'statement included to be included in the voting issue of theAmericanSubmariner magazine so that the member can make an informedadvisory voteup or down.  The 'pro' and 'con' statements will belimited to approx150 words each, written by two different shipmates, andedited for maximumclarity.”

The above is way to restrictive. Does acquisition means outright ownership?Doesthat include renting or rent-to-own?  I don't even like thewordreferendum.  What if the majority says no.  Does that tell us toshutdown the fund?  I wasn't aware the membership of USSVI had a say inthedecisions of the CF.  There has to be a softer way of determiningtheirdesires.  Then it seems that the 'pro' and 'con' statements woulddeterminethe outcome.  I would say the best written by the more eruditewriter will win theday.  Why not drop the idea of a Referendum and discussit for the next year or eighteen months?

Imove to attend the motion to defer the placing of any verbiage about theBuilding Fund on any future ballot until a committee be established under thedirection of Jon Jacque to study the issue further.

CFS Al Singleman, Jr.

I have been looking at thereferendum issue with interest. Referendum is defined as the submission of alaw to the direct vote of the people. Since USSVI and the CF are 2 separatecorporations, it is illegal to have the USSVI membership vote on CF issues. Youcan run a poll to see if the USSVI Membership would support the CF BuildingFund, but the USSVI members can not vote to have a CF Building Fund as they arenot members of the CF. When we get all the pros and cons for the CF BuildingFund together we should ask the USSVI membership to see if they would support aCFBF using a yes or no poll on the USSVI website. This would be purely anopinion poll not a vote in way shape or size. I am therefore against anyreferendum period as it would cause more problems than answers.

CFPPat Householder

This motion is out of order because there isno action as yet to defer.  'A motion to amend' can only propose a changeto the wording of a motion already moved and seconded, but not yet votedon.

An example:  I move to amend the motionon the floor so it says straw poll instead of referendum. 

The motion on the floor stands for voteuntil or unless someone proposes a wording change which is seconded, or it ismoved to be tabled, or it can be moved to refer the motion on the floor to acommittee for further study.

Comment:  The whole point of a strawpoll (or whatever else you want to call it) is to ask the members ofUSSVI, who will be the ones asked to pay for and maintain the CF Building, ifthey will financially support it.  Whether they do or don't have a CF voteis immaterial, since the real vote is with their dollars.  If they will,it makes sense to move ahead.  If they won't, it is a waste of ourtime, AT THIS TIME. 

There have been several announcements in thePOC Broadcasts about the establishment of the CF Building Fund already, and JonJaques will have a article specifically about the CF Building Fund in the nextissue of American Submariner.  John Andersen has a broader article aboutthe CF in the AMSUB hopper which also mentions the building fund, and it willalso be sent in the next Subvet news.

These things are 'laying the ground' to educate the members and to helpus better know if we can expect member support. 

LIBFC Ron Martini

We are being buried by Roberts here. 

All we want is the proposed "Referendum" to go away.  Can we getyour OK that it won't happen?  It wasn't a motion that was voted on wayback as you stated.  Just your word will make this go away. 

CFPPat Householder

There is a legitimate motion and second onthe table.  It would be improper for me to summarily dismiss the motion asRon Martini has requested. 

The members will have to choose to eithersupport the motion, amend the motion or table it.  I'd like to get on withthis because we have other business to attend to. 

Would one of the members of this board eithercall the question, amend the motion or move to table. 

I intend to call for a vote on themotion on the floor absent any other actions on Wednesday.

TomConlon

There is a procedural issuein Robert's whereby we can "put the motion aside" to be reconsideredat a later date.  I don't remember the proper name.  For now, I'llcall it "a motion to reconsider."

Rather than "table" the motion, this allows us to take up the issueat a time of our choosing.  When tabling a motion, it "dies" atthe end of the meeting.
Therefore I move that we reconsider the current motion at at later time.

JohnMarkiewicz

I move that we table themotion, there has been so much discussion of Robert's Rules and so many countermotions that were not relevent to the original motion that I am not even surewhat the original motion was any more or in fact if it was even needed. We needto table this and let it die so that it can start fresh another time when andif it is needed.

Jim Dunn

I agree and second thismotion. 

CFT JohnA Andersen

Why do we believe we have to buy a building. Ever hear of a long term lease?Or what about the existing building we already own through Groton (I know it is not currentlyavailable  based on the Ct building codes but it should be considered). Iget the impression we are assuming it has to be an expensive building in theSilverdale or Grotonareas. Maybe so but it neither has to cost millions nor be inSilverdale. I am not saying it shouldn't be but it does not have to be.Are we approaching the USSVI membership saying

  We want to buy or lease a building in the Silverdale or someother area which may require we raise $500,000 or $5,000,000 to houseour libary or a museum. What say you??????

  Don't just go off willy nilly and take a straw poll

 I do guarantee you that if we spend our time on  forums likethis making premature motions, amending motions, withdrawingmotions we will further confuse a very confused discussion.

Long time ago in 98ish we had a major issue just considering theestablishment of  a national office. It was a contentious issue. Iwas appointed chair of a six or seven member committee and we received a lot ofnegative feedback. Positive also but many who thought we were way off base. Weneed to have this well thought out and have a plan withalternatives developed for this Board (not the USSVI Board)to discuss at the Board meeting in September or the 2011 midtermmeeting.  

 And this is not amotion. It is an attempt to practically approach the entire topic

LIBFC Ron Martini

I agree with John A.  Is there such a thing still of a"rent-to-own" type arrangement?  And his point of a long termrental agreement is fine.  The National Office rental certainly could bepart of his also.  $1275/month or so (guess).  That is assuming theNational Office be a part of that facility. 
Groton does notneed another submarine museum or library.  They have the largest submarinebook library on the planet now.  Their museum is brand new and they haveso much, then can only display 5% at a time for six months at a time. Your item might not hit the floor for 8-10 years. 
Keyport has a great museum (only a small % is submarine-it is an underseamuseum)but it's library upstairs is top notch.
Both of the above are research (cannot check out books) type facilites. 
But you want a location where the most people would see it with a largesubmarine community if possible to draw on for help in a volunteer typearrangement.  So that means the coasts.  I've found a lot of navyretirees (especially officer type are in the northern VA/Washington D.C. area. Close by is Hampton Roads and Norfolkwith its 875000 people.  Charlestonand the entire county there is just 330000.  King's Bay and Jacksonville have a greatfacility now in St. Marys and don't need another.  On the West Coast is San Diego with its 2.9million people in the County with no museum an no library certainly is a toppossible location.  Bremerton/Tacoma/Seattle have 1.2 millionpeople.  In my mind San Diegois the spot. 
Just some thoughts for those interested. 
I would like to hear our NCO's thoughts on a facility now that the dust issettled. 

TomConlon

John's right.  There has been a lot of back-and-forthon this, as well as a couple of conflicting "motions," amendments,proposals, etc..

John M's motion to table may be out of order, since my proposal to reconsideris still open.  However, my proposal is out of order as well in that itdoesn't set a time for reconsideration of the issue to be compliant with RROR.

Specifically, we want to reconsider the proposal at a future date, probablyMid-Term 2011; and even that date is not "carved in stone."

Pat did a little research and informed me that my initial motion was "outof order" in that it didn't set a specified time to reconsider theissue.  He's right.  I also did a little research at the RROR website. 

Therefore, I withdraw my initial motion and submit the following:  I moveto postponeconsideration of the motion until the 2011 midterm meeting.

This meets the criteria of ending the current discussion (which all of us wantto do) and establishes a  future date certain when we may resumediscussion of the issue.  And, as I mentioned previously, if we feel thatwe don't have enough information to make a decission at that time we canfurther move to postpone to another future time. 

CFPPat Householder

Tom's motion did notreceive a second.  John's did.  If the motion to table isdefeated, and your motion then receives a second, we will vote on it. 

A motion to Table the main motion regardingputting a question on the 2012 ballot relating to the acquistion of a CFBuilding has been seconded.  A motion to table, once seconded, is notsubject to further debate. 

The motion to table requires a 2/3 majorityto pass.  If it passes, the main motion will be set aside and if it is not'taken off the table' prior to the end of the next CF meeting, the motion willdie. 

As John M said, this does not prevent someonefrom introducing another motion at some future meeting to achieve a similarpurpose.

Please vote now

The Vote!

WRD-yes, CFT-yes, CFS-yes,CRD-NO, IPNC-yes, NT-yes, ESRD-yes, ENRD-yes, NSVC-yes, NJVC-yes, CFED-yes

The 2/3 majority having voted Yea, the motionto table is passed. 

This issue can be brought up at somefuture date as a new motion, presumably following the 2010 electioncycle.  Regardless of the mode or method of inquiry, our members willultimately vote with their dollars.

Changing Article V of the CF Bylaws

As previously discussed via email, here is apotential change to our Charitable Foundation Bylaws to Section V.  Thischange would not require any modification to the Articles ofIncorporation.  Note the suggested changes in red.  Do Ihear a motion?

ARTICLE V

Officers

1. General. At each AnnualMeeting of the Board in even numbered years, the Board shall elect aPresident, one Senior Vice President (Executive Director) and (1) or moreadditional Vice Presidents, a Treasurer and a Secretary. The Board may fromtime to time elect such other officers as the Board deems expedient.

Any two (2) or more officesmay be held by the same person. The duties of officers of the Foundation shallbe such as are prescribed by these Bylaws and as may be prescribed by the Boardfrom time to time.

2. President and VicePresident. The President shall be the chief executive officer of the Foundationand shall have general control and management of its assets and affairs,subject to the direction of the Board. He or she shall preside at all meetingsof the Board and the members and shall perform all duties incident to theoffice of President. He or she may appoint such clerks and other employees andagents of the Foundation as he or she may from time to time deem advisable.

A Senior Vice President, alsocalled the Executive Director, may be appointed by the board to manage theoperations and fundraising of the Charitable Foundation under the supervisionof the President.

Except as specially limitedby vote of the Board, any Vice President shall perform the duties and have thepowers of the President during the absence or disability of the President. AnyVice President shall also perform such other duties as may be delegated to himor her by the Board from time to time.

3. Secretary. The Secretaryshall have responsibility for preparing and keeping a record of the minutes ofthe proceedings of all meetings of the Board and the members and forauthenticating records of the Foundation. The Secretary shall issue all noticesrequired by law or by these Bylaws. He or she shall have the custody of theseal of the Foundation and all books, records and papers of the Foundation,except as shall be in the charge of the Treasurer or of some other personauthorized to have custody and possession thereof by a resolution of the Board,and shall discharge all other duties required of such officer by law ordelegated to him or her from time to time by the Board or as are incident tothe office of Secretary.

4. Treasurer. The Treasurershall have charge and custody of and be responsible for all funds andsecurities of the Foundation, keep full and accurate accounts of receipts anddisbursements and books belonging to the Foundation, deposit all monies andvaluable effects in the name and to the credit of the Foundation indepositories designated by the Board, and he or she shall discharge all otherduties required of such officer by law or delegated to him or her from time totime by the Board or as are incident to the office of Treasurer.

5. Terms of Office. Each ofsuch officers shall serve for the term of one (1) year two (2) years anduntil his or her successor shall be duly designated, but any officer may beremoved by a majority vote of the Directors in office at any time, with orwithout cause. Vacancies among the officers by reason of death, resignation orother causes shall be filled by vote of the Directors in office. The periodbetween consecutive Annual Meetings of the Board shall be deemed one (1)year two (2)years for this purpose. There shall be no limit on years ofconsecutive service by officers.

Carl Schmidt

I move the CharitableFoundation Bylaws to Section V be accepted with changes as noted in Red

MichaelBircumshaw

Second the motion to ArticleV

The Vote!

WRD-yes, CFS-yes, CRD-NO,IPNC-yes, NT-yes, ESRD-yes, ENRD-yes, LIFC-yes, NJVC-yes, CFED-yes

A majority of votes being case in favor of changingArticle V of the CF bylaws, it is passed.

GOOD OF THE ORDER

Re changing the COI as it relates to eligibility forthe Scholarship Pgm

Re: Scholarship Fund concern.

Our Articles of Incorporation fo the CF state,

"(a) provide "qualified tuition and related expenses" within the
meaning of Code Section 117 (b )(2) to individuals who shall be (i)
dependent (natural or adopted) children or grandchildren of submarine
veterans, active-duty submariners, or personnel in submarine support
activities, both officer and enlisted, and (ii) part or full time
students at an educational organization within the meaning of Section
170(b)(I)(A)(ii), provided that such educational organization (a)
provides an educational program that is acceptable for full credit
towards a higher degree or offers a program of training to prepare
students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation, and (b) is
authorized under federal or state law to provide such a program and is
........."
To me that means shipyard workers, submarine base employees, school
staff, AS and ASR crews are also eligible for our scholarships.  What dowe
do to comply with our own rules?  

Or should the Incorporation Article be revised to mirror what our actual
practices are?

Jon Jaques

As you know, the Dolphin Scholarship Fund scholarship is only available tosubmarine qualified individual's children if the subvet served eight yearsactive duty or more.

We can't start granting scholarships to the garbage man, base worker, andthe yard bird's children.  We need to keep scholarships available to thechildren of shipmates, IMHO.

LIBFC Ron Martini

Fine and I agree.  So then we are obligated to change our Articles ofIncorporation that reads as I quoted above? 

CFEDJohn Peters

NO, NOT AGREED.  The Scholarship Committee receives lots ofapplications and the most worthy, needy, etc get an award.

Just because the POOL of applicants may be broad it makes nodifference.  NEED and SCHOLASTIC MERIT result in awards.

CFPPat Householder

Some time back when this subject came up, John Peters made the common senseobservation that while anyone can apply, the scholarship committee picks theawardees based on the weighting of the eval. factors they haveset.  That seems sufficient to me, and gives the selection committeethe flexibility they require to carry out their task. 

LIBFC Ron Martini

That may be, but those other people described in our Articles ofIncorporation do NOT know that we have scholarships available.  Can't wesimply change the Articles to be compliance with actual desires andpractices? 

Do other organizations (Legion/VFW) open the doors to our grandchildren forscholarships? I don't think so.  So lets close that door.   

CFPPat Householder

If I recall correctly, John Andersen felt we should not be restricting thepotential applicants of the scholarships further than already stated inthe COI because it might invite reconsideration of our 501c3 status by the IRS.

Rather than put words into John's mouth, however, I ask him to restate hisconcern.  If I am wrong, I have no problem with a COI change.

Jan 20 2009 John Peters said “I don't think we needchange anything in the Art of Inc.  If we DID, we would have to reregisterthem with the State of CT. We are NOT violating anything in the Art of Inc and they require no change.

We can certainly ALLOW any submariner's kid or grand-child to apply. The committee making the selection can include MEMBERSHIP in USSVI in theevaluation process.  Merely another item to weigh in the evaluation. Theremay be some really deserving kids we should look at.  We might alsoimprove fund raising in the process.”

Jan 20 2009 John Andersen said “John P is right fora change . No need to change the AOI since it provides us the ability to do allthings charitable.

 I personally have no real issue if we expand the program to all subvets but been thinking on it for a few days and all it takes to qualify is forthe sponsor to join as a MAL. Kind of - my kid needs a scholarship, USSVCFprovides scholarships, I can join for $20 bucks & have the kid apply, get ascholarship or not and quit USSVI iffin i don't like has been subvets. Yes? I don't recall there is any mandatory lifetime membership requirement, isthere?

I think the IRSs only concern would be the available pool of applicants andthe fairness of the selection process. If we did not have a sufficiently largeenough membership to draw from there might be an issue. I don't think that isthe problem today. I'll be a bit busy for a while but I'll ask around andperhaps do some June research iffin' I don't get answers from tax people iknow. But my gut tells me that based on the last few years there are quite afew candidates applying.”

Jan 23 2009:  John Andersen said “Yesterday, I understood from reading the posts that theCOI and ByLaws were in conflict. Not so. We, as a charitable organization, haveour purpose which is very broad. We are not precluded from awardinga scholarships to family members of any sub vet, i.e., not just USSVImembers). In fact, we could award scholarships to others outside the submarinecommunity if we so choose. There is no conflict between the two documents.  However ourscholarship guidelines (not the COI or ByLaws) restrict applications to membersponsors. Since we have a large enough community of applicants within theUSSVI community I see no problem with this restriction, i.e.,limiting applicants to family of our members.   Our scholarshipcommittee is choosing to limit to member and active duty sponsors. That istheir choosing.“

CFT JohnA Andersen

"Can't we simply change the Articles to be compliance with actualdesires and practices? "

 My desire would be to allow children of non quals & supportpersonnel apply for a scholarship. I personally know a CPA who served 20years active, applied for the boats, did subschool and one tour on an FBM.Then went surface Navy. For 60 days he was one of us. And what of a civiliancontractor in the yards and on a boat when an accident happens and he iscredited with saving the day (either the boat or the crew)? Heshould be ignored?

  "to be compliance with actual desires and practices?".

    My actual desire is the allow for thepossibility.

LIBFC Ron Martini

I agree with you John.  But we are assuming that people(not SS) out there know that we offer them scholarships and to go to ussvi.orgto apply.  Would it boost our stature in the submarine community, tenders,schools, shops, to have us give their children scholarships? Or is it becausethey don't contribute, they don't get into the closed circle? 

CFEDJohn Peters

There is nothing to change.  That IS WHAT WE DO.

CFT JohnA Andersen

 Look, maybe some of the AOI or Bylaws should be changed, maybe not.But if we are changing them we NEED to report it to the IRS and the State of Connecticut. If we startmaking changes every year we will need to report those changes to them everyyear. By itself it is not a problem but i do NOT recommend we continuallychange it for a word here and a phrase there. If we want a change then Isuggest once every 5 or 10 years. But this BBS is not the forum to do acomplete study and possible rewrite. Better you do it by a committee . AND NO,I will not serve on it.

But keep in mind that a concern of the IRS is having a pool of applicantsto a Scholarship program which may be to restrictive or small. Idon't know at what level the IRS becomes concerned but the morerestrictive the guidelines the more concerned they could become.

LIBFC Ron Martini

Could we then limit the scholarships to those who onlyserved on DBFs?  Or being a USSVI member for 10 years or more?  Weseem to be taking what was comfortable and standard practice as our guidelineswhen the COI's are more broad.  That's like saying we will drive 55mphwhen the speed limit is 65mph. And that being for the reason that it's beendone that way on the ship I was on. The fact is that it was defined by oneperson and not a committee so long ago that few of us in this discussion weremembers then!  Another case of gray overriding the B&W and semanticsplaying the spoiler. 
Fine....If the horse is dead, throw away the whip. 
I withdraw my question posed in the "good" of the order!
Good discussion never-the-less. 

CFEDJohn Peters

One of the most fundamental rules I learned in Submarines was "If it AIN'TBROKE, DON'T FIX IT" (Ignoring the stupid PMS system which came later.)

There is no reason to change the organizational paperwork of theUSSVCF.  The pool of deserving and qualified applicants for Scholarshipsdoes not require modification.  If anyone in the allowed groups applies,his application will be compared to all the others. The COMMITTEE choses thewinners of the Scholarship Award based on NEED and ABILITY.

I don't think there has ever been an objection to the way this committeefunctions.  We should concentrate our attention on areas with problems (ifany).

I think the requirement to report changes to the STATE and IRS is sufficientreason for NOT MAKING ANY TRIVIAL CHANGES!  Unless we REALLY FIND AN ERRORor have some mandatory reason for change; WE SHOULD RESIST THE TEMPTATION TOTINKER.

There is NO REASON to tinker with these documents! 

I think a 10 year REVIEW interval should be applied to our basic documents!

CF Fund Raiser

MichaelBircumshaw

I make a motion that we initiate an ongoing FUN-d RAISER for theCharitable Foundation with the incoming funds to be divided among the variousarms of the foundation.

It works like this. I propose an ongoing, never ending race between any andall submarines that ever graced our Sub Force. We will determine a start point (possiblythe yard where the Boat was built) and an end point (possibly the best Liberty Port you ever tied up in or anchoredout). The distance will be invented and I suggest that 5,000 miles be thedetermined distance. A one dollar donation for each mile (nautical mile ofcourse) will determine the winner and as each Submarine finishes the race theReunion Group or individual who entered their favorite Submarine will beawarded a scale model of the boat in question. I would like to eventually seeevery boat ever in the Sub Force complete the race and the race does not enduntil we have exhausted all possible boats, and then we start over again. Therewill be a scale model awarded for every boat that finishes the race. Once yourfavorite boat has crossed the finish line then you can start another in therace or get on board one that is already in the race.

There will be ports of call and we will keep it updated on a website and inthe American Submariner with some details about where the Boat has gone.

I would greatly appreciate your comments and suggestions. We can do this

Boats can be entered in the race by individuals, USSVI Bases, ReunionGroups, SV-WW-II, active duty submarines etc..

Now you can actually take your wife or girlfriend to the "SubmarineRaces", again and again..

CFPPat Householder

For further background on fund raising, visit http://ussvi.us/BoDBBS/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=350&mid=3613#M3613

CF Fund Raising is a critical issue for this board and we must proactivelyaddress this need. 

Because we are running out of 'month', I will bring it back to the Board foras a motion in March.

We tend to be very good at figuring out how to spend money.  We need toget much better about raising money if this Foundation is to grow.

Meetingis Closed!

Having concluded our business for this month,without objection, this meeting is closed. 

It will again convene on or about March15 to take up the question of a Bylaws change to Article IV (you have that froma previous email), and Fund Raising for the Charitable Foundation.  Pleasecontinue to cuss and discuss fund raising ideas by phone or email between nowand then.

Thank you for your participation.