Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Strongly Oppose NLUS Board Bylaws governance motion #4

David Samuels
October 30, 2018

Strongly Oppose NLUS Board Bylaws governance motion #4

This presentation shows that there is much confusion around the proposal that is a rehash of an old and incomplete plan that will forever remove elected membership representation from the Navy League Board despite verbal promises made.

Passage will FOREVER ALTER THE STRUCTURE of the organization.

If you have a doubt, vote NO and demand a full plan be presented for a vote

David Samuels

October 30, 2018
Tweet

Other Decks in Business

Transcript

  1. STRONGLY OPPOSE Bylaws Motion #4 on Governance Dave Samuels New

    England Region President 2018 The proposed change FUNDAMENTALLY ALTERS NAVY LEAGUE without cause
  2. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES If you have

    the slightest doubt, vote NO This proposal is being ram-rodded through the process by a small few that for some reason want to control Navy League’s treasury and resources and restrict the influence of and accountability to field membership. Nothing in the proposal increases participation or efficiency – and in fact limits both The bylaw motion text DOES NOT MATCH the presentation promises The plan is incomplete and undefined and after approval the Executive committee is gutted The core proposal is the same as the rejected 2013 plan  LINK ANY PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ALSO NEED TO BE TABLED UNTIL A FULL PLAN IS DEFINED AND IN PLACE – A PROMISE DOESN’T COUNT 2
  3. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES Members who also

    oppose motion #4 (names to be added for final posting and email) …and an additional number of board members that asked to not be named until the vote 3
  4. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES Executive Summary Elements

    of Navy League have proposed a very serious governance change that FUNDAMENTALLY ALTERS THE ORGANIZATION. While changing the name, talking about the plan and its elements, and despite verbal promises, THE CORE PROPOSAL TO REMOVE ACCOUNTABILITY TO ANY FIELD LEADERSHIP REMAINS. IF this change to the STEERING/ EXECUTIVE committee passes to reduce it to appointees and NVPs only, there will no longer be any accountability or representation from members outside of a small cadre of insiders. Next step plans are INTENTIONALLY FUZZY – especially future phases. It is substantially the same as a 2013 proposal put forth by almost the same group of people that was rejected in 2013 at the Long Beach convention. (see link to document). 4
  5. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES Executive Summary It

    SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGES Navy League and REMOVES regional and area leadership input and accountability to members entirely, without improving any organizational decision making speed – leaving headquarters to effectively continue to ignore field needs and leave councils on their own. The justification for pushing this change is weak – see point rebuttals. In fact makes the board less efficient. At the 2018 Convention, there was a vigorous debate and much confusion. A sudden vote was taken and most board members thought they voted to continue analysis – NOT endorse the proposal. There is a better way, while fully engaging and valuing all regions, councils and national interests. I and many other senior leaders in the field urge you to REJECT this specific proposal. 5
  6. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES The board vote

    in Portland was to continue to look at the concept – NOT approve it As you can see from the 2013 and later presentations, the wording and proposal has shifted some numbers, but the basis is the same, as is the wording. WHY is an OLD REJECTED PROPOSAL IS BEING PUSHED AGAIN ? 6
  7. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES 7 The justification

    “Membership is shrinking, leaders are not participating, there are too many directors, no one reads the 120 page budget and we lose money on functions due to lack of attendance.” Why is participation the primary reason to shrink the board ? The current board is mainly utilized as an audience and no true open discussions are conducted. Very few are asked for their advice and input. NAVY LEAGUE BENEFITS FROM MORE FIELD INVOLVEMENT
  8. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES FEEDBACK WAS IGNORED

    and NO CONCRETE JUSTIFICATION GIVEN 8
  9. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES Hidden motives, weak

    justification Reading the presentation and bylaw wording, there are only three facts and many platitudes and empty statements – but the goal is clearly not in the organizations interest. Handpicked “Fact” #1: Participation in Annual meetings is down – 44% board, 70% convention OBSERVATION: This in person attendance is actually GOOD and can be improved with compelling content and fun events that encourage leaders and members to travel and participate 9
  10. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES Hidden motives, weak

    justification Handpicked “Fact” #2: We are unable to fill all the National Director vacancies – 13% open OBSERVATION: This is a sign that potential new and younger leaders feel their limited time and treasure contributes are better used elsewhere – we need to provide more opportunities for members to engage and feel like they can make a PERSONAL difference in both local and purposeful national campaigns. There need to be clear objectives we show progress on. 10
  11. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES Hidden motives, weak

    justification Handpicked “Fact” #3: The Navy league board is too big compared to other organizations OBSERVATION: This is not true. Navy league, as founded is unique in that it is designed to be a grassroots organization with a central support staff. Board size represents some national expertise, regional leadership input and at least one representative from each of our 220+ councils and some flexibility for more interested and active members Members join the nationally centered headquarters of other organizations – who are advocates, but not necessarily accountable nor have independently incorporated field councils. 11
  12. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES The objectionable proposed

    change in Motion #4 Links from the October email for board review of the actual change: Summary shows 5 motions, details show 8 adding confusion – which is correct? Summary link: https://portal.navyleague.org/file/nd-and-nde-secure-documents/Bylaw-summary-for-Nov-2018-003.pdf?erid=739487 Detail link: https://portal.navyleague.org/file/2018-Bylaws-Committee-Submission-Package-April-2018.pdf?erid=739487 This detail change removes all mention of Region and Area Presidents from the Executive board making the organization corporate and Washington centric – WHY? Who benefits? 12
  13. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES The specific detailed

    change: …that removes duly elected field representation in our Region Presidents We are asked to trust that the follow on plan will still include membership without defining said next steps. <Link to full proposal> 13
  14. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES As in the

    previously REJECTED 2013 proposal, the new one uses the same phrasing to hide the true objectives – ELIMINATING ELECTED FIELD LEADERS FROM GOVERNANCE The key part of their proposal 14
  15. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES The PLAN is

    UNCLEAR During discussions this year, the proposed delegate process was not clarified, and the proposal doesn’t mention it – WHY? Because there is no follow on plan once the board is reduced to a few appointees only beholden to the National President. DEMAND A REPRESENTATIONAL PLAN – read the fine print 15
  16. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES The PLAN is

    UNCLEAR At the Portland convention in the Region President meeting, it was speculated that in a perfect board world, a follow on step would eliminate all National Director and Region Presidents from a much scaled back executive committee and include people external to the organization for their perspective and experience. The comments were publicly walked back at the general board meeting, but the intent was clear if this first step passes Passing the motion will end Navy League as a field driven organization inclusive of the diverse and deep geographic, skills, age and industry expertise we field members bring to the board. 16
  17. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES The future after

    step one is a mystery: While not discussed openly, it is PROBABLE that should the natural check and balance of regional leadership be removed from the board with passage of motion 4, a small cadre of Washington focused members will control all money given to Navy League, continue to ignore council advice and support, and create a ‘PAID’ board and ‘PAID’ leadership. This will further decrease active individual membership in favor of the few, and eliminate our national credibility as a non-partisan public voice. These ideas are NOT NEW – but have been tried by the few in the 20s and 30s, the 1950s and in 2013. OPPOSE motion #4 change to Executive committee – ensure the organization can have a strong grassroots voice in public policy This group has already tried to silence dissent by attacking every vocal opponent The link between your membership record and your council-area-and region affiliation has already been broken in the system – the reason rosters are not accurate 17
  18. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES What this means

    for you Members, currently ignored, join the National organization which is no longer accountable to Regional leadership, committee input or participation, council and individual member needs nor beholden to conduct membership drives based on individual issue engagement. Once a proud and unique organization which advocated an independent, concern-based agenda driven by very experienced, credible field leadership close to real, local maritime issues. It makes Navy League like many other, mostly ineffective Washington nonprofit lobbyists with a narrow agenda. 18 (Navy League Bldg)
  19. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES MILITARY LEADERS SEEK

    RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY The argument that NLUS leaders who volunteer as a Director desire to instead be a non-voting delegate with no responsibility to review the financials or vote on organizational matters is false. 19
  20. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES VOTE AGAINST MOTION

    #4 If approved, there will be no mechanism for any member to question, prevent or complain about future transformational changes, potentially: • A Board composed of all appointed vs elected NVPs/National Officers • Cronyism in the form of a PAID board or PAID officers • Misuse or misdirection of organizational resources and messaging • Corporate only focus on SAS and congressional lobbying • Washington DC focused activity, advocacy and fundraising for SAS/Gala/Ball • No field participation or influence on organizational direction or objectives • No committees or other forums to participate in lively debate Ultimately, there will only be pay to play for a narrow group of large donors making any participation out of reach for ordinary membership 20
  21. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES What NAVY LEAGUE

    REALLY NEEDS Navy League does not require a board change – it needs leadership that defines a clear purpose in line with the mission which strongly attracts and retains members, promotes dynamic programs that include every member in it’s success. Each measurable objective with a deadline needs routine communication of progress We need membership operations, communications and events to run smoothly and be a basis for growth in line with publicly stated objectives Aggressively pursue points that the services and corporations cannot on their own, and sell strategic concerns to the public In every organization, whether its people realize it or not, “there is a systemic relationship between purpose (what we are here to do), measures (how we know how we are doing) and method (how we do it).” 21
  22. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES Our original certificate

    of incorporation States that we “do hereby form a membership corporation”…“that the particular object for which said corporation is formed is to acquire and spread before the citizens of the United States, through branch organizations and otherwise, information as to the condition of the naval forces and equipment of the United States, and to awaken public interest and cooperation in all matters tending to aid, improve and develop their efficiency…” /s/ 29th day of December 1902 PUBLIC EDUCATION AND COMMUNICATION IS OUR PRIMARY CORE MISSION Where is the campaign? What are our annual objectives? Seapower alone is inadequate 22
  23. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES Navy League is

    a unique organization …In that we are a dedicated group of local chapters with a shared purpose. Members join their local council and affiliate with the national organization UNLIKE many other Washington based advocacy groups – Navy League was founded to promote public awareness of strategic needs of our maritime services 23
  24. CITIZENS IN SUPPORT OF THE SEA SERVICES What should governance

    look like? It should be inclusive It should be representative It should be transparent We have a breadth of geographic, age and industry expertise with some of the finest and most successful Americans involved in the organization with their ear to all urgent local issues affecting the sea services and their readiness – many previously holding command USE YOUR MEMBERS EXPERTISE and INSIGHT USE THE BOARD FOR MORE THAN JUST AN AUDIENCE and a WALLET 25