Conference 7.286::dcu

    
    Well, that's relatively easy to solve.
    
    Simply hire an outside firm to recieve and tally the votes.
    
    The IEEE, DECUS, the American Radio Relay League (200K member national
    amateur radio organization) and many other non-profit organizations
    do it routinely.
    
    And, before anyone cries about the cost, consider the difference in
    $50 Million invested at the 6% (+/-) overnight Federal Funds rate
    versus being invested in US in the form of house mortgages, car loans
    and VISA cards. (0.07% of $50Million paid the $35K special meeting!)
    
    

I don't know for sure, but I think they *do* hire an outside firm. I don't
know if it takes care of the entire election or just does an audit of the
results. I'm just wondering if there's a way we can verify that the election
was done cleanly. Peat Marwick, CPA firm does the tabulation. I don't really
know what that means tho. Do they handle *everything*?

    Its my understanding that they had an outside auditing firm audit the 
    voting for the special election.  Looks good on paper.  The accual
    method the auditor took and its implementation sucked.
    ed
    

    
    Egad, I certainly hope that wasn't the new DCU auditor!  Maybe a few
    letters sent directly to them are in order for their part in the vote 
    tallying procedures at the special meeting.  Even if they were hired by
    DCU, they were in charge of the vote tally and should have conducted it
    in such a manner that it could not have been called into question.  I 
    don't think their firm looked to well last Tuesday.
    
    Anybody get their name?

    .4 > Egad, I certainly hope that wasn't the new DCU auditor!
    
    I wasn't seated near the front and my memory isn't perfect, but I
    thought that the parlimentarian came from the new auditing firm and
    so did the person running the tally. Chuck mentioned this firm was
    chosen since it was the one most experienced w/ credit unions in the US.
    
    Of course it requires more organization, but in some highly contested
    elections, there are vote tallying monitors from both sides (e.g. in
    the last electionthat Ferdinand Marcos "won"). For the tallying at the
    special election to be seen as correct from both sides, one of each
    pair of the row counters should have come from the opposition (or from
    the towm meeting counters in the audience). The final summation should
    have been done in the presence of all these talliers. I feel the
    results should have been announced by the talliers rather than by the
    chairman of the board.

    
    The parliamentarian was their new General Counsel, Mr. Melcione.  DCU's
    former General Counsel (Cohen according to Chuck Cockburn) has been 
    named in the Barnstable fraud.
    
    I didn't get the name of the auditor either.  Guess we'll find out when
    we get this years annual report.
    
    But I agree with your ideas of how the vote should have been taken.  It 
    certainly would have made the final vote total more believeable in the 
    eyes of everybody who witnessed the process.

    Credible accounting is absolutely necessary with the need for accurate
    counting of ballots and identification of signatures for ballots &
    petitions, plus just accurate and full reporting of financial status.

    This brings to mind an Nat Public Radio story that even reputable
    accounting can't be trusted - especially if they have a relationship w/
    the firm being investigated. The story used an example of a dummy firm
    that was setup to get loans to renovate burned buildings. If the
    accountants had simply driven by the sites they could have seen that no
    works was being done. However they finally setup a visit, so the
    renovators printed some T-shirts w/ their logo's & hired some cheap
    actors to create a make-believe scene which the auditors fell for.

    
    RE: .7
    
    I, too, am more than a bit concerned that the same firm that handled
    the Special Meeting vote count, will also be handling the election
    ballots for the upcoming election.
    

Re: .0, .7, & .8

Let's ask!  Let's send a written request to either Mark Steinkrauss or
Chuck Cockburn (or both?), asking how the vote is to be tallied and how
the talley is to be verified.

It would be most appropriate for a candidate for the position of
Director were to make the request.  If I correctly understand the
situation, the DCU has a legal obligation to ensure that all parties
are satisfied with the fairness of the election process.

At first glance, it seems that the only way to ensure fairness is to
turn to an outside election firm.  If so, candidates should be able
to contact that firm and find out how they can observe the election
process.

It IS possible for an organization like DCU to conduct the election
ourselves, but we'd have to do a LOT to ensure that everyone was
satisfied with the results.  Things like ensuring that those counting
the votes were accurate and unbiased, providing mechanisms to review
any challenged votes, supporting anyone who wished to observe the
counting process, etc.

It would also be a very good idea to keep accurate records of your
correspondence with the DCU if you are a candidate for the Board of
Directors.  Don't forget that this is a Federally chartered financial
institution, which makes some kinds of nonsense a lot more serious than
your local social club.  Any improprieties in the election process,
for example, could easily end up in Federal court.  If that happens,
you had better make sure that you can make a very good case for
any claims you wish to make.

				- - Steve