Conference 7.286::dcu

As I said in a nother note, please give them a chance.  Having spoken to Phil
several times, I know that "better than competitive" is very near and dear to
his heart.  The old board has left so much to undo  that it all can't be done
at once.  Even if three negatives are undone per BoD meeting (and that's a lot
of work!), its gonna take time.  The BoD is listening and communicating. 
That's far more than the last board did.

BobW

>================================================================================
>Note 557.0               What IS the new BoD doing ?????              No replies
>JANDER::CLARK                                        21 lines  28-MAY-1992 11:31
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    
>    I can't take advantage of teh new VISA rates.
>    
>    Recently I voted for a board that assured me there
>    would be no new surprises in rate changes.
>    
>    I have a DCU VISA with a $2500 limit.
>    I have a ATT VISA with a $8000 limit.
>    
>    The new DCU rate 13.9% is only applicable
>    when the Balance is greater than $2500.
>    
>    I would like to transfer my ATT balance to
>    DCU but my limit is $2500.
>    
>    When ATT changed thier ratesthe raised my limit.
>    How come whn DCU raised my rates they didn't
>    raise my limit to where I could lower the rate?
>    
>    cbc
>    
>
> 
> 

    
    re: .0
    
    May I suggest you visit or call DCU and ask them to raise your credit
    limit, give them your old ATT card for cut-up and ask them to
    'transfer' the balance to the DCU card?
    
    Please let us know what happens.
    

After all the months of work, fighting with the old BoD, and struggling
to get a new, presumably more representative, BoD in place, it's natural
to expect many things to happen immediately.  And it's pretty easy to
become impatient when major, earth-shaking change does not happen "now."
However, I would counsel restraint and patience until the new Board gets
on it's feet and fully ramps up.

Consider the mess they've inherited:  the Mangone affair in full swing,
a completely frustrated and agitated membership, apprehensive employees,
and the list goes on and on.  They've got to become fully briefed on all
the issues within DCU, go through some basic orientation, familiarize
themselves with their new responsibilities, and learn how to work together
in a constructive fashion.   All this takes time.

The new board has only been seated for a little while.  Remember that they
only meet monthly (although maybe more frequently during these early days).
Please give them some time to "get their act together."

./Chris

It does seem as if the new board gets less communicative, the more contact 
they have with the DCU management.  We haven't hear from Phil since he went 
into the briefings last week.  I hope that they have not taken him hostage 8-)

    
    Thanks for that laugh NETATE::BISSELL!  No, I have not been taken
    hostage.  I have been keeping up with the conference daily.  The
    full-time job has been pretty hectic lately and I'm in a 3-day course
    this week.
    
    I've tried to participate in here whenever I thought I could add to the
    discussion.  I don't particularly want to inundate DCU employees (both
    management and otherwise) with requests for info to the point of
    distracting them from their normal work.  But I have asked for and
    received info as needed.  Right now there is a lot that needs to be
    done and I can only juggle so many bowling balls and chainsaws... ;-)
    
    Rest assured that silence on my part does NOT mean that issues aren't
    being worked or changes proposed.  There is also a ramp-up process
    (more for some than others).  I know you have all heard it before, but
    it is going to take some time on our part and some patience on yours to 
    give us that time.  It took DCU 12 years to get to this state, an
    overnight remake would not be good IMO.
    

Glad to hear that you are alive and well Phil !

it is also a good thing to have lots of company work as well these days

>Note 557.5               What IS the new BoD doing ?????                  5 of 6
>GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ                                   20 lines   3-JUN-1992 13:14
    
>    Rest assured that silence on my part does NOT mean that issues aren't
>    being worked or changes proposed.  
    
    Let me be the first to say that I'm interested in 'the' LIST of issues
    being worked and changes proposed.  I wait with worm on tongue [baited
    breath].

    Ref.  .6
    
       I don't think there is a need to "list" things that are in progress
    right now...  If a "list" of things were posted, then everybody and
    anybody would be trying to prioritize, add, and delete things that they
    thought were the "most" important to them.  So far I've been mostly a
    RON and from what I've seen, the people ie: "Real Choices", haven't
    changed thier philosophies or goals.  They haven't been "bought out"
    just because they've became BoD's....  Like most people have been
    saying, it's going to take time to learn, digest, and work out the some
    real solutions and not some quick fixes.  And remember, they might not
    be able to "fix" everything because maybe evertyhing isn't as "broke"
    as they may seem.  Give it time....  
    
    
    	An old saying is " A stitch in time saves nine...  but right now,
    some seams have been ripped apart and will take time to fix.....
    
    
    dab

    
    While I will not go into detail at this moment in time, some of the
    issues considered at the first BoD meeting were:
    
    	1. Director term limitation bylaw
    	2. Special meeting bylaw
    	3. Lunchtime branch closings
    	4. Information Protection Policy
    
    I will discuss all of this in much more detail (from my personal
    point of view, NOT speaking for the Board) when the minutes of the
    meeting have been approved and are placed in the branches.  Hopefully
    the feedback loop can be shortened in the future.  I REALLY do what to
    discuss all of this but there are some open issues around means of
    communication of this information.
    

�    the feedback loop can be shortened in the future.  I REALLY do what to
�    discuss all of this but there are some open issues around means of
�    communication of this information.
    
    Some things have changed from the old BoD.  At least someone from the
    new BoD is telling us when/why there are delays in communication and
    not leaving some of us to speculate and assume the worst.

    I think the big difference we can expect right away is that the new BoD 
    will take the time to explain *why* things are the way they are.  I expect 
    the new BoD to listen to member concerns, if any, and to pay attention.
    I don't necessarily expect everything to magically change to suit
    my every whim...or your every whim.  The biggest change I expect is
    one of attitude.  We've already got that.  With that, the rest will
    folow, eventually.  More fundamental changes will take longer, given 
    that DCU is in the hole financially.
    I'm fully expecting that the new BoD may find, after reviewing
    all factors, that many of the current policies of the DCU 
    ought to be left in place because they make the best of a bad
    situation.
    
    I also think of a saying, attributed to the French Foreign Legion,
    that may apply: "When things are bad, try not to make them worse
    because it's quite likely things are bad enough already."
    The new BoD has to be sure it knows what it's doing before it goes
    flailing away and changing the world of DCU.  The hole we're in is
    deep enough already without inadvertently digging it deeper.
    
    
    

	re .9

	Now that is *exactly* the sort of thing I was looking for. Now
	I know that:
			Things are being addressed

			What those things are

	And they seem to be the right sort of things. Certainly by no means
	are they the *only* things the BoD needs to look at, but Phil did
	say that they were only *some* of the things being worked on.

	In addition:

		We now have direct communication to a member of the BoD

		An indication that BoD minutes will be available at branches


	Two things that are new to the DEFCU.

			Thanks, Phil.

						Tom_K	

    WHEN ARE WE GOING TO FIND OUT WGO PAID FOR THE TRIP TP BERMUDA
    
    CAPS INTENTIONAL
    

    
    RE: .13
    
    Would you be satisfied with knowing who paid for them?  Or would you
    expect something more?
    
    Just curious.

    Re: last two

    I think we want to know if the DCU paid the transportation and room for
    any BoD member in Bermuda or Disneyland.  (I won't object if the DCU
    paid for a good meal.)  If the DCU didn't pay for travel and room, then
    exactly who did becomes a non issue.  Unless it turns out that
    Barnstable CU or somebody like that paid for it, in which case I hate
    to think of what should happen next.		:-(

Phil, have you tried to encourage participation in here by your peers on the 
BOD? I'm disappointed that there isn't more communication from the other BOD 
members.

Regards,

Jim

    
    RE: .15
    
    I guess I view the trips of the former BoD as water under the dam. 
    While you or I may not agree with the necessity of them, I'm not at all
    sure what can be done at this point.  There are so many other things
    that need to be addressed I'm not sure our time is best spent on this.
    
    RE: .16
    
    All the other directors are well aware of this conference.  I'm also
    sure they know Paul and myself follow and participate in the
    discussions.  They are free to participate in the discussions if they
    wish.  I don't know what I can do to encourage them to participate. 
    Some may be comfortable communicating in this environment.  If asked, I
    will gladly show them how easy it is. 
    

    
    Re: .17
    
>    I guess I view the trips of the former BoD as water under the dam. 
>    While you or I may not agree with the necessity of them, I'm not at all
>    sure what can be done at this point.  There are so many other things
>    that need to be addressed I'm not sure our time is best spent on this.
    
    I can't believe I'm reading this. I had to blink look at the header
    where the author of .17 was displayed, clear my eyes look again and
    then sadly realize that what I initially saw there was indeed there
    ie GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ.
    
    Yes the Bermuda trips may well be water under the damn and yes maybe
    nothing can be done about it if any wrong is done. But that is not the
    point. You guys were elected on a platform of OPEN AND HONEST
    COMMUNICATION WITH THE MEMBERSHIP. Please explain the business reason
    for withholding this information from the membership. Or is the
    Information Protection Policy still in effect?
    
    Let me remind you that it was YOU that published the information on
    these trips to the membership. Let me remind you that it was YOU who
    used these trips as one of your planks to get elected. Let me remind
    you that that incurs a responsibility. It incurs the responsibility to
    live up to your election promises. So far I see very little indication
    that the REAL CHOICES election platform issues have been put into
    effect. Yes you guys get some sort of honeymoon period but as far as
    I'm concerned it is fast running out. Your .17 takes the cake. Are you
    sure you wouldn't like to reconsider?
    
    Please tell me .17 is an illusion or somebody hijacked your account.
    
    Thanks for listening,
    
    Dave

    The trips were one of the hot buttons during the campain. Now it seems
    that some people want the info to be burried. WHY? Who are the new board
    trying to protect. 

   Re: trips
   
   While it is water under/over/through/around the dam, the dam must be
   repaired so that it doesn't happen again.  The information is
   important.  If the DCU (i.e. we) paid for these trips we need to how
   it happened.  Then we will see what measures the board puts in place
   to see that it doesn't happen again.
   
   We must know if DCU paid.  If not, say so.  "Trust me" isn't going to
   work here.

I think what Phil may be saying is that it's water under the bridge as far
as recovering any money for the trips (if it's even appropriate to do so).
But I agree with you-all that I think it's reasonable to make public what
we-all paid for (see 560.0).

    
    RE: .18
    
    whoa, WHoa WHOA!!!
    
    I am not protecting anybody, or withholding any information.  I have no
    problem whatsoever in disclosing who paid for the trips.  I DO have a
    problem if people expect any more than that and that is what I am
    afraid of.  I am not interested in flushing my time and effort down the
    drain chasing history at this point.  There is a LOT of other important
    work to still be done.
    
    Like I said, we still have to work out the means of communication. 
    Yes, there are still 'policies' in place dealing with information and
    confidentiality.
    
    Geez Dave, replies like .17 sure don't make it any easier to get the
    other Directors in here.  Chill out a bit.  If all the time you can
    spare for us to do anything is a few stinking months, I would have told
    you long ago your expectations are out of whack.  It took 11 years to
    bring DCU to the current state.  I can't believe you and others expect
    anybody to change it overnight.  You voted for Directors, not
    Dictators!  Give us a reasonable amount of time to do things.  Is that
    too much to ask for?

    How long does it take to look up a few stinking records of a trip?
    

	Yes, it is water over the dam. But David is correct in pointing out
	that since you brought it up, Phil, you have a responsibility to 
	follow through. I think all that most of us want is to know is
	was any DEFCU money used for any portion of these trips, and if
	so, for what purpose. Seems to me that is information that 
	the Board could direct the DEFCU to provide, without much more
	work by the BoD than telling Chuck to make it happen.
	
	If that isn't the case, then say so. I'll believe you, and give
	you more time.

	It seems like we were all used to seeing so much action from you
	during the fight to reclaim the credit union that we sort of expected
	to see the same level of activity after. I know that isn't realistic,
	but it is a bit hard to accept all at once.

	BTW: has the new Board asked for or received any 
	cooperation/assistance from the old Board?

						Tom_K

    I agree.  The trips to Bermuda may not be as important as other issues.
    But, to many shareholders that I spoke with, it was one of the things
    that first came to mind when there was mention of the old BoD.  I think
    that checking into this matter and resolving it would go a long way
    towards repairing the attitude that shareholders have about the DCU.
    Though it is not monetarily significant, the issue has high visibility
    and importance to shareholders that should not be underestimated.
    
    Steve

Re: .23
Obviously the time required to look up the info is not significant. However,
I think at this point it's important for the board to discuss what will
be released and when (see my note 460.0)

Re: .24 concerning old board cooperation/assistance
I haven't nor have I asked for it. I can't speak for any of the others.

    
    What are you asking for?  A complete cost breakdown for all trips made
    by the Board and who paid what?  Should this be published in Network? 
    Or just posted here?  Basically, what will it take to get this one
    behind us so we can get on with the real business at hand?
    
    I realize it is a hot button with many people but I need to prioritize 
    my to-do list.  I just place this one further down than some of you do.
    
    As for future BoD or Director trips, I think it would be reasonable to
    require that all trips and their costs be reported to the membership in
    the annual report.  Anybody attending a conference, etc. should be
    required to file a trip report with DCU to be made available at all
    branches.  We have one coming up in July and I've got to make sure to
    buy enough sun tan lotion...
    
    
    
    But how much will I need for that blazing BOSTON sun???  :-)
    

>    What are you asking for?  A complete cost breakdown for all trips made
>    by the Board and who paid what? 

	As far as I am concerned, a posting here, of one of the following
	is all that is required:

		a) No DEFCU funds were spent in connection with DEFCU Board
		   of Directors meetings outside of Massachusetts.

		b) Around $xxx (a round, ballpark figure is good enough for 
		   me) was spent in connection with DEFCU Board of Directors
		   meetings held at (list locations here) in the month/year
		   to month/year timeframe, to (house, transport(,... [other,
		   only if the expense was significant]) (members of the BoD, 
		   the President of the DEFCU, others).


		It wouldn't hurt to put a short statement like above in 
		Network.

	I'd expect that there would be no need to report extraordinary expenses
	related to BoD meetings since 1) BoD meeting minutes (presumably
	including location) are now promised to be made available, 2)there
	won't be any extraordinary expenses :)

						Tom_K

    The hot buttons during the election, as I recall, were the trips to 
    Bermuda and Disneyland.
     

>    The hot buttons during the election, as I recall, were the trips to 
>    Bermuda and Disneyland.

Clearly, one of the MANY hot buttons in the election were the trips to
Bermuda and DisneyLand.  However, in my estimation, substantially hotter
buttons were issues regarding the Mangone situation, as well as questions
of competency and integrity.  While I certainly would like to know about
these trips, digging up this data and disclosing it is certainly not 
something that I feel is of earth-shaking importance.  I'm much happier 
knowing that the Board is getting oriented, ramping up on the Mangone 
situation and other litigation (sidebar:  I spent several hours digging
through one aspect of the Mangone suit...all this stuff is incredibly
complicated and dense - the information I wanted was "only" 10" thick.
Bottom line:  the board has a lot to get through to familiarize themselves
with the various and sundry litigation going on), and keeping DCU open
and operating (that is, taking care of "normal" business as well).

Our new Board has only been seated a very short amount of time.  There is
a lot of stuff to do, and a lot of stuff to learn.  You cannot simply barge
into an organization like DCU with guns a-blazing and expect to fix 
everything and clean up everything overnight.  Or even in a month or two.
Additionally, note that the Board is NOT all "Real Choices" people, but
instead is a combination of nominated people and petition people.  This means
that issues of the Board's direction and intentions still need to be 
hammered out.  Also, we have a real board now...this means that instead of
rubberstamping everything and being a smiling example of unanimity, there 
will instead be lots of discussion and debating.  This is A Good Thing
because it helps to insure that past mistakes will not be repeated.  On the
other hand, decision making may take longer.

Given time, I have confidence that the membership will learn much about 
what was going on within DCU before the new Board, and I'm certain that the
new board will do many right things with regard to disclosure of information
and with keeping the membership in the loop.  But, PLEASE, let's give 'em
a little room to get their work done.

Thanks for listening,
./chris

	Judging by this topic my priorities are all screwed up. I'd be worring
	too much about things like service to the members, understanding complex
	legal cases, understanding NCUA rules and other trivia and not enough
	on how trips were funded.

	Sure I'd like to know but it's not a priority.

			Alfred

�    Geez Dave, replies like .17 sure don't make it any easier to get the
�    other Directors in here.  
    
    Hmmm, seems I was blasted for making comments like this prior to the
    election.  

    
    Let's lighten up a bit.  I can't think of any better way to make
    the new BOD just like the old one than by starting a round of
    hostility.  
    
    Steve
    

    
    My point being that some people choose to avoid confrontation subjects. 
    One way to do it is simply not participate.  While noting is fairly
    simple, getting used to the 'intensity' of the conversation takes a
    while. 
    

I think what I see here is a clear example of lack of candor.

We were originaly told that the BOD received no compensation.  

Now we have reason to believe that we were lied to or at the minimum given a
story that they recieved no compensation, while they in fact did receive 
"trips to nice vacation spots at DCU expense".  What is/was the policy on 
giving perqs to BOD members and DCU employees.  

We need to have a communication policy that will replace the one that now states
you have to have a business reason etc.   As long as the board allows that 
policy to remain in place, it is their policy.  The people that I voted for 
indicated their support of open communications.  

Also the bylaws that revise 
the conditions for calling a special meeting are now this boards bylaws as long
as they keep them in place.

We need to believe that something under litigation or other reason for being 
confidential is the reason that information is not being released.

The board and the management of the DCU needs to understand that confidentiality
is NOT A VALID REASON FOR COVERING UP THINGS THAT WOULD MAKE THEM LOOK BAD OR 
HAVE PEOPLE QUESTION THEM.

>> The board and the management of the DCU needs to understand that confidentiality
>> is NOT A VALID REASON FOR COVERING UP THINGS THAT WOULD MAKE THEM LOOK BAD OR 
>> HAVE PEOPLE QUESTION THEM.
    
    I'm not entirely sure what you intend to say here.
    Perhaps you are saying that if making somebody "look bad" is the only
    reason for confidentiality, then it is not justified.  I'd certainly
    agree.  On the other hand, if in the process of disclosing something
    that would be embarrassing we'd also blow our chance to collect $10,000,000 
    from Mangone or whoever, then I'll accept "covering up things"...at
    least until there is no longer a reason for confidentiality.
    

    Phil,

    Consider what information you personally wanted before the election
    concerning the Bermuda and Disneyland BoD meetings.  Then get us that
    information. I simply don't believe you have to ask what information
    members want. You know full well what is wanted.  I presume you do "get
    it".  You were elected because you already understood the message.

    One of your priorities should be to start some information flow, for
    example getting some answers for the "Martin Luthor" document. All
    those questions don't have to be answered instantly, but I would like
    to see some level of progress toward getting some answers. And if you
    can't do that, give us a date for some answers.  Or a plan for a plan. 
    Give us something!

    
    Ladies & Gentlemen of Jury,
    
    I will do my best to try and obtain the information you request,
    however, it must be done on my time schedule, not yours.  I will try
    and see what I can do by the end of the week.  No promises though. 
    Asking people at DCU for the info will distract them from their regular
    jobs so I'd like to build in some leeway here.
    

Also, remember that Phil and I are not the whole board. We cannot
unilaterally remove policies with which we don't agree. Let's give the
process a chance to work now that we have new players.
Remember also that board meetings only happen
once a month. As I noted in 560.0, the topic of information was not
discussed at the last one. My goal is to make sure that it is discussed
at the next meeting (toward the end of June).

	That's great, Phil. I'd be happy with the end of the month...

					Tom_K

    Meanwhile, could you tell us who determines whether a "business reason"
    is adequate or not and what standards they use for that determination?

    It seems to me that we should be worrying more about Digital's
    survival, than DCU's. If Digital as an entity does not survive, we are
    all going to be a lot sorrier than we are today. I do not mean this 
    statement to insult anyone's intelligence. 
    
    If half the level of concern is put toward getting Digital back on its
    feet, as I have seen in this conference being talked about DCU, we
    wouldn't have any worry of Digital being successful.
    
    I am surprised.
    This is a very sad state that we are in.
    Gone
    DR
    

Currently it's DCU that still does because all the old policies are still
in effect by default. That's one of the prime
policies that I want to discuss at the next board meeting.

Re: .42
I agree with you. I think the sentiment in this file comes from a sense of
accomplishment and excitement that things will change because there are
new people in a position to be able to make major changes from the past at DCU.
Sadly, I don't see the same cause for excitement in DEC. I can work as
hard as I wish under my particular mushroom but DEC still has the
same old stovepipe management structure. For instance, we may have Alpha,
but we missed a major opportunity to combine forces with Apple - a company who
really understands PCs. There. Does that sound like the same old Paul? :-)
Sorry, let's get back to DCU...

    Yup, 	now we just need real choices for the DEC BOD.
    
    :-(
    
    q

    Is there any reason (bylaw) that says that the board can only meet
    once a month. I would think that while the board is learning the ropes
    gathering info etc that they would want to meet more often.
    

re: .46

Remember, the last BoD was made up of mostly VP-level people who don't have
to account for their time, (and some would say, their results).  They also
didn't appear to do anything other than rubber stamp whatever came their way.
It doesn't take much time or effort to do that.

Contrast that with the current BoD, where most of the people are a lot lower
on the food chain than their previous counterparts.  These people may not be
able to simply agree to meet all day on some given day and tell their secretary
that they aren't available.  I suspect that many of the current BoD used either
personal days and/or vacation days to attend their recent multi-day training
session.

I'm willing to wait longer to get quality, not quantity results from the BoD.

Bob

    re: holding the new board accountable
    
    I can understand why people are anxious to see change, but I also know
    that any large project (like revamping DCU) handled by a diverse team
    (the new BoD) is going to take significant time to ramp up.
    
    Personally, I expect to see very little until around the 6-month mark. 
    I'd hope, at that point, that a few (not all, by any means) of the
    "ugly" policies of the past will be put to rest officially (perhaps the
    information protection policy, the revised special meeting bi-laws) and
    that certain board members will make informal remarks in this
    conference to indicate that other policies are receiving serious
    scrutiny.
    
    Slow, careful, knowledgeable progress must be made.  This means little
    to show at the beginning (while the board gains knowledge of the "big
    picture") and then, hopefully, slow but consistent change visible over
    time (~18 months, IMHO).
    
    This is what I am hoping to see.
    
    -- Russ

    re: .46
    
    Ditto.
    
    Ken....
    

>                    <<< Note 557.38 by GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ >>>
>                                 -< Will try >-
>
>    
>    Asking people at DCU for the info will distract them from their regular
>    jobs so I'd like to build in some leeway here.
>   

	Excuse me..  A few months ago you were preaching that this 
	WAS their regular job.
	
	It's called customer service.

	All of a sudden, requests for information may take away from
	their regular jobs, so we should be patient and wait..

	I don't think this sounds right..

	Please explain.

Perhaps what he means is finding out the info about the Bermuda trips should
not be their top priority, above servicing membership's current needs. I
certainly agree. Please wait until after the next board meeting, I'm very
hopeful we'll be able to report much more than we are able now. Let's give
the system (DCU direction by democratic board decision) a chance before
we reject it.

You may think this attitude is a
change on my part but it really is not. I was perfectly willing last fall
to let the system work and not run for the board.
In fact, if you recall, we all thought our job was
done when the old board said they'd all be willing to stand for re-election.
We were going to rely on the process for a new board until we found that the
nomination committee gave us a "non-diverse" set of candidates. So we began
working again to get an alternate set elected and many of us won.
Now let's again give the process a chance to work and see what happens.

    
    RE: .50
    
    I am ALREADY placing many requests for information to get a good
    knowledge base from which to work.  I could easily keep a person busy
    full-time with request after request.  But then DCU would have hire
    somebody to take over the role of the person I just commandeered.  I
    know you're all getting sick of hearing this, because I am getting sick
    of saying it, but give us some time to accomplish something.
    
    I am NOT a politician so I am going to tell it like it is.  If you
    didn't think you could trust Paul or myself to do the best we can then 
    you shouldn't have voted for us.  On the other hand, if you voted for us
    because you DID trust us enough to do what we said we would try to do,
    then PLEASE give us a chance and a reasonable amount of time (and
    breathing space!) to do our work.  Just because this vehicle is
    real-time and interactive doesn't mean the system that we have to work
    within is the same.  Things take time, and that's just the bottom line.
    We're doing the best we can at this point in time.  Hopefully that will
    become more visible shortly.  But don't think for a minute that because
    you don't SEE anything happening that nothing is happening.
    

�    I am ALREADY placing many requests for information to get a good
�    knowledge base from which to work.  I could easily keep a person busy
�    full-time with request after request.  
    
    So maybe there was some justification for portions of the IPP?

>> So maybe there was some justification for portions of the IPP?

There is a need for a policy to designate what DCU can and cannot give
out. It's on my list for the BoD to discuss. The IPP as it was written
last fall was downright insulting. As it stands now, it's considerably
improved, but still has major problems (IMHO).

Last fall, we made a few requests for
information - hardly an "innundation" as it was called by DCU to justify
the policy. Last fall we had very few things to even ask for. We didn't
know about the Bermuda trips, etc., so the list now is much longer than
it was last fall.

    ...and if the previous board would have released SOME of the
    information, we wouldn't still be asking for it now!!
                                     Denny

    [Climb into asbestos suit, ignite torch]
    [SET FLAME ON]
    
    I have been reading the past few notes with a bit of disbelief and
    consternation and not without a bit of downright anger.  Most of you
    people should be ashamed of yourselves.  You didn't want a new BOD,
    what you wanted were new whipping boys who *would* pay attention to the
    barbs you were throwing at them.
    
    The new BOD needs time to learn their new job, time to acclimate
    themselves to their new responsibity, and time to acquant themselves
    with the personnel of the DEFCU.  What they don't need are people
    nipping at their heels about such inconsiquential things as "Who paid
    for the Bermuda trips?" or "They get an ATM, why can't we?"  
    
    Give it a rest and let them learn.
    
    [FLAME OFF]

Note 557.53 by PATE::MACNEAL

>�    I am ALREADY placing many requests for information to get a good
>�    knowledge base from which to work.  I could easily keep a person busy
>�    full-time with request after request.  
>    
>    So maybe there was some justification for portions of the IPP?

It's called pent up demand...  The dam broke type of situation...

	- mark

.52> I could easily keep a person busy full-time with request after request.

Then maybe it's time DCU hired a full-time person for just that.  Sounds to me
like there's a good business reason for it.