Conference 7.286::dcu

I would like to thank whoever is responsible:  these are the first minutes
I recall seeing where the financial information was presented in plain,
understandable English (e.g. without terms like "negative growth").

Phil, do you get the credit for this?

================================================================================
Note 2.20                      BoD meeting minutes                      20 of 21
ASE003::GRANSEWICZ                                  455 lines   9-DEC-1993 00:11
               -< BoD meeting, August 24, 1993, Discussion->729 >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     DIGITAL EMPLOYEES' FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
                           Board of Directors' Meeting
                                 August 24, 1993
    
    
>   *  It was moved by Mr. Milbury and seconded by Mr. McEachin that future
>   minutes are to reflect only action and voting results.  (Three in Favor:
>   Ms. Mann, Mr. Milbury and Ms. Ross;  Three Opposed:  Ms. Dawkins, 
>   Mr. Gransewicz and Mr. Kinzelman;  One Abstention:  Mr. McEachin)  MOTION
>   FAILED.
    

    Dare I ask what the purpose and/or reason for this motion was.  Seems 
    to me atleast one of those voting in favor, ran on the theme of open 
    communications.  How does limiting what is in the minutes, which is all 
    the membership has to review (assuming they aren't red-acted!), foster
    open communication.
    
    I'd send a mail message to those voting in favor, asking this same
    question, if I had any reason to expect a response.  Since most BoD 
    members ignored my last mail message, or should I say, I am still 
    awaiting a response, I'll just ask the question of myself again as 
    I vote in the next election.
    
    Mark

Mr. Milbury, Mr. McEachin, Ms. Mann, and Ms. Ross,
    
    Just what are you trying to hide from us now?  If you don't think your
    discussions can stand the harsh light of day, do us all a favor and
    resign NOW!
    
    Bob

Lets note that though Mr. McEachin seconded the motion, he abstained on the
vote.

    
    Re: .4
    
    > Lets note that though Mr. McEachin seconded the motion,
    > he abstained on the vote.
    
     I don't understand your point.
    
    Steve
    
    

    Re .-1
    
    I think the point is that Mr. McEachin didn't vote AGAINST the proposal
    to further curtail communications with the membership. at the very
    least that means he was willing to aquiese (sp?) to this cutting off of
    communications even if he did have some qualms about it.
    
    Dave

    Seconding a motion does not necessarily indicate agreement.  All it
    means is that the person seconding thinks it should be discussed.
    
    Presumably the discussion left Mr. McEachin undecided as to whether
    or not this motion was a good idea, or in any case undecided about
    what vote to record on it, hence his abstention.
    
    
    Lisa Demauro Ross told me that in her view, the relationship banking
    scheme is not a fee scheme, since it provides means to avoid paying
    the fees.  Therefore, she said, it doesn't violate her campaign
    promise to "try to hold the line on fee increases."
    
    I am mildly curious how she feels that voting to remove discussions
    from the minutes squares with her campaign promise to "restore
    membership confidence through more extensive, honest, and open 
    communication about what is happening at *our* credit union."
    
    		Larry Seiler

    RE:.7

    >Lisa Demauro Ross told me that in her view, the relationship banking
    >scheme is not a fee scheme, since it provides means to avoid paying
    >the fees.  Therefore, she said, it doesn't violate her campaign
    >promise to "try to hold the line on fee increases."

    	Did you expect her to say anything else?  If it looks like a duck
    and if sounds like a duck and if it walks like a duck it must be a ......

    Joe

    RE: .8
    
>    	Did you expect her to say anything else?  If it looks like a duck
>    and if sounds like a duck and if it walks like a duck it must be a ......
    
    Then it must be water fowl of some sort but NOT A DUCK.... 8-)
    
    FWIW:  It is not Ms. Demauro Ross' opinion of her decision.  It is the
    voting member's view; period.  I will NOT vote for her again. 
    
    ~Jon.

    
    Re: .6 and .7
    
    Yes I agree seconding a motion means only that it ought to be
    discussed.  There were several times when I was a school board
    member when I seconded motions because I wanted the chance to
    vote NO.
    
    In the case of abstentions, however, I think the issue is much
    less clear.  IMO, abstention is tantamount to "I can live with
    either result.  Also IMO, the only acceptable vote on this issue
    was NO.  
    
    Steve
     

.3 implied Mr. McEachin favored the motion.  I simply wanted to point out
he did not favor it (in voting), but only seconded the motion.

Mark

re: .11

>.3 implied Mr. McEachin favored the motion.  I simply wanted to point out
>he did not favor it (in voting), but only seconded the motion.

I sure did.  I am aware of the tactic of seconding a motion to force a vote,
and then vote against an issue, but given the issue, IMO, a 'No' vote was the
only acceptable vote.

Bob

    
    RE: .1
    
    No, the english description of financial information was pretty much a
    Board decision I believe.  The completion of Financial Mumbo-Jumbo 101
    shouldn't be a requirement to know how your credit union is doing. ;-)
    
    
    RE:  vote on minutes
    
    It seems my statement in the minutes concerning the first Supervisory
    Comm. appointment was not appreciated by some people and there was MUCH
    discussion about eliminating the ability to place statements in the
    minutes.  There was also discussion around issuing skeletal minutes
    only (back to the good ol' days).  It will be up to the membership 
    to ensure that meaningful minutes are issued.  Seems "Open and Honest
    Communications" mean very different things to different people.  I
    certainly know what it means to me.