Conference 7.286::dcu

      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
      X
    

re Note 839.1 by DRDAN::KALIKOW:

>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
>       X
  
        Dan,

        If any of the above are solicitations, you're in big, big
        trouble. :-{

        Bob

    There's really not much else to say about that meeting, except to ask
    why in the world the member survey was redacted.  The membership
    doesn't have a right to hear what the membership thinks?  
    
    	Larry

       >1.  Amendment to Article XXI, Section 2 of the Charter/Bylaws
       >2.  Modification of Policy #7
       >3.  Addition of Ploicy #8

    Any idea what these three items address?
    

What is a "Volunteer Loan"?  Are we lending money to non-members again?

Bob

    My assumption was that it referred to a loan to someone who is a
    volunteer official of the DCU (Supervisory committee, Nominating
    committee, credit appeals committee, etc) but not a board member.

    		Alfred

re: .3, Larry

> The membership doesn't have a right to hear what the membership thinks?  

Of course we don't. If all of us knew how bad things _really_ were they'd
have a real headache on their hands.

Besides, with the only BoD member who ever gave us straight answers in here
(since Paul left DEC) now a non-person, they know damn well they don't
need to worry about the matter. Let's face it - they haven't a whole lot
of concern or respect for the membership-at-large.

-Jack

    Folks, just because something isn't published in the minutes DOESN'T
    mean that you, as a member, can't get access to it.  Paul, Phil and
    others have worked over time to get you access.  One of the visible
    parts of this is the minutes posted here.  But, if there is other
    information for which you, as a DCU member, feel need to access 
    -- ASK!
    
    It might be confidential and not "postable" in notes.  It might be too 
    sensitive to share with a DCU member without a "need to know."  But, 
    some stuff just might be the kind of thing that you, as a concerned 
    DCU member, have a justification for seeing and can get access to on 
    a confidential basis.  And, if you aren't satisfied with the response 
    you get, you have Board members and others that can check on things for 
    you.  
    
    As near as I can tell, the key is to ask and follow up with Board
    members and other volunteers you feel you can trust.
    
    Steve

re: .9, Steve

>  if there is other information for which you, as a DCU member, feel need
>  to access -- ASK!
    
You seem to miss the point, Steve. We shouldn't have to ASK for information
as simple and straightforward as the results of the member survey. That's
data that _THEY_ wouldn't have if _WE_ hadn't supplied it. That's half of
the reason so many of us are so darn PO'ed over this whole FCU. The fact that
the rule of thumb for the majority of the board, the whole of the DEFCU
management, and most of the "volunteers" (odd term for "appointees", in
my opinion), is "Keep it to ourselves and don't give _them_ any info unless
_we're_ pressed". This THEY vs. US concept isn't something that the membership
at large manufactured out of the ether - _WE've been driven to it by the
conditioning WE've been subjected to for the past several years.

>  with Board members and other volunteers you feel you can trust.

Now, _there's_ an operative phrase if ever I heard one.

-Jack

    Hi, Jack!
    
    I may have not been clear enough.  In the meeting minutes there are
    sections that are typically redacted.  This is often because the
    information is regarded as DCU confidential.  Sometimes, it is still
    appropriate for DCU members to have access to such information.  In
    this case, you know what the information is about and feel you should
    have access to it.  It may still be DCU confidential information, but
    if you feel you should have access, ask.  You may be able to have
    access, even though it is DCU confidential.
    
    Now, if the issue is that the information should or shouldn't be
    confidential, again you can take that up with a Board member or
    whatever that you trust.  There is a process whereby DCU confidential
    information can be made non-confidential.  But, in order for that to
    happen you still need to communicate with those who represent you.
    
    Steve

re Note 839.11 by NACAD::SHERMAN:

>     But, in order for that to
>     happen you still need to communicate with those who represent you.
  
        But it becomes difficult to "communicate with those who
        represent you" when your ballot and thousands of others have
        been invalidated.

        Bob

    I _still_ don't _get it_!  WE, the membership, are the owners of a CU. 
    Right?  Am I okay so far?  So, howzacome that ANY information from BoD
    (they're ELECTED to REPRESENT US, the membership, the owners, right?)
    meetings can be withheld from the rest of under the convenient label of
    "Confidential"?
    
    I agree with Jack, we should NOT have to ASK for ANY information, it
    should be made available to us, verbatim, unedited or redacted and
    anythinged, and as quickly as possible.
    
    I say it's time for another tea party.
    

re: .11, Steve

Marina beat me to it in .-1, Steve. It's the whole issue of "keeping things
from" the membership that's the problem. I don't like the idea of the
results of a survey, in which I was a participant, being kept "confidential"
from me. I'd like to know what the board knows about this matter now. Not
after Chuckles and his PR dweebs have editorialized it and applied the
spin that they prefer. Why is this so difficult to comprehend?

> you still need to communicate with those who represent you.
    
In order to communicate with Paul I need to go to non-trivial personal
expense. Likewise with Phil. The rest of my "representatives" on the
board, I would likely have trouble conducting a civil conversation
with. So where does that leave me?

-Jack

    
    I took the advice in .9 and asked board members and volunteers I feel I
    can trust about the member survey information that was redacted from
    the March 22, 1994 minutes.
    
    So far, I have received a possible explanation, that the information is
    considered vaulable to competitors of DCU and is therefore kept
    confidential. I have also been advised that the survey data might be
    made available for individual members to inspect under a non-disclosure
    agreement. I think this is necessary to quell any suspicions that the
    information is kept under wraps because it indicates strong membership
    dissatisfaction, and I applaud the board memebrs that are pushing for
    it.
    

    
    
    Why should the owner of a product (the survey results) need to sign a 
    non-disclosure agreement?
    ed

    
    That would be a good question to ask the board members and volunteers
    you trust.
    

    re: .15
    
    Thanks, Bill!
    
    Steve

    
    [Posted with the author's permission]
    
From:	US2RMC::"[email protected]" 23-JUN-1994 02:40:30.70
To:	wldbil::kilgore
CC:	
Subj:	RE:  Requesting information on..


>March 22. 1994 BoD minutes:
>
>Question: whay was the membership survey information redacted.

   I don't know why membership survey information was redacted.  Membership
   survey information is pretty mundane stuff.  It might have been because
   it was only preliminary info.  I don't think DCU will publish anything
   that points out weaknesses or dissatisfaction.  We have since received
   the survey results.  I will see how much of it they are willing to
   divulge.

   Phil



% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: from inet-gw-3.pa.dec.com by us2rmc.bb.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94) id AA27911; Thu, 23 Jun 94 02:36:17 -040
% Received: from mail02.prod.aol.net by inet-gw-3.pa.dec.com (5.65/27May94) id AA22075; Wed, 22 Jun 94 23:37:40 -070
% Received: by mail02.prod.aol.net (1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA03574; Thu, 23 Jun 1994 02:37:28 -040
% From: [email protected]
% X-Mailer: America Online Mailer
% Sender: "Gransewicz" <[email protected]>
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% To: wldbil::kilgore
% Date: Thu, 23 Jun 94 02:37:27 EDT
% Subject: RE:  Requesting information on..
    

    
    Re .5:
    
    [Posted with the author's permission]
    
From:	US2RMC::"[email protected]" 23-JUN-1994 02:41:10.98
To:	wldbil::kilgore
CC:	
Subj:	Re: Requesting information on...


>Page 9, section VIII.c, Bylaw and Board Policies Amendments
>
>  Mr. Cockburn reviewed the amendments to the bylaws and Board policies.  He
>  explained that the content of the amendments had been previously approved
>  by the Board.  The final wording presented in the Board package has been
>  approved by the NCUA and must be approved by the Board.  The amendments
>  were:
>
>                1.  Amendment to Article XXI, Section 2
>                    of the Charter/Bylaws
>                2.  Modification of Policy #7
>                3.  Addition of Policy #8
>
>  *  It was moved by Mr. Kinzelman and seconded by Mr. Milbury to approve the
>  amendment to Article XXI, Section 2 of the Charter/Bylaws, the modification
>  of Policy #7, and the addition of Policy #8, in the order in which they
>  were presented above.  MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
>
>Question: any idea what these three items address?


Hard to recall it from way back in March.  I'd have to try and dig up the
meeting materials.  I seem to recall that we got word back from the NCUA that
some of the items they had previously rejected, they now approved.  I don't
think any of this was all that interesting or important.  If you really want
it I'll try and dig it up or ask for more detailed info.

Phil


% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: from inet-gw-3.pa.dec.com by us2rmc.bb.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94) id AA27946; Thu, 23 Jun 94 02:37:03 -040
% Received: from mail02.prod.aol.net by inet-gw-3.pa.dec.com (5.65/27May94) id AA22152; Wed, 22 Jun 94 23:38:37 -070
% Received: by mail02.prod.aol.net (1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA03676; Thu, 23 Jun 1994 02:38:19 -040
% From: [email protected]
% X-Mailer: America Online Mailer
% Sender: "Gransewicz" <[email protected]>
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% To: wldbil::kilgore
% Date: Thu, 23 Jun 94 02:38:19 EDT
% Subject: Re: Requesting information on...
    

    
    Regarding membership survey information that was redacted from the
    March 22, 1994 BoD minutes:
    
    I just got a call from Lisa Kendall, who informed me that the
    Service Account Survey and the Closed Account Survey are available at
    DCU headquarters for inspection. She also pointed out that I could have
    a copy of each (at $15 and $10.75, respectively, in conformance with
    DCU's Information Protection Policy).
    
    I am fairly swamped with work through the end of next week, and then
    I will be out of the office for two weeks after that. I assume that any
    other member would have the same access to these surveys, if they so
    desire. If not, I will look them over and report when I get back.
    
    Lisa Kendall can be reached at 223-6735, extension 221; or try Stephanie
    Duggan at extension 203.
    
    Many thanks to directors Paul Kinzelman and Phil Gransewicz for driving
    this issue. I asked and they delivered.