Frank Reid wrote:

Frank, SSA was moved to Hobbs due to the efforts of Jack Gomez, Mr Hobbs
in his day, and Judge Hal Lattimore...Jack wanted it and Judge Lattimore
as a Director of Region 10 delivered it. Marion Griffith had a sweet
deal for a site near DFW Airport between Dallas and Fort Worth. But the
Judge had control of the BOD's actions, in those days.

This is the second time in four years, the BOD and Excon have been
caught with there pants down. SSA needs a complete overhaul of the
office policies and bookkeeping procedures. Anytime an organization that
collects money for a membership card, publishes a monthly magazine,
sells merchandise and helps contest flying with a few printed cards
continues to get in trouble with someone's hand in the kitty, it is time
for a change.

We have had several articles about "Where is the world is Dennis", he
should have been in the office managing the office.

Sam Fly


Greg,

I could not agree with you more. Good post.

Maybe we should be in Elmira, NY right along side of, or even in the
same building with, the National Soaring Museum. Way back in the 70s
or 80s the board discussed moving to Elmira but for some unkown reason
it was voted down. Maybe now is the time to rethink that issue and
join the NSM under one roof (if they would have us).

There could be a lot of advantages to that move.

Regards,

Frank Reid


Greg Arnold wrote:

There has been a lot of criticism of the Directors on RAS. However,
when you have a couple dozen well-meaning (but basically unqualified)
persons on the Board, and you get in this type of situation, probably
the problem is with the system rather than with the individuals. Put
another two dozen randomly selected soaring pilots on the Board, and the
same thing would have happened.

If the SSA survives, it really needs to hire an outside consultant who
is an expert on non-profit membership organizations, and who can advise
about the proper governing structure. For example, is it good to have
so many directors? Would it be better to have a much smaller governing
body, where each individual is directly responsible for something,
rather than the current situation where any individual is just a face in
the crowd, and bears no direct responsibility for his/her mistakes?

If the Board had hired such a consultant a few years ago, the Board
would have learned about the necessity of an outside audit, and also
would have been told to set up a system of checks and balances, so it
would have been difficult for an employee to create the current
problems. So we wouldn't be in the present mess.

This leads to a point that someone else recently made on RAS -- maybe
what the SSA really needs is to hire someone (perhaps only as a
part-time advisor) who is knowledgeable about running a non-profit
organization, and who can provide continuing advice. Such people
probably are a dime a dozen in Washington. This may is the best
argument for getting the SSA out of Hobbs -- you just aren't going to
find the right people in Hobbs.