|
|
|
|
Subj: Chairman Election Information: Trustee Commentary Refer to: Central Region Letter 04-06; March 2, 2006 **** Dear Central Region Alumni:
As I have pointed out in my other Newsletters my duty to communicate with you is made clear by the Alumni Association Bylaws/Operating Manual: “…being a Trustee of the Association involves serious responsibility...Of utmost importance is the responsibility to communicate effectively in explaining to our individual constituencies about issues, initiatives and activities of the Association.”
REQUEST FOR WIDE DISTRIBUTION. I would ask you to give this Newsletter wide distribution. Let me explain why. Unfortunately, trustees are now prohibited from using the Alumni Association email system to publish informational materials on the write-in candidate, BGen Thomas V. Draude ‘62. We Region Trustees received an email stating that we were not allowed to use our Region email system for this purpose, and our joint request for the Association to transmit BGen Draude's materials to all alumni was denied as well. Part of that joint request was for the entire Board to vote on the distribution should the leadership decide not to send it out. This too was denied. The reason we were given was Board policy as set by the Vice Chairman.
CHOICE. In this Newsletter, I wish to present my analysis of the two candidates’ platforms/records. My position is, and always will be, that you should read materials, educate yourself on the issues, and then vote your head and conscience. Even if you don’t agree with me, at least you have the freedom of choice. That is what a free and fair election, as well America, is all about. I have been a proponent of choice for the alumni, and I believe that’s what the election controversy is all about. If it were not for the write-in campaign of BGen Thomas V. Draude ‘62, alumni would not have any choice—because there is only one Chair candidate printed on the ballot. As you may know, the first Nominating Committee voted to put BGen Draude on the ballot, and the Committee Chair informed him of that fact. Two weeks later, it changed its mind in favor of a single candidate slate. I served on that first Nominating Committee and was embarrassed by the treatment BGen Draude received. I argued, unsuccessfully, to allow the alumni to have a choice, rather than have the Nominating Committee serve as a “selection committee”. I believe the controversy surrounding this election is rooted in the concept of choice for the alumni. I have been maligned by some for not going along with the official Association decision of a single candidate slate; but since the bylaws allow multiple candidates, and also direct that write-in provisions be printed on the ballot I believe that such a campaign is legitimate. I also believe such campaign information should be brought to the attention of the alumni. I believe I have a duty to do so to my constituents who elected me.
THE CANDIDATES. Before I assess the platforms let me state clearly that we have two highly respected and well qualified candidates in this race. The motivations and integrity of both men are beyond question. Both have had distinguished military careers. Both love the Naval Academy. Of relevance to this election is the difference in their philosophies on certain issues, and on their differing management approaches.
PLATFORMS.
ADM TROST. The March issue of Shipmate has hit the streets. Unfortunately the incumbent, ADM Trost, did not present a platform for the future. Hence, my analysis must focus on his record. Some of his supporters point to the great fund-raising campaign success, but since the 1999 amalgamation, all fund raising responsibilities have been transferred from the Alumni Association to the USNA Foundation (which has a separate Board from that of the Alumni Association). In looking at the initiatives of the first term I must reluctantly confess that I have been disappointed in the results. First, there was considerable controversy over his “strawman” proposal to restructure the BOT. That debate continued for much of the term. Feedback I received from you in the Central Region was 10 to 1 against the proposal, and it was finally defeated at the December 2005 BOT meeting. In my opinion, that controversy was very distracting to the BOT and some still have hard feelings over it.
His handling of the candidacy of BGen Thomas V. Draude ‘62 for Chair has been a disappointment as well. I wrote ADM Trost a letter detailing the first nominating committee situation several weeks prior to the December BOT meeting, but he chose not to deal with it, replying instead that he had full confidence in the committee leadership. It’s unfortunate that the issues weren’t dealt with at that point as I believe they should have been. I believe it would have prevented the inevitable controversy we eventually had.
BGEN DRAUDE. BGen Draude’s platform is documented and straightforward: 1. Review and fix the nominating process; make it inclusive of all alumni, not restricted exclusively to a small, select group—thereby encouraging the principle of choice. 2. Engage the BOT in an open and transparent governance process that ensures closer involvement in alumni and constituency interests. 3. Listen and lead a participative BOT that will listen to its alumni; and make sure the Alumni Association serves all of its alumni per its stated mission.
Although he has not served on the Alumni Association BOT, he is a Trustee with the USNA Foundation (Athletics & Scholarships). In addition, he has had a long and distinguished association with the Naval Academy as evidenced by his biography. His military career is exceptionally distinguished, being a heavily decorated combat Marine in the Vietnam War and serving through Desert Storm. Perhaps most importantly at this time in the Alumni Association’s history, his 11 years with USAA in executive positions is a strong background for improving the “customer service” aspect of the Alumni Association—he states that he intends to apply those principles to the Association.
MY CONCLUSION. I believe that a change in leadership would be very healthy for the Alumni Association at this time. In the past, one term has been the traditional period for Chairmen to serve. BGen Draude’s background, platform, and ideas seem to fit with what is needed at this point in time. I intend to write-in “Thomas V. Draude ‘ 62” on the tear-out ballot in the March Shipmate.
No matter if you agree with my conclusion, I urge you to read all the materials I’ve sent out, get further information if you need it, and then vote your head and your conscience. Having a choice is better than not having one. And the choice, as it should be, is ultimately yours.
I am at your service. Let me know if you have any questions or comments.
|
|
**************************************** |
|
|
*** Central Region: |