Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Just a personal observation, an opinion... and a suggestion.

Expand Messages
  • kimberly.mumford
    I think this is a good suggestion. Board Members are elected to lead...let s let them do so. They are rather thankless jobs, so I will say now, THANK YOU to
    Message 1 of 7 , Aug 31 4:42 PM
      I think this is a good suggestion. Board Members are elected to lead...let's let them do so. They are rather "thankless" jobs, so I will say now, THANK YOU to all who have given up their free time to take on these positions! Board Members don't need to accomodate the membership at their meetings, but it is a nice gesture. I think the conference call option is great idea for those so inclined, and lets the directors meet at a location most convenient for them.

      ~Kimberly Mumford~
      Santa Barbara, CA

      --- In CGWcostumers@yahoogroups.com, "Noelle" <lbc42@...> wrote:
      >
      > All of these emails recently seem to un-trusting and rather suspicious of one-another. Did I miss some board-related scandal or something?
      >
      > Do you all really feel like the board is doing a bad job or doing something in secret that is malicious? It really does appear that way to me, who lives up in San Jose, and couldn't even go to a board meeting if I wanted to.
      >
      > I feel like we elected them, I think they do a pretty good job. I am not suspicious that they are rigging the elections or doing anything shady behind our backs. I don't feel like I need to go to a board meeting at all, because frankly, they seem really tedious and I am happy to abide by whatever they come up with in order to not have to go. I feel like if I have a grievance about the way something is happening, I can post it here, and something will change, or I will learn that I am the only one that feels this way. Fair enough.
      >
      > HOWEVER, I do have a suggestion for those of you who are really interested. There are free conference call websites up where you can get a free dial-in number. You could set a phone on speaker and hold the meeting with an open line and then whoever wanted to listen could, without disclosing addresses or making it a geography based thing.
      >
      > I feel like we are a group of relatively like-minded individuals who are here to have fun and costume and enjoy one another, but ever since costume college, this group has been sending emails every day that are really kind of stressful and mistrusting behind the sub-text. I hope you guys all remember that this is supposed to be fun. The baby is not on fire. It's not a huge amount of money that we deal with here, and everyone is here with similar goals. Trust one-another, have a good time and appreciate each-other's talents, and remember that no one is curing cancer here.
      >
      > Just my personal $.02, sorry if this offended anyone, it was not my intent.
      >
      > Noelle Paduan
      >
    • Colleen Crosby
      Everybody has great suggestions! Thank you for taking the time to weigh in with your thoughts. The board will be setting our meeting calendar at our first
      Message 2 of 7 , Sep 1, 2011
        Everybody has great suggestions! Thank you for taking the time to weigh in with your thoughts.

        The board will be setting our meeting calendar at our first meeting, on September 18. We'll publish the remaining dates in future issues of Squeals, but we will not be publishing the addresses, as they take place in private residences.

        If you feel the need to observe a particular meeting, please contact me at cgw.prez@.... And remember that you can contact any board member with concerns to be presented at the meeting or even for discussion between meetings.

        Thanks!
        Colleen Crosby
        President, 2011-2012
        Costumer's Guild West, Inc.

        On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 4:42 PM, kimberly.mumford <kmumford@...> wrote:
         

        I think this is a good suggestion. Board Members are elected to lead...let's let them do so. They are rather "thankless" jobs, so I will say now, THANK YOU to all who have given up their free time to take on these positions! Board Members don't need to accomodate the membership at their meetings, but it is a nice gesture. I think the conference call option is great idea for those so inclined, and lets the directors meet at a location most convenient for them.

        ~Kimberly Mumford~
        Santa Barbara, CA



        --- In CGWcostumers@yahoogroups.com, "Noelle" <lbc42@...> wrote:
        >
        > All of these emails recently seem to un-trusting and rather suspicious of one-another. Did I miss some board-related scandal or something?
        >
        > Do you all really feel like the board is doing a bad job or doing something in secret that is malicious? It really does appear that way to me, who lives up in San Jose, and couldn't even go to a board meeting if I wanted to.
        >
        > I feel like we elected them, I think they do a pretty good job. I am not suspicious that they are rigging the elections or doing anything shady behind our backs. I don't feel like I need to go to a board meeting at all, because frankly, they seem really tedious and I am happy to abide by whatever they come up with in order to not have to go. I feel like if I have a grievance about the way something is happening, I can post it here, and something will change, or I will learn that I am the only one that feels this way. Fair enough.
        >
        > HOWEVER, I do have a suggestion for those of you who are really interested. There are free conference call websites up where you can get a free dial-in number. You could set a phone on speaker and hold the meeting with an open line and then whoever wanted to listen could, without disclosing addresses or making it a geography based thing.
        >
        > I feel like we are a group of relatively like-minded individuals who are here to have fun and costume and enjoy one another, but ever since costume college, this group has been sending emails every day that are really kind of stressful and mistrusting behind the sub-text. I hope you guys all remember that this is supposed to be fun. The baby is not on fire. It's not a huge amount of money that we deal with here, and everyone is here with similar goals. Trust one-another, have a good time and appreciate each-other's talents, and remember that no one is curing cancer here.
        >
        > Just my personal $.02, sorry if this offended anyone, it was not my intent.
        >
        > Noelle Paduan
        >


      • Elizabeth McCash
        ... You are welcome Kimberly (and Noelle!) and thanks for the support! ;) Along with the rest of the Board, I am doing what I can to make this guild an
        Message 3 of 7 , Sep 1, 2011
          > They are rather "thankless" jobs, so I will say now, THANK YOU to all who have given up their free time to take on these positions!
          > ~Kimberly Mumford~
          > Santa Barbara, CA
          >
          >
          You are welcome Kimberly (and Noelle!) and thanks for the support! ;) Along with the rest of the Board, I am doing what I can to make this guild an enjoyable club for all our members. I hope that I can call my efforts a success, and if not, I hope someone else more capable than I will run for the VP position in 2012. ;)

          Elizabeth McCash
          CGW VP/ Membership Development Chair
        • Joyce Saunders
          In response to Elizabeth Mc Cash s post on 8/30/11 ( If anyone has comments or suggestions on these matters or any other, I encourage you to do so, wheather
          Message 4 of 7 , Sep 4, 2011

            In response to Elizabeth Mc Cash’s post on 8/30/11 ( “If anyone has comments or suggestions on these matters or any other, I encourage you to do so, wheather (sic) by posting here, or by contacting myself…-or any Board Member (sic)…”) and a number of other posts on the Yahoo group that seemed to be responses generated by my suggestion that board meetings be open to the general membership for observation, I would like to post my reactions to each of these posts but first I would like to preface this with a few background details. 

             

            I have been a member of Costumer’s Guild West since its beginning.  I was one of the people involved in teaching, and attending classes offered by the Guild long beforeCostume College was created.  I was on the first committee for Costume College , I decorated (with others) the first three Gala’s (with no budget!).  I was a teacher as well.  I have been a past president of the Guild, vice president, director at large, and Squeals editor.  I know what power can do to people when it is unchecked and ungoverned, no matter how nice they start out to be.  I have seen good people do unethical things, or allow unethical things to occur, and in some cases illegal things to occur in the past.  Once I saw what was happening, in the past, I did what I could, with others, to bring the Guild back to what it was meant to be, an amateur club of costuming enthusiasts who convened socially and shared education, sources, and activities for the benefit and enjoyment of all.

             

            I posted that I thought it would be a good idea for the board meetings to be open to all for the edification and instruction of members on how meetings work, and how much work it is for the board.  I have been at these meetings, and I was always amazed at the intelligence and careful deliberation that went into them, it was for these reasons that I believe they should be open to all.  Members that are curious or may be interested in running for a position could see how it looks to be responsible for an organization with 460 members.

             

            Now to respond to the posts generated by my comments:

             

            Elizabeth McCash:

            There is nothing in the By Laws or Standing Rules that restricts the board meetings to board members only.  I did not realize this.  I am sorry to have bothered the group with a non-issue.  Now that a new precedent of attending one is requested, the board will need to create a reasonable procedure to address meeting the needs of its membership. 

             

            I am surprised that you do not want participation from the membership.  If these meetings are so onerous for you, I wonder that you wanted to run for another term on the board.  When I served the membership, I was honored to carry through the work of the Guild, no matter the distance traveled to the meeting, or its length, and the meetings were never boring.  I am a bit alarmed that you feel so, and I wonder if the Guild’s best interest is served if the vice president feels the work of the governing body is boring.

             

            I was not “beating” your door down, but I am interested, and if I am, others might be as well.  I cherish the relationships I found and developed when I served on the board, and this might be a way to know the current board better, in an official capacity.

             

            Meeting minutes often contain the basic information and the outcome of the discussion but the rational, and details of that decision making process are what interest me and are far too involved to be contained  in the concise minutes required by Squeals limitations, and the limitations of the recorder.  I am keenly interested in everything the Guild does since I have invested so much time, effort, and affection in it since the Guild’s inception and growth.  What could be hurt by member observers?

             

            Laura Freas:

            Reserving the number of observers at any one meeting is a good idea if only a few are interested in attending!

             

            Cheryl Avirom:

            I agree, how could it be bad for “a significant number” to want to participate?

            You have good ideas on keeping costs down if “significant numbers” becomes the norm, especially since we have but one “official” membership meeting per year.

            You are correct also in your assumption that we can afford it, if that is what the membership wants to do.

            Thanks to the board are very appropriate.  I know our current president expressed her glee at short meetings last fall on FaceBook.  I am distressed if the meetings last longer than she can comfortably tolerate now. I note in the latest issue of Squeals with board meetings it appears that the last three meetings had an average meeting time of a about 3 and a half hours.  Am I missing something?

             

            Noelle Paduan:

            No one suggested that the board was doing a bad job.  I reread my post and see nothing that indicates that thought at all.  What part of my post indicates that to you?  I also see nothing about malicious secrets in that post.  I noted in this post that I saw trouble before in a different administration (so to speak), so however did you work this out of my original post?

             

            You have your feelings, but you are not the only member here.  Must 460 members be subject to your logic alone?  At least three others see some merit in adding thought to my comments.  You are free to make your opinion known, as I am mine.  I said nothing mean, in fact I am interested in everyone being comfortable and safe emotionally at all Guild functions and activities.

             

            Your idea of a conference call is interesting.  It would, however, lack the nuances of clear understanding as often the sound quality is poor in such calls, and the lack the clarification that seeing faces and body language often adds to making meaning of communication. 

             

            In regards to the dissention you allude to in the emails, I remind you that it is only through differing opinions and points of view openly discussed that we find the best solutions for a democratic and egalitarian society to move forward.

             

            Yes, this is supposed to be fun, but the reality is that people make mistakes, there is always room for improvement, and just like in crafting garments, we must strive to get it “right.”

             

            You got your two cents worth but why should others not comment when they also want to be heard?

             

            Glad to know you do not wish to offend.  I ask that you believe the same of myself.

             

            Kimberly Mumford:

            You will have to talk to Noelle about the secret malicious society for illumination.

             

            The board was elected to lead but not to do what they personally desire, they were elected to represent the membership, working to further the needs of the membership and the Guild.  This is not a oligarchy but a representative board that serves the membership because they wish to see the goals of Costumer’s Guild West, Inc. (see  By Laws Article II-Objectives and Article IX-Duties of Officers, Section 1.a, 2.a, 3.a, 4.a, 5.a, and 6.a,) met and extended.

             

            The current board all ran for their “thankless” office without a gun to their head and accepted each office knowing all its duties.  No one doubts that they all want to be in office, why else would they accept the position?  Leading a group this diverse and intelligent is not easy. When I was on the board, it was the membership I served, not my own desires and wishes.  Do you expect the current board will not think about what is best for all 460 members and wish to know what we think about all issues?  If you believe that, let me refer you to Elizabeth McCash’s quote at the beginning of this post (or refer to the original post she made on 8/30/11 at 1:42pm.).

             

            Elizabeth McCash:

            I am so glad that you thanked Kimberly and Noelle for their comments.  Does this mean that Cheryl, Laura, and I (not to mention Chaz) are less deserving of thanks because you think we have a differing opinion than yours?  Hmmm, I am now not sure your meaning when you ask “anyone” to share comments or suggestion on “any other” matter.  Could you clarify what you really meant?  I am confused now.

             

             

            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:51 PM
            Subject: [CGWcostumers] Re: Just a personal observation, an opinion... and a suggestion.

             



            > They are rather "thankless" jobs, so I will say now, THANK YOU to all who have given up their free time to take on these positions!
            > ~Kimberly Mumford~
            > Santa Barbara, CA
            >
            >
            You are welcome Kimberly (and Noelle!) and thanks for the support! ;) Along with the rest of the Board, I am doing what I can to make this guild an enjoyable club for all our members. I hope that I can call my efforts a success, and if not, I hope someone else more capable than I will run for the VP position in 2012. ;)

            Elizabeth McCash
            CGW VP/ Membership Development Chair

          • Joyce Saunders
            In doing my research for a response to the thread about attendance at board meetings for CGW,Inc. I noticed something that establishes the precedent of
            Message 5 of 7 , Sep 4, 2011

              In doing my research for a response to the thread about attendance at board meetings for CGW,Inc.  I noticed something that establishes the precedent of members not on the board attending. 

               

              Board members are listed in By-Laws of Costumer’s Guild West, Inc., Article VIII- Officers, Section 1.  Offices- The Officers shall be a President, Vice President, Recording Secretary, Treasurer, Corresponding Secretary, and Four Directors-at-large.  All officers shall be members of the Board of Directors.  No officer may hold more than one office. 

               

              The Parliamentarian is an appointed position, not an office.  The past term and current Parliamentarian is Diane Yoshitomi and she has attended two of the last three board meetings.  I am not sure if she attended any preceding meetings before May.  I would have to refer to meeting minutes to mark if she attended any other meetings.  I must admit that I didn’t really pay close attention to anyone’s attendance before. Thus we have precedent for members attending board meetings.  It remains only for the board to establish protocol.

               

              My next thought is: Was the parliamentarian an observer or an active, vocal participant in these meetings?  Did her comments sway members of the board on any decisions?  Hmmm.  Waiting to see how long it will be before I can observe a board meeting.

               

              Joyce Saunders

               

               

              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2011 9:45 AM
              Subject: Re: [CGWcostumers] Re: Just a personal observation, an opinion... and a suggestion.

               

              In response to Elizabeth Mc Cash’s post on 8/30/11 ( “If anyone has comments or suggestions on these matters or any other, I encourage you to do so, wheather (sic) by posting here, or by contacting myself…-or any Board Member (sic)…”) and a number of other posts on the Yahoo group that seemed to be responses generated by my suggestion that board meetings be open to the general membership for observation, I would like to post my reactions to each of these posts but first I would like to preface this with a few background details. 

              I have been a member of Costumer’s Guild West since its beginning.  I was one of the people involved in teaching, and attending classes offered by the Guild long before Costume College was created.  I was on the first committee for Costume College , I decorated (with others) the first three Gala’s (with no budget!).  I was a teacher as well.  I have been a past president of the Guild, vice president, director at large, and Squeals editor.  I know what power can do to people when it is unchecked and ungoverned, no matter how nice they start out to be.  I have seen good people do unethical things, or allow unethical things to occur, and in some cases illegal things to occur in the past.  Once I saw what was happening, in the past, I did what I could, with others, to bring the Guild back to what it was meant to be, an amateur club of costuming enthusiasts who convened socially and shared education, sources, and activities for the benefit and enjoyment of all.

              I posted that I thought it would be a good idea for the board meetings to be open to all for the edification and instruction of members on how meetings work, and how much work it is for the board.  I have been at these meetings, and I was always amazed at the intelligence and careful deliberation that went into them, it was for these reasons that I believe they should be open to all.  Members that are curious or may be interested in running for a position could see how it looks to be responsible for an organization with 460 members.

              Now to respond to the posts generated by my comments:

              Elizabeth McCash:

              There is nothing in the By Laws or Standing Rules that restricts the board meetings to board members only.  I did not realize this.  I am sorry to have bothered the group with a non-issue.  Now that a new precedent of attending one is requested, the board will need to create a reasonable procedure to address meeting the needs of its membership. 

              I am surprised that you do not want participation from the membership.  If these meetings are so onerous for you, I wonder that you wanted to run for another term on the board.  When I served the membership, I was honored to carry through the work of the Guild, no matter the distance traveled to the meeting, or its length, and the meetings were never boring.  I am a bit alarmed that you feel so, and I wonder if the Guild’s best interest is served if the vice president feels the work of the governing body is boring.

              I was not “beating” your door down, but I am interested, and if I am, others might be as well.  I cherish the relationships I found and developed when I served on the board, and this might be a way to know the current board better, in an official capacity.

              Meeting minutes often contain the basic information and the outcome of the discussion but the rational, and details of that decision making process are what interest me and are far too involved to be contained  in the concise minutes required by Squeals limitations, and the limitations of the recorder.  I am keenly interested in everything the Guild does since I have invested so much time, effort, and affection in it since the Guild’s inception and growth.  What could be hurt by member observers?

               

              Laura Freas:

              Reserving the number of observers at any one meeting is a good idea if only a few are interested in attending!

              Cheryl Avirom:

              I agree, how could it be bad for “a significant number” to want to participate?

              You have good ideas on keeping costs down if “significant numbers” becomes the norm, especially since we have but one “official” membership meeting per year.

              You are correct also in your assumption that we can afford it, if that is what the membership wants to do.

              Thanks to the board are very appropriate.  I know our current president expressed her glee at short meetings last fall on FaceBook.  I am distressed if the meetings last longer than she can comfortably tolerate now. I note in the latest issue of Squeals with board meetings it appears that the last three meetings had an average meeting time of a about 3 and a half hours.  Am I missing something?

              Noelle Paduan:

              No one suggested that the board was doing a bad job.  I reread my post and see nothing that indicates that thought at all.  What part of my post indicates that to you?  I also see nothing about malicious secrets in that post.  I noted in this post that I saw trouble before in a different administration (so to speak), so however did you work this out of my original post?

              You have your feelings, but you are not the only member here.  Must 460 members be subject to your logic alone?  At least three others see some merit in adding thought to my comments.  You are free to make your opinion known, as I am mine.  I said nothing mean, in fact I am interested in everyone being comfortable and safe emotionally at all Guild functions and activities.

              Your idea of a conference call is interesting.  It would, however, lack the nuances of clear understanding as often the sound quality is poor in such calls, and the lack the clarification that seeing faces and body language often adds to making meaning of communication. 

              In regards to the dissention you allude to in the emails, I remind you that it is only through differing opinions and points of view openly discussed that we find the best solutions for a democratic and egalitarian society to move forward.

              Yes, this is supposed to be fun, but the reality is that people make mistakes, there is always room for improvement, and just like in crafting garments, we must strive to get it “right.”

              You got your two cents worth but why should others not comment when they also want to be heard?

              Glad to know you do not wish to offend.  I ask that you believe the same of myself.

              Kimberly Mumford:

              You will have to talk to Noelle about the secret malicious society for illumination.

              The board was elected to lead but not to do what they personally desire, they were elected to represent the membership, working to further the needs of the membership and the Guild.  This is not a oligarchy but a representative board that serves the membership because they wish to see the goals of Costumer’s Guild West, Inc. (see  By Laws Article II-Objectives and Article IX-Duties of Officers, Section 1.a, 2.a, 3.a, 4.a, 5.a, and 6.a,) met and extended.

              The current board all ran for their “thankless” office without a gun to their head and accepted each office knowing all its duties.  No one doubts that they all want to be in office, why else would they accept the position?  Leading a group this diverse and intelligent is not easy. When I was on the board, it was the membership I served, not my own desires and wishes.  Do you expect the current board will not think about what is best for all 460 members and wish to know what we think about all issues?  If you believe that, let me refer you to Elizabeth McCash’s quote at the beginning of this post (or refer to the original post she made on 8/30/11 at 1:42pm.).

              Elizabeth McCash:

              I am so glad that you thanked Kimberly and Noelle for their comments.  Does this mean that Cheryl, Laura, and I (not to mention Chaz) are less deserving of thanks because you think we have a differing opinion than yours?  Hmmm, I am now not sure your meaning when you ask “anyone” to share comments or suggestion on “any other” matter.  Could you clarify what you really meant?  I am confused now.

               

               

              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:51 PM
              Subject: [CGWcostumers] Re: Just a personal observation, an opinion... and a suggestion.

               



              > They are rather "thankless" jobs, so I will say now, THANK YOU to all who have given up their free time to take on these positions!
              > ~Kimberly Mumford~
              > Santa Barbara, CA
              >
              >
              You are welcome Kimberly (and Noelle!) and thanks for the support! ;) Along with the rest of the Board, I am doing what I can to make this guild an enjoyable club for all our members. I hope that I can call my efforts a success, and if not, I hope someone else more capable than I will run for the VP position in 2012. ;)

              Elizabeth McCash
              CGW VP/ Membership Development Chair

            • Heather Pritchett
              Joyce, I don t mean to be snarky when I ask this, but i m a little confused by your final comment below. Isn t our yearly meeting on the Sunday of Costume
              Message 6 of 7 , Sep 4, 2011
                Joyce,

                I don't mean to be snarky when I ask this, but i'm a little confused by your final comment below.

                Isn't our yearly meeting on the Sunday of Costume College actually a board meeting? I could be wrong, but doesn't that mean we always have at least one public board meeting a year for everyone to attend?

                Heather


                From: Joyce Saunders <JoyfulBS@...>


                My next thought is: Was the parliamentarian an observer or an active, vocal participant in these meetings?  Did her comments sway members of the board on any decisions?  Hmmm.  Waiting to see how long it will be before I can observe a board meeting.
                 
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.