Has anyone read the personal statements of the ANA Governor candidates in the Numismatist? I'm narro
Longacre
Posts: 16,717 ✭✭✭
I just got the new June edition of Numismatist. Beginning on page 87, there is a personal statement from every candidate who is running for election for ANA Governor, President and Vice President. I read each governor’s statement with interest. Because I have never had the opportunity to speak with any of the candidates directly, I took the opportunity to read their statements closely, because this is the main opportunity that I have to get to know the candidates.
Afer reading the statements, I have started to narrow down my choices for governor. Of course my opinions might change between now and the election, but based solely on the specificity of the candidates’ statements, I have given serious consideration to the following:
(1) Carl Schwenker III– this candidate seems to have good, old fashioned credentials. He is a retired corporate executive and has a proven track record for turning around troubled businesses. I wish he gave more specifics about exactly what he has done in the real world in this respect, but this experience is something that the board could use. The ANA is broken, and is in need of someone who can fix things. I also like his platform which includes “fixing the finances” and optimizing the business plan. The ANA should be run like a business, and these are two good things to start with.
(2) Anthony Tumonis– I like his grassroots approach to helping the ANA. The current board of governors has too many glad-handers and pretty faces, who don’t accomplish much for the current members. I like Tumonis’ ideas of returning to regular meetings, and expanding the use of regional coordinators. The reinstatement of ANA club representatives is a good idea too. I also like his comments about meeting notices, agendas, and requiring the executive director to inform the board about many more things.
(3) Wendell Wolka–I like his succinct platform, which states that the ANA should promote education as its main focus in order to develop interest in the organization and numismatics. I also like his idea that the budget should be balanced (a novel idea), and growth should not come at the expense of sound financial management principles. I feel as though today’s ANA is run like the federal government, with a lot of short term goals and quick fixes, rather than an organization that is run with a measure of responsibility.
(4) Clifford Mishler–I like this candidate’s business experience and his increasing responsibilities during his tenure at Krause Publications. He is not just another pretty face. He appears to be someone who will actually get something done. I also like how he takes a realist’s view of the role of a board of governors. He states that the board should be a membership conduit, establishing beneficial policies and guidelines to be executed by management staff. What a novel idea! It almost seems like this guy used to be on a board of directors in real life.
He also states that the board has a responsibility for overseeing implementation of those policies and guidelines to the benefit of membership. What another novel idea!! Is this guy from Mars or something? If he gets elected, I doubt that I will be referring to the ANA group as the Board of Buffoons anymore.
(5) Donald Kagin– this was a tough one, and one that I am still on the fence about. Obviously Dr. Kagin in an incumbent, which is a strike against him. No matter how lone a voice you are in the woods, anyone who is associated with the current ANA administration is somewhat tainted by the relationship. I am also somewhat reserving judgement until the current scandal related to Kagin’s expulsion hearing is settled. I am not sure when a decision in that hearing will be handed down, but I hope that it is before the election. It is in no members’ interest to have a vote for governor thrown away if Dr. Kagin is no longer in the running at the time the votes are counted. On a more positive note, I like Kagin’s view on more open meetings, and he listed some accomplishments that I never knew about.
*******
I believe that there are seven governor’s seats up for election. I still have two votes in reserve (although, in reality, I am not completely decided on the five listed above). Michael Doran wrote up a nice summary, and he raised some interesting points.
It is my understanding that the President and Vice President are running unopposed. I am not a big fan of that, and therefore will not vote for either.
Does anyone else have any comments on the candidates?
Afer reading the statements, I have started to narrow down my choices for governor. Of course my opinions might change between now and the election, but based solely on the specificity of the candidates’ statements, I have given serious consideration to the following:
(1) Carl Schwenker III– this candidate seems to have good, old fashioned credentials. He is a retired corporate executive and has a proven track record for turning around troubled businesses. I wish he gave more specifics about exactly what he has done in the real world in this respect, but this experience is something that the board could use. The ANA is broken, and is in need of someone who can fix things. I also like his platform which includes “fixing the finances” and optimizing the business plan. The ANA should be run like a business, and these are two good things to start with.
(2) Anthony Tumonis– I like his grassroots approach to helping the ANA. The current board of governors has too many glad-handers and pretty faces, who don’t accomplish much for the current members. I like Tumonis’ ideas of returning to regular meetings, and expanding the use of regional coordinators. The reinstatement of ANA club representatives is a good idea too. I also like his comments about meeting notices, agendas, and requiring the executive director to inform the board about many more things.
(3) Wendell Wolka–I like his succinct platform, which states that the ANA should promote education as its main focus in order to develop interest in the organization and numismatics. I also like his idea that the budget should be balanced (a novel idea), and growth should not come at the expense of sound financial management principles. I feel as though today’s ANA is run like the federal government, with a lot of short term goals and quick fixes, rather than an organization that is run with a measure of responsibility.
(4) Clifford Mishler–I like this candidate’s business experience and his increasing responsibilities during his tenure at Krause Publications. He is not just another pretty face. He appears to be someone who will actually get something done. I also like how he takes a realist’s view of the role of a board of governors. He states that the board should be a membership conduit, establishing beneficial policies and guidelines to be executed by management staff. What a novel idea! It almost seems like this guy used to be on a board of directors in real life.
He also states that the board has a responsibility for overseeing implementation of those policies and guidelines to the benefit of membership. What another novel idea!! Is this guy from Mars or something? If he gets elected, I doubt that I will be referring to the ANA group as the Board of Buffoons anymore.(5) Donald Kagin– this was a tough one, and one that I am still on the fence about. Obviously Dr. Kagin in an incumbent, which is a strike against him. No matter how lone a voice you are in the woods, anyone who is associated with the current ANA administration is somewhat tainted by the relationship. I am also somewhat reserving judgement until the current scandal related to Kagin’s expulsion hearing is settled. I am not sure when a decision in that hearing will be handed down, but I hope that it is before the election. It is in no members’ interest to have a vote for governor thrown away if Dr. Kagin is no longer in the running at the time the votes are counted. On a more positive note, I like Kagin’s view on more open meetings, and he listed some accomplishments that I never knew about.
*******
I believe that there are seven governor’s seats up for election. I still have two votes in reserve (although, in reality, I am not completely decided on the five listed above). Michael Doran wrote up a nice summary, and he raised some interesting points.
It is my understanding that the President and Vice President are running unopposed. I am not a big fan of that, and therefore will not vote for either.
Does anyone else have any comments on the candidates?
Always took candy from strangers
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
0
Comments
I, like you, Longacre, will NOT vote for President or Vice President this year. There are 12 of the 16 candidates for governor that are not associated with the current or past boards and I intend to vote for 7 of those 12 AFTER I do exactly what you are doing, checking out their credentials.
It is wonderful that you have written in detail about 5 that you are "leaning to" now. I too have a leaning right now for Cliff Mishler, Chet Krause and Ed Rochette. I picked those 3 because I believe their EXPERIENCE in the hobby over many, many years and their relationship with the ANA can really be important for the organization at this time. I can understand the need for "new blood" with new ideas also, and that is where my other 4 votes will go. But, I believe, these 3 well known hobby leaders can be very influential within the ANA leadership and in working with the new President, Vice President and the Executive Director to help move the organization forward from the past two year mess.
It would be interesting if other ANA members who will be voting would care to share THEIR choices with the forum. If you are NOT an ANA member or you are NOT planning to vote you can certainly voice your opinions too, but please indicate those facts in this thread.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
Given the travesty that is the current ANA board, I am surprised that no one has more comments on the candidates. I think this would be a great forum to discuss why we should support some candidates for office.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
I will comment but first I need my copy of the Numismatist. I simply do not have your pull to get a copy early...or even on time....
in the Army, he made a favorable impression on me, and I think he would make an excellent board member.
John
SFC, US Army (Ret.) 1974-1994
To be quite honest, I have as many as ten that I could vote for.
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
I'll also be voting for Ed Rochette.
Beyond that, I'm not sure. But I'm thinking I will vote for the folks who seem to be genuine collectors
and not the big-business types.
And while I think Walter Ostromecki got a raw deal in his previous ouster, I'm looking for new blood
in the ANA leadership and not a re-hashing of old bad blood.
<< <i>IMHO, there are more than seven qualified candidates and that may actually work against getting new people involved. There will be many voters scattering their votes among the new candidates and it will have a negative effect for the election of new board members. The incumbents may very well benefit from this.
To be quite honest, I have as many as ten that I could vote for. >>
Julian, IMHO the key to the accuracy of your comment is whether or not we get closer to 10,000 votes cast instead of the usual 5,000 to 6,000. Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
I have only one issue that I am concerned about and my votes will be based upon the responses I receive based upon my concern.
I want to know how each candidate feels about the Ebay connection with the ANA, how they plan to help make it a safer environment for buyers and whether or not they will step up and use the abilities supposedly given to them by Ebay to help eliminate scammers on Ebay.
If they cant' fix the Ebay problem then I want to know if they have the guts to walk away from Ebay and whatever money the connection generates.
Thanks,
Bill
myurl http://www.foundinrolls.com
<< <i>I want to know how each candidate feels about the Ebay connection with the ANA, how they plan to help make it a safer environment for buyers and whether or not they will step up and use the abilities supposedly given to them by Ebay to help eliminate scammers on Ebay.
If they cant' fix the Ebay problem then I want to know if they have the guts to walk away from Ebay and whatever money the connection generates.
Thanks,
Bill >>
I am actually going to be a summer intern at the ANA this year, and this was the exact issue I wrote about to respond to an essay question that asked about a major project that the ANA could undertake to benefit its members and collectors.
I would ideally like to see the board have a mix of business mined individuals, genuine collectors, and bigger names that represent the hobby.
For a large selection of U.S. Coins & Currency, visit The Reeded Edge's online webstore at the link below.
The Reeded Edge
If you are a ANA member who will be voting and you currently do not have access to the member only section AND you have high speed internet access it would be well worth your time to follow the directions at www.money.org to get that user name and password and then watch the video of the whole program. You will see and hear many of the candidates. It is much better than just reading it in Numismatist.
Bottom line for me is I get the general feeling that the majority of candidates DO want to improve communication with the membership. Barry Stuppler, the new President says in his #2 agenda item " Provide new website services such as broadcasting the Board meetings live on the internet, while enabling members to give feedback in real time". After seeing this candidates forum from Charlotte, I believe ANA can REALLY do this, and if they do, then lots of the poor communication with members issues will go away IMHO.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
• For the first time in its history, the Board of Governors ousted a governor duly elected by the membership. Although details are few due to the Board’s lack of candor, it appears that Walter Ostromecki was ousted for merely disagreeing with the Board’s actions and reaching out to a concerned collector. For this, the Board claims they “lost trust” in him and ousted him.
• The Board initially reneged on its commitment to assign naming rights to the ANA museum for a half million dollar contribution. After a nasty and embarrassing fight, the Board found that it was, in fact, in error and reversed course.
• The proposed by-laws are an obvious attempt by the incumbents to retain power and effectively disenfranchise the members from nominating, learning about and electing the membership of the ANA. The bylaws revisions are so odious that they should have never seen the light of day in their present form.
• The lack of transparency and troubling confidentiality agreements foster a culture of secrecy and suspicion, rather than openness and service to the collector. Board of Governors members should be free to express their opinions, vote their conscience and communicate with their constituencies without fear of violating these secrecy oaths.
For these and other reasons, I cannot, in good conscience, support any of the incumbent members of the Board of Governors. As a result, I am withholding my vote for the candidates for President, Barry Stuppler and Vice President, Patti Jagger-Finner.
For the Board of Governors, here’s my take on the candidates, in order of preference. I plan on casting my vote for the first seven choices.
NO-BRAINERS
These candidates are so highly qualified that there can be no doubt that they will be effective leaders of the ANA:
1. Edward C. Rochette – If anyone personifies what the ANA should be, it’s Ed Rochette. As both a past governor and former executive director, Ed has shown a commitment of service to collectors and the hobby. If this isn’t enough to convince anyone of Ed’s qualifications, his statement in the May 29, 2007 Numismatic News should:
"The ANA does not belong to either its elected representatives, those who serve as its board, nor does it belong to its professional staff managed by a salaried executive director. Our association belongs solely and exclusively to its dues-paying membership!"
2. Walter Ostromecki – Dr. Ostromecki was unfairly ousted from his duly elected seat on the Board of Directors last term. That is reason enough to send a message to the ANA by making him one of the leading vote getters in this election. Add his 30+ years service to the ANA and as an educator of numismatics, his demonstrated willingness to respond to concerns of the ANA membership and his willingness to “buck the system” when needed, and you have an outstanding governor.
3. Clifford Mishler – Cliff Mishler’s accomplishments in the field of numismatics are almost legendary. Winner of many ANA and numismatic awards, Cliff has been an outstanding spokesman, author and “good-will” representative for numismatics for over 50 years. Cliff was one of the leaders in bringing the ANA board’s refusal to name the museum after Ed Rochette to light.
4. Chester L. Krause – Founder of Numismatic News, ANA Hall of Fame member and tireless advocate of our hobby. His recognition that the ANA’s financial picture is in shambles and needs thorough study to permanently place the association on a firm financial footing is sorely needed. Chet was also a vocal opponent of the ANA board’s initial refusal to name its museum after Ed Rochette.
5. Anthony Tumonis – Tony has been an active ANA volunteer for years and the recipient of many numismatic awards. His advocacy of open meetings and publication of the votes of individual governors is desperately needed. His leadership in advocating a return of the Club Representative Program is apparent, especially when one views his letters in the January 30 and June 12, 2007 issues of Numismatic News.
STRONG CANDIDATES
The following candidates have very strong credentials and ideas and would be effective governors.
6. Joseph Boling – Probably the candidate with the best knowledge of the flaws of the proposed bylaws and the knowledge of how to fix them. Joe recognizes that the current regime has lost touch with its membership.
7. Michael B. Doran – A relative newcomer, but active on many numismatic discussion boards. Mike’s recognition that the proposed bylaws changes need to be rejected, the club representative program needs to be overhauled and that the ANA exists to serve its members are right in line with what the organization needs.
8. Donald H. Dool – Just misses the cut. Good ideas about reforming the ANA. Could have received my support if other candidates didn’t seen superior.
HONORABLE MENTION
The following are candidates with impressive credentials, but who lack some of the credentials, characteristics or ideas of the candidate who have earned my support. They would probably make fine governors.
9. John R. Eshbach – Some good ideas, particularly on the confidentiality agreement, association finances and the east and west coast museum proposal. His dismissal of some of the uses of technology makes it difficult to give him my vote.
10. Radford Stearns – Overall good credentials. It was difficult excluding him from the candidates who have earned my support.
11. Wendell A. Wolka – Good ideas on advocating more transparency in the ANA. Good credentials. I would have liked to see more comments from him on specifics related to his plans as governor.
12. Carl Schwenker – Recognition of the need to change the ANA and improve its financial picture. Again, I would like to hear more specifics of his plans for the ANA.
NOT QUALIFIED
In my opinion, the election of any of the following candidates would be detrimental to the future of the ANA and I could not, in any way, support their election.
13. Donald H. Kagin – Proposes some good ideas for the ANA. But as an incumbent, why hasn’t he implemented any of them? Troubling questions still remain regarding the ethics complaint filed against him.
14. M. Remy Bourne – Chaired ANA Bylaws and Governance Task Force that created the proposed ANA bylaw changes that would disenfranchise members. Incumbent involved in unfair ouster of Dr. Ostromecki.
15. Arthur M. Fitts III – Apologist for the current regime. Served on the ANA Bylaws and Governance Task Force that created the unacceptable proposed bylaws revisions.
16. Alan Herbert – Arguably the worst candidate of the bunch. Active supporter of the current regime and seems to lack an understanding of the concerns of the ANA members. Arrogantly claims that the direction of “modernization” of the ANA is fine and sees no need for change.
By the way, has ANYONE got their ballots yet?
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
I think we're going to see atleast half of all the members voting in this election.
I also would like to know the candidates' views on the replacement of the Executive Director.
<< <i>I'm hoping I get my ballot and have the chance to vote before my membership expires. I do not want to renew my membership unless the current makeup of the "ol' boy's club" get the shaking up it deserves.
I also would like to know the candidates' views on the replacement of the Executive Director. >>
I am waiting for mine, too. And in regards to your question on the candidate's view of replacement of the Executive Director, here mine: the current executive director should be replaced - period! How to proceed this will not be easy, as the current Executive Director just happens to be a lawyer (and you know what that means).
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>It is apparent that the ANA desperately needs new leadership. The Board of Governors and the Executive Director have been moving the organization away from service to its collector members. In Governor Alan Herbert’s own words, “we are running a corporation, not a 'good old boy's' backroom club.” While nobody wants an organization run by good old boys in the backroom, we must always remember that the ANA is, in fact, a club dedicated to the support and education of numismatics. In fact, if we look at the actions of the ANA Board and staff these past few years, we will find that it has been run like a “backroom” organization:
• For the first time in its history, the Board of Governors ousted a governor duly elected by the membership. Although details are few due to the Board’s lack of candor, it appears that Walter Ostromecki was ousted for merely disagreeing with the Board’s actions and reaching out to a concerned collector. For this, the Board claims they “lost trust” in him and ousted him.
• The Board initially reneged on its commitment to assign naming rights to the ANA museum for a half million dollar contribution. After a nasty and embarrassing fight, the Board found that it was, in fact, in error and reversed course.
• The proposed by-laws are an obvious attempt by the incumbents to retain power and effectively disenfranchise the members from nominating, learning about and electing the membership of the ANA. The bylaws revisions are so odious that they should have never seen the light of day in their present form.
• The lack of transparency and troubling confidentiality agreements foster a culture of secrecy and suspicion, rather than openness and service to the collector. Board of Governors members should be free to express their opinions, vote their conscience and communicate with their constituencies without fear of violating these secrecy oaths.
For these and other reasons, I cannot, in good conscience, support any of the incumbent members of the Board of Governors. As a result, I am withholding my vote for the candidates for President, Barry Stuppler and Vice President, Patti Jagger-Finner.
For the Board of Governors, here’s my take on the candidates, in order of preference. I plan on casting my vote for the first seven choices.
NO-BRAINERS
These candidates are so highly qualified that there can be no doubt that they will be effective leaders of the ANA:
1. Edward C. Rochette – If anyone personifies what the ANA should be, it’s Ed Rochette. As both a past governor and former executive director, Ed has shown a commitment of service to collectors and the hobby. If this isn’t enough to convince anyone of Ed’s qualifications, his statement in the May 29, 2007 Numismatic News should:
"The ANA does not belong to either its elected representatives, those who serve as its board, nor does it belong to its professional staff managed by a salaried executive director. Our association belongs solely and exclusively to its dues-paying membership!"
2. Walter Ostromecki – Dr. Ostromecki was unfairly ousted from his duly elected seat on the Board of Directors last term. That is reason enough to send a message to the ANA by making him one of the leading vote getters in this election. Add his 30+ years service to the ANA and as an educator of numismatics, his demonstrated willingness to respond to concerns of the ANA membership and his willingness to “buck the system” when needed, and you have an outstanding governor.
3. Clifford Mishler – Cliff Mishler’s accomplishments in the field of numismatics are almost legendary. Winner of many ANA and numismatic awards, Cliff has been an outstanding spokesman, author and “good-will” representative for numismatics for over 50 years. Cliff was one of the leaders in bringing the ANA board’s refusal to name the museum after Ed Rochette to light.
4. Chester L. Krause – Founder of Numismatic News, ANA Hall of Fame member and tireless advocate of our hobby. His recognition that the ANA’s financial picture is in shambles and needs thorough study to permanently place the association on a firm financial footing is sorely needed. Chet was also a vocal opponent of the ANA board’s initial refusal to name its museum after Ed Rochette.
5. Anthony Tumonis – Tony has been an active ANA volunteer for years and the recipient of many numismatic awards. His advocacy of open meetings and publication of the votes of individual governors is desperately needed. His leadership in advocating a return of the Club Representative Program is apparent, especially when one views his letters in the January 30 and June 12, 2007 issues of Numismatic News.
STRONG CANDIDATES
The following candidates have very strong credentials and ideas and would be effective governors.
6. Joseph Boling – Probably the candidate with the best knowledge of the flaws of the proposed bylaws and the knowledge of how to fix them. Joe recognizes that the current regime has lost touch with its membership.
7. Michael B. Doran – A relative newcomer, but active on many numismatic discussion boards. Mike’s recognition that the proposed bylaws changes need to be rejected, the club representative program needs to be overhauled and that the ANA exists to serve its members are right in line with what the organization needs.
8. Donald H. Dool – Just misses the cut. Good ideas about reforming the ANA. Could have received my support if other candidates didn’t seen superior.
HONORABLE MENTION
The following are candidates with impressive credentials, but who lack some of the credentials, characteristics or ideas of the candidate who have earned my support. They would probably make fine governors.
9. John R. Eshbach – Some good ideas, particularly on the confidentiality agreement, association finances and the east and west coast museum proposal. His dismissal of some of the uses of technology makes it difficult to give him my vote.
10. Radford Stearns – Overall good credentials. It was difficult excluding him from the candidates who have earned my support.
11. Wendell A. Wolka – Good ideas on advocating more transparency in the ANA. Good credentials. I would have liked to see more comments from him on specifics related to his plans as governor.
12. Carl Schwenker – Recognition of the need to change the ANA and improve its financial picture. Again, I would like to hear more specifics of his plans for the ANA.
NOT QUALIFIED
In my opinion, the election of any of the following candidates would be detrimental to the future of the ANA and I could not, in any way, support their election.
13. Donald H. Kagin – Proposes some good ideas for the ANA. But as an incumbent, why hasn’t he implemented any of them? Troubling questions still remain regarding the ethics complaint filed against him.
14. M. Remy Bourne – Chaired ANA Bylaws and Governance Task Force that created the proposed ANA bylaw changes that would disenfranchise members. Incumbent involved in unfair ouster of Dr. Ostromecki.
15. Arthur M. Fitts III – Apologist for the current regime. Served on the ANA Bylaws and Governance Task Force that created the unacceptable proposed bylaws revisions.
16. Alan Herbert – Arguably the worst candidate of the bunch. Active supporter of the current regime and seems to lack an understanding of the concerns of the ANA members. Arrogantly claims that the direction of “modernization” of the ANA is fine and sees no need for change. >>
Well written. Herbert will definitely not be getting my vote either.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>
<< <i>It is apparent that the ANA desperately needs new leadership. The Board of Governors and the Executive Director have been moving the organization away from service to its collector members. In Governor Alan Herbert’s own words, “we are running a corporation, not a 'good old boy's' backroom club.” While nobody wants an organization run by good old boys in the backroom, we must always remember that the ANA is, in fact, a club dedicated to the support and education of numismatics. In fact, if we look at the actions of the ANA Board and staff these past few years, we will find that it has been run like a “backroom” organization:
• For the first time in its history, the Board of Governors ousted a governor duly elected by the membership. Although details are few due to the Board’s lack of candor, it appears that Walter Ostromecki was ousted for merely disagreeing with the Board’s actions and reaching out to a concerned collector. For this, the Board claims they “lost trust” in him and ousted him.
• The Board initially reneged on its commitment to assign naming rights to the ANA museum for a half million dollar contribution. After a nasty and embarrassing fight, the Board found that it was, in fact, in error and reversed course.
• The proposed by-laws are an obvious attempt by the incumbents to retain power and effectively disenfranchise the members from nominating, learning about and electing the membership of the ANA. The bylaws revisions are so odious that they should have never seen the light of day in their present form.
• The lack of transparency and troubling confidentiality agreements foster a culture of secrecy and suspicion, rather than openness and service to the collector. Board of Governors members should be free to express their opinions, vote their conscience and communicate with their constituencies without fear of violating these secrecy oaths.
For these and other reasons, I cannot, in good conscience, support any of the incumbent members of the Board of Governors. As a result, I am withholding my vote for the candidates for President, Barry Stuppler and Vice President, Patti Jagger-Finner.
For the Board of Governors, here’s my take on the candidates, in order of preference. I plan on casting my vote for the first seven choices.
NO-BRAINERS
These candidates are so highly qualified that there can be no doubt that they will be effective leaders of the ANA:
1. Edward C. Rochette – If anyone personifies what the ANA should be, it’s Ed Rochette. As both a past governor and former executive director, Ed has shown a commitment of service to collectors and the hobby. If this isn’t enough to convince anyone of Ed’s qualifications, his statement in the May 29, 2007 Numismatic News should:
"The ANA does not belong to either its elected representatives, those who serve as its board, nor does it belong to its professional staff managed by a salaried executive director. Our association belongs solely and exclusively to its dues-paying membership!"
2. Walter Ostromecki – Dr. Ostromecki was unfairly ousted from his duly elected seat on the Board of Directors last term. That is reason enough to send a message to the ANA by making him one of the leading vote getters in this election. Add his 30+ years service to the ANA and as an educator of numismatics, his demonstrated willingness to respond to concerns of the ANA membership and his willingness to “buck the system” when needed, and you have an outstanding governor.
3. Clifford Mishler – Cliff Mishler’s accomplishments in the field of numismatics are almost legendary. Winner of many ANA and numismatic awards, Cliff has been an outstanding spokesman, author and “good-will” representative for numismatics for over 50 years. Cliff was one of the leaders in bringing the ANA board’s refusal to name the museum after Ed Rochette to light.
4. Chester L. Krause – Founder of Numismatic News, ANA Hall of Fame member and tireless advocate of our hobby. His recognition that the ANA’s financial picture is in shambles and needs thorough study to permanently place the association on a firm financial footing is sorely needed. Chet was also a vocal opponent of the ANA board’s initial refusal to name its museum after Ed Rochette.
5. Anthony Tumonis – Tony has been an active ANA volunteer for years and the recipient of many numismatic awards. His advocacy of open meetings and publication of the votes of individual governors is desperately needed. His leadership in advocating a return of the Club Representative Program is apparent, especially when one views his letters in the January 30 and June 12, 2007 issues of Numismatic News.
STRONG CANDIDATES
The following candidates have very strong credentials and ideas and would be effective governors.
6. Joseph Boling – Probably the candidate with the best knowledge of the flaws of the proposed bylaws and the knowledge of how to fix them. Joe recognizes that the current regime has lost touch with its membership.
7. Michael B. Doran – A relative newcomer, but active on many numismatic discussion boards. Mike’s recognition that the proposed bylaws changes need to be rejected, the club representative program needs to be overhauled and that the ANA exists to serve its members are right in line with what the organization needs.
8. Donald H. Dool – Just misses the cut. Good ideas about reforming the ANA. Could have received my support if other candidates didn’t seen superior.
HONORABLE MENTION
The following are candidates with impressive credentials, but who lack some of the credentials, characteristics or ideas of the candidate who have earned my support. They would probably make fine governors.
9. John R. Eshbach – Some good ideas, particularly on the confidentiality agreement, association finances and the east and west coast museum proposal. His dismissal of some of the uses of technology makes it difficult to give him my vote.
10. Radford Stearns – Overall good credentials. It was difficult excluding him from the candidates who have earned my support.
11. Wendell A. Wolka – Good ideas on advocating more transparency in the ANA. Good credentials. I would have liked to see more comments from him on specifics related to his plans as governor.
12. Carl Schwenker – Recognition of the need to change the ANA and improve its financial picture. Again, I would like to hear more specifics of his plans for the ANA.
NOT QUALIFIED
In my opinion, the election of any of the following candidates would be detrimental to the future of the ANA and I could not, in any way, support their election.
13. Donald H. Kagin – Proposes some good ideas for the ANA. But as an incumbent, why hasn’t he implemented any of them? Troubling questions still remain regarding the ethics complaint filed against him.
14. M. Remy Bourne – Chaired ANA Bylaws and Governance Task Force that created the proposed ANA bylaw changes that would disenfranchise members. Incumbent involved in unfair ouster of Dr. Ostromecki.
15. Arthur M. Fitts III – Apologist for the current regime. Served on the ANA Bylaws and Governance Task Force that created the unacceptable proposed bylaws revisions.
16. Alan Herbert – Arguably the worst candidate of the bunch. Active supporter of the current regime and seems to lack an understanding of the concerns of the ANA members. Arrogantly claims that the direction of “modernization” of the ANA is fine and sees no need for change. >>
Well written. Herbert will definitely not be getting my vote either. >>
Well, everyone, just remember that, with Herbert sticking his foot in his mouth (read Viewpoint article in May 1st NN) and Kagin and his ethical blunders, is it any wonder that the regime is starting to implode just as the ballots are being mailed out. And what about Stuppler and Finner? I do not plan to vote for either of them as they are, IMHO, very pathetic. Stuppler does not strike me as being much of a leader, Finner and her role in Ostromecki's removal and the downward spiral of the club representative program.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
<< <i>It appears that NOBODY has received their ballots as of Friday, June 8th. According to the ANA, ballots were to be going out from the auditing firm about Wednesday, May 30th. Obviously, there has been a delay. As we receive our ballots, let's report here so everyone will know. My guess is that the vast majority of members will receive their ballot within one week of each other. AND THAT SHOULD BE S O O N!
Steve
I have not received mine yet (and I live in the next town from you, as you know). It's a good idea to report when people receive them.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>"Throw the bums out" (any and all incumbents that is) >>
Self Indulgence | Holey Coins | Flickr Photostream
Authorized dealer for PCGS, PCGS Currency, NGC, NCS, PMG, CAC. Member of the PNG, ANA. Member dealer of CoinPlex and CCE/FACTS as "CH5"
I agree that the Executive Director has to go. It has been my impression that he thinks he is running a "corporation" for his own benefit, rather than serving in trust for all of the membership. The proposed bylaws have the ring of typical publicly traded corporation bylaws in that they make it very difficult to oust sitting directors (governors). I was especially disappointed at the provision in the bylaws to make the Executive Director's title CEO. Besides offending my bias against "title inflation", it appears that this was designed to provide resume fodder for the benefit of the Executive Director. It also appears designed to put the position above the level of the Board of Governors. The Executive Director of the ANA should be hired to serve the membership and carry out the policies of the members elected leaders (the Board of Governors). I fear that the current regime has this concept reversed.
I believe that the candidates I have selected in my previous post plan to replace the current Executive Director and oppose the proposed bylaw revisions.
Member ANA, SPMC, SCNA, FUN, CONECA
I'm not a current ANA member but was a member for many years (probably close to 25, on and off.) I was never very enthusiastic about the direction the organization was moving in and eventually just lost interest completely.
Some thoughts:
Why isn't anyone discussing the east coast/west coast museum issue? This issue could consume the ANA (in more ways than one) in future years. Do your candidates support or oppose the establishment of these museums?
If I were still a member, I wouldn't support any candidate who supported establishment of these museums. My feeling is that the ANA needs to downsize its activities, not upsize.
Does your candidate have enough sense to avoid putting the association in legal trouble on personnel issues. How many of you remember the fiasco a few years back with the executive director who left after only a few weeks?
This is a money issue and the association can't afford to bleed money for legal fees or settlements.
Should the association be issuing endorsements for products and shows? This is another money issue...but should money be the guiding light for decisions?
<< <i>Why isn't anyone discussing the east coast/west coast museum issue? >>
This issue has been discussed in at least two different threads a couple of weeks ago.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Why isn't anyone discussing the east coast/west coast museum issue? This issue could consume the ANA (in more ways than one) in future years. Do your candidates support or oppose the establishment of these museums?
If I were still a member, I wouldn't support any candidate who supported establishment of these museums. My feeling is that the ANA needs to downsize its activities, not upsize. >>
As a candidate, I am against the two proposed museums as I feel that the ANA needs to get a handle on its finances before embarking on grandiose projects. The Executive Director, Chris Cipoletti, stated that at least $40 million would be needed to get the two museums up and running and also to improve on the Rochette Money Museum at ANA headquarters in Colorado Springs, initially through fund raising. Talk about thinking big, or, in Cipoletti's case, thinking way too big. This silly (or should I say, bad) idea, among others that Cipoletti and the regime in power have concocted, is another example of why regime change is seriously needed.
<< <i>
<< <i>Why isn't anyone discussing the east coast/west coast museum issue? >>
This issue has been discussed in at least two different threads a couple of weeks ago. >>
I'm talking about the candidates positions.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Why isn't anyone discussing the east coast/west coast museum issue? >>
This issue has been discussed in at least two different threads a couple of weeks ago. >>
I'm talking about the candidates positions. >>
Some of the candidates have spoken about the museum subject. I think there is general agreement by all that having ANA sponsored museums in Washington, DC and San Francisco, California would "be nice", BUT, realistically this idea that is most likely the brainchild of Chris Cipoletti is NOT what the ANA should be spending ANY of their money on at this time. Attempting to get sponsors to "contribute" the sum of $40,000,000 to an organization the size of the ANA with the assets of the ANA is a real pipe dream in my opinion. Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Why isn't anyone discussing the east coast/west coast museum issue? >>
This issue has been discussed in at least two different threads a couple of weeks ago. >>
I'm talking about the candidates positions. >>
Some of the candidates have spoken about the museum subject. I think there is general agreement by all that having ANA sponsored museums in Washington, DC and San Francisco, California would "be nice", BUT, realistically this idea that is most likely the brainchild of Chris Cipoletti is NOT what the ANA should be spending ANY of their money on at this time. Attempting to get sponsors to "contribute" the sum of $40,000,000 to an organization the size of the ANA with the assets of the ANA is a real pipe dream in my opinion. Steve
focus away from all of the negative stuff that has been happening at the ANA in recent years. The timing of the museum announcements
close to the ANA election is no coincidence.
Also, I would encourage everyone who gets their ballot and knows who they are voting for to make your choices and mail it in
immediately, don't just set it aside and think about getting to it later as time has a way of slipping away faster than you may think.
<< <i>I think the proposed east and west coast ANA museums is the brainchild of the executive director who wanted something to shift the
focus away from all of the negative stuff that has been happening at the ANA in recent years. The timing of the museum announcements
close to the ANA election is no coincidence.
Also, I would encourage everyone who gets their ballot and knows who they are voting for to make your choices and mail it in
immediately, don't just set it aside and think about getting to it later as time has a way of slipping away faster than you may think. >>
Inspired by a pro-smoking bumper sticker I saw on the highway:
I'M AN ANA MEMBER AND I VOTE!
Michael -- Saying it's a silly or bad idea doesn't make it so. Establishing museums with the idea of educating the public and broadening the hobby appeals to me. Perhaps the time isn't right for the endeavor due to the financial condition of the ANA, but I'm not convinced of that. The Spring Report shows that the endowment continues to grow at a healthy rate (with payment toward operating expenses coming only from interest on the principal amount), and other financial indicators also look good. Moreover, the funds for the project will come from a capital campaign, so the operating budget shouldn't be affected.
I agree that the ANA could do a better job in some areas, and I've been disappointed with the Board for how it has handled some issues. I'll vote accordingly; but, dissatisfaction with some members of the current Board doesn't constitute a good reason to oppose the museums. It's a mistake to think that an idea is bad just because it comes from a person with whom you disagree on other points. And going forward with the project certainly wouldn't preclude pursuing other goals to ensure, as Magicrat writes, that the ANA continues to be "a club dedicated to the support and education of numismatics" for the benefit of its members. In fact, the museums would serve that purpose.
I'd like to hear a reasoned opposition to the museum project instead of conclusory opinions using loaded words like "regime" and "concoct."
Boling:
I almost surely will vote for him. He is concerned about the morale at the ANA headquarters and opposes “renting our name and reputation to the highest ‘industry’ bidders,” issues that I think are important. He also has a reasonable view on the bi-coastal museums, namely that the millions of dollars necessary for them “cannot be generated from member dues.”
Bourne:
No way would I vote for him. His list of accomplishments as governor include “initiated ANA reciprocal relations … with the China Numismatic Society, … the Beijing Numismatic Society, … Tibetan Numismatic Society, … and the Guangzhou Numismatic Society.” Now he is working on establishing relationships with “the Trinidad and Tobago Numismatic Association.” In all the lists of issues facing the ANA, I simply do not recall anyone saying “Boy, I wish the ANA had better relationships with a bunch of Chinese numismatic societies. Talk about a governor out of touch with the membership…
Dool:
I do not think I shall vote for him. He seems to have one major issue, that issue being eliminating anonymity of exhibitors and judges. In the 18 lines in the Numismatist that he devotes to his proposals, exhibits and judges take up 13 lines. I think this is an issue, but probably not the most important facing the ANA. His other views are similar to mine but given that I think they are more important than judging exhibits, I am (myself) dismayed by his sense of priorities.
Doran:
I like most of his policies and views. Indeed, anyone who reads these boards must almost surely know Michael’s views. My hesitation is that Michael seems much too quick to respond without sufficient thought and without sufficient diplomacy to comments about the ANA and/or his policies. (IGWT's post above mine serves as an example.) I worry about his ability to influence other board members. It does little good to be the “lone ranger” pushing policies that will never be adopted because everyone else dismisses you. I admit that when it comes to my vote, I am severely conflicted here.
Esbach:
This person is a newcomer to me who looks somewhat interesting. In the Numismatist he listed his top 10 reasons for running for the ANA board. The top 3 are: 3) “Enourage financial support of ANA activities and programs;” 2) “Work toward a balanced budget, not a quick fix;” and, 1) “Scrap the ‘confidentially (sic) agreement’ adopted in 2001.” I agree with these suggestions. But I would have liked a shorter list of reasons with more details about his proposals. Without more details, I think my voting for him remains unlikely.
Fitts:
I appreciate the Medieval Coin column he writes in the Numismatist. But his wife (I believe she is his wife; the last name is the same and the town in which they live is the same) is currently a member of the Board and I have to think he’d follow precisely the same policies of the current board. His candidate's olumn in the Numismatist tells NOTHING of his policies; it’s filled instead with useless pap such as “I will listen to others.” Well, this comment rates a big duh from me because who would write "I will be as closed minded as possible and listen to no one?" I will not vote for him.
Herbert:
I do not personally know him. But from his answers in Coin World to the questions posed by Coin World and his column presenting his views in the Numismatist, he seems to have a tremendous ego. (Of course, my opinion could be way wide of the mark.) He is definitely a status quo candidate. The odds of me voting for him are simply nonexistent.
Kagin:
I like his policies. But he is a current Board member. I must wonder why I did not realize he was in favor of “more frequent and transparent communication” and “all Board meeting open.” I must think that either he came by these views recently as the election drew near or else he is ineffective on the Board. Neither opinion makes it likely for me to vote for him.
Krause:
Krause is almost one of my automatic votes. His column in the Numismatist is short on details—indeed, it is almost TOTALLY lacking in details—about his policies but his actions over the last couple of years are well known to me. (He lead the charge to have the ANA live up to its promise to name the library after Rochette.) I would have appreciated more details in his Numismatist column rather than his life story, but unlike some of the other candidates (Fitts) I am willing to trust him to be an effective Governor because I believe he will generally work for policies I support.
Misher:
Misher IS one of my automatic votes. His comment “the ANA Board and management must recognize and respect that the organization is owned by the members” sums up my view perfectly.
<< <i>-- "This silly (or should I say, bad) idea, among others that Cipoletti and the regime in power have concocted, is another example of why regime change is seriously needed." --
Michael -- Saying it's a silly or bad idea doesn't make it so. Establishing museums with the idea of educating the public and broadening the hobby appeals to me. Perhaps the time isn't right for the endeavor due to the financial condition of the ANA, but I'm not convinced of that. The Spring Report shows that the endowment continues to grow at a healthy rate (with payment toward operating expenses coming only from interest on the principal amount), and other financial indicators also look good. Moreover, the funds for the project will come from a capital campaign, so the operating budget shouldn't be affected.
I agree that the ANA could do a better job in some areas, and I've been disappointed with the Board for how it has handled some issues. I'll vote accordingly; but, dissatisfaction with some members of the current Board doesn't constitute a good reason to oppose the museums. It's a mistake to think that an idea is bad just because it comes from a person with whom you disagree on other points. And going forward with the project certainly wouldn't preclude pursuing other goals to ensure, as Magicrat writes, that the ANA continues to be "a club dedicated to the support and education of numismatics" for the benefit of its members. In fact, the museums would serve that purpose.
I'd like to hear a reasoned opposition to the museum project instead of conclusory opinions using loaded words like "regime" and "concoct." >>
So, you like to see the ANA stretching itself too thin, right? These multiple museums that Cipoletti and the board wants is nothing less than a "boondoggle" as they would require lots of money to operate. The ANA is lucky to run the headquarters in Colorado Springs in light of having 4 straight years of deficits that keep getting bigger. The current regime in power is putting the ANA totally out of focus because of silly, wasteful, grandiose ideas such as this. Prepare for a really huge increase in dues and fees if these plans become reality. And I am being realistic about it.
As proposed, the $40 million dollars would be raised separately from private funding.
If it could be pulled off, I, for one, would be in favor of the two new museums. Let's face it. Colorado Springs is a bit off the beaten path. While I might quibble with the chosen cities, east and west coast museums mike a lot of sense to me, if the goal is to improve the profile and popularity of numismatics, which I think it should be.
<< <i> Prepare for a really huge increase in dues and fees if these plans become reality.
As proposed, the $40 million dollars would be raised separately from private funding.
If it could be pulled off, I, for one, would be in favor of the two new museums. Let's face it. Colorado Springs is a bit off the beaten path. While I might quibble with the chosen cities, east and west coast museums mike a lot of sense to me, if the goal is to improve the profile and popularity of numismatics, which I think it should be. >>
The reason that Colorado Springs is home to the ANA is very political - in the 1960's the ANA was looking for a new home and the mayor of Colorado Springs at the time was also an ANA member. He used his political clout to get the ANA to move to Colorado Springs, which he succeeded.
As far as raising money, pulling it off is a huge, mighty IF! Private funding and donations can only go so far, so funding these museums could end up being a huge drain.
IF-and I agree this is a huge IF--the fund raising suceeds in gathering $40 million, then my concern is whether operating the museums will require additional funds from the ANA of whether the $40 million includes funds necessary to operate the museums over the years. If the $40 million includes an endowment to operate the museums, then it seems to me that the museums should be a good idea--no expense to the ANA for two museums. However, I am concerned that either the operating expenses are NOT included in the $40 million or else there have been assumptions made in the funding plns that the museums will be self-sufficient. Because I doubt that the museums will be able to sustain themselves, if the $40 million does not include sufficient operational funds, then I think the museums are a BAD idea.
These questions are just a few that need to be addressed. I don't see how you can reach a decision without adequate information or consideration of factors important to your potential constituents. I'm still waiting for a reasoned opinion.
Edited to correct a typo.
As to the museums, if the plan is to privately raise the capital funds and to set up an operating trust, how does that harm the ANA membership? Even if the $40 million is not raised, and a lesser plan is implemented, how is the membership harmed?
The ANA has stated that it would be refunded to the donors. Will that include interest?
Would they use it to build one museum?...They say that the 40 million has to be raised to proceed and create the two new museums. What if by the time the job needs to get done, they need 60 million?
Out of the 40 million, they say they want to build or establish two museums and do upgrades to their current facility.
If they don't make the 40 million goal , will they do the upgrades and return the balance of the donations to the donors?
Here is an ANA that has ousted Walter O. basically at the whim of the Exec Director, an ANA that has a member of the Board that is being investigated for what I feel could be serious allegations that on the face of it have the potential to become criminal matters. The same ANA that fired the "Head Researcher and Custodian of the Library" My quote, as the gentelmans name is escaping my memory) by Bill Horton, who apparently didn't understand the bylaws as he quickly found out he couldn't do it. The same ANA that had a board member resign, "effective immediately" who is still on the Board and can't quit until August.
We have elections coming up and a there could be a whole new Board, hopefully with a whole new agenda and will they be stuck with this idea to create these museums even when they may have had nothing to do with it?
This same ANA is tied into Ebay and still has done nothing with the scams found daily even though it is within their power to do so. (Although, I truly, at this point think that what is written on Ebay's website pertaining to the controls that the ANA is supposed to have is of the Oscar Myer School of Bologna.) Which in the overall scheme of things could put the ANA potentially liable to be named, in my opinion, as an accesory to the fraud on eBay if any eBayer decides to file a criminal or civila charge after he gets bilked by an Ebay Scammer.
I don't think the ANA is in a position to ask for much until they can straighten out their business at home first. There would have to be a lot of changes befopre I would be willing to support the ideas of these two museums. I am all for education, I am just not sure this is the time to be stacking up 40 million bucks with no clear plan to use it in a way that I would be comfortable with.
Thanks,
Bill
myurl http://www.foundinrolls.com