White Paper: "Don’t Waste Your Vote" by Hector Negroni '61

[Bill Roberts]

“Change” has become a familiar, but controversial, term in our busy world. But, “change” is inevitable; and it is time for the AOG membership to embrace positive changes that will assure that our alumni association will grow and prosper in the years ahead.

For some AOG members, the upcoming 2011 Board Election will be an opportunity to perpetuate the current Board philosophy and to keep the incumbent leadership in place. But, if the status quo is retained, the unintended consequence will likely be that members may forfeit their last chance to retain a voice in the future of their AOG.

If the current "support the Academy first" theme stays in place, the AOG is destined to become an insignificant player in the affairs of the Academy and a de facto subsidiary of the USAFA Endowment (UE). On the flip side, for AOG members that believe that the AOG is first and foremost a membership association that should put the interests of its stakeholders first, this election is an opportunity to effect some needed changes.

Independent of which position you prefer, it is imperative that the AOG membership makes their voices heard and their votes count in the 2011 Board Election.

Some recent history: In the 2007 Election, 38% of the AOG membership voted. The voters elected a member sensitive Board that tried to bring balance to the three-part AOG Mission, to reassert the independence of the AOG, and to return transparency to the AOG policy making processes.

In 2009, only 12% of the membership voted. As a result, a strong electioneering effort in CO was able to place several 'local' grads on the Board with very low vote totals; and, that has resulted in the reemergence of a voting pattern that existed on the Board prior to 2007. In short, the majority vote resides with Directors who have a strong bias towards supporting programs, primarily Academy brick and mortar projects, without adequate input from the younger Classes who have expressed little interest in construction projects and a preference for AOG programs designed to address graduate needs.

There is certainly nothing wrong with supporting programs designed to benefit the Academy and the Cadet Wing; but, the AOG is a membership organization and the interests of the members should not be subordinated to other interests. Over time, the forced union between the AOG and the UE may mature into a formidable partnership that will benefit the Academy and the graduate community greatly. However, today it is not an equal partnership; and it is deceptive for the AOG to operate under the guise of 'friendraising' when, in practice, all that means is that a primary function of the AOG is to prime the pump for UE 'fundraisers'.

Look at the numbers: Five of the six Directors on the 2009 Board who carryover to the 2011 Board graduated prior to 1973 -- '61, '62, '66, '67, and ‘72. Only one carryover Director -- '88 –will be available to provide the perspectives of the 38 Classes that graduated after ’72. And, not to be overlooked, those 38 Classes account for over 80% of the total graduate community.

If the AOG Board is going to be representative of the graduate community, it needs to more closely reflect the total graduate demographic. The AOG Board needs Directors interested in developing a vision for the AOG of the future, not an AOG that fills the expectations of senior graduates but subordinates the needs of younger graduates. Board policies put in place over the last two years indicate that the Directors from the 60s and early 70s do not fully comprehend or embrace the expectations of the younger graduates. Yet, it is the younger graduates who will have to live with the consequences of AOG policy decisions made today.

If the AOG is ever again to have an independent posture at the Academy with the ability to support the graduate community and the Academy in ways consistent with the will of the membership, the AOG Board must reflect the membership at large. At present, because of the dominance of Directors drawn from early Classes and living in the Colorado Springs area, the AOG Board is perceived by many graduates as just an extension of the Colorado Springs USAFA graduate retiree community. This perception is a deterrent to greater involvement by younger grads who would like to be more closely aligned with the Academy and more active in AOG matters.

To correct the obvious representation imbalance on the Board, AOG members need to vote responsibly to assure that the Directors elected in 2011 will be younger, more diverse, and not Colorado Springs based. It is not a stretch to assert that the future of the AOG as an independent, important player at the Air Force Academy is once again in play. This is not a replay of the governance wars of a few years ago. This is a new challenge and one that, if not addressed now, will blunt expansion of AOG membership and limit the future of the organization.

To balance the 'senior' incumbent Directors that will serve on the 2011 Board, a slate composed of the following Candidates offers a talented, motivated, younger group that will be able to play an important role in shaping a vision to guide the AOG in the years ahead.

O'Neil '83, McDonald '90, Beasley '93, Welter '97, Rock '98, and Rosenow '03.

This slate offers relative youth, contemporary experience, diverse backgrounds, and a member-centric orientation that has been missing in the AOG Board Room the last two years. With their addition to the Board, the AOG will have a balanced Board with diversity and much broader Class representation.

Do your research; discuss these issues with other grads; and don’t waste your vote.