[TheForge] ABANA - long
George Dixon
[email protected]
Wed Jul 3 07:48:01 2002
A member of this forum recently wrote......
=93The question as I understand it is "Why, when
you had received and signed for a bid, did that bid not be considered?
Will you either confirm or deny having received the bid? If the bid was
received by you, why was it not on the table?
I do not want any more evasions, I want an answer to the question.=94
The response below came from a former ABANA Board member
=93I fully understand the question. I did not sign for a bid. Bids or =
a
better word proposals were presented to the total ABANA Board for a=20
vote.=94
-------------------------------------------------------------
It seems that the issue with the current Board of ABANA is twofold. =20
First is the questionable use of office by some Board members. The=20
other is the apparent consent they are given by their fellow Board=20
members=92 silence and failure to oversee Board actions in ABANA=92s =
best=20
interest.
Obviously, the Board of ABANA should rise above crass personal=20
politics. Failing that, members of the Board should not be able to use=20=
their Board offices to further nepotism, political agendas or personal=20=
vendettas. When these two ethical concerns meld with ABANA contracts=20
and the money which members pay annually, then it is the responsibility=20=
of the entire Board of ABANA, jointly and individually, to act as=20
stewards of ABANA, its contracts and its treasury.
There are two primary contracts for ABANA. Publications and the Central=20=
Office. These jobs are filled through bidding. Bid specifications=20
should be the same for all bidders of a given contract. The Board=20
should review and authorize the content of bid solicitations before they=20=
are published.
How it should be and how it is, appear hard to reconcile.
The same Board member, while Secretary of ABANA, handled the bid=20
solicitation for the Central Office and, later as Publications Chair,=20
for the ABANA Publications bid.
Did the ABANA Board review and vote on the two sets of bid=20
specifications?
I firmly believe that none of ABANA=92s contractors bear responsibility=20=
for the current concerns. I truly believe that they applied in good=20
faith and have done good jobs.
It was the Board which awarded the publications contract. It was the=20=
Board which allowed the Central Office job to grow into a $50,000+, four=20=
day a week, job. It is the ABANA Board which oversees...... or fails=20=
to.
The core question regarding the change of publication contractors in=20
2000 is the Board=92s original claim that the reason for the change was =
to=20
save $25,000 of the members money.
The Board of ABANA has the right to accept or reject bids. They have=20
the right to accept the high bid, with cause.
However, does the ABANA Board have the right to state that a change in=20=
Publication contractors was made to save money if the bid was taken was=20=
=91higher=92 and no money was saved?
This =93$25,000 saved=94 figure did not appear, as some former Board=20
members alluded here, from =93proposals=94. Rather, the $25,000 saving=20=
claim was made by head of Publications, Board member Stiegler, who cited=20=
the amount as justification for changing contractors in 2000. It is=20
written into the 2000 ABANA Board Meeting Minutes from the Flagstaff=20
Board meeting.
Note that this set of Board minutes is the only one of three sets of=20
official ABANA Minutes for 2000 not posted on the official ABANA=20
internet site. If you get to see a copy, note also that the dollar=20
figure of the Publications Contract was not cited, although the Central=20=
Office contract dollar figure was in the minutes of the 2000 ABANA Board=20=
meeting.
A former ABANA Board member appeared to claim on this forum not to have=20=
knowledge of having received a bid package from an ABANA=20
contractor/bidder. This seems to conflict with the existing FedEx=20
receipt, indicating delivery to that former ABANA Board members address=20=
prior to the 11/2000 Board meeting in LaCrosse.
That signed and dated FedEx receipt is now in the possession of ABANA=20=
member Lou Mueller.
Why would there be such confusion from the Board past and present?
As is public knowledge, I have had ongoing difficulties with members of=20=
the current Board of ABANA. My complaints have been addressed to what=20=
appears to be varying misuse of their respective ABANA Board offices.
As to the =93saved=94 $25K.....
In late 1999, Anvil=92s Ring editor Jim McCarty let me know that the =
head=20
of Publications, ABANA Board member Stiegler and my former employer,=20
ABANA Board member Yellin, were pressing him to provide them with any=20
submission I, as an ABANA member, made to the Anvil=92s Ring. This=20
included articles, pictures or business advertisements. Jim McCarty was=20=
told to forward them, through ABANA Publication=92s chairperson =20
Stiegler, to my former employer, ABANA Board member Yellin.
Here is what ABANA contractor McCarty sent to me to illustrate what the=20=
Board was allowing the head of Publications and another Board member to=20=
do with their elected offices to an ABANA member.......
The exchange below was so my former employer/now ABANA Board member=20
Yellin could review and either allow or disallow my=20
submission...including my business ads...to the Anvil=92s Ring. No =
other=20
ABANA member was subjected to this.
Late 1999- early 2000:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
To G Dixon from Jim McCarty:
>Reply from Dorothy:
>Thought you'd want to know.
>Don't forget to send me the new ads.
>
>Jim McCarty
>Editor, The Anvil's Ring
----------------------------
>From: Dorothy Stiegler <[email protected]>
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Fwd: Re: Ad
>Date: Sun, Jan 16, 2000, 11:46 PM
>Jim, Regarding the GD ADD, run it as is, I have this from Clare:
>
>Dorothy
----------------------------
>>From: [email protected]
>>Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:00:22 EST
>>Subject: Re: Ad
>>To: [email protected]
>>X-Mailer: AOL for Macintosh sub 147
>>
>>Dorothy,
>>For now using that title in the ad is satisfactory.
>>Clare
----------------------------
{Clare=92s =93For now=94 use of =93that title=94 refers to the use by =
George=20
Dixon of his resume line item of =93Former Head Blacksmith at Samuel=20
Yellin Metalworkers=94 in his advertising}.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
It would seem that the ethics of pressing a paid ABANA contractor=20
(McCarty) to comply with his Board supervisor=92s (Stiegler) =93request=94=
to=20
facilitate the non-ABANA, business or personal interests of a fellow=20=
Board member (Yellin) is obvious.
With McCarty=92s =91OK=92, I put the issue, with emails as proof, to =
the=20
Board. I never got a response. Both of the Board members involved=20
retained their Board positions in spite of this apparent abuse of =
office.
Later, this same head of Publications called for new publication=20
contract bids.
This, according to both current and past ABANA Board members, Board=20
emails, Board minutes and contractors:
Two bidders (the McCarty group and the current group) were asked to give=20=
a presentation at the 2000 Flagstaff Board meeting.
They were assured that no decision would be made at that meeting.
At the Flagstaff Board meeting, in spite of the assurances given to the=20=
bidders, Publications chair, Stiegler, recommended that the contractor=20=
for ABANA=92s publications contract be changed. Board member Yellin =
then=20
asked that a vote proceed. ABANA Treasurer Hightower made the motion=20
and with a second, the Board voted to change contractors.
The reason cited at that meeting by the Chair of Publications for=20
dropping McCarty & company was that the change of contractors saved=20
ABANA=92s members $25,000. Laudable, if true.....
This amount and the reasoning for the change are recorded in the=20
Official and Board-approved Minutes of the 2000 Flagstaff ABANA Board=20
meeting. Again, they are the only set of minutes for that year not=20
available on the ABANA internet site.
The bid for publications that was accepted appears on its face to be for=20=
$6,000+ more than the dropped contractor=92s (McCarty) Publications=20
contract bid. Is this instead of the =93$25,000=94 saved, cited in=20
writing? Would this be a net discrepancy of over $30,000?
After the Flagstaff Board actions, the =91losing,=92 bidder was still =
told=20
to have a bid proposal to the Board of ABANA by the fall 2000 board=20
meeting. It was their FedEx package, addressed to =91a former Board=20
member=92s' Wisconsin residence, that never made it to the entire Board=20=
in November of 2000.
By the late fall of 2000, this =91$25k savings explanation=92 (recorded =
in=20
the minutes of the 2000 Flagstaff Board meeting) had shifted to a =91bid=20=
too late=92 or =91bid not received=92 explanation for changing =
contractors.
Secretary of ABANA Kagel later called the McCarty-bid=92s printer and=20=
told them that they were =93too late=94.
ABANA Treasurer Will Hightower recently stated, in an email to me, that=20=
the McCarty group=92s package was too late. Perhaps he could read the=20=
2000 Flagstaff Board Meeting Minutes and then explain what =93too late=94=
=20
had to do with the decision to change contractors for a "$25,000=20
savings"? And this, months before =91too late=92 happened?
=93Too late=94...when the decision appears to have been made by Board =
vote=20
the previous summer and the loser was still told to submit a bid?
=93Too late=94....when the 2000 Flagstaff Board minutes instead cite =
the=20
savings of $25,000 as the sole reason for the change over 6 months=20
before the solicited-anyway McCarty package was received in Wisconsin,=20=
pronounced =91too late=92 (and never shown to the entire Board?)?
=93Too late=94 vs $25,000 =93saved=94? Why would a published reason, =
like a=20
major savings, seemingly morph into a time-based decision? Could there=20=
be over 6000 =91reasons=92 that =93savings=94 became an untenable public=20=
explanation for an ABANA Board action regarding the Publications=20
contract?
Throughout all of this, the bulk of the Board sat/sits silent. ABANA=92s=20=
current President, Doug Learn has yet to openly comment.
Former ABANA President Lou Mueller stated that he quit as President of=20=
ABANA over how this publications change of contract was handled.
Mr. Mueller has kept copies of all of the bid documents. As noted, Mr=20=
Mueller also has the FedEx delivery documents relating to the =91bid=20
package not received=92 confusion.
The $6,000 figure of the seemingly higher, accepted bid package comes=20
from side by side comparisons of both bids as written and submitted to=20=
the Board of ABANA in 2000.
Perhaps this is all coincidence. Proof of $25,000 saved would go a long=20=
way toward that perspective.
Perhaps there should be an documented explanation forthcoming from the=20=
ABANA Board to the salient questions: =93was there a savings of or near =20=
$25,000 by the change of Publication contractors in 2000=94? =93Did the=20=
Board review and vote on the bid solicitations and specifications of=20
that bid cycle prior to their being issued=94?
It may be that reforms are needed. The appearance or reality of the=20
bid/contract/abuse-of-elected-ABANA-Board-office irregularities need to=20=
be stopped now and precluded in the future.
Bid solicitations should be Board approved by vote and openly=20
published. Bid criteria should be spelled out, adhered to and overseen.
Recusal from Bid related activities and votes should be enforced for=20
Board members with business or personal relationships to bidders or=20
contractors for ABANA.
Contract amounts should be immediately published.
Oversight is the Boards job, yet some appear unable to restrain=20
themselves, much less oversee one-another. In addition to this seeming=20=
metaphor for ABANA today, we now have a Board in oversight of itself for=20=
the recent ABANA conference and auction.
It may be time to take a hard look and learn from the past with an eye=20=
on reform. This can take place at the ballot box as well as at=20
blacksmith meetings and online, here to forth. Press for the truth and=20=
as needed, press for reform and accountability.
Clearly, all of this is something for ABANA=92s members to respond to as=20=
they see fit. But so long as the entire current Board holds its silence=20=
or offers to sell answers by the hour, reform is unlikely.
George Dixon
ABANA Member
Former ABANA Board member