Warbird Information Exchange

It is time to speak up. My name is Bill Coombes, and I have served on the General Staff from 2004, and as Chief of Staff in 08 and 09. Thus I have been at the hub of this entire affair, and bear responsibility for many of the things that have been brought up here. I am loathe to become part of this thread, not because I am reluctant to share information but because I find it damaging to the CAF, and it is not what most who look on WIX expect to find. I would much prefer to read posts about airplanes than about the internal politics of the CAF. Also, I spent more than two YEARS emmersed in this, and can not adequately explain every part of it in some resonable space on WIX. What follows is an abbreviated version of a more thorough accounting which I will be working on over the summer.

On one level, this is a personality issue. Steve Brown has rubbed some people the wrong way, he has made decisions they don't like, they've lost influence within the CAF, they might even seriously believe he is a threat to the very future of the organization. However, as a member of the General Staff, let me point out that Steve Brown was hired to be the leader of the entire CAF, and that since November o 2007, he has stabilized the membership, taken the yearly deficiet from $600,000 when he came on board to essentially a zero deficiet in 2010, he has created a program to fund the restoration of many of the CAF's "hangar queens," he has increased the visibility of the organization on a national level, he has increased the profitability of Airsho, he has increased the efficiency of HQ, and he has turned the leadership of the CAF from being "reactive" to being "proactive." He has visited more than 40 units, he has made himself available to all members, and he has committed himself to the CAF, just as thousands of others have done. In short, evaluating Steve as the leader of a business finds him successful by anyone's measure. Do I like all the decisions he has made? No, but "like" Steve and his decisions on a personal level is not an appropriate way to evaluate, as a board member, Steve's performance as CEO.

On the level of issues, rocks should be tossed at me, since, as Chief of Staff, I introduced into the conversation the subject "What is, exactly, the CAF, and who governs it?" I posed that question to the rest of the GS as a way to begin a dialogue which ultimately led us to adopting "Policy Governance" as the management philosophy through which we allowed Steve Brown, as CEO, to run the CAF. I did not realize that others had a much different view of the exact nature of the role of the General Staff, vis a vis, it being the ultimate governing authority of the entire organization. I spent long hours talking to many members, including Raybourne Thompson, the man who created the four corporations that people refer to as the CAF. I know all the why's and where for's about this organization, liability protection, etc, but I could not get a clear answer as to "who is ultimately in charge?" It was clear to me that, with the requirement that the current General Staff be the majority on each of the four corporate boards, that the GS was "it" and Steve Brown, as hired by the GS, was the leader. (FYI, when the IRS approved of this corporate restructuring, it was with the understanding that the GS be the ultimate governing authority: our tax exempt status required that). In any event, the "issues" problem began when members of the Museum board attempted to eliminate that requirement from their bylaws. This would have effectively removed control of the Museum from the General Staff and made the Museum a stand alone corporation (which was the goal of this board: I have a letter signed by three of those members, including two General Staff members, stating this very succinctly). This is the issue that led, sadly, to the lawsuit. Two judges agreed with the GS position that the bylaws change was illegal and that the GS is, indeed, the ultimate governing body. We are now implementing a new restructuring document that will MAINTAIN THE FOUR CORPORATIONS AND THEIR BOARDS, but will make clear the chain of authority.

More could be written about the issues involved. For me this has always been an issues thing. I've known all of the personalities involved for years and considered them friends....Hal Fenner since the 1970's, Gordon Stevenson a good friend since the 1980's (I've watched Taylor grow up in the CAF) and it pains me to think of the strains this has placed on those relationships. But this is not about accreditation fears, state funding, selling museum assets, or risking the public trust...those are "straw men" and future events will, I'm sure, bear that view out. Instead this has been about personalities. Steve Brown is the CEO of the CAF, serving at the pleasure of the General Staff. It is time to move on from here.

Bill Coombes

Well said Bill...

Thank you, Bill

_________________

Bill, I don't think anyone but you could have made it make that much sense in that few words.

Thank you.

Well,,,, I can see all parties are going into Friday’s meeting with an open mind. I had hoped for better.

Oh my….yes….. the success for Steve Brown. We will definitely look at that Friday! I think, as does a great number of others, METHOD MATTERS !

As do other things besides $$$$$$

It does matter that the protection of the museum and its assets are at the highest level possible. After all, we fly 60 year old airplanes around crowds of people. It’s not a matter of if an accident will happen; it is when.

The museum is not just “a bunch of WWII stuff” It is the largest collection of WWII memorabilia in existence, That “stuff” is not replaceable. The CAF members didn’t fight WWII, the American people did. The CAF does not have the right to risk that in any way, or consider they own it. The artifacts deserve the same respect as the aircraft, managed by professional museum practices under the guidelines of accreditation. Simply put, the artifacts are bigger than the CAF.

It does matter how people in high places go about ruling and gaining control of their self proclaimed kingdom. The sneaky underhanded methods that have taken place to achieve their goal does matter, and we will hear the details of such actions Friday.

It does matter that we destroyed the career and the life’s work of one fine museum director who considers the CAF “her family”. It matters that the CAF has now lost her talents. When you look at the museum – the thing the big fight is over – you are looking at Tami. She created it from scratch.

It does matter that you throw dedicated people out of an organization they love, just because YOU decided they were in the way of the “new” direction. Of course that is my feeling of why they were thrown out. The illegal action thing doesn’t hold water with me.

It does matter that there is a right way and a wrong way of conducting business, all you “only for the business” business minds. Sacrificing people for business is NOT part of a decent business plan. Sacrificing the safety of the museum isn’t either.

It does matter the methods for which we choose to keep our aircraft in the air. Both on a human level, as well as on a business practice level.

I forgot one very important point. Quoting one of the many wonderful members that have written me,

"A principled person will never compromise their principles."

Probably the only thing I ever needed to say.

Diane

Well Diane, if you and the folks show up from the museum staff that feel they were wronged and can make there case on friday, so be it. I for one ,would like it if this negativeness of the CAF to just go away. Those of us that love what we do and what we stand for, are just appalled by your comments and intentions of harm to this organization. Is it your hope that your actions and actusations will make some kind of difference in how people feel about the CAF?? Is that your real goal here?? To harm the reputation of the CAF. Step back and look at what you are doing?? This is a group you and your husband have been a part of and supported for many years. I have to agree that you have crossed a line and this should stop. these folks on this forum for the most part are not CAF members and don't really understand what is really going on here. they don't really need to know as well.
One last thing, you brought "FIFI" and Cavanaugh into this and that makes it personal!! The only thing that Mr. C wanted out of his extreme generousity, is to be recognized for his interest in keeping these national treasures flying for the publics experience and education of current and future generations.

My two cents

Dave

I know of a girl in the valley long time ago that wanted to marry a Col of the CAF plus in my flight suit, I always reveived a discount at Mickey D's, wished it would work at Starbuck's now days....

Kinda' wish I could be at that meeting. WAHOO...sounds like it's gonna' be a real dust-up.

Mudge the interested

_________________
Land of the free because of the brave

I'm in that camp. I'd like to be there but don't have the means and I've got work then anyway. I AM interested and would likely be a member if there was still a local San Antonio wing. No disrespect to my friends in Hondo, San Marcos, or Burnet, they're just not close enough for me to justify it.

Ryan

_________________
Aerial Photographer with Red Wing Aerial Photography currently based at KRBD and tailwheel CFI.
Websites: Texas Tailwheel Flight Training, DoolittleRaid.com and Lbirds.com.

The horse is prepared against the day of battle: but safety is of the LORD. - Prov. 21:31 - Train, Practice, Trust.

Sounds like they might need a metal detector at the entrance.

_________________
The more I learn about aircraft, the more I realize I still have to learn.

No just a big room with the furniture placed against the wall.....

The most important thing about the CAF problem is we will have a venue to hear the truth Friday. No more one sided he said she said. From the beggining that is all I have asked for .. the truth and the whole truth. You can tell a little bit of truth but if you stop before telling the whole truth in my mind it is a lie. Which ever side tells the whole truth will be the winner in this pissing contest AFAIAC.

First off, thanks for the response on the separate corporations and how they're affected under Texas law. Again, not being a lawyer, simple explanations are appreciated.

Second, I want to thank Bill (Old Shep) for weighing in. His comments on how the new CEO has improved the business performance of the CAF are interesting and well-taken. I would humbly submit, however, personality does indeed matter- most specifically because the CAF is by and large a volunteer organization. People pay money to join the CAF, they are not under any obligation to do so, and they are within their rights to expect a certain level of business performance from the organization to which they belong, as well as expecting to be treated with a certain amount of respect... they are not "employees" in the traditional sense, after all.

Taking Bill's statements regarding the business performance of the CAF under the new CEO at face value, it sounds as though Mr. Brown is certainly meeting his fiduciary responsibility to ensure the long-term viability of the organization. That is good, and suggests that Mr. Brown is well grounded in corporate business practices. But what also seems clear is that Mr. Brown may not fully appreciate the significant cultural differences between a traditional corporate hierarchy and a volunteer organization. People are far more personally vested in the latter, and both cannot and should not be treated as disposable assets, as they might be within a corporate structure. Call it personality or what have you, but that cultural difference is significant and a failure to understand and work within that structure will have lasting, long-term ramifications for the business... because people do not want to invest themselves personally in an organization where their contributions (economic or otherwise) are regarded as disposable or otherwise unnecessary on any level.

Lastly, I want to make it clear that far from seeing this as an airing of dirty laundry, I see this as a necessary and healthy exchange of ideas, because the members of this board are exactly the group of people upon whom the CAF must depend to ensure it's long-term viability. It is warbird and history enthusiasts who founded the CAF and have made it so successful, and the CAF must continue to cultivate that enthusiasm and draw from it in order to survive. There will be passionate debate about how best to accomplish that goal- as there should be. But the end goal of all parties must be the same, and that is the long-term survival of the CAF and it's mission... if all parties can agree upon that, then a workable solution can surely be found.

Once again, I appreciate the information, and look forward to hearing more about this over the next few days.

Lynn

Lynn...Excellent, excellent post.

One, well taken point, in particular, jumped out at me. The fact that CAF is a volunteer organization and it's members cannot be treated as "employees". Although they don't get a "paycheck" they must be rewarded, nonetheless, for their efforts. That reward must be manifested in the respect and appreciation that is shown, overtly and tangibly , by everyone in CAF regardless of their position in the organization.

(Well...I know what I'm trying to say. )

Mudge the verbose

_________________
Land of the free because of the brave