dfenner wrote:
Ryan, All I know is Tami O'Bannion had a very productive and solid relationship with the Midland/Odessa Permian Basin communities. Tami made sure the community was well represented by the museum by placing Barbara Davis, Luann Morgan and Andy Shaffer on the museum board years ago. These people are solid, extremely well respected citizens of the community. As for your specific question I don't know the details, don't need to know the details. As a CAF member I trusted Tami and her board and I leave the details to them. As with everything, it always boils down to who you trust.
Diane, Some time you have to let this go. It's obvious that you are letting your emotions over come the facts. I wasn't there for the whole meeting but I did hear the lawyer, ( from court sworn testimony) explain how the IRS considered the museum as " a seperate but not independent" PART of the CAF. This was made extremely clear. As a board member when Steve was hired, I had no doubt that Steve was over all four parts of the CAF. The job description, that was presented to all of the board members at the time, was read in the meeting Friday, and all of the board members that were there, including the ones kicked out, admitted that they saw and agreed to it's message before we hired Steve. Steve gets there and the museum director decides that the museum must be independant.
If you remember, I asked "why did the museum hire a law firm instead of using members that would do it for free". What I didn't realise, until Friday, was that 2 free lawyers representing the museum in a meeting with the CAF lawyers were shown that seperating the museum would be in violation of IRS rules, State rules and the lease with Midland. The board held an "illegal meeting" without the required General Staff quorum requirements of the Museum bylaws, and voted to change the bylaws anyway. The museum volunteer lawyers probably decided that they wouldn't defend an undefendable stand. The cost was from the museum director hiring this law firm and the CAF had to cover the expense.
Your quote "As a CAF member I trusted Tami and her board and I leave the details to them. As with everything, it always boils down to who you trust."
I think you need to re-read that quote and you'll get the answer.
My take from the meeting, from the record of the sworn testimony in court:
1. The board had an illegal meeting without the required quorum.
2. Even after knowing that it would violate IRS rules, State rules and the lease with Midland, they voted to change the bylaws anyway.
3. When the CAF filed a court action to stop the board, the director hired a law firm to represent the museum without authorization.
My view is that the museum director signed the agreement and should be required to pay, but the CAF decided to pay it to get it over with.
I spoke to you for quite a while after the meeting by phone. You said that " the meeting was nothing but a lawyer stating a lot of legal stuff, they didn't allow for the human side of this". ( paraphrazing)
I said to you then and repeat now " The legal stuff was FACT, the human side is EMOTION" I spoke to each of the CAF members sactioned, except Floyd who I wasn't able to talk to before I had to leave, and Joe who I didn't care to talk to. The rest (including Floyd) I still consider friends that just are on a different side of an issue.
another quote of yours:
"My question in the meeting was, I want to know what IS IT that you want to do with the museum that you can not do under the 4 corporate structure that has worked beautifully until October, 2007 when Steve arrived. This fight for total control of it has cost the CAF over $100,000.00, really good guys kicked out, life long friendships destroyed, and Tami gone. I want to hear a $100,000.00 answer."
To answer that, I want to know "What is it that the museum wanted to change that has worked beautifully until October 2007 when Steve arrived?"
I hope you can get over this. Nothing you say can or will change anything. The meeting was very productive with the vast majority learning a lot. There were many emotional sides to this issue and in the meeting. All, but a few, said that they were willing to get on with it and let things heal.
Please Diane, for the sake of the CAF, which you claim to love so much, and for Hal who the CAF loves so much. LET IT GO.