Agenda of the next KCBS BoD meeting

[ThomEmery]

http://www.kcbs.us/news.php?id=299

[motoeric]

This is interesting (from the current agenda):

________
In May the Board passed the following board rule as to “any intended e-mail blast sent by MMA for KCBS or by KCBS, the e-mail blast must be submitted in advance to all members of the Board for comment. The members will have 48 hours to comment. Should there be an objection by any member of the board, then the executive director and the president will direct how the e-mail blast will be handled.” In June an e-blast was sent out where Marketing committee co-chairperson of the marketing committee approved an e-blast without notifying the Board.
On 6/23/2010 11:44 PM, Tana Shupe wrote:
“I agree with Candy, and maybe Carolyn can confirm this. I can't imagine why the entire board would need to see it unless, for some reason, they need to approve the expense ... and I believe that is already covered.
Great job, Julie!”
:) Tana

In November an e-blast was sent our where Candy Weaver co chairperson of the marketing committee approved an e-blast over the objection of two members of the Board, and without submitting to executive director and president to authorize, modify or reject.

On 11/29/2010 12:58 p.m., Candy Weaver wrote:
“Why would this be an agenda item? Why further board approval? Your objection and Gene's objection and Carol's timing objections were the only concerns. I released the e-blast based on only three objections and one of those was a timing objection, not content driven. More positives than negatives, e-blast approved and in process of being sent now.
Should Carol want to add a timing of notifications change, that would be her call.
Candy”

In May a member of the Board kept material information from the Board where the Board was making a substantial financial sponsorship in the event involved.

On 5/12/2010 11:26 a.m. Tana Shupe wrote:
“My contact with Helen Brett emailed to let me know she has been on vacation ... and that she was just told that Helen Brett will not be involved in the Louisiana Tailgate & BBQ Festival. I asked her if she could share with me why they will not be and am waiting for her reply, but wanted to let you know because it does concern me since the website and Enthused Partners have published that there will be plenty of vendors, etc. Maybe I'm just panicking, but wanted to keep you updated. I'll be back in touch if I hear from Leane again. For the present, however, I don't want to share this with the board.
:) Tana
________

Who is Helen Brett? Is she the organizer of this event? As the statement is made that she (Tana) doesn't want to share this with the board, I have to assume that it is something that the board might be interested in, but I have no idea why.

Can anyone shed any light on this?

Is Candy not following the rules about email blasts because she wasn't aware of them or because she doesn't think that they apply to her?

Eric

[motoeric]

Ok, so I did some checking.

It seems that the KCBS had a large stake in the success of the Louisiana Tailgate & BBQ Festival. The figure that I heard was up to $10,000.00 to cover things like demos, lectures, etc. Helen was (from what I gather) the person that was in charge of getting vendors for the event. There was concern over the potential success of the event that was exacerbated by Helen's stepping away.

The fact that Tana wanted to keep this from the BoD is a HUGE problem.

This is completely unsubstantiated, but according to Ray Lampe, Tana received financial renumeration by this event in 2009. The possibility that she had a financial stake in this years event as well and her trying to quash any communication of problems to the BoD is a bigger problem.

Eric

[Divemaster]

That Paul Kirk has once again offered 'No Report' for the only two committees he is responsible for?

I guess the the fact that he is responsible for the:

2010 - 25th Banquet and Annual Meeting Committee

and has 'No Report' bothers me the most. Correct me if I'm wrong but my reservations are for January, 2011. I would think that there would be some kind of report for that meeting since it's just a little over a month away.

So much for a transparent board.

Rant over.

[Jeff_in_KC]

Eric, such an unsubstantiated comment is probably not something that should be posted in a forum. I like Ray a lot but I'm not sure he's completely unbiased. And he may very well be correct. I just don't know that making a comment publicly about something that MAY have happened is a wise decision until facts are certain.

[drbbq]

I'll stand by it Jeff. And while I am biased I have food reason. I have first hand knowledge of some really chitty things Tana has done. Anybody ever wonder why she doesn't work for Jack Daniel's anymore?

[Jorge]

Eric, such an unsubstantiated comment is probably not something that should be posted in a forum. I like Ray a lot but I'm not sure he's completely unbiased. And he may very well be correct. I just don't know that making a comment publicly about something that MAY have happened is a wise decision until facts are certain.

Since I know Ray, and know that he WILL speak his mind... and suspect that he's willing to back that up HERE... I'm OK with it:becky:

Ray has earned a LOT of respect from me, because he's willing to speak and understands that sometimes there may be some professional risk involved in that. I may not always agree with him, but he's cool with that.

I also know him well enough to call him a friend. If he's proven wrong, I think he'd be willing to admit that.

[motoeric]

Jeff,

That is a reasonable concern and I would certainly not make a blanket statement about the veracity of the claim. Ray may be mistaken. I don't know.

On the other hand, Ray is a well informed member of the community and a former member of the KCBS BoD. If he makes that claim then I believe it at the least is something that should be looked into.

I do appreciate and respect your concern for remaining fair and unbiased. Why don't you and I both send Tana an email via her BoD address and ask her directly? We can then post her response to be fair to everyone. Would that be reasonable?

Eric

[motoeric]

Does this seem to be fair, respectful and reasoned? If so, I'll send it tonight:
____________

Hello Tana,


There has been some discussion in the BBQ community about your involvement with the Lousiana Tailgate and BBQ Festival.


I don't think that it would be fair to have these discussions without asking you about it directly. Rumor and speculation isn't fair to anyone. Hopefully you agree and can help set the record straight (if the current perception of things is inaccurate).


With that in mind, here are the questions that seem to be at the crux of the matter:




Did you receive any money or other remuneration in any form under any title (ie. stipend, gratuity, payment, etc.) from the Louisiana Tailgate and BBQ Festival or anyone involved with the festival in 2009 or in relation to their 2009 event?
Did you make an attempt through email or otherwise to either passively or actively suppress information regarding the Louisiana Tailgate and BBQ Festival's status, development and potential problems from getting to the BoD?



I'm sorry if this comes off sounding officious. It's the only way I can think of to ensure that no one winds up twisting your words or equivocating.


Thank you for your service to the BBQ community.


Eric Devlin
Event Organizer and CBJ

[Spydermike72]

Well I guess the question I have is; why is this brought up under "New Ideas" ?

It is a BOD matter and should be handled by the BOD but I am not sure how it is a New Ideas topic, maybe Good of the Order...

I am glad it was brought up and now we can see what happens.

Also the Nepotism thing again, really ?

[drbbq]

Seems fair to me. I'd love to see a straight answer.

[motoeric]

I waited to receive any more feedback and to edit the letter if necessary, but not having heard any suggestions I sent it this afternoon.

I'll post when I get a reply.

I'll also post if I don't receive a reply and mention that as well.

Eric

[arlieque]

Bet you want get a honest reply!

[motoeric]

Bet you want get a honest reply!

I have no way of telling if she would be lying, but I also don't know Tana, so I have no basis to form an opinion that she would be.

Eric

[arlieque]

No reply yet?

[motoeric]

No reply yet?

None so far.

Eric

[Smokedelic]

I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for an answer on this one. I'd bet you're not going to get it.....ever.

[arlieque]

Did you check your junk mail! hahahahaha

[Scottie]

Did you check your junk mail! hahahahaha


Sorry... that one made me laugh... That was funny Arlie...

[arlieque]

it was just for you Scottie but TE made me do it. Arlie

[ThomEmery]

Throw me under the bus
LOL Arlie no more PM jokes for you!

:)

[drbbq]

I see in the Bullsheet that Tana is running again and that she supports shorter board meetings.

[Smokedelic]

I see in the Bullsheet that Tana is running again and that she supports shorter board meetings.
I'd think not answering questions that are directed at you would make the meetings shorter.:thumb:

[drbbq]

She also wants to reorganize the Rep Committee. The one she was the chair of until she got caught with her hand in the cookie jar. I wonder what she has in mind.

[Bunny]

She also wants to reorganize the Rep Committee. The one she was the chair of until she got caught with her hand in the cookie jar. I wonder what she has in mind.

Ray,
Tana has never been the chair of the rep committee.

[drbbq]

My mistake. She was the chair of the sanctioning committee. That's where the trouble began.

[Jeff_in_KC]

You know, Ray, if this whole thread was a Merl witch hunt, you'd be going ape chit against the discussion. The ball bounces both ways and they all need to be replaced and we need to start fresh.

[drbbq]

I admit to a personal agenda against Tana because she did some unbelievable stuff to me personally. That's the difference, first hand knowledge of her character makes it reality.

[motoeric]

You know, Ray, if this whole thread was a Merl witch hunt, you'd be going ape chit against the discussion. The ball bounces both ways and they all need to be replaced and we need to start fresh.

Jeff,

To be honest, I don't care about about personal interactions between Ray and Tana. If they have personal problems, that's between them.

I believe that the questions brought up here are reasonable and I believe that we had a responsibility to go straight to the source and get Tana's take on things. I did that. She chose not to respond. The questions were pretty straight forward and unambiguous.

Are you implying that these issues should not be discussed?

Eric

[Jeff_in_KC]

No but I think accusations ought to be kept in check a bit more.

[Bunny]

I admit to a personal agenda against Tana because she did some unbelievable stuff to me personally. That's the difference, first hand knowledge of her character makes it reality.

Ray,
If it's a personal agenda, why don't you keep it that way and leave it off of this forum and just keep it between you and Tana?

:boxing:

[Smokedelic]

No but I think accusations ought to be kept in check a bit more.
Since when? Accusations seem to have never been throttled in the past, especially by a few BBQ cooks that I have a lot of respect for.

Elections are right around the corner and I think that anyone paying attention and considering their vote should be acknowledging the lack of information in this thread.

...but that's just me.

[Jeff_in_KC]

Since when? Accusations seem to have never been throttled in the past, especially by a few BBQ cooks that I have a lot of respect for.

Elections are right around the corner and I think that anyone paying attention and considering their vote should be acknowledging the lack of information in this thread.

...but that's just me.

I don't think you can fault Tana for not posting anything on an Internet message forum or allowing someone else to post in her behalf from an email in regards to such issues. And with her being a board member, I'm suspecting certain other board members have raised the ridiculous "gag order" issue and threatened consequences if she speaks out.

That being said, you're right. Elections are just around the corner and it's really too bad we can't toss every board member and start fresh with a whole new board with members who care about the organization and the members. The entire soap opera is getting more and more ridiculous. It's freakin barbecue.

[motoeric]

No but I think accusations ought to be kept in check a bit more.

Ok. That seems reasonable.

Which accusation in particular do you believe was out of line?

Eric

[Jeff_in_KC]

Ok. That seems reasonable.

Which accusation in particular do you believe was out of line?

Eric

Maybe "accusation" was not the correct term but...

"This is completely unsubstantiated, but according to Ray Lampe..."

If it's according to Ray, who admittedly is biased due to a personal conflict with Tana, it might be something best left to the two of them.

[Smokedelic]

Maybe "accusation" was not the correct term but...

"This is completely unsubstantiated, but according to Ray Lampe..."

If it's according to Ray, who admittedly is biased due to a personal conflict with Tana, it might be something best left to the two of them.
I completely agree....except for the fact that Tana is running for a seat on the board. I think she would have a vested interest in addressing this issue. If she weren't running for re-election, it wouldn't be much of an issue...for me, anyway.

[drbbq]

Ray,
If it's a personal agenda, why don't you keep it that way and leave it off of this forum and just keep it between you and Tana?

:boxing:

Because she's running for the board and I want people to know what kind of person she really is.

[drbbq]

If it's according to Ray, who admittedly is biased due to a personal conflict with Tana, it might be something best left to the two of them.

I guess I mis-spoke too because while it was between her and I and her boss and my client it wasn't actually personal. She tried to use her position with a previous employer to get my client to fire me and it was all BBQ related.

BTW I'm still working for that client...........

[Jeff_in_KC]

Previous employer... clients you work for... that all sounds personal to me, Ray. Just because you happen to work in BBQ for a living doesn't make it barbecue related for anyone else. I'm not trying to be a smart ass there. It just doesn't have anything to do with her running for the board. Kinda like when Mr. Clinton found himself a new humidor for a cigar in the oval office... people said that was personal and had no bearing on the job he was doing as President. Now if she had used her position as a BOARD MEMBER to try to get you fired, that's different.

[drbbq]

Just because you happen to work in BBQ for a living doesn't make it barbecue related for anyone else.

I disagree.

[Jorge]

Previous employer... clients you work for... that all sounds personal to me, Ray. Just because you happen to work in BBQ for a living doesn't make it barbecue related for anyone else. I'm not trying to be a smart ass there. It just doesn't have anything to do with her running for the board. Kinda like when Mr. Clinton found himself a new humidor for a cigar in the oval office... people said that was personal and had no bearing on the job he was doing as President. Now if she had used her position as a BOARD MEMBER to try to get you fired, that's different.

I'll have to disagree with the premise. Past behavior is usually a pretty good indicator of what a person will do in the future.

[motoeric]

"This is completely unsubstantiated, but according to Ray Lampe..."

If it's according to Ray, who admittedly is biased due to a personal conflict with Tana, it might be something best left to the two of them.

I usually hate 'unnamed sources', so I referenced Ray who had mentioned this publicly. What piqued my original interest (and I'm speaking strictly for me here) was that I had heard the same thing from two different sources that were much closer to the situation than Ray.

I didn't mention that originally, as personal conversations that I had that I don't offer sources for shouldn't influence anyone else.

Regardless, that was only one facet of the discussion. There is still the question of why she was attempting to keep things from the BoD (that she was a member of). That is a significant concern in and of itself and is at least tangentially problematic and related to the question of financial involvement as it begs the question of what her interest in the matter was.

Eric

[motoeric]

Hi,

Just a very quick note letting those that are interested that I received a response from Tana to my email. Unfortunately, I'm heading out so I can't go through it fully right now, but I will do so as soon as I get home.

I'll also ask her permission to reprint her reply here.

It seemed that some people were doubting that she would reply, so I thought it only fair to let those that are interested know that she did as soon as I received it.

I'll post again this evening.

Eric

[Jorge]

I usually hate 'unnamed sources', so I referenced Ray who had mentioned this publicly. What piqued my original interest (and I'm speaking strictly for me here) was that I had heard the same thing from two different sources that were much closer to the situation than Ray.

I didn't mention that originally, as personal conversations that I had that I don't offer sources for shouldn't influence anyone else.

Regardless, that was only one facet of the discussion. There is still the question of why she was attempting to keep things from the BoD (that she was a member of). That is a significant concern in and of itself and is at least tangentially problematic and related to the question of financial involvement as it begs the question of what her interest in the matter was.

Eric

In all honesty that bothers me just as much as some of the allegations I've heard regarding your initial question(s). I've seen and heard it from both factions of the current board, and it doesn't matter who it comes from at this point.

From my point of view it's further evidence of how dysfunctional the current board has become. It's juvenile, and embarrasses me as a member regardless of who initially leaked information about whatever the scandal/issue of the month is.

As legitimate as the issue may seem at the time, keep in mind that when you pick up the banner you have become a pawn to some extent. I say that, based on personal experience...and again that's based on information that has come from both factions of the current board.

At the end of the day, we are all responsible for our reputations when we speak publicy on any issue. Those that have leaked info to their chosen network, are rarely if ever named or held accountable.

My .02

[moocow]

At this point I don't care if she did or did not do what she is being accused of, just the point that here name is being brought up shows in my opinion there is some kind of conflict with her on several different levels. If she did not do anything questionable then I would have a hard time believing she would have been drug threw the mud like this. We do not need anymore conflict on the Board, its time for most of them to go!!!

[drbbq]

There are five seats on the board available this time. Five new bodies would be a great start.

[Jorge]

There are five seats on the board available this time. Five new bodies would be a great start.

Preaching to the choir.:becky:

[Jeff_in_KC]

I'm there with you on that, Ray!

[motoeric]

As legitimate as the issue may seem at the time, keep in mind that when you pick up the banner you have become a pawn to some extent. I say that, based on personal experience...and again that's based on information that has come from both factions of the current board.

At the end of the day, we are all responsible for our reputations when we speak publicy on any issue. Those that have leaked info to their chosen network, are rarely if ever named or held accountable.

My .02

I understand where your coming from and agree. Which is why I only referenced Ray and not the 'unnamed sources' in the original post. If Ray hadn't said anything publicly I wouldn't have referenced that part of the question at hand.

Secondly, I may not be perceiving this the same way as others, but I don't believe that I'm being anyone's pawn or taking up anyone's standard here. I haven't passed judgment and tried to get answers directly from the source.

I have asked Tana if I can publish her answer to the questions here and will repost as soon as I hear back from her.

As an aside, her answers seemed well thought out and reasoned.

Eric

[drbbq]

I have nothing to hide and I speak the truth. Matter of fact anyone who gets to know me learns that I never lie and I detest people who do. Unfortunately that doesn't sit well with some people. Mostly liars.

[motoeric]

I received permission from Tana to post her reply this morning. I believe that I had mentioned earlier that I would post it in it's entirety, but I have to leave just a bit off. She graciously included her phone number in case I had other questions and I don't think it would be right to post that. She also made some complimentary comments about the Brethren that were more of an aside than directly dealing with the questions at hand.

Before I post her response, let me acknowledge that there have been concerns about both an open and clandestine agenda regarding Tana and different 'factions' on the board. Although I am certainly cognizant of the politics and politicking involved, I believe that the original concerns in and of themselves were legitimate, regardless of how they were brought to light.

I also believe that no one should make any judgment without reading Tana's response. She was under no obligation to address these issues and seeing as how she has, I believe that any concerned party would relish the opportunity to hear the other side of the story.

As Tana doesn't frequent the Brethren forums, she is unlikely to respond to any follow up posts here. I'm concerned therefor that if others attempt to refute or provide perspective on her post, the entirety of the thread will be skewed. Sadly, I don't see a remedy for that other than keeping in mind that aside from this exception, the person in question won't be here to provide a counterpoint and that should be taken into consideration.

Aside from the two exceptions, here is her reply in it's entirety:

"Hi Eric, Thanks so much for coming to the source. I know there has been discussion surrounding that event and I am glad to respond.

First, to answer your question, yes, I did receive some remuneration for that event, and I disclosed that to the board.

Now I hope you'll bear with me as I give you some background on that event so you will know the full story.

In early February of 2009, I was approached by a friend (let's call him SS) who is primarily an MIM (not a current MBN) judge who wanted very much to have a barbecue contest in New Orleans simply because it is one of his favorite cities and one he visits often. Knowing that I was a successful contest organizer and that I always strive for excellence, he contacted me. SS knew a gentleman who he believed would be instrumental in organizing the contest contact me. At this man's request and expense, I sent to New Orleans and spoke with several people who would be involved if the decision was made to hold the event. I looked at sites and gave them my advice and information about what it would take to hold the event. After consideration, they decided it was too much for them to take on.

Within a few weeks, SS had another gentleman contact me about organizing a contest for New Orleans. After attending the contest in Mobile, AL, I visited with some friends in Pensacola for a couple of days, and then, at this man's request, a friend and I drove to New Orleans to meet with a second group of potential backers. This gentleman arranged for a room for one night. We looked at the site they wanted to use and told them that, although beautiful and convenient to the French Quarter (which is where their business are located) it was completely inadequate for a contest. This group did have an organizer for the event, but she was unavailable for over a year, so they decided to not pursue having the contest.

In May, a representative from the Morial Convention Center in New Orleans attended Memphis in May and met SS, who told this rep about his wish to hold a contest in New Orleans. The rep from the convention center was so excited about the possibility that he called me even before he left Memphis. He told me that in mid-August they were hosting an event called the Louisiana Tailgate Festival and asked if I would look at their site and talk with the promoter of the festival to see if we could hold a barbecue contest during the festival. In June, I went to New Orleans to meet with the promoter, the manager of the convention center and several other people who would be working on the festival. (In case you're wondering, they did pay for my flight and one night's lodging.) The site was well suited for a contest and the convention center was furnishing the staff and infrastructure for the festival, so at that meeting, they asked me if I would take charge of the barbecue contest, including getting the teams, judges, necessary volunteers, and making sure the contest was a success, and they offered compensation for my time and expertise, which I accepted. I do want to remind you here that most of our board members are contest reps, conduct judging classes, cooking classes, write books, etc. so there is certainly a precedent for members to utilize their individual areas of expertise for financial remuneration.

Because this specific event was timed too soon to receive sanctioning from KCBS, I submitted a request for it to be licensed and received the board's approval, and by late June or early July of 2009, I began sending out information to teams and judges about the event. I am proud to say that 28 teams attended The Big Easy Challenge in 2009, and everyone considered it a success for KCBS.

Although an expo and another contest was planned for 2010, the oil spill compelled the promoter and the convention center management to decide that other critical issues take precedence and the event for this past August was cancelled. I do want to make clear that in 2010, my remuneration for this event would have been limited to the normal compensation for KCBS reps.

Regarding your question #2. I believe I know where that came from, so I'll explain (briefly, if you can imagine). During the preparations for the 2010 event, the company that had been hired to work with vendors withdrew unexpectedly. When I heard about it, I made a statement in an email to one of the members on the Expo Planning Committee to the effect that "I was concerned, but didn't want to inform the KCBS board because vendors were expected to be a major part of the 2010 event and I didn't want anyone to panic." Eric, as I'm sure you understand, when planning an event, something unexpected will come up, and rather than creating concern unnecessarily, you just go with "plan B" and work things out, and in this case, another company was hired within days thus taking care of the problem. Obviously my comment got back to a board member who seized that comment as an opportunity to discredit me, and tried to accuse me of "keeping something major from the board." This was an over-reaction to my comment and was just taken too literally.

As an organizer Eric, I am sure you know that from time to time, there are people who may not be pleased with some of the decisions you must make when you plan your contest. It is simply impossible to keep every vendor, every sponsor, every team, and every judge ... even all of the public 100% satisfied with each of your decisions, and I believe that is one reason you may be hearing different versions of the same issue. Because I organized an event for over 15 years before my retirement, there are a very few people who resent some of the decisions I had to make and with which they did not agree. Even on the board, there are conflicts that, I believe, become personal, but that is simply a fact that must be accepted and we must all conduct the business of KCBS as we feel is correct and necessary.

I do apologize for the length of my response Eric, but, because you were considerate enough to contact me personally, I wanted you to know the full story. If I have done anything less than fully support the mission of KCBS, I am unaware. I love this society and its members and I would NEVER do anything to impune my integrity or to harm the KCBS in any way. I have sought and brought several new contests into our program and I will continue to do so as long as I am able.

I am proud to serve on the board, even with the stress and conflicts it sometimes brings, and I sincerely appreciate your coming to me."

[Jeff_in_KC]

OK so... where is the problem as anyone sees it? Tana was acting in the capacity of organizer, NOT BOD Member. An issue with an associated company came up and rather than bothering the board with it (and further the micro-managing), she took care of it and fixed the situation. Am I, as an organizer myself, required to approach the board if a major sponsor pulls out? Should I ask to speak to the board for every problem we encounter? That's ridiculous and Tana's situation appears to be the same thing. I would further say that she was not given this opportunity because she was a BOD member... she was given this opportunity because of the respect they have for her for organizing the most prestigious event in barbecue for so many years.

[drbbq]

I was going to just let it go but.....

I think she just admitted to the things she was accused of but put a very eloquent spin on why it was ok. But it's not.

There is a big difference between an organizer doing it as a volunteer in his home town and an organizer working for hire around the country. Arlie will have to jump in here but I believe he was told previously that he couldn't run for the board if he was going to organize for hire. This changed everything and that's why he can now run.

[Ford]

OK so... where is the problem as anyone sees it? Tana was acting in the capacity of organizer, NOT BOD Member. An issue with an associated company came up and rather than bothering the board with it (and further the micro-managing), she took care of it and fixed the situation. Am I, as an organizer myself, required to approach the board if a major sponsor pulls out? Should I ask to speak to the board for every problem we encounter? That's ridiculous and Tana's situation appears to be the same thing. I would further say that she was not given this opportunity because she was a BOD member... she was given this opportunity because of the respect they have for her for organizing the most prestigious event in barbecue for so many years.
Jeff. It's my understanding that Tana was a member of the marketing committee and was actively involved in planning the KCBS participation and in that role she was a member of the BOD. I see the issue as an organizer also working on behalf of the KCBS BOD to arrange significant KCBS participation in the EXPO. Had Tana excused herself from the KCBS participation and had another BOD member work on that it would have been fine.

And for 2010 if the only compensation she was receiving was as a rep then there's no financial conflict.

It does however bring up a very good point about organizers being on the BOD. I think that anything to do with their contest should be considered a conflict of interest and they should excuse themselves from discussion and voting and any other KCBS activities related to the contest. I know this would apply to more than one current BOD member and to a few that are running this year.