The executive director of NCRA sent out a response to the Firmowners’ ListServ defending her position regarding contracting that has blown up because NCRA has refused to show up for the Virginia Court Reporters Association as they are right on the cusp of getting some very fruitful legislation passed to protect the public from some bad business practices.
Here’s an excerpt from the E.D.’s email sent out last Thursday:
“NCRA’s position on contracting is as follows:
“In November of 2016, in consultation with NCRA’s Government Relations team and legal counsel, the Board of Directors agreed that it is in the Association’s best interest to remain neutral on contracting. For several years, “contracting” has been used as a catch-all phrase for items and issues that fall in the category of business practices; the Board believes this puts NCRA at risk for antitrust claims. Any events, issues, and items concerning ethics should be addressed via NCRA’s Committee on Professional Ethics (COPE), which is charged with interpreting and enforcing the Code of Professional Ethics in accordance with the bylaws.”
Here’s an excerpt from the minutes of the November 12-13, 2016, NCRA Board Meeting Minutes:
“EXECUTIVE SESSION
“EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT
“Michael Nelson, Executive Director & CEO, presented a verbal report to the Board. He commented on recent staff changes and promotions. Mr. Nelson also informed the Board of a new leadership training program for NCSA on a regional level. He also commented on other aspects of the organization, including finance, testing professional development, schools, communications and marketing, and government relations.
“CONTRACTING
“Dave Wenhold, NCRA’s Washington Counsel, gave a presentation on contracting. Jackie Henson, General Counsel, also attended this session, as well as her associate John Steren, who joined the meeting by phone. There was discussion on this item.
“END OF EXECUTIVE SESSION”**
This is ALL that membership knows about the official change in policy regarding contracting – that occurred 15 months ago, and we are just hearing about now!!!
What prompted the “presentation” to the board by the lobbyist and NCRA’s counsel? A presentation involving a lobbyist and two attorneys just doesn’t pop up on the day of a board meeting! There is a lot of research in making a “presentation” to a board.
How much did this “presentation on contracting” cost membership? WHY was the E.D.’s report and the “presentation on contracting” held in EXECUTIVE SESSION*?
What was the “discussion on this item”? What was the vote of the board? Was there a vote of the board?
It sounds like the new executive director has alluded to an “agreement” that “it is in the Association’s best interest to remain neutral on contracting.” All of us here at WUNCRA don’t believe that our association’s policy changes should hinge on mere “agreements” between a board of directors “in consultation with NCRA’s Government Relations team and legal counsel.”
Wake Up, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense
P.S. Please send this to ten NCRA members so they are also informed about the latest hyperbole coming out of NCRA headquarters.
P.P.S. Was the board involved in the selection of NCRA’s new lobbyist? Was the new position advertised? Were multiple candidates interviewed? Was it just three members of the executive committee that made the decision? Or was it just the E.D. herself that made the decision?
P.P.P.S. Membership is still waiting for a full accounting and back history on the sale of NCRA’s largest asset – aka, our former headquarters building. Was it three members of the executive committee that made that decision, too?
*Robert’s Rules of Order define an executive session as a meeting or portion of a meeting whose proceedings are secret. Only members of the governing body are entitled to attend, but they may invite others to stay at the pleasure of the board.
**Yes, fellow members of NCRA, these are all we get for minutes of meetings of the NCRA’s Board of Directors. If it wasn’t so serious, it would be laughable