Q24: Are you satisfied with the current AOG Trustee election process?

Previous Question Next Question
Again, the majority of graduates who responded to the survey were not familiar with the AOG Trustee election process.  Only about a quarter of the graduates felt that they knew how it worked and were happy with it.
 
Number
Response 
Percentage
of Respondents
124
[Blank]
2.40%
227
No
4.40%
3551
Not familiar with the process
68.84%
1256
Yes
24.35%
Total Processed: 5158
Additionally the following comments can generally be categorized in the following manner:
 
 
General Category
Number 
Percentage
of Comments
AOG fails to adequately explain
60
21%
The process is 'rigged'
57
20%
No knowledge of entire process
39
13%
Know nothing about nomination
36
12%
Know nothing about election process
3
1%
N/A
96
33%
Total comments:
291
  The following are the raw comments collected for this survey question.  The numbers serve only to identify the comment for this question and do not serve any other identification purpose:

[001]  it seems that proxy ballets for voting are not sent automatically to graduates

[002]  Nominations are not as open as they should be, but that is probably the fault of local societies.

[003]  Rumor has it that "heavy" contributors have an advantage in being selected.

[004]  From my observations on the WP Forum net and my class net, I would say there are alot of grads who are not familiar with the nominating process, etc. Part of the frustration being felt by all concerned is the perception that the AOG hierarchy has a closed, tightly knit group of retired 4 stars and industrial CEO grads who do their AOG business behind closed doors. They seem to know what's "best" for the rest of us without our input or even, knowledge!

[005]  I have never been asked to participate in the process. As far as I can tell, the Trustees are selected by a small group.

[006]  I am unaware of it, and have no idea how you pick them

[007]  Seems Fixed --- There are no alternatives. The slate process is too inbred. Too hard for alternative candidates to get on the ballot. Not enough information on those who are running... Seems fixed

[008]  Trustee selection is an old boy net work---election is generally automatic based on current system. Get nominees from classes based on a percentage of classmates nominating the person to be put up for election. You could get more active and energetic members if you cast a wider net.

[009]  As former WPS of Silicon Valley President, I nominated and WPPSV board approved the forwarding of Bill Almon to the Selection Committee. Although I may be comfortable with the process, there may still be the perception of a "inner circle" controlling the process. Many may not understand the time and financial/travel resources needed to fully participate as a trustee. I don't have the answer, but the feeling that only big dollar contributors or "annointed" others is out there.

[010]  I have never received information on this process.

[011]  Relatively new to the inter-net and I am aware of information passed via E-Mail fairly recently.

[012]  I don't know how the process works, but I recollect that Jack Hammack would not be a trustee if the Class of 1949 had not been so vociferous at the General meeting because our class had been by-passed. It was wrong and got corrected. I don't know if that could happen again.

[013]  I don't understand how people are nominated. if this is the appropriate forum, I'll throw my name into the ring.

[014]  Never really heard about it

[015]  Screening processes are a mystery. Term limits seem advisable.

[016]  I admit that I am not as familiar with the process. It seems as a relatively younger grad that the AOG Trustees seem to rotate on and off the Board and decisions are made by more seasoned trustees who may not always be directly in touch with the concerns, affairs, and financial status of younger classes, particularly those who left the army before 20 years. (Surveys like this, however, are a good way to correct that!)

[017]  I have read a lot of criticism on the class email list, but have not investigated the process enough myself as yet. I have been told via email that it appears there are rather many trustees who were not career military or disabled if discharged early. I would support requirement that trustees be career officers unless for some special circumstance.

[018]  Not familiar with the process, particularly how the nomination process works.....but I'm naturally suspicious.

[019]  WE NEED MORE GRADUATE AWARENESS THROUGH PUBLICITY. THIS PROCESS NEEDS TO BE 'HYPED' AND BE VERY VISIBLE SO IT ISN'T SEE AS JUST ANOTHER ACTIVITY OF THE OLD BOYS NETWORK.

[020]  Not sure how nominations are made. I am just presented with the ballot, whether I like the nominees or not.

[021]  Whatever

[022]  Fact that I don't know how trustees are elected tells me I am out of the loop. Am member of NMMI Alumni Association (equivalent to AOG) which has very visible process in which I get a vote. It is better and fosters greater interest by Alumni in what the Association is doing.

[023]  I have no clue, frankly, how this process works. I would be interested in learning more about it.

[024]  I believe the nomination process should be clarified and spelled out more completely.

[025]  It seems that Trustees are "selected" on the basis of their military rank/accomplishments. A desire to serve, it seems to me, is as important as any other criterion. Why doesn't the AOG ask those who are interested in serving to let that be known to them.

[026]  The nomination and volunteer process is a mystery. AOG needs to explain it.

[027]  Too much emphasis on wealth and contributions to USMA.

[028]  should be a vehicle for individual nominations from grads as a whole

[029]  It appears to be very much of an insider and by invitation only affair. I feel no connection at all.

[030]  the nomination process is controlled internally

[031]  Society's and Classes are asked for nominations, but no feedback is given as to who is up for election or how the Trustees were selected. Would recommend that after nominations are received, classes and society's are also involved in the selection process.

[032]  Better information needs to be published about the process. I have never heard how to get listed on the ballot. It doesn't appear to be a very impartial process.

[033]  Too far removed. Get web pages up with backgrounds, agendas, qualifications, etc.

[034]  Not sure about how we get the nominees.

[035]  Obviously inbred--who knows who to get someone on the board.

[036]  Like more information so I can take part in voting.

[037]  I have no ability (that I am aware of) to nominate, to run, and to elect trustees, and to monitor their performance in office.

[038]  It has never been clear where the candidates for election come from. Are they appointed? Do they personnally request consideration? Do the WP Societies nominate? Obviously, folks want to participate and can participate but the mechanism of how all this is done is not evident.

[039]  I have never been sent any literature on the nomination process. No one has asked me for my input, and my first knowledge of elections came in the mail (and with the choice but to vote for the preselected candidates or not to vote at all)

[040]  If you don't subscribe to Assembly, how do you find out?

[041]  I am not satisifed because I have never been informed of the nomination and election process. This is a major problem in itself. I am interested in becoming a Trustee.

[042]  It's not a sufficiently open process.

[043]  How is the process open to all graduates? My impression is that it is a close-hold process and that elitism is practiced in determining who will be invited to be a Trustee-at-Large

[044]  Seems preordained to some extent.

[045]  Seems too poorly communicated. Several years ago, while on the board of Los Angeles society, the process was very political. The grad who lobbied the strongest (and was ultimately elected) was never visible at any of the functions or dealing of the chapter.

[046]  I'm not satisfied, because I am not familiar with it. I am pretty plugged into what is going on in the world. I am not obviously plugged into this.

[047]  I may have participated by proxy, but I can't remember.

[048]  I've always assumed it was an old boy net.

[049]  I would be interested in beign considered for a position but do not know the process.

[050]  Process should involve all memers.

[051]  Election process may be okay. Am somewhat mystified by the nomination process.

[052]  I have no idea how the candidates get nominated.

[053]  Need to educate the masses on this process.

[054]  Appears not to be representative of all Graduates. Nominations should be provided from the field. There also should be geographic representation. This would provide greater tie-in locally.

[055]  Who makes these selections--too ingrown

[056]  Entirely too many non career members.

[057]  I get the feeling it is like a secret society of grads in the DC beltway area with a few links to texas or florida

[058]  It seems to be a mysterious process. How does one get nominated?

[059]  Somewhat!

[060]  It's an all or nothing process. The AOG needs to send out ballots to all members (not just those who subscribe to Asssembly),provide names of nominees, and provide for wite ins and withheld votes much as most major corporations do.

[061]  slates seem to offer no real choice

[062]  Trustees should be grads with career military experience, not those who got out early and have deep pockets.

[063]  how does one get nominated?

[064]  It is unclear how nominees are selected and how by-law changes are enacted. It seems AOG operates in its own little world. Why not publish more information in the Assembly or on the web page?

[065]  As I see it, it's not really an election with a choice of candidates, but an affirmation of those nominated. HOWEVER, to make it a real election would be so difficult and time consuming that it would likely be a worse solution. So let's stay where we are.

[066]  I didn't even know there was such a process, Have I missed a mailing or something? My impression is that it's pretty much of a good old boy group. As one of the unwashed masses, I have had no opportunity to participate. I don't know what I would have been able to contribute, but one would like to have been invited to the dance.

[067]  I am aware of the process and indifferent to it. The AOG today seems 90% focused on the matter of raising funds from graduates to compensate for inadequate levels of federal funding.

[068]  Used the no block just to say, Who cares? This whole thing is self generating. Thoses close to the process will be those nominated and among those elected.

[069]  Not enough attention to outside/non-inner-circle input

[070]  I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY ARE SELECTED AND WHAT THE ELECTION PROCESS IS.

[071]  only feasible way

[072]  Too many Retired Generals. Need to have active duty generals and active corporate leaders to include non-grads. They can have more influence with fund raising and in government. May be it can be capped at 20-25% non-grad friends of USMA.

[073]  You need a wider membership. AOG should be prepared to pay the travel and fees for its Board Members to attend meetings just as companies do. Then members without corporate or private funds could afford to be involved. Also, there ought to be an elective process where graduates can seek a position on the Board without being nominated by the Board.

[074]  As shown above, I was not sufficiently aware of the process to participate

[075]  Not familiar with the entire process

[076]  The election process is OK. However, younger grads ( under about age 40 or so), minorities, and women are very under represented on the board. Also, only a very few (two or three) are active duty, and a minority are military retirees. I found it curious to hear the opinions of board members about how to train military leaders when they had done 5 or fewer years active time thirty or fourty years ago!

[077]  Information and announcements regarding this process should be more more actively published.

[078]  Voting should be by secret ballot. It should be possible to vote for "all, except any names struck through" and to cast a vote for a write-in candidate. The nomination process needs to be more open. Graduates must feel confident that the AOG's actions are fully transparent.

[079]  I believe Assoc. Members are unable to vote on Trustees. And I have no problem with that policy.

[080]  I assume based on hear say it is an old boy, big contributors,and "Godfather" network as most of the things are done by the AOG.

[081]  Understand the election process, but not the nomination process.

[082]  What is the nomination process? Who is considered for election, and by what process?

[083]  Seems that the election is a "done deal" by the time we get to vote.

[084]  Appears to be too many trustees

[085]  It looks like an inside job to me.

[086]  the process in my opinion does not allow for more candidates to compete for the trustee positions--I believe the local societies and the vclasses themselves should have more of a say in the selection process--by invigorating the process we may have trustees selected who would bring more activism to the aog board

[087]  I don't think the "process" is well-known or well-communicated. I have always wondered how those persons selected for positions were chosen.

[088]  SEE QUES #17

[089]  I am not sure why the process seems to elect so many guys who did not make the military a career. I am afraid that the AOG is losing touch with the Army and career officers.

[090]  Not online. Electronic democracy is alive and well! I wish AOG would wake up to its value.

[091]  Doesn't really matter to me one way or the other. I have a lot more important and pressing things to take care of.

[092]  Not familiar w/ the process enough but appears to be somewhat out of balance by classes or time periods.

[093]  I have no idea how one is even considered to be a trustee. I might be interested in this if I knew more about it.

[094]  I want to see more trustees chosen with better real world business connections. Out here what counts is not what you know, but who you know....

[095]  I would be interested in the process and maybe becoming a trustee-at-large.

[096]  Limited to people who can travel alot. Others, bound by the economics or by work demands are excluded.

[097]  I am embarrassed with my responses to 21-24 above!

[098]  Became familiar through working on this survey.

[099]  Actually both "no" and "not familiar" are similar responses, since if grads are not familiar, I don't think the process is adequate in involving as many willing individuals as it can!

[100]  Seems that one must be in the inner sanctum to be considered.

[101]  Money oriented

[102]  The single slate of candidates strikes too close a parallel to the election process followed by the former USSR. "Here are the candidates, vote yes!" Furthermore, the use of proxies fro those grads who fail to return them by the AOG president guarantees the single slate will be elected.

[103]  Do not believe that I even was aware of being invited to attend or able to voice an opinion by proxy.

[104]  The BOT is not representative of the living graduates. There is no way that a class should not have trustee at large for 50 years. There are too many trustees from too small agroup of classes. There should probably also be a regional representation of some type.

[105]  We seem to be seeing the same old guys year after year.

[106]  I personally do not like elections where a nominating committee decides who to place on a proxy ballot. I prefer general election with two strong candidates who want to better the organization. First place = Chairman/President, second place = Vice Chairman/Vice-President

[107]  I may have voted over the years, but nothing sticks in my mind.

[108]  N/A

[109]  The compliant I have heard is that the Board is too much of a rubber stamp for the Supe and his USMA policies. The Board needs to be more attuned to what its grads are thinking and can contribute to the process through the Board. The Board needs to be more active and assume a more questioning mode.

[110]  Its a joke--an old boys clique--not a grass roots process.

[111]  I am a former cadet, and prefer to leave this to those eligible to serve.

[112]  22: Assuming most such meetings are at West Point, they in themselves would not be worth the trip. 23/24: If the processes and candidates were forwarded to me, they obviously did not make an impression.

[113]  The same people are elected time and again. The "class of '65 mafia" are on for life. Why must Tom Barron and Denny Coll be on the Board for over 20 years each. It's a joke. I could name MORE names but what good would it be. Up until the last few years there wasn't ONE grad from the 1970's year groups as a Trustee at large because you had to make room for the same old tired faces. Term Limits MUST be enacted for ( two terms max???) the AOG to grow and thrive.

[114]  The process needs to be explained clearly and well before an election. (Perhaps it has been in a letter from the President of AOG which I did not read at some point.) But I always wonder how people are selected for the ballot we get in the Assembly and how we can participate in the process.

[115]  The process is not clear to the membeship, in my experience. In particular, how is someone nominated to begin with?

[116]  Don't recall the proxy process.

[117]  Unfortunately, I have not paid attention to this important aspect of the AOG

[118]  how about doing through internet?

[119]  Nominations are actually restricted to alumni who are in the circle of power.

[120]  Can't really explain it...I'm just not satisfied...

[121]  My classmates who got elected as class officers while in schoo do nothing to communicate with our class, but routinely use the benefits about self-appointment for meetings, etc.

[122]  How do nominees become nominees?

[123]  I knew they existed but never knew how they were selected

[124]  I'm not satisifed because I simply do not know how people get elected. I see their names in the Assembly and wonder how they got there. I'd like some more knowledge about and input in the process.

[125]  This process should be better advertised. I wouldbe interested in being a trustee but don't know how to go about it.

[126]  Enough information is not sent out to truly get a representative sample of potential candidates. I only get to vote for already nominated individuals. Who nominates the individuals and what makes them so special? What is the nomination process and why is it not widely disseminated? Perception is you are a small club of individuals.

[127]  Is this an important poistion? If so, its a well kept secret.

[128]  If I had an interest in being a trustee, how likely is it I could do so? Not having been a class president, high ranking cadet or officer, am I likely to be considered? I'm just not familiar with the politics, if any, of getting into the running!

[129]  Don't understand how nominees get selected.

[130]  It honestly is something I have not followed

[131]  I voted, but I admit I didn't pay a lot of attention to the process.

[132]  Not "open" enough-still pretty tightly knit process for people "in the area".Works reasonably well by using Classes to nominate,.

[133]  I am not familiar with the process and as a former 15 year member of the WP Society of New York it was never covered in our monthly meetings. My suspicions are that it is run like an "old boy" network although I must add that all of my classmates who are or have been on the board are eminently qualified.

[134]  Based on experience with local society, there is a fairly closed group of people who continuously fill these slots. Suggest specifically reserving slots for first time Trustees to broaden view and reach out to membership.

[135]  Related to 23 above - unaware of the process.

[136]  Not enough involvement of the graduates at large; seems that not enough info gets out to encourage more participatin in the nomination process.

[137]  I've not gained enough info on the process, but it seems too closed

[138]  This is one area that needs improvement. Can you provide some information on this process.

[139]  Get it down to a nomination process where classes and societies are involved and then let the members vote directly or by proxy as in a corporate BOD election. The AOG is not doing this now. The perception is that it is the "old boy network" putting their stamp of approval on the slate nominated by Classes. There is little democtratic/participatory involvement by akll the members.

[140]  I'm sorry to say I don't remember. I do remember getting annual USAA ballots, but if you have sent me any they don't stick in my memory.

[141]  I'm not sure how trustees get nominated.

[142]  It seems to be a close door process.

[143]  If proxy ballots are distributed though the Assembly then I may have voted but I don't recall doing so.

[144]  I have always considered it a "closed shop".

[145]  It is a good old boys club is it not?

[146]  I have never been notified or informed of the process

[147]  Don't really know how folks are nominated. Heard some rumor about financial commitments on the part of trustees in order to be a trustee. True?

[148]  I have no idea how people are selected/nominated. If one is interested in serving, how do they let it be know? How do I nominate someone?

[149]  I have never heard of this election process.

[150]  Process is too little known, and seems too much a closed system, with "outside" grads having little opportunity to impact the process.

[151]  If I get a ballot for a proxy, I must admit I do not recall it. Therefore either I've been asleep or the process is not advertised.

[152]  Whether right or wrong, and with at least the eception of Buster Hayden, Trustee selection seems too centered on major dund donors. Re 25 and 26, below: How about posting agendas and results on the web?

[153]  It has never been explained to either myself or any of my classmates. It would be nice to see the possibility of electing a chairman who is a businessman rather than an ex general.

[154]  How does one go about nominating a class mate or someone else for a position?

[155]  It is more like a club. Too many members remain too long on the Board. There should be term limits.

[156]  Don't know what it is or how I am suppose to play.

[157]  I do not remember participating by proxy in the last four or five years; thus, I am probably not up-to-date on the process.

[158]  More information should be offered to graduates via all means of communication as to how the process works. How do trustees get nominated? Who nominates them? What's the required workload for trustees (in terms of hours of volunteer effort)?

[159]  How are nominations made?

[160]  1. What do the Trustees do? 2. Are there any young grads?

[161]  Probably do not know enough about the overall process.

[162]  ... so not satisfied.

[163]  There should be a term limit of no more than 2 cycles. I am at West Point. I have housed Board Members for the past several years and my impression of the process is an "old boy network" with little or nothing getting done. I have not heard of a single WP initiative being disregarded or challenged.

[164]  From my experience with the WP Society of NJ I find the process looks to much like a closed process and Society & member inputs are just noted and filed,

[165]  Need more representation from career military and less from successful business men.

[166]  Do not think general membership is aware of process

[167]  Active participation has nor been solicited and I would like to see a more open nomination and selection process.

[168]  The process should be explained on a continuing basis so that it is not considered to be within a closed system.

[169]  Not enough publicity.

[170]  I would like to see nominations taken from others than those residing at Weest Point. I think AOG should advertise the opening of nominations to the membership at large via the internet so the membership can make nominations before they are published for voting.

[171]  If you're not supporting graduate activities, as opposed to trying only to get graduates to support your activities, then you have a problem. These questions look as though you want to duck behind some technical issues to explain away a problem.

[172]  Nomination process very vague (can't remember ever reading any information about this process). For instance: who's eligible, role responsibilities, time/meeting commitments, etc. As far as the election process, it's fairly similar to a corporate proxy vote; however, what powers & rights do the general membership have in the Association. Additionally, the nominated Trustees should have some biographical data provided with the proxy statements. I just feel that we need to address more specific & detailed Trustee nomination and election guidelines to the general AOG memebership. To me, it's appears to be a "good 'ol boy" network!

[173]  Nomination process for potential board members is unclear. Qualification requirements for board members unclear.

[174]  The little I know of it--it seems most of these guys are from close by the USMA, and are non-contentious (if everyone agrees with the Supe why have Trustees).

[175]  I'm so far removed geographically and by duty requirements I don't feel part of the process. Don't know how to fix that...

[176]  Making an option of voting by internet would provide more widespread availability.

[177]  What is the Process?? Is it an "old boys network"??

[178]  Dissatisfied because I didn't know about it. Would be willing to serve, however.

[179]  It appears to be tied too closely to a candidate's ability to spend money. Good service and good ideas do not necessarily require the expenditure of money.

[180]  Not at all familiar, and not sure what function they currently serve. Seems to be a forum for friends of the class officers.

[181]  The Graduate now votes for a proxy who then votes for whomever HE wants. This results in a disproportionate number of high givers.l

[182]

[183]  I am not staisfied because I do not know how the process functions. This needs to be addressed in the Assembly.

[184]  I would like to be involved but simply am not aware of the process

[185]  Seems to me that this a little used process, in which a small group of graduates, usually assigned to, or recently from, the academy take turns nominating each other.

[186]  Don't know how people get nominated

[187]  It appears to be controlled through the selection of the nomineees.

[188]  I voted once years ago when I happened to be present for a General Meeting.

[189]  OBVIOUS NOT INFORMED..BY THE AOG TO MAKE A DECISION...NEED TO INFORM GRADS OF THIS PROCESS

[190]  I am unsure of whether I participated in the last trustee election. I am aware of the proxy ballot, but am unsure if I followed through with it or not.

[191]  If these are the same c-suckers that are responsible for losing SEALS off Grenada, FUKIM. Same type of attitude that brought us the 'Battle of the Bulge" and "IA Drang". remember that Boys? Any fuckin'questions Crots?

[192]  I think a major effort should be made to peridocially get "new blood" on the board.

[193]  By choice, I continue to believe the vast majority of grads practice the ideals of WP and I trust those willing to serve.

[194]  who are these people ? how did they get elected. ? what do they stand for ? what are they contributing ?

[195]  I am not familar with the "nomination" process, but would like to be better informed. Maybe this is a mailing that I simply do not read. Nt sure

[196]  Who came up with the candidates?...and how?

[197]  Not enough general info out to classmates about the process. Seems either a classmate currently stationed at WP or the Class Pres gets the job without a lot of discussion.

[198]  I have not voted by proxy because I do not know the individuals up for selection. I'm reluctant to "rubber stamp" approval for trustees I know little about. I reiterate, however, that I have been very happy with the efforts of AOG since my graduation.

[199]  I feel that I am left out of the process. I don't know how it works.

[200]  The process is totally unfamiliar to me. I don't believe the AOG does a very good job of informing its "public" of Trustee nominations/elections etc. It seems to be a process closed to all except those "in the know"

[201]  Proxy votes give an elite the powe to select winners, making such an "election" a farce

[202]  Do not understand the process at all !!

[203]  Perhaps it is somewhat the fault of my class officers, but my class has selected a Trustee in the past by "self-selection." In other words, the classmate who was in contact at the time with AOG (for reunion purposes) had himself nominated and selected for the class trustee position without anyone else in the class being involved. I think we need clearer information in the Assembly prior to elections.

[204]  Last question (#23) did not allow for a "no" response.

[205]  I am not convinced that the process chooses the graduates that best represent the interests of all graduates.

[206]  There should be a provision for selection of Trustees by the membership - not just by the nominating committee. A write-in option, or selection from more nominees than the number of spaces to be filled are two ways to approach this.

[207]  I didn't know it occured and didn't know I had a vote.

[208]  Why is there no class of 57 representative on the board?

[209]  It's not clear how candidates are selected and what their qualifications are.

[210]  Not familiar with the process

[211]  it appears to be very selective and part of the "good ole boy" network which tends to select those with similar views which inhibits rationale discussion and proposals for improvement.

[212]  I apologize, but I have not paid much attention to it, but would like to be more involved.

[213]  Trustee selection seems to be a closed process, or a process that I (others?) am not familiar with. There seems to be a small coterie that directs, controls, and administers the process. Gift capability seems to be one of the guiding principles in selection (which I understand) and rank attained while in Service. No doubt these people are gifted and strong in their love for the Academy, but others are as well. I believe that there should be more diversity on the Board in terms of achievement, background, experience, wisdom, racial, and (because we have women cadets) gender.

[214]  Not fully aware of how the Trustees are identified, nominated and elected.

[215]  It isn't important to me

[216]  I have no idea what the process is.

[217]  not aware of the nomination process

[218]  Have never been approached nor apprised of what the process includes.

[219]  Not enough information on candidates.

[220]  Seems to be run by a group of insiders.

[221]  Each class should be represented in turn.

[222]  It seems to be an "old boy network" of retired military brass. In doing so, the junior classes are not well represented and are therfore often alienated. We have a large number of emerging business leaders in the classes from the 70s and 80's who could potentially add great value to the Trustees.

[223]  Class trustees do not serve long enough to be effective. Lack of travel reimbursement limits process to those who live reasonably close to West Point or to those who can afford to travel at own expense.

[224]  Class trustees do not serve long enough to be effective. Lack of travel reimbursement limits process to those who live reasonably close to West Point or to those who can afford to travel at own expense.

[225]  The AOG doesn't explain how it selects its Trustees just like it never explained how to nominate someone for the Thayer Award.

[226]  Seems to be a closed operation which magically takes place each year.

[227]  Do not believe it is anything other than pro forma election of individuals who by and large did not complete a career in the army. AOG definitely needs to look at this with a view of insuring that the board has people who have spent their lifetime doing what the acvademy hoped they would do. I am by no means alone in this view.

[228]  Poor communications

[229]  Too many entrenched members, taking on an "old boy" look

[230]  As mentioned below, I do not recall receiving any information on nominees or a proxy ballot!!! Where do these appear.

[231]  There is a process for selection of BOT members, but these members are not essentially different from the many Committee members who attend the Board meetings. Need an open, accountable process for all.

[232]  However, there is a perception that seats are more likely to go to high contributors (funds) or to successful fund raisers.1

[233]  CLEARER ANNOUNCEMENTS OF PENDING NOMINATION SELECTION AND THEN OF THE ELECTION ITSELF

[234]  Process needs to be explained better and more peploe included that may not be in the mainstream activities of the AOG currently.

[235]  My local chapter is dominated by retirees. Younger members and active duty personnell seem an after thought.

[236]  Since the AOG presumes that all ballots not cast are theirs as proxies, there is no point in voting. AOG wins, no matter what, since only 50% of graduates subscribe to Assembly and that's how the ballots go out. My guess is that there has never been an issue that AOG has not won by a 100-to-1 margin.

[237]  Might want to participate via video teleconference rather than having to travel to WPT

[238]  With more career soldiers as AOG Trustees a Walter Cronkite would never have received the Thayer award!

[239]  Maybe I've missed it but nothing has ever been sent to me that jumps out to me about the process

[240]  Need more information on those to be voted on, particularly their position on current Army and Academy programs, etc.

[241]  There should be an emphasis on putting graduates on the board who have had full careers (20 years minimum) in the services. There are too many people on the board who graduated USMA but who made their careers primarily in civil life.

[242]  It seems awfully inbred, but I may have a bias in that regard! There seems to be a strong network of folks who have been directing selections/policies for years. This has plusses as well as downsides, and maybe if they did not continue there would be no one to take their places! Active duty people areespecially remote from these processes and I'm not sure I know how to get them involved. They are busy, and USMA is far away!

[243]  I am very interested in the process and in participating in it.

[244]  It appears that the process is controlled by the Executive Committees of the graduating classes and is not determined by a selection process or vote by the class members.

[245]  AOG should notify members of the position nominees would take on major issues so that members could make a reasoned vote.

[246]  I have only become vaguely aware of the process through the "forum" page and was surprised at the nature and criticism attendant to the selection of nominees

[247]  We sould have more input in nominations.

[248]  There appears to be a "core" group that selects the trustees at large.Frankly,this is the first time I have become aware that there is an election.Even so I can see the possibility of only a chosen few to be entered on the slate.

[249]  Nominees should come from officers who have made the military their career. With, perhaps a very exceptions, no graduate who resigned after only 3-5 years in the service should be eligible.

[250]  Only because my own class seems to be under-represented! However, I have no specific concern beyond that.

[251]  I don't keep current with that process.

[252]  Having been elected at one time it seemed that proximity to West Point was the most important factor. Maybe that has changed. I think the Trustees are sometimes too much of a clique and not truely representative of the membership.

[253]  Right now it seems to b an old boy network, where current trustees ask friends or acquaintences to come on board and elections are more or less uncontested. Someone needs to galvanize the AOG to make it an organization that might make a difference in the current decline.

[254]  If continued use of the proxy system is desired, greater emphasis should be placed on increasing participation in the nomination process. Currently, the selection process has a "political machine" feel to it. This should be avoided.

[255]  I seem to get all the fund-raising mail but none of the proxies.

[256]  I believe that their should be no age limitation (e.g., 75 years) for service on the Board of Trustees. It should be based soley on willingness and capacity to serve.

[257]  I did not even know we were supposed to vote!

[258]  I really do not understand what the selection process is. Just seems to me that there are an awful lot of grads involved.

[259]  -seems to be focused on those who graduated and became powerful captains of industry rather than captains of the military. -some stayed the course--these people need a lrge voice in leading the AOG

[260]  See previous comments about the "good old boys" club. Also - to open up the process, have meetings somewhere other than West Point. Maybe then, more members of the AOG could witness and participate in the process.

[261]  I'm not sure how the candidates are selected.

[262]  current process is "Soviet" style. 12 names for 12 seats, you can only vote yes or no. Like to see a ballot with more nominees than vacancies.

[263]  BOARD OF TRUSTEE MEETING PROCESS 25 Would you be interested in seeing the Board of Trustee Meeting Agenda forwarded electronically to graduates before the meetings are held? trustee_meetYes Yes trustee_meetNo No 26 Would you be interested in seeing the results of each Board of Trustees Meeting forwarded electronically? brd_rsltYes Yes brd_rsltNo No USMA DIRECTION 27 Have you been aware of or followed the Superintendent's proactive process of including graduates in the development of a new USMA Mission Statement? missionYes Yes missionNo No 28 Are there any issues or policies about USMA or its direction which concern you? concernNo areas of concern as I am happy with the direction that West Point is heading No areas of concern as I am happy with the direction that West Point is heading concernSee List Below See List Below concern_Other29 Are there any Congresssional, Defense, or Army mandates impacting the ideals or welfare of the Academy, or Graduates, which concern you? directionYes Yes directionNo No If yes, please explain: direction_OtherLAST CHANCE 30 Please add anything you want passed on to the AOG leadership in this space: anythingFEEDBACK 31 Please add any constructive comments you wish to make about this survey or any other concerns not covered in the survey that you would like included as questions in a future survey. feedbackThank you for participating in this electronic survey developed by West-Point.org working in concert with many other graduates and the AOG. When the data has been reduced to useful information and analysis, you will be informed of how to access that information by the same means used to inform you of this survey. Submit Answers   Reset   http://defiant.west-point.org/Questions? mailto:feedback@west-point.orgContact us

[264]  It's mysterious

[265]  Although a true outsider to the process, having observed only one AOG board meeting (June '94), my sense is that the organization and process is pretty moribund. Indeed, my view is that the real activity of importance to me takes place at the local society level. Consequently, if there were a change in the election process, I would propose that directors/trustees be in large part selected by the societies. Those grads elected by the societies would bring needed energy, enthusiasm, and ideas which are important to individual grads.

[266]  Like to see more trustees that are successful academy graduates. Look at what Bob Herres has done at USAA.

[267]  Trustees should be foreced out after 6 years. It appears to be a semi-closed click.

[268]  I have no understanding of the process at all.

[269]  Do not understand the complete process Appears to be an insiders game