Responses of Captain Leonard R. Wass, USNR (Ret.),
Central Region Trustee Candidate,
To Concerned Alumni Questions

1. (Question). Of course, as a member of the Board of Trustees, you will have the primary obligation of ensuring adherence to the Alumni Association's Bylaws. There are currently a number of Amendment Proposals that are now under consideration at Alumni House. Please review these Amendments (available on the CA web site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/usna_ca/files/U-Bylaws.doc ) and advise of your views on these Proposals. (If you do not have access to this site, please advise and we will forward the documents to you via email.)
   

1. Answer:

• Concur with write-in candidates for election of Chairman and Vice Chairman.
• Concur with flexibility for single slate or multiple slate election as proposed.
• Ambivalent about removal of two BOT appointed trustees in favor of chapter/class elected positions because the CA write up justification was not compelling to me. I feel all Trustees represent all members, with special emphasis on their constituencies. “At Large” Trustees might better represent members who are overseas, without chapters, or without strong class organizations.
• Concur (strongly) with all four parts of this nominating process change, particularly in light of my experience to raise 150 nominating petitions. (Hard to do if you’re not in a big Chapter). In fact, I would add another amendment authorizing nominating petitions to be submitted by facsimile (rather than just email) to accommodate members who don’t have email access. As amended, the new by-laws would be changed to: a timely Nominating Committee process; 100 petitions by email or fax; and Nominating Committee having final authority for slate.
• Concur with BOT filling Trustee vacancies rather than Executive Committee.
• Concur with membership review and comment period for bylaw changes.

Other Comments: I think the above changes, proposed way back in August 2000, should have been acted on already. This tardiness is unacceptable, and hopefully will be solved by formation of the new Governance Committee. I support the new Governance Committee based on my 28 years of general management consulting experience in this area. I am hopeful that it will discharge its duties promptly and effectively.

2. (Question). Do you think it proper for the Association to discuss and, when considered appropriate, voice constructive criticism of Academy policies. Further, do you consider that Shipmate should be the voice of the Association or the voice of the Academy, or is there a difference?

2. Answer:

• Yes, definitely. It is not only proper, but I believe it is our responsibility to convey our thoughtful and considered criticism and advice to Academy officials in order to improve our beloved institution. Academy officials would be foolish to disregard, or not want, this valuable source of advice and counsel. It is incumbent on those offering such advice and counsel to make sure it is, indeed, thoughtful and considered. You should know in advance that I am adverse to spurious, ill considered or “sour grapes” criticism and will not act on it. I will listen to issues and concerns if they are presented thoughtfully (i.e., having done ones homework on the issue beforehand) and are also accompanied by practical and actionable recommendations. If you are looking for someone who will just do your bidding, I am not your man. I will carry the torch for those issues that we can influence and bring about constructive change.
• With regard to Shipmate…It is the communications organ of the Alumni Association, owned by it, and should be controlled by it. Having said that, the Alumni Association should also continue to solicit input/articles from Academy officials and use Shipmate as a vehicle for having Academy officials inform the alumni of developments at USNA. Unless we continue that policy I do not see a convenient way for the Superintendent to communicate to the alumni. Unlike many civilian universities, USNA does not have its own “house organ” to communicate directly to its alumni.
• If this question infers whether we should air our “dirty laundry” in Shipmate, I am opposed to that. There are other more direct and more discrete ways for us to communicate our views to USNA officials and we should use them. Using Trustees, Alumni Association management, Class Presidents, and email/letters/phone calls direct from alumni are examples of some more direct and effective communication channels.

3. (Question). Current fund-raising efforts by the Association (actually the Naval Academy Foundation, but the two organizations are, in important ways, joined at the hip) are unprecedented, with goals five to ten times historical amounts. Do you think the Association's current emphasis on fund raising is overdone, underdone, or about right, and why do you think this?

3. Answer:

Based on the emails I’ve been reading in the CA network, some of you won’t like my position on this matter. I believe that USNA has been long overdue in tapping its alumni for needed funds and support this effort completely. Further, through discussions with my class officers I’ve learned that USNA alumni are among the most parsimonious in their contributions to their alma mater as compared with other distinguished institutions of higher learning. There seems to be a belief among many USNA alumni that the government should pay for everything needed by USNA. I strongly disagree, and it mystifies me as to how former military officers could even think that “mother government” would provide for excellence in all areas needed for developing Midshipmen into top tier Naval Officers. The government, as you all know, is rarely generous in funding its military to required levels. It’s also low-bidder oriented. If we depended on the government to fund all USNA needs we would have a third-class institution. I don’t think any of us want that. There was no secret as to where these monies would go. A facilities plan was developed and is being implemented. I was asked to join the USNA Foundation Trustees in April 2001 (different than the USNA Foundation in that the Trustees focus exclusively on financial support for Navy athletic programs). The Trustees organization contributes from its own wallet, adding to the principal it has accumulated over the years, and funds many programs that “mother government” wouldn’t dream of financing. If not for this source of alumni financing we would not have 31 varsity sports and a similar number of club sports, many of which are nationally acclaimed. I would hope that we all agree that the Navy sports program is an important ingredient to shaping future military leaders. This is but one example of the need for outside funds. Furthermore, every other institution of higher learning depends heavily on alumni support. Tuition just doesn’t suffice to fund a first-class institution. Take the University of Notre Dame, which I am very familiar with having funded my stepson’s tuition for four years. (Notre Dame is the second biggest accession source for new Naval Officers by the way—only USNA is bigger). Notre Dame alumni contribute heavily, and they also have a big say in the way the institution is run—not just in athletics, but in all aspects of the university. The most recent fund-raising campaign raised over $2 billion. I believe USNA graduates must recognize that their contributions are essential if we are going to maintain a first class Academy. They should also recognize that their influence over the direction the Academy takes would increase as they become bigger factors in the economics of USNA.

4. (Question). In your opinion, should appropriated funds be commingled with private funds? Give your reasons. For example, what fraction of faculty salaries should be paid by the Association, if any, and why do you think this?

4. Answer:

First of all, read my lengthy answer to question #3 above. Secondly, the word “commingled” infers, in my mind, something nefarious. I object to all unethical or nefarious behavior. Third, I am certain that no private funds are used at USNA for faculty salaries and I don’t think any ever should be. To my knowledge some professors are occasionally brought in with private funds to teach an occasional course, but they are not considered faculty. Similarly, private funds are used to compensate some of the Ethics Center for Excellence personnel but none of them are considered faculty. Roger Werheimer and Hank Chiles are examples of these personnel (the Distinguished Chairs of Ethics and Leadership, respectively). They report directly to the Superintendent and are not beholden to the Academic Departments. Instead, they volunteer to teach/support certain courses and make themselves available to midshipmen. Hence, in this example private funds are used to pay for the difference between good professors brought in by government funds and revered individuals who have a prestigious reputation in a professional area. My great Class of 1964 has raised funds for an Ethics Center of Excellence, and some of those funds are being used for salaries as I have discussed herein. Fourth, I do support a publicly disseminated plan that states the reasons for and uses of outside funds. USNA and the USNAAA have done that. The new center for assemblies, basketball, theatre, etc. is a good example of a building that was needed and could not have been built without outside funds. Planned renovation of our football stadium is another good example. Housing in Annapolis is provided by the USNA Foundation Trustees (with their own funds) for many of our coaches. Without that funding, we couldn’t attract top caliber coaching talent (and I’m not talking about football alone). Finally, I think it is time for many of our alumni to step up to the plate with their wallets to help USNA maintain excellence. We have financially independent alumni who are quite willing to criticize, but unwilling to contribute. I am not supportive of such alumni positions (i.e., those that have the ability to contribute and refuse to do so).

5. (Question). Do you think the Naval Academy Foundation should be responsible to the Alumni Association and the Alumni? If so, how would you, as a Trustee, expect to monitor and control expenditures? If not, should the Association be party to raising monies for purposes beyond the knowledge or control of the membership?

5. Answer:

I know for a fact that many of our alumni don’t understand the organizational changes that have taken place recently with the merger of the USNA Foundation with the Alumni Association. Until recently, the USNA Foundation was part of the USNA Foundation Trustees (which I am a member of). Most large universities raise their funds under the umbrella of a “Foundation”, and the Alumni Association wanted to pursue fund-raising under this umbrella. So, the two Boards agreed to merge and the Alumni Association is conducting its (first ever) major fund-raising campaign under its new umbrella, the USNA Foundation. And, to answer the CA’s question directly, whatever monies are raised should be carefully monitored and controlled by the Trustees of the Alumni Association.

The USNA Foundation Trustees still continue to function separately in its capacity for funding athletic excellence. Its funds are self-generated and separate from the USNA Foundation/Alumni Association; hence, members of the Alumni Association have no interest in those funds (but should be appreciative of this generous and necessary effort which has gone on for many years).

Make no mistake about my position about control and usage of funds. As a life-long management consultant I embrace strong oversight and control of policy and usage of monies by the appropriate Boards. Hence, I embrace such oversight by the Alumni Association Board of Trustees over all funds raised from its membership.

6. (Question). Much has been said for a number of years about improving communications between Trustees and the membership, but no serious mechanism is in place. Under the present arrangement, as a Trustee, you will be unable to consistently communicate directly with your thousands of constituents, or through Shipmate in any meaningful manner. Do you think the membership should be polled on matters of substance? If so, how would you go about putting in place a mechanism to facilitate this? Do you have any other ideas on the subject of constituent communications?

6. Answer:

I am a first-time candidate for Trustee. Quite frankly, I’m surprised that prior Trustees haven’t solicited the views of their constituencies. I know that my class President has done so. The email Internet system has been around for some time now, and so has Shipmate and telephones. I think many past Trustees haven’t reached out broadly enough for input. As for my plans…I have kept an email group address list of everyone who gave me a nominating petition (185 people). That’s a start toward communicating in the Central Region. I also intend to use Shipmate and the USNAAA Web Site by listing my email address, phone numbers (work and home) in my candidate credentials (soon to be published). In those credentials I have stated my platform to be:

I respectfully request your nomination and support for the job of Central Region Trustee for the USNA Alumni Association. I use the word “job” because I believe the position carries responsibilities for me to represent each of you to the best of my ability. I wish to make a difference for all of us—and I assure you that I will try.

PLATFORM: To seek, on an ongoing basis, inputs of what you like, and what you want changed--with the Alumni Association and the Academy—and to represent your thoughtful views. I believe that a Trustee must represent the considered views of others to carry out his duties responsibly. I pledge to represent Central Region Members well--to be available in person, by phone, or by email throughout my term—and to feedback progress periodically. This would be my first service as a Trustee to the Alumni Association.

I would hope that those who vote for me and know that I am their representative (if I am elected) would contact me with issues and concerns as I have stated. I consider the Trustee position to be one of “service”. I’m a busy man, but I’m serious about serving well if elected.

7. (Question). If you could change the course and speed of the Association, what would you do or what would you recommend to the membership?

7. Answer:

I don’t believe that the Alumni Association has done enough to bring two-way communications between itself and its membership to a desirable level. This must be improved, and brought to a level where members are being informed of Alumni Association activities, including its interfaces and discussions with Academy officials on topics/issues of interest to the membership. In the other direction, the communication flow of topics/issues of interest of members needs to be improved. I believe that much of the frustration I’ve observed among alumni, including the CA group, would be at least lessened if not removed by more effective, ongoing communications.

8. (Question). Are you familiar with the current courses of instruction in ethics at the Naval Academy and with which the Alumni Association has assisted in funding? What are your opinions?

8. Answer:

Ethics has been, and will continue to be, a major challenge for USNA. I am somewhat familiar with the current courses of instruction at USNA through my great Class of 1964 funding programs and participation in them. I have attended all (except one) January dinners in the Mess Hall (called King Hall today) where my class has annually presented updated ‘64-commissioned books containing real-life ethical military case studies to the graduating class. We have spoken to the First Class about ethics, individually at the tables, and collectively by the classmate chosen to speak that evening (e.g., Commandant of the USMC, CINCPAC, SECNAV, former Vietnam War POW, etc). I believe that USNA is making progress against a tough societal challenge. Our culture has not valued integrity and ethics for quite awhile. A two-term Commander-in-Chief who was a chronic liar and ethical scoundrel (no names mentioned here) exacerbated this unfortunate development. Hence, for many years the input to USNA was young people who weren’t raised at home with sufficient sensitivity to and appreciation of proper ethical behavior. And to make matters worse, for many years Academy officials did not react appropriately. I believe this situation has turned around in the past few years. My Class President spent considerable time recently attending actual Midshipman ethics courses at USNA at the invitation of the Superintendent. I read his report and talked to him extensively about his conclusions. He believes that the courses are sound, and making progress. Establishment of the Ethics Center of Excellence through my class’s efforts also helps. Additionally, VADM John Ryan, the current Superintendent, has taken other initiatives to imbue a sense of ethics in our USNA Midshipmen. Is it completely resolved? I think not, and I know from conversation with him that my distinguished classmate General Chuck Krulak, USMC (Ret.) concurs. I value his opinion, and I believe that we will need to pay continued, and even stronger attention, to this most important area.

9. (Question). On a scale of 0 to 10 how do you judge that USNA is delivering the appropriate products to the U.S. Naval Sea Services? Please provide a qualitative rationale for your quantitative scoring.

9. Answer:

This is an important question, and one I have considered for some time. Nonetheless I really don’t have enough evidence to reach a thoughtful conclusion. I know that the Board of Visitors indicated that there is room for improvement. I also know that our Navy/Marine Corps team has successfully waged war in recent conflicts, including Afghanistan where the Navy/Marine Corps team has done the heavy lifting and most of the work. This evidence tells me that our young and not-so-young officers, from all accession sources, are doing a good job. Admiral Snuffy Smith in a recent BOT meeting conveyed some evidence that USNA air warriors are held in high esteem. I intend, whether elected or not, to pursue this important issue because it interests me, but more importantly, is vital to the continued existence of the Naval Academy. I think the issue should be framed differently than the way it is above in question #9. I think the real issue is whether USNA, as an institution, is adding sufficient value to the taxpayers to justify continuing its relatively high funding as compared with other accession sources such as NROTC. We all need to get a definitive answer to this question, and hopefully one positive to our beloved alma mater.

Thank you for the opportunity to express my views on several important matters. I will be out of the country and away from email/phone communications from 12/27 until 1/13/02. May all of you have a healthy, happy, and prosperous New Year. God Bless.

/s/ Captain Leonard R. Wass, USNR (Ret.)

All USNA alumni—active duty, retired and civilian—
are invited to JOIN the Concerned Alumni discussion.