A secret MAB forum members can't see. Is this rumor true?

[Greg Bell]

Please let us know what company Joe F has so we can all stay away from it.

The CMI program is a perfect example of how you can get what was outstanding vendors to the dark side. Any officer of NACHI that is on the board of the CMI should be thrown out of NACHI.

Nick it appears that your child (NACHI) has grown up and no longer needs you. Are you man enough to step down and let the members take over?

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

Originally Posted by gbell

Please let us know what company Joe F has so we can all stay away from it.

The CMI program is a perfect example of how you can get what was outstanding vendors to the dark side. Any officer of NACHI that is on the board of the CMI should be thrown out of NACHI.

Distance Learning:

• H.I.T. Interactive
• http://www.hitinteractivemedia.com/home.html
  Contact: Joe Farsetta
  info@hitinteractivemedia.com

The Master Inspector Certification Board, Inc. thanks the schools listed above for participating in the EveryInspector database project.

http://www.certifiedmasterinspector.org/cmi/contact.htm

[Greg Bell]

Thanks Joe,

While we are at it how about letting the members know who gets the biggest share of the funds paid to ADRS.

[Greg Bell]

Looks like you had better change your signature Joe. Everyone is a master now.

[Mark A. Timpani, CMI]

I see ashi in the horizon

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by mtimpani

I see ashi in the horizon

Yes, I'm Pisces with ASHI rising.

[rdawes]

Just a point of correction. The policies put forth by the MAB only affect vendors on the MAB and the ESOPC, no other committees or offices are affected. Why only those? Because our scope of effort was designed to be limited. We didn't feel that trying to reform all of NACHI was possible all at once.

And for the record, I didn't even know that Joe Farsetta was a vendor until this thread. So again Nick's argument that all this was targeted at him is B.S. It's targeted at making the processes better.

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

Originally Posted by gbell

Looks like you had better change your signature Joe. Everyone is a master now.

There are many home inspectors.
But only one Master.

HouseMaster

[jmichalski]

Originally Posted by gromicko

Yes, lets listen. I won't even campaign for my position. I'll just write my argument against your proposal in the same or fewer number of words as you use to argue for it.

Why do you refuse to listen to the members? Lets hold a referendum Michael.

Michael? You can't even read names.....

[jmichalski]

I can see where you would want to drum up support from inactive members who recognize your name but are not aware of any issues. Thus, they would give greater weight to your position, regardless.

Sure, if I had such an inherent advantage and I was losing the argument badly (as you are), fighting alone against the President, ED, VP, MAB and nearly every member who has weighed in on the issue, I would want to bait my opponent into some arena where I could press that advantage, too.

The most active members, and those who truly care about internal NACHI policy are already speaking. You simply refuse to hear it.

Anything we do would simply be an exercise in futility because, in the end, you always do what you want - despite the member's wishes and best interests of the membership in general.

We both know that the members who do the most and care the most about internal NACHI strucutre and processes are right here on this BB. They have already weighed in heavily on my side. You can go pad your numbers if you so choose....such an exercise has little meaning to me.

[Richard L. Bennett]

30 people out of 8000 is not a landslide

Would someone list the areas of debate as they see it??

I do not see this as an all or nothing issue

rlb

[Joseph Hagarty, CMI]

Originally Posted by rbennett

Would someone list the areas of debate as they see it??

rlb

http://www.nachi.org/mab-agenda.htm

4/25/06 - The MAB is putting the final touches on guidelines for NACHI committees and a formal complaint layout program. Our plan is to forward the final documents to the BOD no later than next week. With the recent resignation of MAB member Dave Valley we will be posting requests for a replacement soon on the private area of the message board. Please contact an MAB member if you may be interested in this position.

5/9/06 - After weeks of writing and re-writing, the MAB completed and forwarded to the Board of Directors yesterday the new "Committee Guidelines", and "Ethics Complaint Procedures" documents. The committee voted unanimously on the documents and await the review and adoption by the BOD. My thanks to all the members for their time and input, and especially to member Ron Dawes for handling the writing and editing task.

5/26/06 - After months of hard work the MAB finished writing the new Guidelines for Committees and Procedures for Ethics complaints which were forwarded to and accepted by Pres.- Blaine Wiley, VP- Paul Sabados, Executive Director- John Bowman, and Founder and Director of Public Relations- Nick Gromicko. The new documents can be viewed on the "What's New" section of the NACHI main page of the website.

[jmichalski]

I never claimed a landslide, but in political terms 55% and greater is usually considered a landslide.

The fact that only 10 of our active BB members (to date) oppose the proposal is telling, though.

I also do not see it as all or nothing but I think we have two significant fault lines of debate at which we have reached an impasse. (I will try to present them as factually and without spin as I can)

1) The MAB has proposed elections for the MAB and ESOP to produce accountability and responsiveness to the membership from both bodies. The founder wants no elections and would like to retain the ESOP as an independant body that is appointed by him (or the BoD - on which he sits). Agruments pro and con are listed above.

2) Vendors will not be allowed to hold positions on the MAB or ESOP under the new proposal. This was designed to eliminate the conflict of interest or potential appearance of impropriety. Those with financial relationships to NACHI could be influenced by them, and use inside knowledge, or steer policies and programs to their own benefit. The founder would like to see no restrictions placed on vendors.

Ultimately, the agrument against the plan seems to keep coming back to the fact that the current Ethics chair would have to stand for election and (it seems) could possibly lose (I am not sure of that, but it is not at all relevant to me).

Nick seems to feel that Joe F. cannot be replaced (otherwise, why worry that he might lose an election) - I (and the MAB) believe that any member with common sense, high ethical character, and a desire to serve the membership could fill this post quite well.

The arguement has been offered up that the ESOP could be put in the awkward position of ruling on an issue for someone who has campaigned for them. I have yet to see a campaign at NACHI that had "helpers" and find it far more likely that someone would have to rule on an issue of a friend or colleague they are close to. In any event, recusal is a part of the proposed process and the conflicted member is obligated not to rule on the issue. That is the only ethical thing to do, even if we do not have elections, so this is a moot point.

The argument has been made that vendors should be allowed to hold positions of influence since they have industry experience and offere benefits to members. I believe that the potential conflict of interest is not worth the potential benefits. These vendors can still serve in an advisory capacity. They can still offer advice, help, guidence on the BB and through other NACHI channels. And they can still provide goods and services to members - we just do not think it is proper or ethical to allow them inside knowledge or the ability to impact policy or programs (given that money is the most easily recognized of conflicting interests.) The benefits from vendors can always be present - they will not stop selling to NACHI if they can't be MAB or ESOP members, and are welcome to provide advice and input.

That is it as best I can do in a cut and dry way. Understand that I already have a stated position, so mine is not an objective view, but I tried to be fair in presenting the arguements.

[Richard L. Bennett]

Joe T

Good job

Does anyone else see any issues with the MAB drafts??

Joe I think you can see the direction that I am going here - your thoughts sir

rlb

[rdawes]

Some other key points of the proposed policies:

• The ESOPC creates SOP and Ethics policies but does not adjudicate complaints. The handling of the complaints is handled by a separate body, the MAB.
• A public policy is created for the handling of complaints with procedures intended to be fair to both sides. This policy is not shoot from the hip make-it-up-as-we-go and is known to all parties in advance.