COLLEGE OF MONARCHS EXECUTIVE SESSION
MEETING OF THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2008, 7:30PM
KENTON COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY
In attendance (by walk order):
· Emperor III Kevin Raleigh
· Emperor V James I (James Smith)
· Emperor XII Sam Clemons
· Empress XII Ginger Snap
· Emperor XIV Tom Wherry
· Emperor XV Greg Barker
· Emperor XVI Bobby Kettenacker
Agenda: This meeting of the College of Monarchs was called to regarding a letter received by Harry Voll (Truly Scrumptious) dated October 12, 2008 (postmarked October 14, 2008, received by the College of Monarchs on October 15, 2008), regarding his (her) request for reinstatement of his (her) titles and/or readmission into the College of Monarchs.
Format of meeting: round-table discussion. Due to the unusual circumstance surrounding this issue, some round-table discussion also includes or refers to a similar letter by Roberta Bigg, who is likewise requesting title reinstatement.
Comments shared from College member not in attendance: comments regarding this situation were offered from an out-of-town College member via telephone with the College Rep, who shared those responses: Before consideration of reinstatement, we would like to see (1) a letter from each Roberta and Truly, acknowledging that the initial resignation of their this was their choice, and that what they did wrong (unclear in meaning here – what exactly are the “wrong” things that they did?), and (2) an apology to the entire membership. The letters need to be approved by the College of Monarchs, published in the newsletter, and also sent via e-mail to the Membership chair for e-mail distribution to those members who have indicated that they would like to receive Court e-mails.
Another offering states that the next ballot for Monarch should have their names on the ballot, whereby the general membership could vote to reinstate or to not reinstate their title. If they want it faster than that, they need to pay for a special mailing for a special vote. The perception is there that Truly and Roberta have never taken ownership for what they have done, and that they have tried to destroy this organization; however, we have all tried to move past it, and are trying to move forward.
Issue of sending a vote to the general membership: Concerns over this included the following:
· Erodes the power that the College has in taking away titles and/or reinstating them
· Muddles (or further muddles) the “membership / active titles / in the College or not” issue.
· Suggestions / Comments do not mean reentry into the College.
· Is the College being painted into a corner again? Concern that if a membership vote is used, and if and the membership votes to give them their titles, then the College will have no choice but to grant Truly and Roberta reentry into the College.
Comments shared from e-mail correspondence to College Rep from International Court Council:
· Conversation with ICC members offered the following: if they have been gone for 2 years, they need to come back for 2 years; however, give them their titles back, but they are on probation for 2 years with those titles. They need to prove themselves to this organization again. During this probationary period, they should not be in the College.
· When the 2-year notion was discussed with Roberta, offering that it was suggested to her to take 2 years and come back, Roberta’s response was: “I’ve been gone for 6 months.”
· Roberta resigned in Reign 16, and about halfway through Reign 18, she was asked her to perform. That’s more than 2 years.
· There is a general concern regarding both Truly and Roberta, that they are of the mindset of “we want this” and “we want that.” They owe an apology to the membership. If they would apologize to the membership for all the turmoil they created, that would be a huge step in the right direction. They need to show some remorse and respect, and they need to take some responsibility for their actions. By the way they are acting now, it seems that they don’t think they have done anything wrong.
Comments on general procedures:
· This entire matter needs to be a clearly-defined step-by-step process.
· Protocol manual: concern over whether or not we are following it; whether or not people actually know its contents; whether or not people interpret those contents in the same way.
· Argument that the protocol manual cannot be a complex list of reactive, incident-specific rules for each and every situation; rather, the document has to be more general, more proactive and to offer commonality and consistency within the ISQCCBE and within its College of Monarchs.
· Agreement that we are in unchartered territory, and that protecting the ISQCCBE, its name, its integrity and its credibility, is a shared goal.
· The perception is out there that the College is ambivalent and uncaring on this issue. The College needs to take to the forefront, and to make sure that everyone is aware that we are moving as quickly as we can.
· While rules were bent to let Roberta back into the membership, and the majority of the College felt blindsighted in this occurrence, overall some members of the College are glad they are back, as others are now back, too, and overall this does helps to bridge gaps and rifts in the ISQCCBE.
Discussion of specific events concerning Truly, concerning Miami (Oxford) show:
· This show was advertised as a Court show, and was supposed to be a Court show. The public perception was that it was a Court show. One central point of conflict concerns the perception that Truly knew that the reigning monarchs could not attend the Miami show because of a Shooters show.
· The name of the ISQCCBE was on this event.
· The handling of the money from this show was also a point of contention. Copies of money orders that she produced effectively proved that every word she had said was a lie. The very evening of the show is it understood that Truly called a “special meeting” and changed the show from a Court show to a Spectrum show.
· The Court Treasurer was never involved in this because the show money was never deposited into the account.
· Did the charities get their money within 30 days? When asked about the money that wasn’t deposited, that’s when it came to light that the Miami show wasn’t a court show. That is when Truly told us that she “didn’t have to say anything about it because it’s not a court show, but for your edification it was sent U.S. mail.”
· There is still a money discrepancy that needs to be explained, and the only one who can explain it is Truly. The numbers bantered around over the Miami show have been between $800-$900. She showed up with 3 money orders @$180 ($540), but the balance of the money – what happened?
· All 5 charities did in fact get their money.
· Despite all of this, the College wanted to bring Truly in to ask for some explanation. No letter went to the membership, the meeting was initiated as more of a “family meeting,” because the reputation of the ISQCCBE was at stake. However, instead of attending this meeting, she resigned.
· The general perception is that her lackey on the Board ran right to her, and told her exactly what was being discussed about her. Had Truly not resigned, she would have walked into a room just like this, with College people around, and what we would have said was, “Truly, here is your work of art, your book of antics. Does any one of these necessarily get you in trouble with your peers? No, but the accumulation of them does. Now Truly, are you with us, or are you against us? It can’t be both.”
· At that point she still had her membership; if the issues were that important, why weren’t they presented to the membership? (Unsure on answer.)
· What we tried to do at that time was to have a “tough love” approach with Truly, but it didn’t work. Out of 5 scheduled meetings, Truly showed up for 1, and it was at this one meeting that she showed up with the money orders.
· Truly knows she will have to answer some questions. People have had questions for a long time.
Call for Procedure:
· We would like to see (a) remorse; (b) acceptance of responsibility; (c) apology to the College and to the membership.
· Both Roberta and Truly need to come to us, one on one, and answer the questions we have.
· In the specific case of Roberta, regarding responsibility and remorse, we want to ADDITIONALLY hear / see Roberta’s remorse directed specifically to College members for specific instances.
· We will write a certified letter stating that we are going to meet with them. The letter will also include a notation that the College will meet again, within x number of days, after this meeting.
Web Master: Michael L. Connley
Web Updated: 12/13/2009