Back in June, Deckboss predicted conflict among the six companies operating under Alaska's Community Development Quota program.
Now we're seeing that prediction play out, as five of the companies are opposing efforts of the sixth, Coastal Villages Region Fund, to obtain a greater share of the quotas.
Coastal is vowing to continue its efforts, which the other five consider to be "dangerous" to the CDQ program.
Read a remarkable exchange of correspondence among the CDQ players in this press packet Coastal distributed this week.
Just think how much more Morg can pay himself if they get an increased allocation. Kind of disgusting that he's the highest paid CEO of the six groups (by a long, long way) when he's spouting that his region has the lowest per capita income.
ReplyDeleteJust a question...
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone who works for APICDA own a $1 million house they bought with their compensation package from a non-profit?
Conspicuous consumption is a monument to hypocrisy and exploitation.
Evil shit if you ask me.
Hmmm, Morg, Trevor, Rich - let's see roughly $1.6m collectively in salary (2010 Annual Report - bonuses not listed)- how far would that go toward programs in CVRF's region...HOW FAR WOULD THAT GO?!? $1m in legal fees??? $1m in consulting fees??? SERIOUSLY?!?!? HOW FAR WOULD THAT MONEY GO TOWARD PROGRAMS IN CVRF's REGION?!? What takes $1m to cover up and $1m to create some type of crafty spin (pollock provides campaign) so CVRF residents don't question the smoke and mirrors game that the present 'leadership' have going on. Will be interesting to see where they hid their salar-ease and bonuses in their next annual report so it doesn't look as bad as their 2010 figures. BTW, is it true Morg you make more money than a few of the top 20 FOR PROFIT seafood company CEO's IN THE WORLD...HUH? WHA? some Intrafish Top Paid seafood CEO's article a year or two ago. Anyways - don't ferget your checklist. http://www.federaltaxissues.com/docs/Rebuttable-Presumption-checklists.pdf
ReplyDeleteIt's funny, the only group that has graduated from " the program" (owning their own boats and quota) has by far the least quota per person and yet they have delivered considerably more in terms of benefits. When are you bringing the boats to Seward Coastal Villages?
ReplyDeleteWhat is the point in having the two smallest groups represent less than 500 people each when the third smallest has at least 3,000 people? Even if those two small groups combined efforts, CVRF and NSEDC would be responsible for at least 8,000 more people each. 18,000 people are being short-changed at the expense of less than a 1,000. Even I can see their rationale behind this effort.
ReplyDeleteThe leadership of CVRF deserves to be paid well. They have done an outstanding job of providing jobs in the region through supporting commercial salmon fishing. To those who are complaining about the fact that Mr. Crow makes more money and has a nicer house than you do, please consider this: If you were hiring a brain surgeon to operate on you, would you want one that drive around in a Dodge K Car and lives in public housing, or one that charges a lot and drives a BMW.
ReplyDeleteAhem...there is a difference between being paid "well" and stuffing your pockets with non-profit cash.
ReplyDelete8:35 makes a bad analogy. Maybe the BMW driving surgeon is doing unnecessary operations. We'd rather have the most competent brain surgeon with the steadiest hand, and be able to check the hospital records for their success and failure rates, talk to the nursing staff and former patients about the surgeon, etc. And competence about bilking the health care programs through false claims or getting kickbacks in the health care system is analogous to the unjust enrichment, private inurement, excessive credit card charges for Travel and Expenses (hidden income), or other abuses of the CDQ program executives and board of directors. Lacking firm federal and state laws to ensure full, deep and revealing audits of CDQs and their players, Crow gets to go on acting like the one-eyed king in the land of the blind.
ReplyDeleteGroundswell Fisheries Movement
Being from the CVRF region I would like to see more transparency with our CDQ organization including CVRF staff and Board of Directors. Information should be more readily available to the approximately 9,300 residents in the 20 member villages.
ReplyDeleteLocal fishermen are really tired of seeing our salmon devalued and having to sell them to only one buyer for the lowest price they can get them for, halibut prices are not much better compared to other CDQ regions. IMO if CVRF wants more of an allocation we better start seeing much better prices at the dock. Can barely keep food on the table and keep the bills paid when CVS is buying our salmon for .85/lb.
2012 was a very poor salmon run compared to prior seasons. Fishermen barely made enough money to take care of their fishing expenses. The handful of local halibut fishermen didn't do much better either.
ReplyDeleteIn this region we have a small boat fishery skiffs range from 18ft to 24 ft in length most are open boat with small outboard motors, majority of fishermen are using equipment that is outdated and old. Our people here in the CVRF region need more opportunities to get out and work for ourselves at what we know best which is commercial fishing.
Developing our halibut fishery is important to improving our local economy especially during a time when we are facing declining salmon returns. Not very many jobs in the villages out here and people need work to support their families. This summer I saw a lot of fishermen scraping the bottom with their gillnets for a few salmon to pay for their fuel most ended up breaking even and/or in debt after the season was over. What more can I say our people here in the CVRF region live at the poverty level and need to be given more of an opportunity to get out and work for ourselves. If it means working towards increasing our halibut allocation I am all for it, just hope we see good prices for our fish at the dock.
Greed and oppression of the poor.
ReplyDeletePsalms 12.5 For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the Lord; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him.
How does one "graduate" from the "program"?
ReplyDeleteThat usually indicates some kind of performance standard.
What would that be exactly?
That's just Crow's $1 million house in Anchorage. Who knows what else he's bought with other people's money or if you will - economic development.
How many LLCs or vessel ownerships or research vessel contracts through NOAA or other spiderwebby backdoor deals has Crow enjoyed?
This whole fight for quota sounds like Crow and his pal McCabe burned through all the millions they were already paid and need more.
The smell of desperation stinks. The other CDQs don't want Pandora's box opened - as they were warned by our Congressional delegation.
Because if Congress finds out how the whole thing is really constructed, I got a feeling they'll tear it apart. It's far from perfect but not everybody used the flaws in the program to exploit impoverished people. That takes a special kind of Devil to do that...
And he makes the biggest bucks.
The Pollock Trawlers are still fishing aren't they?! Because they haven't filled their chinook salmon bycatch quota of 25,000 for Bering Sea & additional 25,000 for Gulf. Well, they are intercepting ALL chinook, chum, & coho salmon from getting to the rivers. We the people of Alaska by law own those fish and the governor, NWFMC, & CDQ programs are selling all us Alaskans down the river with NO FISH. Then the governor declares a disaster! What hipocrocy. Does he think we all want a goverment check to replace the fish that won't be there because the pollcok trawlers ARE NOT PRACTICING SUSTAINABLE FISHING. Making people give up their freedom of speech also is not sustaining anything but the fact that they are killing all our salmon! PLEASE sign this petition and share it with everyone you know and don't be afraid.
ReplyDeleteWe're also going to NWFMC meeting in Oct to demand they stop killing all the fish which this petition stands for. http://signon.org/sign/end-salmon-halibut-bycatch
Make the CEOs live in the region and then see who wants the job
ReplyDeleteMonopolize the region's fisheries.
ReplyDeleteBuy catch for lowest prices in the State.
Hire locals at minimum wage for processing jobs.
Increase profit margin.
Pay exorbitant salaries to management staff.
(iii) alleviate poverty and provide economic and social benefits for residents of western Alaska ???
I'm curious, which of the CDQ groups do you think didn't use "the flaws in the program to exploit impoverished people. That takes a special kind of Devil to do that..."?
ReplyDeleteBased upon my experience, those types of Devils are ubiquitous in fleecing programs intended to benefit western Alaska. It's child's play to rob the defenseless residents of the impoverished villages and so they get robbed again and again.
The only thing unique about the CDQ program is that there is more money available for robbing. Other than that, it is just business as usual. The CDQCBC almost identical to the CBC that got their start in 1971 with the passage of ANCSA.
Morgan Crow and his minions make more $'s per year than any executive in the private sector in Alaska including the oil industry. CVRF Board members didn't write any of the statements attributed to them....c'mon Man it's obscene whats going on here!
ReplyDeleteChecked out the ADF&G website today and found out that one district in the Kuskokwim area harvested 967,310 lbs of salmon for the 2012 commercial season. CVS bought the salmon for .85 per pound equaling $822,213.50 Early in the season there were up to 210 permit holders participating in the fishery.
ReplyDeleteCVRF's top executive makes more money in one year than the whole fishing fleet combined in that one district.
So the company went from practically 0$ to about $300,000,000 in assets from 1997-2010 while spending over $250,000,000 on programs and operations during that time. I might dislike how much money those guys are getting paid but if they generated more than half a billion in revenue after going bankrupt, then they get my support. Someone should challenge the other CDQ groups to work towards owning their own huge vessels and take on all of the risk and responsibility.
ReplyDeleteThe CDQ allocations are still unfair. We still haven't heard an explaination about why this is And why it is justified?
ReplyDeleteCoastal Voters Require Fairness-CVRF!
They built a plant in Platinum that cost them $40 million to build. Maybe other companies are not buying salmon because they aren't making money. Their annual report says that they subsidize their salmon and halibut commercial fisheries from the Bering Sea. Maybe they don't make a profit but maybe they see the value in providing jobs and fishing opportunities. From the comments I read there is a need for more and if they did get their share of fish, they would be able to provide higher prices.
ReplyDelete@7:25pm - CVRF buys fish in multiple salmon districts, and also Halibut area 4DE. Let's stick to the facts. CVRF buys from more than 1,200 permit holders and their crew and provides upward of $20+ Million for projects and programs in the region they serve with more than 9,300 Alaska Residents.
ReplyDeleteLet's stick to the argument about why the CDQ you work for deserves more quota than CVRF.
@6:59 pm- I wish that were true. Don't believe the hype.
-Devoted CVRF Minion
As a commercial fisherman here in the Kuskokwim area I support CVRF's efforts to secure a fair share of the fish allocations for our 20 villages. We need jobs, we need more fishing opportunities, we need to support and provide for our families. It is as basic as that.
ReplyDeleteAPICDA's people gets from 11 times up to 112 times more fish than CVRF's people and yet APICDA is more than 20 times smaller. How in the world did this happen?
ReplyDeleteCVRF's people shouldn't get less fish just because of where they live.
The five groups want to protect the long-term benefit of a couple hundred instead of the thousands of other CDQ groups not getting their fair share. No disrespect to those hundreds of people, but the five CDQ executives need to get their heads checked. Change needs to happen to benefit the thousands of people in need.
How is it possible to stay united right now when such insane amounts are being given to others at the expense of their neighbors?
Sept 16 - 9:07pm...Maybe Morgen was asleep at the wheel pre 2006 and Trevor was off diggin' for gold elsewhere when allocation negotiations were going on...now Morgans tryin 2 keep his 800+k gravy train chugg chugg chuggin along. Maybe Morgen isn't as great as the CVRF residents thing he is (take the "pollock provided" blinders off folks - time to re-call MC and TM's bluff).
ReplyDelete@9:07. So, someone sleeping at the wheel = allowing the politics reign and get less quota?
ReplyDeleteCoastal Voters Require Fairness!
Again, why are the allocations unfair?
Really, there were allocation negotiations? Can you tell us what they were based on?
Please enlighten the public.
I agree with the commenter who posited that McCabe & Mrs.Crow are pursuing a radical restructuring of allocations because they have no choice. Insolvency is nearer than they'd care to admit. Remember the complex web of debt and partneships that American Seafoods had prior to the split.And the financial stresses of the parent company that led to the division of assets. Very few people to this day understand the true financial condition of CVRF's holdings. Hence the end run on Congress.
ReplyDeleteInteresting language in that letter, R. Samuelsen
ReplyDelete"had recommended certain allocation levels."
"Congressional, federal and state views on the proper level of allocation diverged widely."
It's great that unlawful state allocation plan, shown best today in Robin's hometown salmon model.
We note that the board's allocation of the harvestable salmon between the cooperative and the open fishers was potentially arbitrary and capricious. Allowing some, but not all, Bristolol Bay salmon drift net permit holders to operate different types and amounts of fishing equipment potentially raises questions of efficiency, arbitrary decision making, and equal protection. The allocation may be vulnerable to attack on the theory that under a two-subfishery system, the open fishers only have access to a small percentage of the allocation for the whole Bristol Bay fishery. That subsection provides that “an entry permit authorizes the permittee to operate a unit of gear within a specified fishery.” “Unit of gear” is defined by the Limited Entry Act as “the maximum amount of a specific type of gear that can be fished by a person under regulations established by the Board of Fisheries defining the legal requirements for that type of gear.” Because only some of the Bristol Bay permit holders could operate the maximum amount of gear, the regulation unlawfully discriminated.
To the blogger 9/15 @ 10:07 AM, I understand your plight because you are talking about "fisheries related economic development"!!!
ReplyDeleteThat was exactly the CDQs mission from Congress when they were formed 20 years ago. That's more than enough time to achieve this simple goal. The CDQs have failed to serve the improvished people of Western Alaska.
The CDQ program is going through a 20 year review this year. I am so happy that Coastal Villages group couldn't contain their greed any longer.
ReplyDeleteIn response to blogger 9/15 @3:13 PM, Congress needs to "tear it(CDQs) apart" and fix it to make those billions and billions more responsive to the poor people the money was intended to help in the first place.
I'd like to correct blogger 9/15 at 3:14 PM
ReplyDeleteThe Bering Sea pollock trawler King Salmon Bycatch quota is 60,000!!!
Once the numbers from this past fishing season are out, I'm going to bet that that Bycatch number is higher than what the land based fishers caught. Crazy isn't it?
"CDQCBC" as blogger 9/16 @ 6:59 PM said.
ReplyDeleteThe ANCSA corporations was the base form of the CDQ program. Now 20 years later, we can see this slippery, slimy, quick bandaid fix isn't working as intended.
How can the CDQ work for the benefit of the poor if there are no shareholders to provide the administrators minimum checks and balances?
There are no checks and balances in the CDQ program. They are not accountable to the people. They have no transparency requirements.
That's why Coastal Villages can give their administrators an outrageous yearly salary. What it boils down to is robbing the poor to enrich a handful. Thats not the intent of the CDQ program.
Congress does indeed need to tear them apart and fix them to become more responsive to the mostly poor, mostly Native people of the Western Alaska coastal area.
The CDQ groups are charitable non-profits, and are no diferent than the Red Cross when it comes to measuring their effectiveness in their managements ability to improve their charitable recipients lives.
ReplyDeleteThere is one significant difference between CDQ's as charitable organizations. Charitable organizations are measured everyday, and have to COMPETE for funding.
CDQ's do not normally have to compete for funding via constant fundraising. They only have to open an envelope full of licenses and then bid them out to companies listed in under the seafood section of the Seattle phonebook.
Most CEO's of charitable organizations justify their pay, by pointing to their fundraising abilities. CDQ groups do not need to constantly compete for via fundraising.
Because of this major difference the salaries of some of the CDQ organizations are outrageous on their face, and all of this outrageous pay comes from the people they are supposed to be helping.
Wisely Congress ensured that these organizations should come under a professional review. Not a review which only counts the number of members served, but how well the members are served by the current management.
A review and potential reallocation of fishing licenses is exactly what Congress inteneded to keep these organizations serving their members.
There are a number of organizations which I will list at the bottom that have developed as trustworthy and tested measures of how the management of a Non-profit charitable organization is performing.
These methodologies should not be ignored due to political influence, as it would be a tragedy and an embarrassment to the State;s reviewing body to promote charitable organisations like the individual CDQ's which would score very low by accepted private ranking organizations.
The CDQ quotas should go to those organizations which have proven over the last ten years to be great managers of charitable organizations, and any review which does not take standardized measurements used worldwide into account, and over the whole ten year period.
Some of the CDQ's are blatantly trying to come out with programs in the last few years to pass the review. Any CDQ that only takes care of its members in the last couple of years just prior to its review, is blatantly trying to fool the reviewers, and anyone can see this red flag, if they are an honest auditor.
Here are some links for objectively reviewing charitable Non-profits. Remember that these CDQ's are only at their basics charitable organizations which do not have to continuously raise funds from the public, as the government (ie. taxpayer) gives them their funding.
Link: http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=33
Link: http://www.publishing.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=ijamt&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dranking%2520standards%2520for%2520charitable%2520organizations.%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D3%26ved%3D0CEUQFjAC%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.publishing.waldenu.edu%252Fcgi%252Fviewcontent.cgi%253Farticle%253D1038%2526context%253Dijamt%26ei%3DZm5XUJ_6A-aaiAKuqYDAAg%26usg%3DAFQjCNFQyK98zVrU2JwKo-D74104Ai3UFw#search=%22ranking%20standards%20charitable%20organizations.%22
In the end, some of these CDQ's managers are greedy and an embarrassment. We shall be watching to see it the State rewards those CDQ's which are well managed in delivering sustainable economic development to their members, and punishes those whose managers are feathering their own nests and trying desperately to blow more money on public relations trying to fool the public into believing they are all of a sudden in the last tow years, ... good managers of these charitable organizations.
The easiest thing to do, is to submit these CDQ's programs to these independent Charity reviewing organizations for their score prior to the State coming out with theirs.
ReplyDeleteThis would highlight any political shenanigans.
These CDQ groups will receive approximately $1,000,000,000 direct from the government over the next ten years, and the well managed will improve the lives of the poorest of Americans,
The taxpayers, and the village residents deserve the best, and most effective review and reallocation possible.
Anything less, would be a travesty.
No checks and balances in the CDQ program? That's a true statement if ever there was one.
ReplyDeleteThis is what happened to me when I tried to ask questions of Norton Sound Economic Development Corporation.
http://youtu.be/dDETOB8DgZg
All of these stuff by CVRF is embarrassing to us on the Kusko. This organization is so out of line with the values of our peoples. The 20 board members need to wake up and demand change. There is lots of anger over CVRF making people to testify on king salmons bycatch and stuff and asking Council not to put a cap on it... and on top of that, they make us sign all kinds of papers to get a drum of gas with that really stupid saying Pollock Provides painted all over it. Then they really try to get us to sign more papers for nets. This isn't the way our people should be treated, this isn't what Mr. Harold Sparcks would have wanted... it isn't what Mr. Harold Sparcks would approve of. Now I kinda think they want to talk about fighting for fish to sort of change what we are talking about. And not talk about where they are doing wrong you know! It makes me sad to see, really sad to see all this going on. Our members of that board need to be really strong and stand up for what they know is right and fight against wrong things.
ReplyDeleteGreat comments from a local about the management of CVRF.
ReplyDeleteThe sad truth is that if the Board were really strong, then you would not have so many complaints.
The Board is weak, because the "real" managers want it that way.
When the Board has to essentially bribe its members to vocally support it, then that is an indictment of the management itself.
Sadly, one of the worst managed CDQ's is demeanding more, and cannot get widespread vocal support from it's members withour resorting to bribery.
One does not have to guess what they would do with the money if they were given more quota..
The first thing they would do would be to raise their outrageous salaries again, pointing to their value at lobbying the government for more quota.
The management and Board of CVRP is exactly what Congress worried about happening, and the review is supposed to take quota away from them for being greedy self-serving managers.
We shall see how honest the State review is.
I smell a scandal and a whitewash, but with millions at stake, the scandal will be exposed, and if fraud or crimes are committed, the State will get a black eye, have the review taken back by the Feds, and then a "new" honest review will take place.
The close relationships between the reviewers and some of the CDQ groups reeks of scandal.
With a billiond dollars at stake, do you really thinks that one of these groups will not try to protect themselves from legitimate criticism that Congress intended and rig the review.
There is powerful motivation to rig this review. Let's hope the Governor takes the parties reviewing the CDQ's and eliminates anyone with a long cozy relationship with any of the CDQ groups being reviewed.
Anything less, and the Governor would only be screwing the poor villagers which don't make these huge salaries.
Village residents voted in the CVRF Board of Directors and if the representatives are weak and not strong enough to deal with the problems that are originating with upper management, then vote the BOD representative out.
ReplyDeleteReplace the weak representatives with stronger representatives who will do what is right for the people in the 20 villages.
As Village residents you voted them in, you can vote them out.
Require more accountability and transparency from your elected CVRF representative.
Demand that they do what is right for the people in the villages. Godspeed.
Of course CDQ group board members are weak. Managing a multi-million dollar business in the ultra-competitive groundfish commercial fishing industry is not easy. It requires uncommon skills and experience that people in the CDQ eligible communities don't possess. Why would they? How would they possibly have acquired those skills living in a small rural Alaska village?
ReplyDeleteVillage residents who get on the board immediately run into conflicts of interest. Most of them badly need the money, free travel for themselves and their families, fancy hotels, free computers, free internet access and all the perks that go with the job. If they make waves, all of those things can be taken away by the CDQ group administrators.
Our CDQ group, NSEDC cheats on elections to keep the board stacked with yes men. Five of the board will be elected on the first Tuesday in October and so they are doling out $3 million to the city councils of the 15 villages to distribute. The deadline for making the distributions is 4 days before the election and that is no coincidence. That much money dumped right before the election sends a powerful message to the voters to vote for the incumbents and it works.
The CDQ program decennial review will show how ineffective the CDQ program has been during the past 20 years in developing fisheries related economic opportunities in the 65 CDQ eligible villages if it is conducted properly. Looking at who is involved and how badly the State of Alaska has failed in its responsibility to protect the interests of the people in the villages so far, I'm not confident. I hope it will not turn out to be a whitewash.
Some of the commenters here are calling on the feds to step in and I think that will have to be the next step if the state fails to act responsibly for the bush....again. I'm an Alaskan first and foremost but I have to say that Juneau has forsaken those of us who choose to live in the rural communities and we have gotten more respectful treatment from the feds lately.
The National Marine Fisheries Service and the North Pacific Fishery Management Council were actively involved in CDQ program oversight until that dirty little rider to the 2006 Coast Guard Act created the free-for-all that we have today. It is time for those agencies to step back in and drive the foxes from the henhouse. They have the professional staff to do a thorough review and I'm not sure the state does.
Let's hope for the best but be prepared for Plan B if the State of Alaska fails to do an adequate job with the CDQ group decennial review.
Does anyone really care about the blathering of Tim Smith/ManFromUnk/NSCrabber or whatever personality he chooses to assume in a given forum? I haven’t looked, but I bet you a 3 dollar bill that he is on the CNN websites commenting that NSEDC is responsible for the embassy attacks in the Middle East. I mean come on!!??? This guy will use any story on any subject to attack NSEDC. Paaaaaaaaaaaaathetic!!
ReplyDelete3:17 can only blow smoke as a means to distract from the truths that Smith tells. That is the real definition of PATHETIC. Why are you scared of a thorough State audit and review? Are you just another one of the many "anonymi" on the take? And by what basis do you surmise he is posting anon, too? Seems he always puts his name on things - even if it is just so fools like you can defame or abuse him by name. I suppose you think Smith owes you an apology for messing up your game with the truth. If so, stop being a coward and post your name and let Smith know where to contact you.
DeleteGroundswell Fisheries Movement
Stephen Taufen
I don't agree with most of what Tim Smith says, but he does make a good point in that this great disbursement of cash from NSEDC is right before the election, and that is a BIG suspicious red flag for me.
ReplyDeleteIn the hands of good management, the CDQ program can produce economic development that does significantly change the life in these villages.
It is not unreasonable to hold the management of the CDQ's to high standards.
The American public has given these very valuable quotas to these CDQ groups, and if they cannot prove to be good managers, then either oust the current management or return the CDQ's to the American people.
Nothing wrong with accountability, when you get a billion dollars over the next ten years.
These managers should be accountable, and their record over the last ten year is a fair thing measure.
The CDQ program is definately working as it is suppose to be doing. The thing is that the allocations of the funds are not hitting the member communities outrightly so. The community members rarely see any good developements in the communities but to mainly benifit the CVRF company that the members own. Why are they saying they are losing money to salmon and halibut fisheries. The CDQ money is supposed to be carried out to the member village to enhance its resources around them. The CVRF board members should have meetings once a year in 20 village member communities annually to hear directly from each community. I'm sure any representative will not correctly mention out the community needs by themselves.
ReplyDeleteMr. Morgan can literally steal from the poorest part of Alaska, almost $1 million dollars in bonuses. From those suffering to pay bills, heat their homes, feed and clothe their children. While Mr. Morgan can live in his $1 million dollar home, well heated with no worries. He only pays those risking their lives in the Bering Sea Crab Fisheries just $15 an hour, and still charges them for food and rent while in the boat, including their air fare to work and home to the village.
ReplyDeleteFormer Calista President, Matthew Nicolai, is an angel compared to this Mr. Morgan.
To blogger 9/17 @ 3:17 PM - I am the Man_from_Unk. Tim Smith is not me! I choose to remain anonymous so that NSEDC doesn't "attack" me. They would too if they knew who I really am. That's the kind of people they are. Reckless and sloppy.
ReplyDeleteBased on the latest news in The Nome Nugget starting in the first of August 2012 issue, NSEDC is attacking Tim Smith. According to the letter from his wife in the Nugget, NSEDC is trying to "criminalize" him just for speaking up.
Read it yourself at www.nomenugget.net. Go to the issue from the first of August and all issues there after.
Go Tim Smith keep up the good work. Good will always prevail over evil
ReplyDeleteSometimes "evil" takes a long, long time to unravel.
ReplyDeleteKilling off the livelihood of the Western Alaska Native people is an "evil" thing to do. The salmon are getting wasted as pollock fishery Bycatch, the CDQs are heavily invested in the pollock fishery.
The intent of the CDQ program was to help alleviate this forseen problem that the lack of salmon to live off of is causing the poorest people in the state. 20 years later, the problem is bigger than ever before!
If given the choice on the national election ballot this year, I'd vote to "return the CDQs to the American People."
ReplyDeleteWhy pretend that it's working when it really isn't?
Anybody who cannot tell that it is not me doing the writing from the Man From Unk's writing style and what he writes about must have been one of those children they talk about who was left behind by our educational system.
ReplyDeleteMaybe that's why they have to toss the communities $3 million, 4 days before the election, to keep them on the NSEDC board of directors.
As a member of one of these impoverished communities I would appreciate it if people would provide more constructive criticism rather than making attempts to slander and defame the people hired to work for these CDQ organizaions. If they have done wrong it will come to light, in time.
ReplyDeleteThese CDQs are important to our villages and they do provide economic development and jobs to our villages residents.
People need to remember that the original idea for the CDQ program originated with our Native Elders who wanted to see our people get a share of the fisheries in the Bering Sea, which we now have. And quyana to them for having such a vision and following through with seeing it become a reality for our people who live on the coast.
If we are having problems with our respective CDQ organizations correct the problems, use your voice make your concerns known and demand that these CDQs work responsibly for our communities, demand accountability and demand transparency, maintain high expectations for your CDQ orgnaizations and demand results. Don't tear apart what our communities have been given but build them up and support the people hired to do the work. Pray for the people hired to do the work, pray that they will do what is right for our villages. And most importantly let them know you are praying for them.
To the "praying" blogger, I'm not the praying kind so I recommend that you try this scientific experiment: Pray onto one hand and spit into the other. Which gets full faster?
ReplyDeleteSome of us are getting tired of the CDQ administrators treating us like we're too dumb to understand what's going on. That's why they are getting away with ignoring the real intent Congress gave us the CDQs in the first place.
I will pray for you from Heaven because I know I've never ever done anything to disqualify the human dignity that any poor person on earth has a right to from their fellow man regardless of their economic status. This is the god given right to all Americans. It is in our Constitution.
ReplyDeleteCDQs on the other hand have turned into hell born programs, enriching a handful and making beggers of the rest of us. This is not right and it should be stopped by the people of our country.
Blogger Sept. 17 @ 6:11 recommends that we wait for the "time" for some outsider to determine that the people hired to administer the CDQ programs "have done wrong" for the thousands of poor people who are loosing a hundreds year old culture and tradition of living off the salmon.
ReplyDeleteThe "time" is now, better late than never, because we've given the program 20 years to work and so far the salmon runs are getting weaker and weaker. Helping the tradition and culture of the poorest people in the State of Alaska survive the slaughter in the Bering Sea and the Gulf of Alaska is happening now.
The CDQs are not working as intended. The salmon are being killed off and we're waiting for the right "time" to speak up against the biggest blunder wacked against the poorest people in Alaska?
CDQs need to be torn apart and revised by Congress now, not later! 20 year review - this year 2012! The salmon can't take any more "time" before they are long lost to the poorest people in this once great, once important, once a place for the future - The Last Frontier - Alaska. "North to the Future" was once the proud moniker of our state.
3 days and 53 comments and still nobody has explained why these CDQ allocations are justified.
ReplyDeleteThe Graph that shows the Yellowfin Sole allocations is very interesting. Why does YDFDA to the north and BBEDC to the south get more Yellowfin sole than CVRF? What is the rationale there?
The Sablefish graph is criminal. Zero percent to CVRF with more than 30% of the population. .
I pray that a rational soul will explain why 9,300 CVRF residents deserve less than residents from other CDQs..
The only CDQ program that is not "weak" is the one serving the Aleutian Islands. One village working together. Perhaps these multi-village CDQs are not the way to go. Some villages have bigger bullies than others so the weaker members get silenced before they even speak up.
ReplyDeleteSept. 17 @ 6:11 PM - you probably haven't been to a CDQ Board of Directors meeting in the 20 years of their existence have you? You'd see what I say if you did.
CVRF already went broke once and had to be bailed out the the Native Corporations that went Chapter 11 back in the early days.
ReplyDeleteMaybe that's why the Allocation Managers are giving them little bit because they can't manage lots!
"Pathetic" means inadequate and I'm predicting that the CDQ 2012 review will be just that - inadequate.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how Coastal Villages will justify their high salaries on the review?
Graph speaks for itself. CDQ allocations are unfair. Population based redistribution is need. That is the message that needs to be relayed to Congress.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the greatest weakness of the CDQ program as implemented is a lack of open consistent communication between the CDQ groups and the communities they represent, particularly a lack of mechanisms for substantial input from the communities into the governance structures. There has also been a lack of outreach by the state to the communities to help ensure that the communities are aware of the program and how to participate. For the CDQ program to be effective there must be a clear, well-established governance structure that fosters exchange of information among the group’s decisionmakers, the communities they represent, and the state and federal personnel involved in program oversight.
ReplyDeleteThe Community Development Quota Program in
Alaska and Lessons for the Western Pacific
Committee to Review Community Development Quotas
Ocean Studies Board
Commission on Geosciences, Environment and Resources
National Research Council
National Academy Press
Washington DC 1999
1) Exactly how much did Morgan Crow earn in bonuses in 2011, who never risked his life in the sea?
ReplyDelete2) If one was to calculate it into the 20 villages, how much would each village benefit?
3) Then divide it into 20 fishermen who risk their lives in the sea, in each of those villages?
Someone, please tell me?
400 people in the member villages would be able to recieve $1,000.00 worth of heating fuel with one persons bonus.
ReplyDeleteMorgan is getting too much power with the bonuses he is getting and using that money to hire his own lawyers to protect himself against the members.
He sure is scamming all the members of the CVRF.
Start an investigation of what else hes doing under the CVRF members noses.
Morgan Crow acts like we are starving dogs in the villages, greedy for whatever scraps he has handy.But it takes a dog like him to think like one.
ReplyDeleteWhile you are at it look into how much Don Stiles at NSEDC is getting. It might be more than Morgan Crow.
ReplyDeleteDon Stiles at NDEDC is good at tossing out scraps to us starving doggs too and watching us fight over them in the mud.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like Coastal is right in their push for fair allocations across the board. The PFD was just announced and each person gets a fair share of the pie no matter age, race, or where you live in Alaska. The only requirement is Alaskan residency. If the PFD was set up like the CDQ allocations then maybe I would think about moving to where I can get 112 more times of the funds compared to where I am now.
ReplyDeleteContact the following board to express your concern. They need to hear from you to help them make decisions. Seat expirations are shown at 3 year terms.
ReplyDeleteCVRF Board of Directors: Pres. John O. Mark, Quinhagak, 2013; Vice Pres. Richard Jung, Napakiak, 2015
Secretary Paul Tulik, Nightmute, 2015; Tres. Evan S. Evan, Goodnews Bay, 2015; Exec Brd. Mem. Felix Albert, Tununak, 2013; Exec Brd. Mem. Joe Avugiak,Chefornak, 2015; Skye Chayalkun, Chevak, 2015; Walter Brown, Eek, 2017; Eric Olson Sr., Hooper Bay, 2017; George Chuckwuk, Kipnuk, 2017; Ralph Kiunya Sr, Kongiganak, 2017; Andrew Kiunya, Kwigillingok, 2013; Vacant, Mekoryuk, Open; Helen Kaganak, Napaskiak, 2013; John Andy, Newtok, 2013; Frank Berezkin, Oscarville, 2017; Henry Williams, Platinum, 2013; James Akerelrea, Scammon Bay, 2015; Harry Tulik, Toksook Bay, 2017; and Gabriel Olick, Tuntutuliak, 2013
ReplyDeleteCOMMENT IN TWO PARTS
PART ONE
These CDQ groups were designed by Congress to be charitable organizations to the communities surrounding the Bering Sea and it’s riches, which have been off limits to theses villages, which have few precious resources and are generally the poorest people in the United States of America.
It made sense that the very communities surrounding this enormous resource should gain something from it, as they could sure use an economic boost.
As the government was giving all these licenses away free of charge; Why shouldn’t some of the local communities and their residents get some for free. too?
Most of these villages have been de facto walled off from these resources for one simple reason; they do not have access to capital like many from outside the area or outside the nation, do. Bank of America has never, ever loaned money to these Alaska Native villages for any reason, even if they provided incredible profitable investment opportunities. Today, for the first time in history, good economic opportunities can at least approach the CDQ’s for investment, and that is progress.
Just imagine if the first IFQ issued by the US government from Washington DC in the form of the Pribilof seal harvest had been awarded to the Aleuts, instead of the Alaska Commercial Company, which along with the Federal government enslaved the Aleuts for 100 years after the Civil War ended (until 1964)
The Aleuts would have been extraordinarily rich. The first 20 year monopoly IFQ was worth $500,000,000 in pure profits in today’s dollars. They could have bought a fleet of factory trawlers.
You see most IFQ’s were awarded to the people with the most money to start with, and that was not these villages. So how do you get lots of money? Well as illustrated above, it sure helps to get awarded free licenses from the Federal government, which is a long distance away from where these villagers live. For most of their existence these villagers never had enough money for a one way ticket to Washington DC.
By the way, I know of nothing in the record to support that the CDQ’s were given Bering Sea quotas to make up for salmon bycatch. Congress intended to add to their income with CDQ’s, not subtract from their meager incomes.
Congress intended these CDQ’s to undergo a review every ten years. Why would Congress do this? It is simple. To ensure with awards of very valuable quota that these CDQ groups were well managed and accomplishing the goals that Congress intended. These CDQ licenses are worth approximately $1 billion over ten years, and that kind of money will attract all types of scoundrels.
How do we measure them? First you don’t ask them to write their own review conditions. Second you have to ask yourself what are these CDQ’s are, and if they were successful, what would the results look like?
First and foremost these organizations are charities. Pure and simple. Their goal is to improve the economic well being of their constituents.
Is the goal to improve the economic lives a few lucky individuals, or the median incomes of the whole group. They accomplish this by giving money away to worthy causes. Economic causes in the case of the CDQ’s.
So if we apply objective and widely established criteria for measuring charities, then how do the CDQ groups compare??
CONTINUED-
PART TWO
ReplyDeleteI have not looked at them all, but only CVRF. If Coastal Villages were objectively measured by objective standards of charitable organizations, they would get a solid “F”. In fact if the national press gets a hold of the story at CVRF, the whole CDQ programs is at risk, which would be a real tragedy.
Coastal Villages has done an admirable job at increasing the size of the organization, but that is simply not the goal of a charity. Today CVRF is 5 times larger than the Salvation Army World Service Office. CVRF has amassed almost a quarter of billion dollars in net assets.
This is important. You see it is easy to grow a charitable organization. Just take money in and don’t give it away. As it grows simply pay yourself and your cronies exorbitant salaries. This is not a new scam and exactly why the IRS demands that tax returns and salaries are published.
Most charities have to constantly beg for money from donors, which cost a lot of money and staff time. CDQ’s simply have to open and envelope.
So what did the CVRF give away in 2010. They gave away $350,000 to 126 kids for scholarships. A whopping $2,800 per student. CVRF gets about $20 million annually from the government licenses it gets, and it gives away a niggardly $350,000 annually in scholarships. Education is the one area that can make a huge long term difference economically in the region, and they give next to nothing, while the CEO pays himself $850,000 in 2010 and his Lieutenants get another like amount.
If the students got more money for education, then maybe some young bright Indian kids would take over the white guys running this organization for their benefit.
Compare this to the highly regarded charity; American Indian College Fund, which takes in about $20 million a year, much like CVRF and gives out around $9 million a year and the CEO makes $175,000.
Average salary for a charity the size of CVRF is less than $300,000 annually.
When the national press gets a hold of this story, there will be a cry for eliminating CDQ’s altogether, and CVRF will be the poster child example of why these CDQ’s have failed at being charities.
Too bad because some of the other CDQ’s are doing great charity work, and will be painted by the CVRF black brush.
If the State of Alaska fails to employ objective standards used to measure charities worldwide then this will be a whitewash review, and the scandal will taint all involved. The poverty in these villages is appalling and folks who skim off monies for themselves, while failing to give it away, like charities are supposed to will shock a national audience’s conscience.
Keep you eyes on the Wall Street Journal
Now which ones are the weak members on the Board? Identify them and vote them out. Then vote for the person you think will do the best job for your village and for your CDQ company. We live in a democratic society exercise your right to vote.
ReplyDeleteThe two part analysis was excellent. The only issue I have with it is that the CDQ program is not a native program, it is a community program. The majority of the residents of the 65 CDQ eligible communities are mostly of Alaska native ancestry but the program is supposed to benefit community residents regardless of race. That's an important point that is misunderstood by almost everyone.
ReplyDeleteThe confusion about the charitable nature of CDQ groups is because of the negligence of congress and the State of Alaska in defining the program in the early days. The people who took control back in 1992 assumed it was another Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act program and set about to operate as for-profit corporations like the ANCSA regional corporations and invest in commercial fishing businesses.
For-profit corporations are supposed to grow their assets for the benefit of their shareholders. The problem with that model for CDQs is that they don't have any shareholders. They are privately owned by the individuals on their boards of directors.
As you point out, they are failing in their role as social welfare organizations but that is because they have never recognized that they are supposed to be social welfare organizations.
CVRF's Democratically elected CDQ board members are dumb and weak?
ReplyDeleteCan you be anymore racist and ignorant.
Here is one Alaska Company with 20 Alaska Native Board members who successfully wrestled away highly valuable Pollock, Cod, and Crab quota and assets from Pacific Northwest (Seattle) companies and people are questioning their intelligence.
@5:59. If you only looked deep into CVRF how can you conclude they are the worst CDQ? You sound like that gussuk who writes those evil articles about CVRF.
The facts are the facts. CVRF is the biggest CDQ and because of that it, provides more benefits than other groups with less quota per person. I'd look closer at the numbers. It's not about giveaways. That is the ANSCA model. Send me a free check please.
For example, Those regional Native non-profits like AVCP have been around for since 1971, and poverty and socio economics still look dismal. In my humble opinion that is government money going to waste. The free money model doesn't work.
CVRF earns money in the Bering Sea and turns it into jobs. People need to work, and they provide jobs. Lots of jobs. Moving their boats to Seward will create more jobs and people will work. How about supporting these Democratically elected Alaskan legislators who also share in the CVRF vision?
http://legiscan.com/gaits/text/260665/Alaska-2011-HJR27-Introduced.pdf
How many jobs are provided to Western Alaskans by all thse CDQ groups? It's about work and not about charity, declining populations, phantom communities, and free money.
Quyana!
Actually,
ReplyDeletein this Republic, after Kindergarden was confusing...
"and to this republic for which it stands..."
tell us about democracy, like Johnson stealing the social security trust funds, for the great society of welfare mammas.
What happened to the rest of the local villages, just a little S.E. of Nome? There's a whole lot of coastline with MIA CDQ groups, or is it just the western village on the welfare doppler radar screen.
Indeed, if there was a 'civil war' it may, by the process of selection, provide entertainment only; much like watching monster truck smash-up or topless mud wrestling. Which sport has the biggest boobs, anyway? Our congressional contingent will never, ever let these darlings suffer harm. One can only imagine the conversation between Larry Cotter and Don Young right now. Alas we are another ten years away, I think, before the grifters get pegged. That's how much longer until enough people 'get made as hell', in my estimation. I'm not just talking about CDQ land, but the whole land. And by then, the perps will be in Arizona, golfing. All hail Jon Corzine!
ReplyDeleteNot only do they treat the villages in the Norton Sound like "starving dogs", they also kick us around like we are - the outspoken ones anyway.
ReplyDeleteRemember a couple of years ago when NSEDC and CVRF partnered up with some buy-out down there in Dutch Harbor? You guys down the coast know anything about it? We don't up here in the northern coast.
It's the out of sight, out of mind control tactic. I guess we're too dumb to know what kind of business these administrators are getting involved in on our behalf.
Blogger @7:21 PM probably has one of those high salaried gopher jobs for CVRF. They got to make it look like its working for some of us anyway.
ReplyDeleteBlogger @ 6:00 PM thinks we can vote out the "weak" board members from these CDQ boards. Wake up and smell the BS before it chokes us all to death okay.
ReplyDeleteThese Board members are watching thier peoples hundreds year old culture and tradition of living off the salmon die right before their eyes and it doesn't look like they give a nugget. They are worried about getting a bigger share of the free money for their overpaid bosses.
For those who ignorantly believe that CDQs are not effective, check your data again and look at the whole picture. Try to be a little bit more optimistic as well.
ReplyDeleteMore than a quarter of a billion dollars have been spent on programs, infrastructure, and operations since 1997 by CVRF while growing into a company worth more than a quarter of a billion dollars. With increased Alaskan ownership of assets, that number will grow even more.
If CDQs didn't exist, much of that money would be going to Seattle and elsewhere. I doubt that much of it would go to Alaska even though the fishery is right outside Alaska.
The whole State of Alaska should be supporting CDQ.
Oh. Wait a minute. The State of Alaska passed a resolution in support of CVRF's efforts to park their vessels in Alaska.
The State's elected leaders (yes all of them are voted for) can see the importance of CDQ. They are bringing jobs to Alaska.
Federal and State funding is dwindling and the future seems bleak for organizations that rely on government sources. The whole state of Alaska relies heavily on oil for its economy as well as funding from the federal government.
The Bering Sea provides a renewable resource and Alaskans are gaining ownership in this resource.
Thousands of residents are counting on CVRF to provide their families with jobs and fishing opportunities. Comparing Calista to CVRF is comparing apples to oranges. Calista and other ANCSA corps gives out dividends to their people. CVRF gives out jobs and fishing opportunities in the millions each year as well as other programs.
As for the current allocations, the people involved in allocating the fish from the beginning to middle part of the program used various confusing methods that do not hold water to the most basic formula.
That basic formula involves basing fish allocations on the population of people. Their formulas s(t)ink
What they ended up with is a mish-mash of incomprehensible and indefensible numbers that hurt the residents of the largest CDQ groups.
CVRF is responsible for providing jobs to benefit thousands of people and yet they receive the least amount of fish per person under the current CDQ allocations.
As new board members take over in the future, they will see the CDQ allocations as they are (a complete mess). They won't agree with the explanations of why the allocations are they way they are today. They will seek fairness.
There has yet to be an argument made in defense of CVRF's efforts to seek fair allocations.
Coastal Voters Require Fairness
@8:19pm you are on point like a sniper.
ReplyDeleteFairness is comparing CVRF to other charities around the world.
ReplyDeleteSome folks just object to being measured. Especially those that are inefficient, gluttonous, and want to hide this fact.
Competition and measurement are the tools of improvement, ... and by any objective measurement of a charity, CVRF needs improvement, and this improvement will never happen without an honest review process.
The review process if honestly done, will only benefit the residents of the region CVRF is supposed to be serving.
CVRF is building an empire, not being a charity, and the review should change this.
We shall see, but in the mean time, keep your eyes on the Wall Street Journal.
@8:48 some folks choose to compare apples to oranges.
ReplyDeleteCVRF is doing as it should be
1) providing economic and social benefits to the region with earnings from the Bering Sea
2) increasing ownership in the Bering Sea
In terms of providing benefits and gaining ownership, they almost match dollar for dollar.
Coastal's press packet is factual and honest.
The fact remains that Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
ReplyDeleteSo, you imply that with Begich facing a tight race for reelection,a bit more quota to a populous impoverished region from congress,would be remembered at polling time?
ReplyDeleteWho is to say that the fishing in the Bering Sea and the Gulf of Alaska will always remain lucrative? There is a whole lot of fishing going on beyond the US boundary by the countries of Japan, Korea, Russia and who know who else.
ReplyDeleteBlogger on 9/17 @ 12:22 PM smells "...scandal and whitewash.." and I think he is right on track.
These self-given high salaries are a tip-off if I've ever seen one. Hoarding because it isn't going to last much longer. Might as well become a multi-millionaire on poor peoples money before they wake up and figure out that they are getting jack-screwed.
It's the oldest cheat tactic in the history of man - manipulating the ignorant and illiterate.
Fill their minds up with BS promises for the "future" and maybe, just maybe, the investments will finally start paying off.
I just about laughed my socks off when I read what blogger 9/18 @ 7:21 PM said about "free money" of corporations like AVCP and Kawerak.
ReplyDeleteThe blogger alludes to buying into the high risk pollock fishery as their people "wrestled away" these ships and quotas to get involved.
Doesn't look like wrestling to me. The fat cats are already fat and they figured that they might as well get fatter from the CDQs which in reality is "free money" in the first place.
To blogger 9/17 @ 6:11 PM, please post the names of those "Native Elders" you claim got the Western Alaska CDQs involved in the destructive Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska fishery which is killing off the peoples culture and tradition. They need to be held accountable.
ReplyDeleteAs a rational, reasonable, educated Alaska Native, I think that it's time for us to hold our leaders accountable for the mistakes they have made that places a whole lot of people down deeper in a hole that is impossible to climb out of! Without rational, reasonable help that is.
Coastal's press packet is self-serving advertising.
ReplyDeleteEvery charity has a press packet that points out what is has given.
If we measured charities by their press packets, they would all be saints.
What is important is what management takes from the generous donors, versus what they then give to the needy.
CVRF takes donors and pays the top three wneior managers salareis and bonuses, that simply cannot be justified by any objective measure that I am aware of.
The aurgument often given is that this is a big complex organization, and it needs top notch managers.
This is horse pucky. If CVRF had given more money away like a charity should, then it would not b so large and complex.
Once again CVRF is building and empire for the managers, not a charity.
Even the IRS has become concerned at the lack of charitable giving that the some of the CDQ's have exhibited.
When the IRS becomes concerned, it is hard to deny that these CDQ's may have problems with their management and remembering their charitable purpose.
In 2010 CVRF shows on their tax returns $248,870,487 in net assets and gave away $853,039, while paying the top three managers $832,367, $504,467, and $477,467 respectively.
Put another way, if CVRF liquidated all their assets and kept their giving charitable giving at current levels, they would not run out of money for 291 years.
Most good charities have 3-5 years of reserves. CVRF for their size gives away almost nothing, and if this continues runs the risk of losing their non-profit status.
Hell, CVRF gave their CEO twice as much money as they give away in scholarships annually.
Anybody connected with CVRF is going to aurgue that they are doing a spectacular job, but anyone can make an argument.
The problems is that with numbers like these, claiming spectacular results and management is not a compelling argument.
In reality CVRF's financial results are a compelling argument for eliminating the CDQ program altogether.
Sadly, like many fishing organizations CVRF has another characteristic. Indians can have any job they want at CVRF, as long as they leave the highest paying jobs for white people with all the brains.
Nope the managers at CVRF are taking care of themselves with outrageous salaries, The Board of Directors have been hand selected and are ineffective, and CVRF is failing by any accepted objective standards are being a charity.
Anyone arguing otherwise is either not looking at how other charities are performing, or have some how been bought off.
@6:54 AM.-You are correct. The board members were hand picked for the people and by the people... through elections! Elections not selections.
ReplyDeleteCVRF has promoted three distinct distortions of the truth, either with words or actions.
ReplyDeleteOne, it is unjust to not give CVRF more quota because they have more residents. Clearly Congress intended there to be quota given based upon the performance of the CDQ organization AND NOT SIMPLY RESIDENCY, hence the purpose of a review.
Two, pollock is more important than salmon. Not true, as bycatch is specifically cited as a concern to protect the cultural and local economic value of salmon. Not once is the salmon bycatch mentioned as a trade for Pollock quota.
Three, education plays a minor role in their core purpose. Also not true, as NSF cites educations ability to promote the long term economic benefits including the ability to move up the economic ladder to management positions, which are currently held almost exclusively by non-residents and white people.
These are all three false, and revisiting history will reveal the original purpose of the CDQ program.
The CDQ program was reviewed by the prestigious and impartial National Sciences Foundation, and organization which was founded to give independent advice to Congress, who writes the laws governing CDQ's
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT QUOTA PROGRAM:
SUMMARY OF A REVIEW BY THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Conclusion 3: Governance and Decision-Making
State and federal criteria for the allocation of quota based on performance and plans should be less complicated than they are … The committee notes that the criteria currently are used for two purposes: to allocate quota equitably and to encourage good management. One way to clarify some of the confusion created by using the criteria in this way would be to separate these two purposes into two allocations of quota. A "foundation quota" would address issues of equity and a "performance quota" would address issues of performance. The foundation quota (likely more than half of the allocation) would be allocated on measures of population, income, employment, and proximity to the fishery being allocated. The performance quota (the remainder) would be allocated based on clearly defined performance measures such as accomplishments of the CDP goals, compliance with fishing regulations (e.g., regarding bycatch), quality of community development plans, and so forth.
Conclusion 4: Development of Human Resources
Education, training, and other activities to develop human resources in the participating communities are an explicit part of the CDQ program mandate and a key element in ensuring the program’s success because stable, healthy communities depend as much on people as on economics.
Recommendations
• To be truly effective, the CDQ groups must have education and training elements. These elements should not be haphazard, but carefully planned and coordinated so they meet community needs. Both vocational training and support for higher education will help members of the community acquire the skills and knowledge needed for more advanced technical and managerial positions.
Conclusion 6: Economic Sustainability and Environmental Stewardship
Clearly, communities that squander their local environmental resources (or that fail to maintain cultural and social processes and structures) will be incapable of economic sustainability. Large-scale commercial fishing activities can have negative impacts on ecosystems, either independently or through interaction with natural fluctuations. Because the CDQ program is designed specifically to increase participation in fisheries activities and at the same time improve the long-term economic conditions of the participating communities, greater emphasis should be given to environmental stewardship.
Recommendations
• Economic sustainability is dependent upon sound environmental stewardship. In order for the CDQ program to help build a sustainable economy in the region, it is imperative that the underlying resource base—the fisheries—be used in ways that are sustainable over the long-term. {including Chinook salmon}
"And whether you're an honest man, or whether you're a thief, depends on whose solicitor has given me my brief."
ReplyDeleteBenjamin Franklin
There is still no explanation or justification of the unfair allocations.
ReplyDeletePerformance-CVRF
People-CVRF
Congress intended for the CDQ organizations to undergo performance reviews with an eye towards rewarding the high performing CDQ organizations, and penalizing the poor performing organizations by either giving them more quota or taking quota away from them.
ReplyDeleteThis is without question one of Congresses intentions, and an irrevocable condition of getting the CDQ program in the first place.
Congress is staffed and members themselves are permeated with attorneys which are supremely qualified to write in clear terms, when they so desire.
If Congress had intended for the CDQ quotas to be awarded specifically upon number of residents, it would have said so.
Instead it said that CDQ organizations will undergo a review, and specifically a review to measure the underlying organizations performance over time.
If you want to look for something that is unfair, is an organization which is worth a quarter of billion dollars, pays it's CEO $850,000 a year, and only manages to give out $350,000 in educational scholarships a year ($2,800 per student), and only has non-resident white people in grossly over paid positions, all the while surrounded by some of the poorest people in America they are charged with helping.
Somehow I feel confident that the American public which ultimately funds this program, will agree with me.
When you lose the American public's trust, the CDQ program is dead.
What Congress giveth, Congress can taketh away. (Ben Franklin)
That is really what is at stake with the abysmal performance of CVRF.
It is utterly amazing that the CDQ organization with the most assets, highest salaries, and lowest charitable giving on a percentage basis, now claims to be a victim of unfairness.
ReplyDeleteIf CVRF pulls this con off, then someone has been bought off.
White people? It's about jobs.
ReplyDelete"Lord loves a workin' man; don't trust whitey!" -Navin R. Johnson
Where is the dialog about the quota allocations?
If Coastal Villages pays their CEO and his two hand picked Lieutenants $1,819,301 in salaries in 2010, and the best they can do is an average of $2,800 per student in scholarship, then the management has illustrated by their actions, their priorities.
ReplyDeleteThe local Board of Directors should hang their heads in shame at only being able to come up with $2,800 annually per student for scholarships.
Is this all these young deserve in educational support?
What the fuck does $2,800 buy.
The Board of Directors obviously thinks that their youth are only worth $2,800.
I hope whatever Crowe and Company gives the Board in bead and trinkets is worth abandoning their young people's educational opportunities because $2,800 buys virtually nothing in the way of an education.
For shame.
"If CVRF pulls this con off, then someone has been bought off."
ReplyDeleteAnd that would be business as usual in Alaska, home of the CBC.
It is truly a con game. Nobody is supposed to notice that the Emporer wears no clothes.
http://www.amazon.ca/Disrobing-Aboriginal-Industry-Indigenous-Preservation/dp/0773534210
Kudos to CVRF. Create more jobs and provide work for new college grads in this weak economy.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cityofseward.us/DocumentCenter/View/1464
http://www.ci.valdez.ak.us/archives/36/June%2020,%202011.pdf
http://www.cityofsitka.com/government/clerk/boards/info/industrial/documents/SCIP121211_000.pdf
http://www.ketchikandailynews.com/free/Edit-CDQ-fleet-040511
A Century of Servitude presents an incredible read of how Washington DC has ensured that indigenous people in Alaska have always been denied the rights to harvest their own resources. In fact today, one has to wonder if some of the managers of these CDQ groups are thinly disguised colonialists whose goal is to fool the public into believing they are only managing these organizations out of pure benevolence and caring for the indigenous people, when in fact it is just another system to take the resources by sophisticated deception.
ReplyDeleteI notice much of these CDQ fishery resources end up in the hands of the industrial fishing giants anyway.
A far cry from true independence.
Remember when the government had to take over from the evil industrialists to hold Native interests in trust. How did that work out??
Read "A Century of Servitude". It will stun you.
Link: http://arcticcircle.uconn.edu/HistoryCulture/Aleut/Jones/preface.html
In game theory and economic theory, a zero–sum game is a mathematical representation of a situation in which a participant's gain (or loss) of utility is exactly balanced by the losses (or gains) of the utility of the other participant(s). If the total gains of the participants are added up, and the total losses are subtracted, they will sum to zero. Thus cutting a cake, where taking a larger piece reduces the amount of cake available for others, is a zero–sum game if all participants value each unit of cake equally (see marginal utility). In contrast, non-zero–sum describes a situation in which the interacting parties' aggregate gains and losses are either less than or more than zero. A zero–sum game is also called a strictly competitive game while non-zero–sum games can be either competitive or non-competitive. Zero–sum games are most often solved with the minimax theorem which is closely related to linear programming duality,[1] or with Nash equilibrium.
ReplyDeleteCVRF's contention that it is the largest of the CDQ groups is not supported by the 2010 Census. NSEDC is the largest at 8,731. CVRF came in at 8,570 according to the US Census Bureau.
ReplyDeleteIncredibly, NSEDC president Janis Ivanoff signed the letter opposing basing CDQ allocations on population. I guess that they don't want to expose NSEDC's program to any more scrutiny than they absolutely have to. The program takes in enough money to pay $5 million for administration so I suppose that's good enough for NSEDC.
If you believe the reports, NSEDC or CVRF do come in far behind the others in terms of revenue per capita but you need to take that with a large grain of salt. CDQ group audited financial reports are confidential and so we are stuck with the annual reports prepared by the groups themselves. Nevertheless, the disparity is shocking. During 2009, CBSFA brought in $49,687 in per capita revenues compared to $3,722 for NSEDC.
I have to agree with Trevor McCabe. Congress and the State of Alaska need to reallocate CDQs as a matter of fairness.
Several of the commenters here have commented that the members of the CVRF board of directors are actively and competently managing CVRF. So why aren't the directors speaking out on this issue? Why do they have to work only through their highly paid mouthpieces?
ReplyDelete@9:35am, "The local Board of Directors should hang their heads in shame at only being able to come up with $2,800 annually per student for scholarships."
ReplyDeleteActually they should do that when their high school close down because everybody has moved out of town like in Bristol Bay and the Aluetian Islands.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/26/us/26alaska.html?scp=1&sq=alaskan%20village&st=cse&_r=0
"Five schools closed this fall and 30 more are at risk, William Yardley reports. Rural population in Alaska is declining – as much as by 19 percent in the Aleutians."
NSEDC is giving away $3 million dollars to the 15 communities four days before the board of directors elections. A cynic might think the handout was intended to buy votes.
ReplyDeleteHere is a link to an article on a previous NSEDC pre-election giveaway in 2009, the last time Nome elected its one and only representative on the NSEDC Board of Directors.
http://alaskareport.com/news109/x71351_alaska_cdq_group.htm
Someone from this Forum should copy all these comments and send them to the following Board of Directors. Let them know about the Thievery they are enabling Morgan Crow to enjoy:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.coastalvillages.org/about-us/board-members
CVRF Board of Directors: Pres. John O. Mark, Quinhagak, 2013; Vice Pres. Richard Jung, Napakiak, 2015
Secretary Paul Tulik, Nightmute, 2015; Tres. Evan S. Evan, Goodnews Bay, 2015; Exec Brd. Mem. Felix Albert, Tununak, 2013; Exec Brd. Mem. Joe Avugiak,Chefornak, 2015; Skye Chayalkun, Chevak, 2015; Walter Brown, Eek, 2017; Eric Olson Sr., Hooper Bay, 2017; George Chuckwuk, Kipnuk, 2017; Ralph Kiunya Sr, Kongiganak, 2017; Andrew Kiunya, Kwigillingok, 2013; Vacant, Mekoryuk, Open; Helen Kaganak, Napaskiak, 2013; John Andy, Newtok, 2013; Frank Berezkin, Oscarville, 2017; Henry Williams, Platinum, 2013; James Akerelrea, Scammon Bay, 2015; Harry Tulik, Toksook Bay, 2017; and Gabriel Olick, Tuntutuliak, 2013
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
ReplyDeleteCoastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Coastal Voters Require Fairness!
Now Morgan, take your fingers out of your ears when you demand "fairness".
ReplyDeleteIf you say it enough times, still will not make it true.
Basing allocations purely on population is illogical and inefficient. Touting it as "the fair way to do it" is purely propaganda to get CVRF residents riled up.
ReplyDeleteAn even split based on population ignores communities/regions historical participation in fisheries, existing infrastructure in communities and benefits of complementary allocations of certain species. It makes sense that Aleutian communities receive more halibut, crab and cod because they have existing infrastructure and their residents the fishing experience to fully utilize those allocations.
What use is a halibut south of St. George to a fisherman with an 18' skiff based out of Platinum? Yet in CVRF's spring newsletter, "A bigger CDQ allocation of halibut for CVRF would mean more halibut available for you to catch." "It’s not fair!" How fair is it for CVRF to take fish away from other CDQ groups, claim that it’s for their fishermen, and know that it cannot be utilized by them at all? Quite clever, quite deceptive to have their own residents fooled by this propaganda.
This effort by CVRF is a waste of valuable time and resources that can be used more constructively in the apparently needy communities.
A person might ask why after 20 years and all those millions of dollars of CDQ monies to CVRF, why are CVRF fishermen still fishing Bering Sea halibut out of 18 foot riveted aluminum boats designed for lakes?
ReplyDeleteThe comment at 9/19/12 12:06 PM is pretty interesting in what it says about CDQ boards of directors. Everybody assumes that you have to spoon feed them information because we all know that they keep their heads buried deep in the sand like a flock of ostriches lest they lose their place at the trough.
ReplyDeleteMany of their neighbors would love to slide into one of these high paying positions and speaking up is a way to get taken off the board.
Don't the board members have a fiduciary duty to know what Trev and Morg are up to without needing "Someone from this Forum should copy all these comments and send them to the following Board of Directors. Let them know about the Thievery they are enabling Morgan Crow to enjoy:"
The board members don't seem to understand that they can be held personally liable for failing to protect the community owners of CVRF from thievery.
Why cause division among the CDQs by pursuing a reallocation of the CDQ quota? CVRF instead should be taking the lead in trying to get addition allocations from the non-CDQs. Non-CDQs have a much larger share of the pie than all the CDQs put together.
ReplyDeleteThe current approach will cause division amongst the CDQs. Better yet why don't all the CDQs band together an pursue a larger share of the non-CDQ allocations and everyone and every CDQ region would benefit.
All fishermen fight over allocations all of the time. It goes with the territory.
ReplyDeleteWhy is it important to give the appearance of unity among the CDQ groups on this issue?
ReplyDelete@3:08 PM Because we all have family and friends in all the CDQ regions.
And you like some of them better than others?
ReplyDelete@3:26 Peace and unity are more important than war and division. History has proven that fact even amongst our Native people just look at our history.
ReplyDeleteIt is more important now than ever before to stand together as one people regardless of our CDQ affiliation. The CDQ program is important to all our villages in all our respective regions, why put it in jeopardy?
Like I said before; There are other non-CDQ allocations that should and could be pursued, and all CDQ organizations would benefit.
@3:26 This insight was provided by a Native Elder in the CVRF region.
ReplyDeleteIf you take off the rose colored glasses for a minute and look at actual history instead of a romanticized version that never existed, you will see that peace and unity has never been a historical reality when billions of dollars are at stake. There is no reason to think that would be possible or even desirable in the current situation.
ReplyDeleteWhat jeopardizes the CDQ program the most is the unfair way it is administered. CVRF is right about that.
This insight was provided by an elder in the NSEDC region. So what do you do when two elders have different insights?
@5:06 PM You listen respectfully. That would be the start.......then the discussions can begin.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to see a serious lack of repectful listening in the CDQ program, take a look at this.
ReplyDeletehttp://youtu.be/dDETOB8DgZg
@12:42 you say they have existing infrastructure. communities up north need more infrastructure. why should those Aleutian communities get more quota for a few hundred when thousands need that fish? I think CVRF is making a good argument. maybe if the cdqs were given fair quotas they would start working together. time to make a change for the better
ReplyDeleteI hope this 2012 review brings out real facts for a change.
ReplyDeleteCDQs were modeled after the ANLC corporations right up to copycatting their hand-outs to the poor natives.
Scholarships - 40 years of hundreds of thousands of dollars and how many young people from Western Alaska are educated beyond a High School Diploma?
Small Business Initiatives - good ideas paid for and some have never ever been launched yet say 5 years later.
There needs to be accountability because this farce at playing 'charity' is just that - a farce.
Give the CDQs back to the Americans and perhaps we'll find a better use for it. Right now, a lot of bucks are being wasted just to enrich a handful.
I'm sure all 6 of the CDQ programs are paying some minion overtime to keep an eye on this blog.
ReplyDeleteOur team to Washington DC is probably paying attention also. Lisa, Don and Mark have all been around. They probably read BS better than half the bloggers on this site.
Will they be honest to our country is the question?
CDQs were not intended to enrich a handful. What has happened to the program without oversight and detailed regulations is turning this into a big black eye for America.
Whats wrong with trying to equalize the deficiencies in quota allocations among the CDQ groups with an additional allocation from the non CDQ allocations? If all the CDQ groups could put their differences aside and work together bet they could revise the allocation law and make this happen.
ReplyDeleteTed Stevens is dead, Jim
ReplyDeleteHow those groups who have small populations go so much fish beats the heck out of me. It doesn't make sense. NSEDC should join CVRF to help people.
ReplyDelete"It's logical. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Go CVRF!
ReplyDeleteThe groups with small populations have higher per capita allocations because they had competent people at the helm in the beginning who worked the system to their advantage. CVRF and NSEDC didn't.
ReplyDeleteIt's not too late to correct that. CVRF is on the right track. I don't understand NSEDC's opposition to reallocating quota but the people who make those decisions stay in their fancy offices in Anchorage and they don't talk to the people in their 15 communities about anything they do.
A hog always wants a bigger share.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how the CDQs umbrella group WACDA is handling all of this greedy sounding public testimony from CVRF.
I wonder why the other CDQs are staying silent.
To blogger @ 8:31 PM - NSEDC and CVRF are already joined in a joint venture far away from the peoples local economy base - down there in Dutch Harbor. Done deal about 4 years ago.
It is no wonder that CVRF wants more quota from the other CDQ groups.
ReplyDeleteIf you look at their 2008 tax returns of all the CDQ groups there is one ration that jumps out at you. This is the ratio between "Program Revenue" and "Salaries and other Compensation"
The managers at CVRF are literally raping this organization of revenues and depriving their members of charitable contribution.
These ratios are an embarrassment to any objective analysis of this organization, and a red flag to reviewers that simply cannot be ignored.
Here are the ratios of all the CDQ groups as reported to the IRS in 2008. I used 2008 as an example, as this is before a handful of these organizations began to dress up their financial statements in preparation for this 10 year review.
The higher the percentage, the worse the managers are raping their residents.
From the best managed to the worst:
Bristol Bay 6%
Yukon Delta 7%
Aleutians 8%
Central Bering Sea 14%
Norton Sound 27%
Coastal Villages 68%
This is rape of these villages by their managers at CVRF. If the reviewers do not stop this abuse in its tracks, then this will continue for another 10 years.
The managers at CVRF are out of control and only looking to line their own pockets while essentially stealing form the poorest of Americans, and all this right before the Feds and States eyes.
Any one can look up these tax returns.
If Coastal Villages prevails, they will get approximately $9.5 million more each year to pay themselves.
ReplyDeleteNorton Sound will get $11.5 million more a year.
The Aleutians will lose $8.2 million
The Central Bering Sea would lose $5.7 million.
The Yukon would lose $6 million
And Bristol Bay would lose $1 million.
These are all at 2008 prices, and gains and loses would likely be higher today.
It is a wonder that with $11.5 million to gain that Norton Sound has a least behind the scenes not objected too much to Coastal Villages proposal.
Based on your estimates APICA and CBSFA are getting an extra $17,118 per person. That's a brand new car for each person from newborns to elders. Or maybe an extra two snowmachines each. Or maybe an extra brand new boat and motor.
ReplyDeleteThat just doesn't make sense. An extra $13,900,000 going to 812 people and 18,000 people are getting over 20,000,000 less.
CVRF is right to push for their people.
Good old fashioned greed is always dressed up in the argument of unfairness.
ReplyDeleteI can just see the over-paid managers polishing their halos now.
My guess is that as long as the greedy managers in CVRF still have their jobs, there is no way that any reviewer will be able to withstand the public scrutiny of rewarding these managers.
You could give another $10 million a year to the mangers at CVRF and the first thing they will do is to figure out some slippery way of paying themselves more.
The last thing on their mind is distributing their booty to the needy.
It is simply too difficult to justify giving more money to them, when they give away so little and take so much.
But if you fired them, you might just have a good chance of getting more quota.
Remember the three best managed organizations as measured by their commitment to control overhead are Bristol Bay, Yukon, and the Aleutians.
Hard to justify taking money from good management and give it to poor management, and call it an honest review.
The State better get some assistance with objective measurements of Non-profit management, because CVRF is sure to sue unless they get their way.
These CVRF managers are greedy and self-serving bullies who could give a shit less about the plight of their residents, otherwise they would have paid themselves less and distributed more.
If CVRF gets $10 million a year more, and guaranteed that every penny went to the kids scholarship fund, that would help, but I doubt you can change the stripes on these fatcats.
Probably one of the best methods of measuring the performance of these Non-profit CDQ's is to measure the per capita income over the last ten years of their residents.
The best thing the residents of CVRF could do is to fire their CDQ managers and their Board.
Otherwise there is not a chance in hell that any reviewer would public ally reward this horrible management, by taking dollars away from other needy people somewhere else.
Think about it.
Those of us who live in Norton Sound wonder why NSEDC opposed allocating quota based on population size. It seems like it would be reasonable to be able to ask them about it but the NSEDC administration refuses to talk to us about anything CDQ related.
ReplyDeleteIn an August 9, 2012 letter to the editor, NSEDC president and CEO Janis Ivanoff wrote, "NSEDC is a private nonprofit corporation" According to them, that means their affairs are "private".
Why they wouldn't want $11.5 million per year is a mystery. Janis signed the September 7 letter opposing reallocating quota based on population. The NSEDC board member I asked about the letter didn't know much about it and didn't remember voting on it. Neither the issue nor the letter were discussed in open session at the board of directors meeting at the end of July and beginning of August. NSEDC does most things of that nature in executive session, secret from the stakeholders so it is possible that it came up in an executive session.
As long as there is enough revenue to pay their 27% for administration, things are good with the NSEDC management. Asking for more quota could and should open the door for the CDQ review team to closely examine what they did with the hundreds of millions of dollars they took in during the past 20 years. I'm sure they don't want that and so Norton Sound Community residents will miss out on a lot of future revenue for economic development.
The people on the board of directors should be ashamed of themselves for letting this happen.
Every program they have for the villagers is conditional, sign this, agree to that whether you believe it or not.
ReplyDeleteEven their scholarship program is conditional. Kids that find jobs outside of the CVRF villages during the summer months don't even qualify for higher ed scholarships, CVRF tells them they don't meet the residency requirements any longer. Just because our kids are not working in the village during the summer doesn't mean they gave up their residency. Even when our kids try and explain that there are no worthwhile jobs in the village they still lose their scholarship for that semester.
CVRF's scholarship program needs an overhaul. Feels like it discriminates against our kids out here who are trying so hard to get their educations so that they can improve their lives.
People out here are so tired of CVRF pushing their agendas on us, making us feel like we're just being used.
"Probably one of the best methods of measuring the performance of these Non-profit CDQ's is to measure the per capita income over the last ten years of their residents."
ReplyDeleteExcellent idea. The Alaska Department of Commerce Community and Economic Development commissioned a study on the impact of the CDQ program on community residents' income. The report published in 2002, ten years after the CDQ program began found the following.
"As in the comparison of household adjusted gross income, the difference in per capita income
between CDQ communities and non-CDQ communities can be tested to determine if it is statistically
significant. Tests of equality of the means indicate that there was no statistically significant difference
between the 1989 average per capita income in CDQ and non-CDQ communities. The difference
between the 1999 average per capita income in CDQ and non-CDQ communities was also not
statistically significant."
"The implication of the results of these comparisons between CDQ communities and non-CDQ
communities in terms of household and per capita income is that the communities participating in the
CDQ program have neither fallen behind economically nor gained significantly relative to similar
communities that do not participate in the program. One possible interpretation of these results is that
the CDQ program has not been effective in significantly raising incomes in the participating
communities."
AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE WESTERN ALASKA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT QUOTA PROGRAM. 2002
Yes even BBEDC requires an affidavit of residency that everyone needs to turn in every year if they want benefits provided by BBEDC. If they don't fill it out they don't benefit.
ReplyDeleteI looked into CBSFA's halibut fishing. 16 boats fishing and earning 4,100,000 in 2010. Lotta dough at $256K a person in a small village of 400 people. CVRF paid 1.5 million to 170 boats in 2010.
People in the villages are afraid to speak up against CVRF because they are worried that they and their families will be discriminated against and be excluded from CVRF's programs. Some people have even said that they don't want to say anything about CVRF because they might not get hired when they need a job. This type of intimidation against our people needs to stop!!!
ReplyDeleteIt looks like the two smallest groups are getting shanked by the two largest groups. Whoever made the allocations need to get their heads checked. the two largest groups could do a lot more with more than 20 million each year. Maybe it is hard to measure their success because they have been getting shanked. That's 100 million in 5 short years. 200 million in 10. 400 million in 20 years.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a resident of those communities I would be pissed off at how much money we weren't getting. CVRF is forced to work with so little because it isn't an equal playing field.
NSEDC is losing out just as much. Maybe the money they aren't getting is causing their residents to feel left out. 20 million goes a long ways.
ReplyDeleteWe are feeling left out because NSEDC does not listen to us. It is all about them. At least CVRF is trying to do something for their people even if they may be paying themselves too much. Ours pay themselves too much but don't do anything for the money.
ReplyDeleteUgly. Why should two poor regions lose out on a potential $400 million in 20 years. Who can answer for this ugliness.
ReplyDeleteCongress needs to know that 400 million can go to the poor 18,000 people instead of the rich 800 people.
ReplyDeleteAs the headline implies. The smaller groups are holding the allocations hostage and CVRF is trying to set them free.
ReplyDeleteCounting your fish before they're caught?
ReplyDeleteWho can really say what will happen with trawl fisheries within the next 20 years.
Chinook salmon are declining now, what's next? Pollock? Cod? Crab? Sole? Sablefish? Halibut? What about the other species of marine life in the Bering Sea? all connected by the food chain, including us. Think carefully before you decide where you stand on this issue.
There's a passage I got memorized. Ezekiel 25:17. "The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you."
ReplyDeleteCure chronic poverty? Who'd give us free millions if we did that?
ReplyDeleteI am glad that my village is not a CDQ village because 1)
ReplyDeleteless incidence of greedy managers stealing and misusing of public funds, 2) less preoccupation with the situation of someone else getting more free stuff than we are, 3) my neighbors do not testify that pollock dragging is more important than subsistence harvesting and salmon conservation.
Blogger above is wise and insightful.
ReplyDelete"greedy managers stealing and misusing of public funds, .....free stuff....., neighbors do not testify that pollock dragging is more important than subsistence harvesting and salmon conservation."
This whole post goes to show how money to a handful of CDQ managers is more important than the poor peoples hundreds year old culture and tradition of living off the salmonl.
I too would rather have more king salmon coming back to our rivers. Salmon fishing may be poor in the eyes of the CDQ managers but it is rich to our people. Salmon feeds our people.
ReplyDeleteThis is worth repeating:
ReplyDelete19th @ 1:56 PM said "the board members don't seem to understand that they can be held personally liable for failing to protect the community owners .... from thievery."
"personally liable" for stealing from Western Alaska's neediest people.
CDQ Administrators have a responsibility to let their board members know before the hammer comes crashing down on their heads.
Money can't buy culture and tradition.
ReplyDeleteAll CDQ boards and their administrators are killing off the salmon culture by getting involved in the destructive pollock fishery.
I want to assure blogger 20th @ 2:47 PM that the weariness from having the CDQs exploit the poor is spreading through Western Alaska.
ReplyDelete20 years is a long time to wait for the promise of economic development in our villages. Real economic development - not the kind that is put forth by the CDQs because it's monopolized putting us in the position of kowtowing to the King in order to stay in favor.
You say, "People out here are so tired of CVRF pushing their agendas on us, making us feel like we're just being used."
Yes, the administrators are "pushing their agendas" and "we're just being used."
CDQs need to work with the people in their respective regions to help restore salmon back to our rivers and streams. Salmon are more important to our people than pollock and sole.
ReplyDeleteI like my CDQs agenda. Seek fairness for the people. We are not second class citizens! We have more people and we get less quota. It is just plain wrong!
ReplyDeleteIt looks like CVRF has a serious problem with excessive executive compensation, and may increase the possibility of a negative IRS Audit.
ReplyDeleteLarge fines and/or loss of non-profit status can be at risk.
Let's hope for the Boards sake that CVRF has a solid independent basis for determining compensation of $1,8 million to three top executives, and not been spoon fed by the top Executives. I wonder whether the Board was handed a hand picked compensation survey.
Charity Navigator studied 3,005 mid to large non-profit charities. These results would suggest that these fellas running CVRF are obtaining excessive payment. Maybe they should have to pay it back?
The results of this survey are stunning. These guys are literally -- off the scale -- and they are demanding more quota?
I wonder whether the State and Feds are going to let them get away with this.
On the first blush, these compensation packages are without question out of the norm when compared to the other CDQ's and when compared to other charity's.
None of the other CDQ's even come close to these huge salaries. CVRF's CEO is paid over 80 times the local per capita income.
At the bottom is a 2010 Report from Charity Navigator. These fellas running CVRF are double the national median for non-profit compensation.
Here is what Charity Navigator has to say:
"At Charity Navigator we receive numerous inquiries from donors, reporters and nonprofit board members asking “how much compensation is too much for a charity’s CEO?” And they aren’t the only ones asking this question. CEO compensation has become such a hot-button topic that the IRS, the entity responsible for regulating charities at the federal level, continues to prioritize CEO compensation as one of its main areas of focus in uncovering fraudulent nonprofit practices. The IRS has even redesigned the Form 990, the information tax return charities submit to the IRS annually, in part, to force greater transparency around nonprofit compensation.
IRS rules simply state that nonprofit CEOs should receive ‘reasonable compensation.’ This is obviously not an especially helpful yardstick for the average donor. Yet, the procedure behind this terminology is useful. In determining ‘reasonable compensation,’ the IRS encourages a charity’s board of directors to collect data on the compensation practices of similar nonprofits.
In the process of evaluating thousands of charities, Charity Navigator has collected a wealth of data on CEO salaries. Our analysts have examined tens of thousands of nonprofit financial documents, giving us insight into the real-world financial practices of America’s largest charities. We know how CEO salaries vary by the charity’s location, size and type of work. Since 2005 we have published our findings in an annual CEO Compensation Study in an effort to help donors, nonprofit leaders and regulators make educated decisions about the appropriateness of a nonprofit executive’s pay."
Link: http://www.charitynavigator.org/__asset__/studies/2010_CEO_Compensation_Study_Revised_Final.pdf
The CDQ regions of Coastal Villages and NSEDC are also served and influenced by predatoy, underperforming self serving ANCSA regionals.Sharing is an abhorrent thought to them.They feel like they are stealing from themselves. To multiply the money theey control is merely to multiply corporate greed & corruption.
ReplyDeleteAncsa's major flaw was the relative impotence and poverty of village corporations. This major structural flaw has been replicated in the governance structure of the CDQ's. More gleaming glass & steel coffins of their peoples aspirations pushing up against the Anchorage skyline. More decline and flight of human capital from the villages. Family fortunes are being made by a few corrupt clans who are expanding their skills at corruption and extortion honed on the village level to the regional. Asking the oil junkies in state government or the feds who are bankrupting the nation to give a damn is a form of self deceit. To give the bear it's roar it has to come from the communities.Local governments need to put pressure on the state & feds to fix it. While they can still keep a light on in the city office. Because once they cut oil taxes in Juneau, revenue sharing will be the first thing cut.Better get off your butts before it goes dark.
Someone needs to wake up the she-bears of the regions. Women always speak up for their families when the men don't or can't. Seen it many times.
ReplyDeleteThe IRS asked CVRF the following question about how executive compensation was determined:
ReplyDelete"Did the process for determining compensation of the following persons include a review and approval by independent persons, comparability data, and contemporaneous substantiation of the deliberation and decision?"
CVRF answered yes to that question for the following executives:
"The organization's CEO, Executive Director, or top management official."
"Other officers or key employees of the organization."
But it doesn't appear that they did what they said they did. This is what they wrote about the process they used.
"Executive director of the board perform an annual CEO/Executive director evaluation after making their recommendation on salary increase and bonus, the full board approves annually, each December. The process was last completed in December 2010."
Who among us has seen the "contemporaneous substantiation of the deliberation and decision." The answer is nobody because there is no deliberation. The boards of directors treat our CDQ money as if it was monopoly money.
It's ironic that the most unfairly paid managers of any CDQ group are asking for fairness. How can anyone believe that they are looking out for anyone but themselves in all of this?
ReplyDeleteThey are using their poverty stricken people as pawns in an attempt to gain more for themselves. It'll be even more disgusting to see they're compensation if they're successful in this campaign.
CVRF managers are willing to gamble the entire program to benefit themselves, it's quite arrogant and selfish of them.
For want of a nail... the kingdom was lost.
Right. Don't put the sled ahead of the team. Make it fair first to the average resident. Then worry about more quota.
ReplyDeleteNakleng
ReplyDeleteWe have nothing to apologize for. McCabe and Crow are so transparent
ReplyDeletein their greed I doubt they cast a shadow. They exploit their constituents humility and generosity.
Go CVRF! At least you have the courage to stand up for your residents. Every CDQ resident should be treated fair.
ReplyDelete161 comments and still there is no clear explanation why these quotas are so unfair and why they shouldn't be changed or adjusted.
ReplyDeleteWho gave the order for the Code Red back in the Murkowski days?
You can't handle the truth!
Power to the people!
Power to the "Real People" who live in the villages for whom this CDQ program is really supposed to be for.
ReplyDeletePower to the Real People!!!
If you follow the money, CVRF really has only two people. McCabe & Crow.
ReplyDeleteThere is no fairness in only two CVRF employees amassing wealth as those two have done off the backs of the poor in the villages.
ReplyDeleteYes, CVRF voters demand fairness!!! Internally, within the organization.
ReplyDeleteI can't imagine we couldn't find people of equal ability for 10-20% of their current income. the savings could help elders and families in need.
ReplyDeleteBased upon the fact that there are 167 comments, mostly talking about everything other than basing allocations on populations, is a pretty good indication that CVRF is right.
ReplyDeleteCVRF is right. For fish not to be based on people is ludicrous. The delegation should realize that they have a chance to fix the allocations and make CDQ successful. Base fish on people. Simple.
ReplyDeleteIt seems the CVRF Board and Communities have settled for the beads and trinkets that Morgan Crow and Trevor Mccabe have thrown their way the only thing left is they are still negotiating the size of the mirror still to be received.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the 171st comment can shed some light why CDQ quotas should not be based upon population alone.
ReplyDeleteThe performance of the CDQ organization was clearly intended by Congress to be a factor in deciding how much quota to give, and to which CDQ.
You see giving more quota to an organization which is self-serving and inefficient, simply does not benefit the anybody except the management.
Congress intended that the benefits from these free fishing licenses flow through to the residents of the various regions.
In the case of CVRF, they are simply not very good at giving it away, unless of course it is to themselves.
Congress wanted to make a distinction, and wisely so between well managed charities, and those which are poorly managed.
There are a lot of ways to measure the individual CDQ charities performance, but here are three reasonable criteria other than simply the crude yardstick of population.
One, is based upon need. Certainly those communities which suffer from lower capita income, have a greater need.
Second, based upon performance; measured against the increase in per capita income in the last ten years, standardized for population. In other words Congress intended these funds to go to improve the economic well being of the regions residents. If the money is not making it to the residents, then why give them more?
The third way is to measure how much of the CDQ's annual income if given away, rather than wasted on excessive wages and overhead.
Now there are three reasonable and rational reasons for not simply giving these licenses based upon population alone.
The management of CVRF fails two of these tests miserably.
Everyone can see that the management of CVRF are an embarrassment to the CDQ communities, and should have been fired long ago, which means that the Board of Directors at CVRF are also an embarrassment.
Even the public can see the mismanagement at CVRF.
Does anyone here know if the review is in process now? Is there any time line for it? All I can find at WACDA (who on earth ever came up with such an unfortunate name) is that it is to happen "beginning in 2012". We are closing in on the end of 2012. Are there any penalties for failure of the collective group to meet the requirements other than their own stated? Frankly, when I read the CDQ Panel Rule, which, I assume is the guidelines for their self-reporting it is the best mash of double-speak words I've ever read. And what department in the State of Alaska is doing the review?
ReplyDeleteAPICDA is the easy target in this play. The average person flying over at 30,000 feet with these two thoughts held simultaneously; fairness of allocation vis-a-vis population, would automatically agree that some should be taken away from APICDA and reallocated. The criteria is vague enough to be argued to death. How does one quantify "the overall financial performance" of the entity? MF Global was doing just fine, until it wasn't. One thing they cannot escape or massage: changes in population. All other criteria can be spun.
ReplyDeleteI notice that of all the fishery issues that this blog points to, far and away, the most comments revolve around CDQ's.
ReplyDeleteWhat I find very interesting is that CVRF is succeeding in the Bering Sea fishery when mega giant Tyson foods didn't. Remember them? The Arkansas based chicken giant that fell on their face in the 1990s when they tried to do seafood.
ReplyDeleteThere are so many comments because these are real Alaskans who were "given" 10 percent of this lucrative fishery for free they need to be held accountable. Oh, wait a minute. The other 90 percent was given away for free as well (most to non Alaskans).
Cudos to the Alaskans who run fishing companies better than guys from Arkansas. Wasn't CDQ created the year after Alaska kicked Don Tyson in the balls?
BTW wild Alaskan Seafood is always a better food option than antibiotic injected boiler chickens from Arkansas.
Commercial Fishermen in the CVRF region also catch the best wild salmon and halibut in the State of Alaska. They are bled and iced immediately and delivered quickly as well. You can not find any better anywhere in the State.
ReplyDeleteI beg to differ on the quality of your salmon
DeleteA good read from 2002.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fakr.noaa.gov/sustainablefisheries/afa/congress202.pdf
Even farmed salmon is better than antibiotic injected chickens from Arkansas.
Coastal Villages wRong Fishfight!
ReplyDeleteCoastal Villages wRong Fishfight!
Coastal Villages wRong Fishfight!
Coastal Villages wRong Fishfight!
Coastal Villages wRong Fishfight!
Coastal Villages wRong Fishfight!
Coastal Villages wRong Fishfight!
Coastal Villages wRong Fishfight!
“No Indian prince has to his palace more followers than a thief to the gallows.”
ReplyDelete-Edward Bulwer-Lytton
These words were written in the 1800s but couldn't be more true today!! Morgen and his henchmen would be wise to take heed.
Every CDQ resident should benefit equally from every school of fish. It's a no-brainer.
ReplyDeleteIf you show the allocations as they are to every of the 28,000 residents and explain to each of them why the allocations are set up the way they are, they will not approve of any possible explanation.
As a young Alaskan I believe that fish should be allocated equally to each person.
You have been brainwashed by your CDQ managers into beliving that population is the only fair way to allocate CDQ quota.
ReplyDeleteThere are certainly other "fair" ways of allocating resources that have been used by mankind over the years.
Wh gets to define the word "fair".
Is it "fair" that the greedy management at CVRF brainwashes young people into believing that division of resources are only divided fairly if is by population, in order to line their pockets further. (kind of a communist idea, where earning resources does not count)
I am not sure who has the exclusive right to determine fairness. There is more than one definition of the word "fair".
.. but I do know what is unfair. Giving the greedy managers at CVRF a single pound more, because they are line their pockets with exorbitant compensation, and not passing it on through to their residents effectively.
Like one of the previous writers, if every penny in additional quota went to a scholarship program not administered by Crowe and his band of merry henchmen, then I could see the value of this to the region.
.. but Crowe and crew, are thieves from the American people and the residents of their regions.
Nobody can make a case for Crowe and his henchmen to get more quota, with a straight face, and even fewer are willing to sign their names in support for these rip offs of so many poor people.
We shall see if anyone at the State or Federal level is willing to use their good mane to make a case for giving Crowe and his band of thieves, more resource to steal.
Publically supporting the the current management at CVRF is political suicide.
Stealing from poor people, is abhorrent to most people, and making $850,000 annually to run a charity, when the median salary for a charity of this size and no fundraising responsibilities is only ~$250,000 a year, is simply to out of line to ignore, when it comes from the mouths of the hungry.
wow this looks like the residents of coastal villages might have gotten more fish, if it were not for their greedy managers bad reputations
ReplyDeletegreedy white mangers have done it to us again.
history is repeating itself, and the government that is supposed to protect us from predators is nowhere to be seen
good bet that government officials are being corrupted by these greedy white managers
this has happened before in the past
And still no justification why this unfairness shall continue!
ReplyDeleteWhy is fixing this broken system political suicide? There are 9,300 Alaskans demanding fairness.
Power to the people!
Don't support pebble mine and fix the broken CDQ allocations.
@ poster 5:21 AM
ReplyDeleteGreedy White managers? Racist comment if I have ever heard one. I do know a overwhelming majority of the CVRF board are not "white." Plenty of management at CVRF has "non-white" lineage. I understand this is an emotional issue but get a grip. CDQ is a village based organization...not some entitlement based on race. I'm not "white" either.
The senior managers of the CDQ group Coastal Villages Regional Fund that the top three Executives received $1,814,301 in compensation in 2010.
ReplyDeleteThey are all white and received approximately 6 times more money than the CDQ group gave as scholarships to young people for higher education.
Maybe this lack of scholarships can start to explain why it is that only white people are qualified to hold the top positions at CVRF.
This CDQ has been operating for almost two decades now, and apparently nobody is qualified to hold the top positions , except white men who do not live in the affected area.
Just looking at the people and salaries of the other CDQ groups there does seem to be a pattern. Most CDQ groups are able to find local residents capable of holding the senior posts, and if the senior posts are filled with people who actually reside in the region, there compensation is more in line with other Non-profit charities nation-wide.
The CDQ groups CVRF pays CEO Crowe over $69,000 per month in 2010.
If have yet to see a lugical argument that this huge salary is either justified as compared to other charitable organization, or justified in some fashion.
Funny, after 185 comments nobody thinks that paying a CEO $69,000 a MONTH is reasonable, especially considering the abject poverty of the people who he taking this money from.
His two henchmen have to scrimp by on a measly $40,000 a month.
With wages like these and abject poverty of the area, it is no wonder they do not live in the region.
These top folks running CVRF, are an embarrassment to the other CDQ organizations doing good work, and the nation as squandering the money donated by the taxpayer in the form of fishing licenses that were supposed to improve the economic well being of this region, which desperately needed assistance.
$69,000 a month.
For shame.
How about all workers at CVRF get paid at the same level? Pure per capita compensation should be fought for just as hard as allocations based purely on population: Coastal Village Employees Demand Internal Fairness!!
ReplyDeleteThe big bonus the CVRF CEO received a few years back sure could have helped a lot of college kids pay for their tuition, lodging, meals and travel expenses.
ReplyDeleteHistorical information on one CDQ region....will history repeat itself in this region due to greed for profits from the regions resources? Excerpt from AK Dispatch: In the late 1700s, Russians enslaved Aleut hunters from Russia and mainland Alaska to work the seal's breeding grounds. After America purchased Alaska in 1867, the U.S. government continued the practice. In exchange for labor, the Aleuts were given food, housing and medical care, but they were barred from owning their own homes until 1966. They were civil servants living in a company town built around the lucrative fur trade.
ReplyDeleteBut the Aleut people saw little, if any, of the profits -- money that could have funded the United States' $7.2 million purchase price for Alaska many times over.
In the early era of contact with the Russians, sickness wiped out nearly 80 percent of the Aleuts. Then, during World War II, Alaska Natives on St. George were evacuated to the mainland, forced to live for more than two years in an abandoned cannery and mining camp. At the camp, sickness and hunger again invaded their lives.
Please knock it off with the rascism. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteCVRF is right that the CDQ allocations are grossly unfair for no clear reason and something needs to be done to correct the unfairness. However, the solution they propose is not the best answer.
ReplyDeleteTwenty communities or fifteen communities in the case of Norton Sound Economic Development Corporation is too many. It is nearly impossible for 15-20 board members to agree on anything meaningful. Meetings become so cumbersome and expensive that everything gets deferred to the paid staff and that doesn't make for good representation.
CVRF is sounding a little desperate. Most people have probably forgotten that CVRF was previously the Coastal Villages Fishing Cooperative. The state had to take away their CDQ allocations when their failed investments in the Brown's Point factory trawler in partnership with Golden Age Fisheries ended in bankruptcy. The concern was that the Christiana Bank of Norway who financed the deal would seize the CDQ allocations.
It looks like CVRF's new partnerships are losing money too but as with all of the CDQ groups, the financial information that is available is not detailed enough to really tell.
The legislative history behind the CDQ program does not suggest that congress ever envisioned the CDQ groups owning the competitive, for-profit, federally managed commercial groundfish fishing industry. That is a concept that developed later and it is not a particularly good idea. Tax exempt social welfare organizations, which is what the CDQ groups are under the IRS code, are not supposed to be organized and operated for profit but obviously they are all about profit making now.
The IRS has not addressed that major inconsistency probably because of the bill stalled in the US Senate to exempt even their for-profit activities from income taxation but that bill has little chance of passing and when it is finally declared dead, the CDQ groups that haven't been paying income tax could face enormous bills for back taxes and even forfeit their tax exempt status.
The best way to satisfy CVRF's concerns and to bring the CDQ program back on track would be to turn the existing CDQ groups into the for-profit commercial fishing corporations they want to be and organize new and smaller CDQ groups to do the nonprofit economic development activities the CDQ groups were created for in the first place. That need is still unmet because the existing groups are too busy chasing profits on the high seas.
The for-profit corporations formed from the existing CDQ groups should not need the CDQs to subsidize their operations if they are as well managed as they say they are and the new groups could focus on developing the economies of western Alaska. It would be a win-win for everyone.
CDQ groups should not be made up of 20 communities. It is clear from the experience learned during the past 20 years, smaller is better.
Why is St Paul not a part of the Aluetian Pribloff Island CDQ group like St. George?
ReplyDeleteI wonder how that combined CDQ would look?
http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/cdq/allocations/annualmatrix2012.pdf
ReplyDeleteAPICA is stockpiling 12 million in long-term reserves, most of that put away in 2010. They even give their board members loans close to a 100,000. Oh. they even paid their top guy 425,000 to benefit 378 people. 135 K in scholarships.28
ReplyDeletehttp://www.apicda.com/News_Reports/Annual%20Reports/2011-Annual-Report.pdf
Why do they even have two board members as non-residents?
Jobs created in 2010:
ReplyDeleteCBSFA - 97 residents with 2.4 million
APICA - 37-ish residents with 900K
BBEDC - 44 residents with $687,916
YDFDA - 925 residents with 4.5 million
NSEDC - 648 residents with 7.9 million
CVRF - 776 residents with 10.4 million
APICDA spent 1.3 million on community development while spending 4 million on G%A and keeping 12 million in reserves. Do they really need the extra fish to begin with?
ReplyDeleteWhy is Larry so adamant about not changing the allocations while they stockpile the money and spend so little on "COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT"
It's funny that CVRF gets attention for spending 2.7 million on GA payroll while providing 15 million in programs with 10 million in employment earnings in 2010 (and closing a deal to own their own pollock and cod boats that they can work on getting more residents on boats) while APICDA spent 1.8 million in payroll for 1.3 million in programs and storing money.
ReplyDeletePlain and simple. Fix the allocations and base it on people. Enough injustice has been allowed to happen.
ReplyDeleteWhoa! Some of you are completely out to lunch in your readings. APICDA didn't just put away 12m in one year, it is the cumulative savings over many years. A permanent fund, so to speak. There are plenty of reasons to find fault with their style but this isn't one of them.
ReplyDeleteTim Smith - having, for years, worked for a CDQ, I'm not sanguine about the future. When first involved it was exciting and new and full of potential. It has turned into individual bureaucracies that, for the most part, have little respect for one another. They are always looking over their shoulders, trying to preserve what they have. Subdividing them further will only lead to more divisiveness. The root problem, in my opinion, is that the CDQ's suffer the ANCSA syndrome - another attempt to fit a rural population into the corporate suit.
ReplyDelete