Reform the Board: Recall Danny Grizzard, Kok Kew Wong and Simon Yu.

  1. No Member of the Board of Directors shall file ethics violation complaints against another Director. In the event of disagreement between individual Directors, the sole and exclusive procedure for resolution shall be as follows:
  2. The Board Members having issues resulting in disagreement over any matter which cannot be resolved in the normal course of a Board Meeting shall submit the item or items causing the disagreement to Binding Arbitration by an individual certified in mediation or arbitration by the American Arbitration Association, or to a licensed Attorney familiar with mediation and arbitration procedures who shall act as the hearing officer for the complaint(s),
  3. The respective Parties to the disagreement shall submit such testimony, evidence and supporting documentation as they see fit and determined to be admissible in the Arbitration hearing.
  4. The Arbitrator shall render a final decision in due course on the contested matter or matters and assessment of costs which shall be binding on the parties and dispositive as to all contested issues as if the decision was a consent judgment between the parties of a Court of proper jurisdiction and shall not be appealable.
  5. The process requires that board member disputes first be addressed in board meetings to attempt to resolve them. Barring that, it puts the obligation on the aggrieved board member to initiate binding arbitration outside of NAUI and assume the financial burden, specifically to avoid using NAUI member money to resolve board member disputes, as has been done to the great expense of NAUI members in the past. Despite numerous objections in writing by multiple board members, this process was flatly ignored.
  • The lawyer engaged to investigate the harassment claims is a Florida attorney who is not qualified to make any determinations, recommendations, or issue legal advice about a California-based 501(c)6 corporation.
  • It is not legal according to California corporate code or the NAUI bylaws to forcibly recuse and disconnect board members from board calls.
  • It is not legal according to California corporate code or the NAUI bylaws to bar duly elected board members from board meetings for any reason. In fact, it is a breach of a board member’s fiduciary duty to do so and opens anyone who does so up to personal liability. Here is an article in the Los Angeles Times relating to this exact subject:
  • The only legal way to prevent a NAUI board member from attending meetings is removal, which can only occur in one of two ways according to our bylaws: recall vote by the membership or unanimous vote by the remaining board members to remove the board member.
  • Furthermore, the board call recordings from the January meetings used in the investigation were illegally recorded without consent of those on the call, in violation of Florida, California and U.S. federal wiretapping laws, yet they were shared with and used by the attorneys. These are state and federal crimes. We have asked for these recordings repeatedly but they have been denied.
  • All complaints filed against board members.
  • Name(s) and contact information for all attorney(s) engaged to advise on the harassment investigation matters since January 2021.
  • All correspondence between the attorneys and board members, including emails, call recordings, written legal opinions or other relevant information relating to the harassment claims and investigation.
  • All invoices, paid or not, for legal and other fees relating to the harassment claims.
  • All executive committee agendas, call recordings and meeting minutes since January 2021.
  • Meeting minutes and call recording from the most recent board meeting on Friday, June 18, 2021.
  • Danny Grizzard, Kok Kew Wong, and Simon Yu to step down as board officers and immediately resign the board.
  • If they refuse to resign, recall of board members Danny Grizzard, Kok Kew Wong, and Simon Yu.
  • Removal or resignation of Rick Lorimor as Executive Director of NAUI Worldwide.
  • The financial burden of legal bills for the investigation to be given to Barry Moore, who had a fiduciary obligation as a NAUI Board member to make every effort to resolve his personal disagreements with Michael Feld. He should have pursued arbitration at his own cost required by the NAUI bylaws instead of initiating this excessive and costly harassment investigation at significant member expense.
  • The creation of a standing Legal Affairs committee to review any legal matters related to NAUI to be composed of qualified attorneys and especially those familiar with California corporate law as relates to 501(c)6 corporations.
  • A complete examination of NAUI’s corporate and board structure and bylaws by independent and qualified experts with an eye toward complete restructuring to prevent this from ever happening again.

--

--

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store