top of page

The Roy Williams Foundation Meeting Minutes, Meeting 51, In Person

Date of Meeting: Meeting 51 11/18/2023 1300 MST

Roll Call:
 

Chairman: Tom McConaghy- Present

Vice Chairman: Hailey Fuller- Present

 

Secretary/Treasurer: Bret Collyer- Present

Assistant Secretary/Social Media Manager: Amber Holmes- Present

Website Manager: Cody Collyer- Present

 

Board Members/Directors:
Dexter Pitts- Present/Partial-Zoom

Markus Hugle- Present

Samuel Vena- Present

Robin Olson- Present

 

​​Directors:

Two Vacancies 

 

Alternate Director:

Three Vacancies

Guests: 

Call to Order:
 

Additions, deletions or changes to the agenda?: Fuller stated that she wanted to discuss fundraising.
McConaghy noted that there are two Full Director vacancies as well as three alternates and he has one
prospect in mind who is a retired MH professional, currently helping Sol-Vista in Chaffee County. Fuller knows
a prospect living in Washington State, who is also a Disabled Veteran. Both McConaghy and Fuller will reach
out to them to gage interest. Collyer also knows a local Deputy that he will contact. Olson asked about the
difference between an “Alternate and a Full Director”. A brief discussion followed where Hugle explained that
an Alternate is like the ‘farm-team’ for the board, in case a director is absent, an Alternate can vote in their
place and if a director leaves us for whatever reason, then an Alternate can (be appointed to) take their place
(as a full Director) as they should already be up to speed on the issues. Collyer noted that Alternates can
always be part of the discussion, but can only officially vote on issues during the absence of a director on a
one-to one ratio basis. Cody Collyer suggested that we also talk about phones and setting up a Google Voice
phone number.

 

Adoption of Meeting Minutes, Meeting #50: (Action Item): Fuller made a motion to accept the
minutes as written, seconded by Olson. A unanimous vote to adopt followed.

 

Old and continuing Business:

1) Consider RWF letter to the Ross Perot Foundation requesting funding:
     a. Letter being redrafted by Tom McConaghy – will send out for review before next meeting
     b. Anyone know where the grant application can be found?
     c. Does anyone have statistics already gathered? Demographics?

 

McConaghy spoke about the revisions he made to the letter (released just prior to the meeting)
and asked members to review it. All agreed that he made progress with the letter with Fuller
remarking that “It is important to give credit to original (board members) but also acknowledge
the current board.” McConaghy agreed and discussion followed. Fuller asked “How important it
was to note how Roy was found (after his suicide)?” Discussion continued with some members
speculating that although it was unpleasant, that it also added “A human touch” and
underscored the grim reality that we are trying to change. After more discussion McConaghy
stated that he will ‘’Continue working on it.” McConaghy stated that he was doing some
research on the Ross Perot Foundation and found it to be a “Closed Group” which is not
uncommon, with a “Gate-Keeper organization known as ‘Philanthropy Southwest.” He added
that “We will have to get into their inner circle and he will send them a contact request and try
to get on their list.” Cody (looking at their website) stated that it looks like they have annual
membership dues starting at $450.00. It was noted by the group that it seems high, but it might
be worth trying it for a year. Cody then emailed everyone a copy of the “Philanthropy
Southwest” application during the meeting. Olson asked “Will they help us get our name out
there?” McConaghy replied “Yes, that is a big part of what they do, helping with publicity and
outreach.” A brief discussion continued and all agreed this would be an ongoing conversation.

 

Scholarship program discussion for 2023/2024 school year Amounts and numbers?

     a. Review what was done last year
     b. Change to previous year
     c. Date to announce / application due date: McConaghy asked for a summary of our last year’s
scholarship program. Hugle replied by explaining that ‘last year we had two $1,000.00 scholarships
available. We only received one application from a very qualified individual and subsequently
awarded one scholarship.’ Collyer explained that one of the reasons why we only received one
application was likely because we announced it late in the scholarship cycle and the local schools
guidance counselors seem to be severely overwhelmed by their current post-covid workloads
among other pressing social issues. Olson asked about the possibility of following the original grant
recipient’s educational progress and inviting her to reapply for follow up funding. McConaghy
asked if we still had her contact information, Collyer replied in the affirmative. All agreed that we
should invite her to re-apply. After discussion of last years application (included in the packets)
McConaghy indicated that he would send a follow up document with ideas for the new application.
He then asked “What can we do differently this year to get the word out about our scholarship
program?” Discussion ensued and consensus was reached that we should work on announcing it a
lot sooner to generate more interest. Olson suggested that we shorten the application timeline to
six weeks as opposed to ‘open ended’ as it was last year, noting that if it goes on too long, people
tend to forget. The discussion then focused on how far we could go (geographically) to advertise
our scholarship program. Collyer advised the board that we are a Colorado based non-profit

corporation and things can get legally murky when dealing out of state. In addition, our local
donors, such as the VFW, who donate $100/month (paid quarterly) and attach a letter with each
check thanking us for helping “Local Veterans and First Responders”. He added that perhaps in the
future, we could designate funds to be spent locally VS regionally or statewide, depending on
where specific funding comes from. The discussion then turned to how many scholarships we
should offer and for what amounts. After a brief discussion. McConaghy offered two grants at
$1100.00 each. A motion was put forth by Vena, which was seconded by Hugle, before more
discussion. Fuller then suggested that ‘We should wait a little longer to see how much money we
will have available after following up with the Ross Perot Foundation and other granting entities.’
All members agreed this was reasonable and the issue was formally tabled for this meeting and will
be discussed at the next meeting.

 

2) Website changes/discussion (Cody Collyer): Olson remarked how she thinks we have a beautiful logo
and she would like to see it be made bigger and more prominent. Cody agreed and stated that was a
challenging problem, noting that it can be difficult to size the content so that it looks good both on a
laptop or PC as well as a cellphone screen. Olson also spoke about how she very much likes both the
vision and mission statements, but they seem to be reversed and should be switched. A few other
members agreed and Cody replied that he will switch them. Olson also spoke about the need to
summarize how many Veterans and FR’s we have helped and display it prominently, or under a link on
the website. All members agreed and Collyer noted that those statistics can be hard to measure and
spoke of some of our previous efforts to include the 2021, 9/11, twentieth anniversary event that we
sponsored at the Poncha Springs Townhall, where we flew in CSM John Wayne Troxell to address the
crowd and a few other speakers. We also had a free meal for Veteran’s and FR’s, which was well
attended, but ‘we lost money.’ Everyone very much enjoyed and appreciated the event, but it was a
net loss for the RWF. Events like that mean a lot to the Veteran and FR community, but ‘are difficult to
quantify.’ A longer discussion ensued about how we can help the Veterans and FR’s in a quantifiable
manner. Hugle spoke of how, for the past few years Ashley Ottmer (Former RWF Managing Director,
Veteran, PTSD survivor and very well qualified and passionate counselor) has been offering free
counseling to Veteran’s and First Responders with her “First Responder Friday’s” program. Hugle
continued that ‘Now that she is no longer on our Board of Directors and it won’t be a conflict of
interest, we need to get to a point where we can actually pay her for her services and find somebody
to help her so she is not overwhelmed.’ McConaghy agreed and stated that maybe his friend
(mentioned earlier) can help. As discussion continued, Fuller informed Cody that the “Managing
Director” position is no longer valid anymore with the departure of Ottmer. Cody agreed and stated
that he will remove it from the website. Fuller added that Cody and/or his business (Company) should
be included on the website as he deserves recognition for his contribution to our mission. All members
agreed and Cody stated he would include his new logo and business information somewhere. Fuller
also mentioned that she has been unable to find the link for the scholarship application. Cody replied
that the link for the old application has been removed and will be reactivated once the new application
is finalized by the board. McConaghy asked if Cody could add safecallnow.org to the “Resources by
state” document link. Cody said that he may not to be able to edit the document, but that he can add it
somewhere else if he cannot. McConaghy replied that he thinks he can edit it and will work with Cody
on it. Fuller stated that Cody should be compensated for his efforts related to the Website. Cody
replied that “I’m not too concerned about making money off of the RWF”. Collyer noted that “Cody has

always volunteered for the responsibility, but he has now established his own company and should be
recognized somehow.” Cody relented and said if you (RWF) want to pay me something, there are a few
options, either a set price (salary) or by the hour. Hugle asked “What is a good hourly rate for this type
of work? Cody replied $25.00/hr is a pretty reasonable, discounted rate he would be happy with. After
further discussion Cody stated that he would ‘keep track of his time for awhile and see how it goes.’
McConaghy replied that would be good and added “How about making the changes we ask you for
today and then we’ll talk about it.” Cody agreed to this approach.

 

3) Social Media report (Amber Holmes): Olson asked Holmes about what social media platforms the
RWF uses to communicate with the public? Holmes responded that we have Facebook, Instagram and
Twitter (now X) accounts, Cody then added “Website too.” McConaghy reminded members that he
owned some highway frontage that he would like to place a banner on to advertise the RWF, but size
and pixelation constraints might make it difficult. It was noted that Holmes designed our current logo
and has the original artwork and will work with him to get it in the right format (Vector size) to create a
banner. A discussion about the best approaches to leveraging social media presence ensued. Holmes
concluded the discussion by pleading with members to send her pictures that would be appropriate for
her to use for social media posts. She noted that the pictures can be service related, or anything that
may be interesting to our followers, basically any subject that may demonstrate the type of people
that we are, normal people they can relate to. All agreed to send Holmes more pictures. McConaghy
then reminded everyone that “Tuesday is ‘Giving Tuesday’ so we should put something together and
share it on all of our platforms and other networks.” He noted that ‘once the likes and shares get past a
certain level, it will grow organically very quickly.’ Holmes agreed and spoke about the success of our
“Director Spotlight” social media campaign, but noted the effort ‘kind of fizzled out’ due to the lack of
follow up/responsiveness from the previous board members. All agreed to work on re-establishing the
effort. The discussion then turned to a renewed effort at establishing a regular coffee club, or other
gathering that could be promoted on social media. Vena then spoke about the possibility of using the
Odd Fellow’s building (of which he is a member) on First Street for a brick-and-mortar location for
events and RWF purposes.

 

New Business:

1) Consider appointing Robin Olson to Serve as Treasurer for the RWF (Action item): McConaghy
deferred to Olson who stated that she has 25 years of accounting experience, an accounting based
education, experience with various non-profits and that she “Has a passion for numbers”. After a short
discussion, Vena made a motion to appoint Olson to the position of Treasurer. The motion was
seconded by Hugle and Fuller and the vote was unanimous. It was noted that her appointment would
remove her from a director position, thereby creating another director vacancy. All members thanked
her for her willingness to assume the responsibility, with Collyer expressing great gratitude, noting
that, by ‘passing the accounting torch’ he can now focus on being ‘A better Secretary’.

 

2) Consider Adding Tom McConaghy and Robin Olson to our financial accounts as signors and removing
Bangura and Collyer (Action item):
No further discussion was needed on this item, with Hugle making
a motion to remove Bangura and Collyer as signors for the accounts and adding McConaghy and Olson.

The motion was seconded by Fuller and the vote was unanimous. Collyer noted that he will have to
complete the meeting minutes which would have to be adopted (as accurate) by the board at our next
meeting. The adopted minutes would then be presented to the bank in order to make the changes. He
added that the bank would also like to be provided with a copy of our current Bylaws.

 

3) Consider full review of our Bylaws to identify possible changes or improvements: McConaghy stated
that he didn’t ‘want to get into it today’ due to time constraints for today’s meeting. But that we
should all take the time to carefully review our existing bylaws and discuss it at our next meeting. Cody
mentioned that he could post it on Google Docs as a living document and email it to everyone who can
strikethrough and suggest changes or additions in red. There was some discussion about our current
Bylaws being somewhat vague. Collyer noted that the existing bylaws, once revised in 2021 provide
room to grow and evolve as our mission approach changes. There was also discussion about everyone
establishing a separate Gmail address for RWF business. The Google Docs discussion then turned to
establishing a “Google voice” phone number for the RWF.
Cody noted that there is no charge for the
phone number as long as it is used. There was some back and forth as to the clarity of the connections
by using the service and how it is transferred between members who would (eventually) take turns
answering the phone. Fuller noted that members should receive “Some level of training before
establishing and manning an official phone number for the RWF.” All members agreed with this idea.

 

Treasurer Report (Action Item)
Checking Account Balance          $2,967.64
Savings Account Balance:      + $14,117.16
Total Monetary Assets                $17,084.80

 

Deposits: 11/13/2023 VFW 4 th Qtr. recurring donation $300.00
Liabilities/Bills: Credit Card Bill $1,119.15 Charges: 10/1/2023 Fiesta Mexicana, Director Lunch. $81.15
“Enmotive” Event Registration/Navy Seal Foundation for “Frogman Swim” $1,038.00

 

Vena made a motion to accept the Treasurer’s report. Seconded by Hugle, the vote was unanimous.
 

Anything Else/General Discussion: The conversation then focused on fundraising. Collyer relayed to the
board that prior to the establishment of this current board, he had turned down a few local fundraising
opportunities. Noting that as the Secretary/Treasurer, he really didn’t have any decision-making authority and
therefore really felt uncomfortable being the main point of contact for the RWF. He added that he “Politely
declined the invitations to compete for recent local funds” telling the potential grantors that the RWF is in the
middle of a personnel realignment, with a new board coming on and there are other very good local non-
profits that have an immediate need for the money. He reassured the grantors that once the RWF has a better
idea of our new direction that we would be available to apply for funding during the next cycles. Collyer went
on to explain that “Some of our most successful, informal programs so far doesn’t cost any money.” One
example of which is the text threads that he is involved with that simply share music back and forth with
(sometimes troubled) Veterans and FR’s. He added that those text threads are active 24/7, are very effective
and very enjoyable.

 

McConaghy suggested that “We need to form a sub-committee for fundraising and outreach efforts.” Hugle
spoke about his desire to organize an effort to help Veterans fix up their homes and do odd jobs at free or
discounted rates. McConaghy compared the idea to his (current) work as the Director for the ‘Upper Arkansas

Agency on Aging’ and the ‘Helping Hands’ nonprofit organization and encouraged Hugle to pursue the effort
with the full support of the RWF. Collyer mentioned that he is hoping to keep at least one steer over from his
calf-crop which will be ready for processing next year to help needy veterans meet their food needs. He would
work on gathering names of needy Veterans and FR’s from his local VA and VFW contacts. McConaghy asked
the group “Who would like to be on the Fundraising and Outreach Committee?” All members raised their
hands and McConaghy confirmed that “Ok, everybody is part of the F and O Committee!” Fuller suggested
that we schedule a special meeting to discuss fundraising.

 

McConaghy asked Cody about the “No-Cost” phone associated with Google Voice. Cody replied that everyone
would just need to download the App on their phones and simply turn it off when they are unavailable. There
was some further discussion about (static) clarity when using the app and built in scam filter technology to
help deter robo-calls. McConaghy called for a MOTION to move forward with Google Voice: Fuller made a
motion and Olson seconded, a unanimous vote followed and Cody was asked to set up a phone number for
the RWF. The discussion then touched on permanent email addresses for members. It was noted that email
addresses should follow titles more than names to address eventual Board succession concerns.

 

Next Meeting: TBD
 

Meeting Adjourned: 1535

bottom of page