To all candidates for Regional and National Director:
Please tell us what you see as the top three issues facing USPA and our sport. Tell us your position on these issues and what - if anything - you intend to do about them. Finally, defend your position on how your plans for these issues will better the organization and the sport.
Re: [chuckakers] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
1) Remaining relevant in a time of declining sport participation. All economic indicators point to a tough time ahead for U.S. skydiving - fuel costs continue to rise, and the cost of a weekend of skydiving continues to go up and will likely price some people out of the sport for the short- or long-term. Unfortunately, there's not a lot that I or USPA can do to control the economy.
However, I think there are things that USPA can do in the face of what will likely be a drop off in membership, at least from the current base of skydivers. First, we can turn the Group Membership program into a way to grow USPA's individual membership base. Every tandem skydiver that comes through a dropzone is a potential USPA member. I'm neither an aircraft owner or operator, but AOPA sends me email and snail mail regularly asking me to join. USPA should be gathering demographic information every week from each Group Member dropzone and sending every single tandem jumper an email with a link to information about how to become a licensed skydiver and asking them to join USPA. Maybe we just get them to join USPA - but they read Parachutist for a few months and decide to sign up for a first jump course because they've gotten excited about getting involved in the sport on another level. Either way, it allows USPA to improve its membership base.
Second, USPA needs to get serious about promoting the sport. Sure, happy articles about skydiving are nice. But USPA needs to be where people are getting excited about the sport. I'll use an AOPA example again. AOPA's website includes a big report from Oshkosh - not an AOPA event, but the AOPA was there because its members (and potential members!) were there. USPA was at Skyfest, which was a good start. But I'd like to see USPA at places where non-skydivers are getting excited about the sport. High-profile demos. Air shows.
Third, USPA needs to do everything it can to retain its newest members. Parachutist is the face of the USPA for most members and as such, needs to be relevant to all members. I've seen some changes in Parachutist that have made it more relevant to the newer jumper (for example "How Skydiving Changed My Life"), but I think there could be additional features that could draw in the new member. Instead of focusing on just the elite teams at Nationals, pick an Intermediate team that's not going to be on the podium at the end, where all the jumpers have under 500 jumps, and give us a monthly feature on their training trials and tribulations leading up to Nationals. These are the stories that make a big article on USPA Nationals relatable for someone who just got their A or B license, not another article about Airspeed or Fastrax.
What do I plan to do about this issue? As a board member, I will do my best to navigate the "process" (something I'm still learning about) to make them happen. Getting Group Member dropzones to provide tandem data would need to be proposed through the Group Member committee, so my first step would be to join that committee and bring up this plan to the committee, and try to work it through that committee to the full board, while also talking to other board members not on the committee about the idea to gather support for the idea.
Sport promotion is something that needs to be executed by headquarters, but the directive to do so needs to come from the board. As a new member of the board, I need to figure out exactly how that process works, but I will work to ensure that one of this board's directives to headquarters is to increase the amount of sport promotion work that is done on a regular basis (and that the board will evaluate and allocate the appropriate budget support to allow headquarters staff to execute that directive). Same goes for changes in Parachutist content.
2) Maintaining safety in an evolving sport. The recent rise in fatal and near-fatal canopy collisions is an all-too-real example of a risk that has always existed that has, because of a number of changing factors, moved from a relatively low risk to a relatively high risk. It's as if the "perfect storm" of risk factors is now coming together:
* gradual increase in average number of jumpers in the air at any given time (fewer 182s and 206s, more Caravans, PACs, King Airs, and Otters) * gradual increase in average wingloading of jumpers in the air at any given time (what used to be high-performance is now what we give someone who just got their A license) * gradual increase in the percentage of jumpers doing high-performance landings at any given time (no, I'm not against swoopers, it's just a fact - they're out there) * gradual decrease in emphasis on canopy skills in A license training as many dropzones have transitioned from static line/IAD to AFF training (as a static line baby myself, this is just an opinion, and it is of course going to vary widely from school to school but I'll put it out there as a possible factor). * lack of separation of high-performance and standard canopy traffic at many dropzones (still... even after the change in the Group Member Pledge).
So let's use this as an example of a problem facing our sport - how do we maintain safety in a sport that's rapidly evolving? Since I declared my candidacy we've lost more lives in the U.S. to canopy collisions. And I've had people send me private messages and ask "Do you think USPA can solve the problem?" My answer is always the same: "No."
Do I think USPA can be part of the solution? Yes, and what's in the Group Membership Pledge right now (re: separating landing patterns) may ultimately make its way to the level of a BSR. But even if it does get to the level of a BSR, it's still up to individual dropzones to create and maintain a culture of safety that actually saves lives. There's not a damn thing USPA can do to create that at an individual dropzone level. But USPA can control what we're requiring individuals to demonstrate for licensure, and it's probably time for the Safety & Training committee to take a hard look at the canopy skills requirements for the B, C, and D license and add something other than accuracy skills to the mix.
But what I think USPA can do is reconnect with dropzones as much as possible. I'd like to see the S&TA program cleaned up to give it more "teeth", and I've posted about that already. As a National Director candidate, I won't have any direct involvement in that, since the appointment of S&TAs is a Regional Director responsibility. However, as a National Director, I plan to make a point of introducing myself to DZ managers and S&TAs when I visit dropzones, and providing my contact information as a liaison to USPA, and to discuss current issues. The USPA board needs to stay in close contact with what's happening on the ground at the DZs, and DZs need to know that the USPA board is both listening, and paying attention to what's going on at their DZs.
3) Building/rebuilding member trust. Most members don't have a very strong opinion of the USPA Board of Directors and what they do. I'd also venture to guess that the vast majority of members form that opinion without ever 1) attending a board meeting or 2) talking with a board member or members. Yet they have formed strong opinons about the board and many individual members. Go figure.
Flip side of that is that the board doesn't do a very good job of helping its cause. It publishes vague and cryptic agendas (not, I think because of any nefarious intent, but because most people raised in corporate America just don't know how to write a useful agenda). It publishes no accounts of committee meetings at all, and only vague accounts of the full board meeting (via the web site, Parachutist and official meeting minutes), and often months after the meetings have passed.
Many board members have been reported to not respond to emails. They avoid online forums like dropzone.com (though sometimes I can't say that I blame them). They create a general aura of inaccessibility. So, then, when issues come up such as the Skyride lawsuit that the board is legally prohibited from talking about, the board now has an image and credibility problem on its hands. No one trusts them, and no one trusts the reasoning behind the board's refusal to talk.
So what am I going to do about it? Be as open and accessible as I can be. Answer questions. Talk to people about how the board works (and doesn't work). Talk to people about what the board can (and can't) do. Encourage people to participate in the process. Solicit input and share it with the rest of the board as appropriate. Help people to understand what a 22-person committee that gets together for six days out of the year is reasonably able to accomplish. Frankly, I believe a lot of the anger at the USPA board is due to a lack of understanding of how it works. I actually had a jumper say "so if you get USPA director thing that'll be your full time gig, right?" He genuinely believed that it was a paid position and a full-time job. If USPA members believe that the USPA board is working full-time on their behalf and getting paid for it, well of course they're going to be disappointed in the progress! So, clearly the board needs to do a better job of educating members on what it is and isn't, and what it can and can't be expected to accomplish in a given year.
(This post was edited by NWFlyer on Aug 6, 2008, 2:03 PM)
Re: [chuckakers] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Top three?
1. Keeping skydivers in the air.
2. Growing the membership
3. Safety and training.
All three have equal importance but I will start with #1
USPA's number one mission should be to keep skydivers in the air! We have had several drop zones close in the last year and getting new ones open is becoming very difficult (if not impossible) In my region we had one new DZ open with considerable opposition and another that was unsucessfull although we tried our best. Airport access and fighting for our right to skydive on federally funded airports will be a big priority for me if I am national director.
Growing the membership and bringing new people into the sport should be a priority for all skydivers. I believe that small dropzones are the backbone of our sport and our students are the life blood. Without new people becoming skydivers our sport will die. The beyond the first jump mentality should be second nature. All instructors should encourage student progression and not treat the first jump as a one time thrill ride.
Safety and training has always been a priority for me. Skydivers should not die after the parachute opens but that still is the highest percentage. Seperation of standard and HP canopies must be enforced at all dropzones. We are currently on pace to double the fatality count from 2007. I am not in favor of new BSR's but I do believe in continuing education and mandatory canopy training to meet license requirements.
Re: [SStewart] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In Reply To
clip clip
I wish it were that simple, I have asked to join 3 different committees and was denied. (no, sorry kid we have enough already)
You can't just "join" you have to ask the committee chair and you might not be accepted. The whole thing is very sophomoric.
I believe any board member should be allowed to join any committee they are interested in.
clip clip
Hi Scott and everyone,
I think it is time to let some light into the room with (boring) details. Scott signed on to the board late in the term and missed some of what was happening. Please allow me to fill in that gap from my perspective. When the term started, every Board Member signed on to the Committees as they wanted, at least that is how it worked for me.
Let's take the Safety and Training Committee for this example. Over half of the board signed on to the S&T Committee. It got bogged down and was getting nowhere. So, Todd Spillers, the Chair, made the decision to reduce the size of the Committee to a workable level. After that decision, they achieved more in this term than in the past 5 or 6 terms. I sit in on this Committee a lot and sometimes I hear Jim Crouch in the background saying things like "thank you thank you" when progress is made.
One important point, a board member does not have to be on a Committee to get things done in that Committee. On several occasions I have had Region issues come up. I would represent my members before the S&T Committee and they always listened and responded. Actually, I got quite a lot done in that Committee and I am not a member.
In my opinion we can thank Todd Spillers for his direction as Chair. He could be tough when needed as you can tell by the reduction in the size of his Committee, but he was never trying to push an agenda. What I heard when in Committee was always, "How can we best get this goal achieved?" Then he listened. I wish all Committees worked this well !!!
Re: [chuckakers] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Fellow skydiver, I am writing to announce my candidacy as a member of the Board of Directors of the USPA. Frankly, due to team commitments and a growing family, I have, for several years, resisted running for office, but I have reached the point where I have decided to stop complaining and do something positive to help refocus our governing body, the USPA, on its original and true mission. As the son of DZ owners, an instructor, a competitor both Nationally and internationally, and now a manager at a wind tunnel , I have seen how the politics of division within our organization have been hurting our sport for far too long. It is time for a change. It is time to unite ALL skydivers and DZ owners towards the goals outlined in the first page of the USPA Constitution. It is time to refocus on what we have in common rather than our small differences. It is time that we moved beyond our traditional bounds and worked to expand and improve how OUR USPA works. I suggest that together we can make the USPA accountable to YOU, the members, and make it work for us all. If you agree with me, I ask for your support and your vote. Blue Skies, Kirk Verner
Re: [kirkverner] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Kirk - Nice speech. Very moving. Just like all the others.
What specifics do you want to accomplish during your term? Are they measurable?
Why is this so hard for so many candidates?
Edit: I've met you and really like the person and I believe your note. But that's all concept - and the same as everyone else has wrote. What do you want to "do"?
Re: [rehmwa] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In Reply To
Kirk - Nice speech. Very moving. Just like all the others.
What specifics do you want to accomplish during your term? Are they measurable?
Why is this so hard for so many candidates?
Edit: I've met you and really like the person and I believe your note. But that's all concept - and the same as everyone else has wrote. What do you want to "do"?
Not directed to Kirk specifically but to all the names on the ballot~it would be both interesting & helpful to have the every one's mission statements available for review.
What specifics do you want to accomplish during your term?
Re: [airtwardo] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Sorry for the delay in my reply, I've been out jumping for the past few days. Here are my views of the changes I would like to see happen at the USPA and how I would like to make those changes happen. I have put down a few thoughts which I hope you will find helpful as you gather information to assist you in casting an informed and impactful vote in the upcoming USPA election. As with a lot of people running for any office within any organization, the decision to run is often driven by negative emotions and frustrations. To a large extent I am no exception, but I hope that if I am elected, my frustrations can turn into positive energy which will allow me to join with you to make changes to OUR organization which will benefit skydivers AND DZ owners alike. It is my belief that unless and until the USPA does a better job of representing the interests of all of its members, we will not be able to protect and expand the sport which means so much to all of us. YES, I am saying that there is a need to re-focus the USPA. It needs to expand beyond only representing the needs of one of its member groups. It MUST do a better job of including the thoughts, ideas AND INPUT of all dues paying members. As a sport, clearly we need strong active DZ across the nation, at the same time, however, we need to make certain that the individual jumper who funds our organization is listened to and represented to the industry, DZ owners, to their local communities, to the FAI, and to the Federal Aviation Agency. In my view the representation of the USPA is not balanced towards all of its members and too many if its long term employees do not seem to be interested in what the skydivers have to say. I believe it is time for us to elect more leaders who are current and active skydivers who frequently get out into the skydiving community to jump and talk with fellow skydivers. Only by having frequent participation in the sport and conversations with jumpers can the USPA Board be a truly representative organization and only then will USPA BOB members have a first hand and up to date idea of what is really happening within our sport! Further, I think that far too much time, effort and dues money is spent within our organization aimed keeping the same people in positions which allow them to travel around the globe to attend meetings and competitions at member’s expense. Unfortunately the experience they bring is far too often driven by self-protection and promotion and they only bring old ideas about our sport which were created decades ago when they used to participate in skydiving. Our sport is evolving rapidly, and the USPA MUST evolve with it! Clearly, far too many views and actions taken by the USPA do not reflect the desires or needs of today’s skydivers. We need to expand the vision and the positions taken by our organization by injecting new people with new ideas which more accurately reflect the views of the current members of the membership. To do that we must make certain that the new USPA engages in a DIALOGUE with all of its members. Sadly, in its job as an overseer of safety and training, far too often our organization acts more a ‘cop” than an educator which only serves to create a larger gulf between the USPA and its members. It furthers the “us and them” feelings within the membership. That conflict or appearance of a conflict has to be removed, permanently. It is counterproductive at best and damaging at worst. The USPA structure tends to work against the membership by creating the feeling and the reality that its does not want to hear from its members. It does little if anything to promote a “sense of community” within our sport. When the USPA BOD has its annual meeting, there is supposed to be an annual membership meeting shortly thereafter. Are you aware that the membership meeting has not actually happened for years! The reason? There is never a “quorum” or a sufficient number of members who have, at their own expense, traveled to the site of the USPA meeting to ever have a membership meeting. The result it that the USPA BOD functions with little or no oversight by the members, and changes to our Constitution and operating process can happen with absolutely no membership input. While all of this is perfectly “legal” it flies in the face of any feeling that this is truly OUR organization. Obviously it all but eliminates input from the membership. To me, rather than be happy that no membership meeting has occurred, the BOD should be studying ways to either change its structure of have other meetings to seek your input! This must change. I am in favor of regional and informal meetings where some or all of the USPA BOD attend. I think we should have the meetings where the skydivers are. The meetings should be at Nationals, large and small boogies, at local competitions, and big way or record attempts, anywhere a large number of active skydivers are going to be. This would give the USPA BOD a change to LISTEN to the concerns of the membership in a relaxed and informal setting where all topics could be discussed and the BOD could really learn what is going within the sport. Open conference calls and web video seminars could be held to seek input and open all issues up to membership input which could help guide BOD members in making decisions. Internet polling on issues would really help the BOD decide of actions to be taken as well. I am sure that you have other ideas as well, but at the present time have no clear way of being heard. This is not to say that DZ owners concerns are not hugely important to all of us. Of course, but I think that membership input might give us more ideas which might help the BOD discover the BEST answers to issues facing our sport and the industry. For example, when we want to introduce our friends to the sport, most of us bring our family and friends to the DZ. We want them to go on a tandem jump and we want the red carpet rolled out for them so that they have the best experience possible so that friends and family might join us for more jumps. At the same time, we get frustrated when we feel that more and more DZs, in an effort to cope with rising fuel and tax bills are becoming “tandem factories” and forget about the individual and team jumpers. Don’t you think that the USPA should LEAD discussions, help develop options and seek solutions so everyone feels a part of the solution which should be the growth of our sport? This is just one example in which the proper use of USPA assets can and should create discussions and solve problems. Obviously, there are many more. I want to see the USPA listen to more instructors to continue to develop leading edge training and certification syllabi for new and experienced jumpers. Are we using the best methods to teach our new jumpers? How does tunnel flying fit into the future of our sport and our industry for training, certification and as a magnet to grow our ranks? Further, I would like every member to be able to see how their dues monies are spent and how the trust funds are invested to maximize their growth. I would like to see staff travel reviewed for effectiveness and efficiency with an eye to including more people in the travel and representation of our organization to other groups and nations. Finally, I think that the USPA needs to do a far far better job of promoting our sport to the outside world. More often than not, our events, competitions, boogies, record attempts, celebrities taking tandem jumps, fundraising efforts etc., go unnoticed in the communities in which we jump. Many times these events happen at DZ which are one of the largest economic engines in their area, and yet these is almost no recognition or coverage in the local, regional or national press, and even when we get some coverage, there is no ongoing effort to create the relationships with the press which will keep us in the public’s eye. Don’t get me wrong, our USPA Magazine, The Parachutist, is a wonderful publication, but, frankly, we are talking to ourselves, the membership. Yes, the adds serve us well and keep us informed about upcoming events we might like to attend, but we need to do more. We need to expand our ranks and one way to do that is to have the USPA promote our sport and what we do across the nation. I do want to make one thing clear. At USPA headquarters there is a band of wonderful employees who on a daily basis work hard to make our organization function as efficiently as possible, and we own them a debt of gratitude. However, there are some long time employees and managers who seem to always resist change and modernization as well as member input. That has to change! Right now this sport, like most things across the country, is being caught up in a “perfect storm.” High fuel costs, job losses, increase costs for food and energy, loss of equity in our homes and a tightening of credit will equate to fewer jumps and new jumpers and that does not bode well for our sport. Increases in property and business taxes on the DZs, the seemingly never ending march of the FAA trying to impose “user fees” upon DZ owners and efforts by the ATC system to strangle the airspace in which we can jump can only mean higher jump prices. Again, that too means fewer jumps and the downward spiral of our numbers and almost impossible pressure on DZ owners. Fewer jumpers mean fewer purchasers of new and used equipment. Making our equipment last longer can mean fewer equipment manufacturers remaining open, and less research into new, better and safer equipment. Ultimately it will mean fewer local DZs. High gas prices will make longer drives to other DZs too expensive to do every weekend. So, unless we join together to act as one voice to protect our sport and the industry our sport is could be on a path which none of us want . We MUST join together like never before to push our sport forward. We need to communicate with each other and with the USPA using the internet, and more local meetings and we all must become activists to assure that our sport will prosper for years to come. I am running for the USPA BOD so I can make a difference by listening and leading. I would appreciate your vote and your support and your ideas as we join together to make skydiving stronger. Blue Skies, Kirk.
Re: [kirkverner] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In Reply To
................elect more leaders who are current and active skydivers who frequently get out into the skydiving community..........[a bunch of stuff that I could imply means implement term limits on BOD members???...........I am in favor of regional and informal meetings - The meetings should be at Nationals, large and small boogies, at local competitions, and big way or record attempts, anywhere a large number of active skydivers are going to be......[something about revving/modernizing the training programs] ....[something about open budget and expenses to the members and a review of spending policy?] ......[promotions of skydiving events]
I think I found some stuff here amongst the honest but page filling rhetoric - THANKS Mainly something that translates to either term limits or a currency requirement for RDs and NDs, and something about actively soliciting input of members. The rest is interesting, but still hard to measure or implement.
I see two types of pitches from the candidates (I don't care if they are incumbants or new - and I'm pretty turned off by the new that only have the pitch consisting of the fact that they are new):
1 - The LIAISON - "tell me what you want and I'll work for you." It's the easy approach and usually ends up with reps that complain that no one gives them any input (other than bitching) - then they stall out in their efforts due to lack of interest - then they just become administrators of licenses and awards. I think Kirk's is a 'liaison' offer, but it's different in that he's trying to set up requirements that facilitate the input he's asking for. That's a nice change on an old theme. I'd vote for him just because one good idea is one more than most put out there.
2 - The REPRESENTATIVE. This type puts out what he wants to explicitly accomplish (hopefully based on talking to people before putting his hat in the ring, not after) and we vote for him if we agree with his platform. I've seen maybe 4 candidates in the last 20 years that REALLY take this stance. I've voted for them every single time - in fact even when I disagree with their platforms - because I want to have people with a goal. That's why I keep asking for a pithy list of accomplishments that can be pointed at as a completed action, not a change in attitude or something else so subjective.....
I think Kirk is dead on target one thing, though. If one wants to be a RD or ND, they have to ACTIVELY solicit input form the people, not just wait for skydivers to come by and make comments. That's a great idea. But a goal of 'doing a better job' is really a pain to measure. How about make USPA PUBLISH a traveling rep schedule? - who will be at what events for a forum on what topics..... Maybe 'require' the reps to attend x number of events each per year and facilitate the forum or suffer a penalty or loss of position. If they don't choose to be leaders in this, force them as part of the job.
Re: [kirkverner] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I didn't get a lot out of that except rhetoric and a headache trying to read it.
I did find this that I agree with: "I would like every member to be able to see how their dues monies are spent and how the trust funds are invested to maximize their growth. I would like to see staff travel reviewed for effectiveness and efficiency..."
Clarity is needed.
Try again, please?
(This post was edited by popsjumper on Oct 29, 2008, 6:12 PM)
Re: [rehmwa] Open Questions for All Candidates
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I think there is a key point in there ... about getting input from the skydiving community. In an effort to do exactly that, Todd Spillers created a Gulf Region forum on his dz's forums. It has seen almost no use whatsoever, and what there has been has almost all been initiated by Todd, without a whole lot of responses for the most part. I don't know if most skydivers just get lockjaw when it comes to something serious, or what ... but I sure understand that getting input from "constituents" could be a lot more difficult than many would expect. If it is too difficult to type a little bit, then what WOULD a majority of skydivers be willing to do? ... nothing more than complain over a beer at the end of the jumping day? I sure don't have answers to it, but I'd guess that getting meaninful input from a good sample of the jumpers they represent is probably a problem for all of the reps.
If USPA members believe that the USPA board is working full-time on their behalf and getting paid for it, well of course they're going to be disappointed in the progress! So, clearly the board needs to do a better job of educating members on what it is and isn't, and what it can and can't be expected to accomplish in a given year. 
