Well the forum title is a bit dated, but I'm here and if anyone is interested, or has questions, let me know. I'll try to keep up a running dialog.
The Pacific Regional Director resigned in the last few weeks, and since I have an interest and am in that Region, I'm going to try to convince the board that I'm the right guy to fill Q's shoes for the rest of the term.
Krisanne (NWFLYER) and Craig (topdocker) are also putting their names in the hat for the job, so good luck to them!
I've heard on good authority that Craig Stapleton was chosen as Pacific Regional Director.
I question the choice of a jumper who is rarely if ever seen at dz's other than where he calls home or those hosting CRW events to represent a region. I also question why someone who didn't show interest in a BOD position at election time was chosen over two people who were candidates for ND slots then and were expressing interest in the position now.
It would seem the appropriate thing to have done would have been to offer the position to the person that had the next highest amount of votes from the last election...Am just whacked or what?
It would seem the appropriate thing to have done would have been to offer the position to the person that had the next highest amount of votes from the last election...Am just whacked or what?
Well, yes, you're whacked, but that's another topic altogether.
The process the board used is what's in the bylaws; to go with what you proposed would require changing the bylaws, first.
Another challenge with what you proposed is that (unfortunately) the regional director races often go uncontested. It wasn't the case with the Pacific Region this year (results below), but it was for several other regions. That could complicate the replacement process if there were no one else to go to.
Quote
Pacific Chris Quaintance 93 Melissa Nelson 42 Brian Fairhurst 34
(This post was edited by NWFlyer on Jul 10, 2009, 1:16 PM)
It would seem the appropriate thing to have done would have been to offer the position to the person that had the next highest amount of votes from the last election.
That would seem the most fair to me as well. Should they decline the offer, then open it to others.
In many ways I'd be fine with this choice if it had been an ND slot, although I still think the next highest votegetter should be offered the position first. The CRW community deserves representation on the board too. I just hope that representation doesn't come at the expense of an entire region. Especially when there were two other candidates, both of whom are known at multiple dz's in the region, that put their names in the hat.
The overall impression that I get is that they either picked someone they knew or chose based on years in sport instead of picking someone they don't know who might upset the apple cart...
(This post was edited by skybytch on Jul 10, 2009, 2:21 PM)
The overall impression that I get is that they either picked someone they knew or chose based on years in sport instead of picking someone they don't know who might upset the apple cart...
Some of the deciding issues mentioned to me between Craig and I included the fact that while I started in the region, my return is somewhat recent while Craig has some history here. In addition I under estimated the need and effect to get written support sent to the BOD, and started a little late in my pursuit of such support, where as Craig had quite a bit sent in prior to his arrival.
I've had a brief conversation with him, and hope to have a longer one later, I think he'll put in a great effort, I wish him the best in the endeavor, and as an S&TA in the region under him I plan on working closely with him.
The two potential candidates that showed up here made their pitch to the BOD. The one who had a previuos commitment did not show up (for that obvious reason). The BOD listened to the statements from each candidate then dismissed the gallery and voted according to their opinions. That is within their power to do so as is written in the USPA's documentation.
The two potential candidates that showed up here made their pitch to the BOD. The one who had a previuos commitment did not show up (for that obvious reason). The BOD listened to the statements from each candidate then dismissed the gallery and voted according to their opinions. That is within their power to do so as is written in the USPA's documentation.
Not questioning whether proper written procedure was followed or not. Merely expressing my opinion that said written procedure does not seem to be the fairest method to handle this kind of situation - fair both to the members in the region and to those who have already put effort out expressing their interest.
Why did the seat have to be filled at this meeting? I understand that the bylaws say "at the next meeting", but is there not some leeway when the time between the seat becoming vacant and the next meeting is short? Allowing only a couple of weeks for potential candidates to rearrange their schedules so they can attend and to get the word out to their friends to politic for them doesn't seem right to me.
The overall impression that I get is that they either picked someone they knew or chose based on years in sport instead of picking someone they don't know who might upset the apple cart...
Humm... I think Craig can upset apple carts just as much as JP or Krisanne.
In Reply To
In Reply To
The two potential candidates that showed up here made their pitch to the BOD. The one who had a previuos commitment did not show up (for that obvious reason). The BOD listened to the statements from each candidate then dismissed the gallery and voted according to their opinions. That is within their power to do so as is written in the USPA's documentation.
Not questioning whether proper written procedure was followed or not. Merely expressing my opinion that said written procedure does not seem to be the fairest method to handle this kind of situation - fair both to the members in the region and to those who have already put effort out expressing their interest.
Why did the seat have to be filled at this meeting? I understand that the bylaws say "at the next meeting", but is there not some leeway when the time between the seat becoming vacant and the next meeting is short? Allowing only a couple of weeks for potential candidates to rearrange their schedules so they can attend and to get the word out to their friends to politic for them doesn't seem right to me.
It's nice to see USPA following the rules for a change.
If you want to 'blame' the timing on someone, go find Q and ask him about his 'pull-out'.
I have a question,, If a DZ has been closed for whatever reason, ie, the Clarksville DZ being shut down by the City (if I understand correctly) and has since relocated, Would their USPA GM still be valid AND, would the S&TA appointed for that DZ still be valid as well?
Also, would the business practices they displayed down there, be a violation of the agreement with USPA?
(This post was edited by Driver1 on Jul 10, 2009, 9:22 PM)
Do me a favor and ask anyone on the S&T committe if they bothered to check their e-mail today before the meeting. I sent them a lengthy e-mail on the wingsuit issue and if it were not entered into the discussion I am going to be pissed off. Sorry I could not be there. I had some unscheduled "relative work."
Nothing in the GM pledge that says you can't move across the street.
Quote
would the S&TA appointed for that DZ still be valid as well?
Yes the DZO get's to pick their choice of S&TA and it's approved by the RD, nothing says the S&TA can't also move across the street. Moving out of state or out of region is another story. JUst because your an S&TA one place don't make you one some other place.
Quote
Also, would the business practices they displayed down there, be a violation of the agreement with USPA?
More then likely not and even if it was the lawyers for USPA would settle out of court......again.
Looking at the vote totals, it shows why the suggested succession should not have worked. Missy Nelson (that's how her father introduced us at the last Freeport Freak Brothers Boogie) has become a great skydiver and has name recognition, but she is NOT a Nor Cal or Pacific Region jumper. To have her take Q's place on the board because she came in 2nd ( and look at the number of votes compared to the number of jumpers in the region_) would not be appropriate in this case. IMHO
According to her profile here, she currently lives in Hawaii, which is the Pacific Region. It's true it'd be tough for her to actively interact with the rest of the region (Northern California and Northern Nevada), but she does meet the objective criteria of being a resident of the region.
Well she is an active jumper in the Pacific region and resident of Hawaii. Which happens to be in the Pacific Region. She is an AFF instructor and video person plus does coaching. She would have done more for the sport getting on the BOD then most of the clowns who are on the BOD now. Hey, Hawaii is in the Pacific region and to my knowledge we have never had our regional director here. And I can guarantee that we do more jumps here per year than any west coast dz.
I'm really glad you were there. Still sorta stunned at how naive the board is about a lot of things. It was good to hear you chime in on a number of subjects.
Of course we do a ton of student jumps here. On average 2,000 plus per instructor per year but we also have a pretty good fun jumper base. The population of Oahu is well under 1 million people and we have more visitors then people living here. So of course our fun jumper base isn't as large as some DZ's. I can also guarantee we produce more AFF graduates and A-licensed jumpers then most dz's in the country. Which is a great thing for the sport. Plus we're just totally bad ass over here and everywhere else just sucks by comparison. Aloha
