3 3
baronn

USPA continues to fund ISMHOF

Recommended Posts

Clearly Billvon is not paying attention. Nobody "told" the BOD to fund this. Nobody knew about it until it was done. The BOD did this with 0 input from the members it is supposed to be representing. I continue to attempt to contact BOD members. Only 3 answered my last calls. Paul is the only 1 that has come here to tell us anything. These members were elected to represent us. Not make these type of decisions with no input from its members. And if you actually see what is going on, you'll also see many don't agree with this. At all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baronn, what you are saying is simply not true. There are no “secret meetings” or voting unannounced. Every topic the Board discusses is on the agenda, and it is published weeks before the meeting. This gives any member the opportunity to voice an opinion about an issue. The Museum made a presentation, and the Board agreed to contribute. I was not on the Board then, but it is in the minutes. If you or anyone else want to push for a project, or an issue, or want some money, get it on the agenda and the Board will consider it. It happens all the time, every meeting. I can give you numerous examples of exactly this occurring. I believe Billvon had the correct response...call us, email us, text us. We want to know what you want.

Baronn and I view this approach very differently. In my opinion, he thinks he is most effective pushing his agenda here on DZ.com, Facebook groups, and other public forums.  I took a different approach to affect the changes I wanted in USPA. I saved some money, filed for a Regional Director slot, ran a campaign, traveled and talked to jumpers, and got elected. That is the way I feel I can be most effective pushing my agenda.

History, and the membership, will decide who was most effective.  Baronn tells his story, I tell mine.

As always, I am happy to answer any questions I can concerning skydiving, USPA, Safety &Training...but I encourage you to just call USPA Headquarters. They deal with all these questions everyday, and there are some really sharp, heads-up people there.

And everyone, please forgive Baronn today, he is just giddy because all the money he has contributed toward the “Skydiving Museum” has been returned to him. He no longer has that financial burden weighing him down.

Paul Gholson, USPA Southern Regional Director 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, baronn said:

Clearly Billvon is not paying attention.

I am paying quite close attention.  And due to that attention I notice you did not answer the question.  So let's try again - do pay attention this time.

What did the BOD say when you called them to talk about it?  This is a rather important question, since you claim they are ignoring input from the members.  What did each BOD member say when you gave them the input you are claiming they ignore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again Thanks for simply doing what you SAID you wude do. I don't believe anyone was holding a gun to your head to make you say you wude refund any members dues that you and the other's committed to this. Let me know if I have that wrong. And yer rite, I am a little Giddy that it actually happened. 

 I was unaware that the agenda is listed before the meetings. Thanks for letting me and the others know. I will be keeping an eye on that. 

As I have mentioned many times already, I did call and I did text. I followed just what yer suggesting and got just 3 responses. You consistently keep trying to say its the members responsibility to stop their lives and attend a meeting. I fail to see how I will get any better response by traveling somewhere when I can't even get a return phone call. All this is aside of the main point. And that is that the BOD chose to support an organization that hasn't done shit in half a century.  You CHOSE to get elected. That was your call. Just as its my call to investigate this the way I have. I believe we both want the museum done. You choose to support an organization with a lousy track record and I point out the shortcomings and offer an alternative. You keep saying you have seen the plans for the museum. Well, be a good member of the Board and inform your constituents how their funds are being used and tell or show us what those are. This is the 2nd time I have asked AFTER you said you saw them. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Baronn, I am happy to respond to your request, although you have already spoken of it all.  The Museum representative, Jim McCormick, was given no more than 10 minutes to speak to the Board. His video presentation was for the Board, the staff, everyone present in the gallery including members. It was not closed session. He said they were on schedule with their timeline and the money, and were currently looking at about 5 locations in the Orlando area. He showed a map with the specific areas pinpointed. He also showed everyone a street level artists picture of the design of the project. Simply, the Museum is center, and a wind tunnel on each side. My opinion was the Museum building was the "center stage" and the tunnels flanked it. He said the plan is to have not one, but two wind tunnels. A more conventional vertical tunnel, and a wing suit or "horizontal" tunnel is the general plan. The interior designs of the museum, elevator built as a jump ship, sound effects, visual effects, computer effects, virtual reality and all the other features have already been shown to everyone and were not delved into again.

In my opinion, this concept is more exciting than the original concept with IFLY as a partner. There is currently only one wing suit or horizontal tunnel in the world, and its in Europe. The horizontal tunnel offers possibilities for other sports, also. Wind tunnel testing for ski jumping comes to mind. 

This was the presentation the Board, staff and members saw. It is no secret, it was open for everyone. And you know I personally invited you to attend, and hoped you might.

Will there be changes, sure.  The wind tunnel partners and the Museum will exist together, but operate separately. In any partnership there will be compromises, I'm sure. Will it succeed long term, I believe it will.  I am sure the Museum organization can supply much more detail if you request.

USPA doesn't own or run the Museum. We are only contributing money toward a future goal, much like one might contribute to a church building project or charity drive. We believe in the project, and we are willing to support it.

So I will end with this. The USPA Board promised to supply some funding for this effort, along with many many other individuals and organizations. It is that simple, we are going to do it. We will keep our promise.

Paul Gholson  USPA Southern Regional Director

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, billvon said:

Because you told them.  (Right?)  And they will listen because you elect them.

Pick up the phone.

What did they say when you called them?  When you talked to them at the meeting?

i am not sure what i expected when i asked the questions you didn't respond to, but i am pretty sure it wasn't a bunch of idiotic questions.  i say idiotic, not as an insult, but as descriptive because they all are answered if you read my original questions.  now, one more time for real this time and please, if you don't have anything to add that is helpful, stay the hell out of this one.

i was wondering a similar thought, how do they know what we want to do with our funds?  is there an open process or do we have to come to a meeting?  if that is the case, it seems a bit exclusionary.  i don't recall ever having been given the option in 22 years of choosing anything the bod votes on.  shouldn't there be some sort of ballot or letter of issues circulated so that we can make a choice, rather than reading about it?  if there is one, why have i never received it?  is there a place where we can go look at minutes of meetings and see a list of issues?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The museum so far has raised a significant amount of money.  They have not broken ground and may never break ground.  
 

What due diligence did USPA do before sending checks?  

What happens to the money if they never build the museum?

A tunnel manufacturer (not iFly) is going to build 2 tunnels in Orlando where there already is 2 tunnels;

Has this manufacturer released a press statement with their intention to build 2 tunnels?

Have they built a horizontal tunnel before?

What size tunnels are they planning on building?  

Which tunnel manufacturer has committed to these 2 new tunnels?

Has USPA reached out to this tunnel manufacturer for any information on their schedule or experience in the industry? 

Derek V

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for FINALLY telling us that. I feel like Im pulling teeth here. If I had seen this I wuda been Giddy to tell everyone about it. I had to ask multiple times to get this. For someone that claims to be sooooo transparent ya sure do a LOT to contradict that. This does sound cool. I honestly hope they can pull that off. Now, lets get down to earth. The tunnel in El Paso was about 15.5 million to open. For 1 vertical tunnel. In a mkt that had some assistance from the city. Land isn't nearly as expensive there as it is in Orlando and they're a whole lot friendlier to starting new ventures. To have any chance of pulling this off, the ISMHOF is gonna have to raise another 20-25 m. Property alone will be 2-3m. Planning, development costs for a new concept, engineering, permit fees are gonna eat up another 2-3m. We've spent almost the entire ISMHOF fund and havent even put a shovel in the ground. Has ANYONE on the BOD looked at any of this? If they have, please be the open and transparent person you claim to be by telling us how in this world they plan on pulling this off? I have been told many of the tunnels are not doing well financially. How does the ISMHOF plan to make this work in a mkt that already has not 1 but, 2 tunnels? IF this is the plan, and yeah, I'm skeptical, I don't see any possible way it can ever get off the ground and succeed if it does. I have been wrong before. So enlighten me and everyone else looking at this, how they plan to get this done. And please, enuff of the "Im a believer" speeches. That BS doesn't work in the real world...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I will end with this. The USPA Board promised to supply some funding for this effort, along with many many other individuals and organizations. It is that simple, we are going to do it. We will keep our promise.

Paul Gholson  USPA Southern Regional Director

And that rite there says it all. They will do whatever they want in spite of what the membership, logic and simple research says is a bad idea. 

We all make mistakes. What may have seemed like the rite thing to do when McCormick pitched this in the summer of 2018, is now obviously shown to be, at best, an impossibly flawed plan. Instead of shoving this down the members throats and saying "too bad", the responsible thing wude be to re-evaluate this decision and change it. Until the ISMHOF can produce a workable plan for what they are saying, the USPA shude stop all further funding.

Period

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

i got that when i started looking into the voting app wv used.  i asked what kind of vetting it had and who reviewed the code, a rando from the internet said it's solid.  i am here to tell you that he lied like hell.

i disagree about pulling funding though, a promise is a promise, and it should have been vetted better before the vote, but now it's a done deal.

Edited by sfzombie13
another thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what that 1st paragraph means or is referring to. As far as the second, let me ask a question. IF this was your money that you worked to aquire and you discovered the folks you were giving it to were spending it with no oversight or responsibility for what happens to it. Wude you continue giving more money to them?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the first paragraph was another way of paraphrasing reagan's "trust but verify".  and no, i would not.  but if it is true that there was an opportunity for members to see what was to be voted on and to show up or otherwise oppose the measures, and it still passed after being voted on, then the only recourse is to give the money away.  to do otherwise tarnishes the name. 

what i would do if i wanted to get something passed is to take the advice of skypilota1 posted above and do it that way.  if i am not mistaken under parliamentary procedure you can motion to withdraw a recurring payment as in this case, so you don't have to wait until they pay it all out.  you just have to work your ass off and get petitions, or other tangible evidence that it needs to be revisited. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never ceases to AMAZE me to hear this type of insanity. The BOD, which has a fiduciary responsibility of protecting and prudent investment of funds that dues paying members provide, chooses to go against Ottley's wishes and provide funding to a non existing museum that has not accomplished anything in 48 yrs. No oversight. No accountability. The ISMHOF continues make promises that it has little to no chance of EVER accomplishing. And yet, in spite of all the protests from myself and all the others that had NO SAY in this decision,  we are suppose to allow this to continue because THEY MADE A PROMISE? Are you kidding? In what world does that work? Besides the government. This is tragic. Anybody that can make a statement like that needs to find some intestinal fortitude. There is no reason that the members shude be on the hook for a commitment these few have done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

like i said, if you go to a meeting and make a motion to have the donation stopped, then someone seconds the motion, it has to be voted on.  at least that is how the rules of parliamentary procedure work in general, depending on the version the uspa uses.  if you had a petition of a certain percentage of membership (not sure what that would be), it would show that many people are with you.  i am not sure what you have and have not done, but if you have been to a meeting with facts in hand along with petitions and were ignored, then you have standing for a major complaint.  if you haven't, then that would be the next step.  i am way late to the conversation so don't have any of the pertinent facts.  i am going to go to the uspa site and read minutes of old meetings so that i can see for myself that you are accurate.  not that i don't trust you, i don't trust anyone much if i want to get facts.  i like to see them for myself in their own context. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, baronn said:

Never ceases to AMAZE me to hear this type of insanity. The BOD, which has a fiduciary responsibility of protecting and prudent investment of funds that dues paying members provide, chooses to go against Ottley's wishes and provide funding to a non existing museum that has not accomplished anything in 48 yrs. No oversight. No accountability. The ISMHOF continues make promises that it has little to no chance of EVER accomplishing. And yet, in spite of all the protests from myself and all the others that had NO SAY in this decision,  we are suppose to allow this to continue because THEY MADE A PROMISE? Are you kidding? In what world does that work? 

This world.  It is working; they are in fact funding the museum.

Don't like it?  Simple answer.  Go to a meeting and talk to them.  Call them and talk to them.  And if that doesn't work, vote them out.

Or just sit in front of a computer.  Bitch on the Internet.  In what world does that accomplish anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To sfzombie13:  you are correct, the USPA Board operates under Parliamentary Procedures, following Roberts Rules of Order. In fact, there are at least 3 Parliamentarians on the Board to keep everyone straight.  If one wants a topic addressed, write a motion and have it put on the agenda before the meeting.  Your Regional Director can assist you. The motion is initially assigned to a Committee, in this case, probably the Budget & Finance Committee. You may attend the meeting and make your case, or supply information explaining & supporting your case. The issue is discussed, and voted on. If it passes Committee, then on the last day it is presented and voted on by the Full Board. There is an opportunity to support your case during discussion there, too.  If it passes, it is enacted.  That simple. All the Committees and members are listed on USPA.org under “Board”.
 

That is my view and understanding of the procedures. For a more detailed look, check out the USPA Governance Manual (available on USPA.org), or call USPA Headquarters.  
    Paul Gholson. USPA Southern Regional Director 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sfzombie13 said:

like i said, if you go to a meeting and make a motion to have the donation stopped, then someone seconds the motion, it has to be voted on.  at least that is how the rules of parliamentary procedure work in general, depending on the version the uspa uses.  if you had a petition of a certain percentage of membership (not sure what that would be), it would show that many people are with you.  i am not sure what you have and have not done, but if you have been to a meeting with facts in hand along with petitions and were ignored, then you have standing for a major complaint.  if you haven't, then that would be the next step.  i am way late to the conversation so don't have any of the pertinent facts.  i am going to go to the uspa site and read minutes of old meetings so that i can see for myself that you are accurate.  not that i don't trust you, i don't trust anyone much if i want to get facts.  i like to see them for myself in their own context. 

3 hours ago, sfzombie13 said:

like i said, if you go to a meeting and make a motion to have the donation stopped, then someone seconds the motion, it has to be voted on.  at least that is how the rules of parliamentary procedure work in general, depending on the version the uspa uses.  if you had a petition of a certain percentage of membership (not sure what that would be), it would show that many people are with you.  i am not sure what you have and have not done, but if you have been to a meeting with facts in hand along with petitions and were ignored, then you have standing for a major complaint.  if you haven't, then that would be the next step.  i am way late to the conversation so don't have any of the pertinent facts.  i am going to go to the uspa site and read minutes of old meetings so that i can see for myself that you are accurate.  not that i don't trust you, i don't trust anyone much if i want to get facts.  i like to see them for myself in their own context. 

I've said many times to research what I post here. I discovered today, that the ISMHOF paid Jim McCormick 95,670 in 2017 and 73,509 in 2016. Thats a total of 169,179. It's on page 28 of their 990 IRS forms. You can find those on guidestar.org

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, billvon said:

This world.  It is working; they are in fact funding the museum.

Don't like it?  Simple answer.  Go to a meeting and talk to them.  Call them and talk to them.  And if that doesn't work, vote them out.

Or just sit in front of a computer.  Bitch on the Internet.  In what world does that accomplish anything?

2 hours ago, billvon said:

This world.  It is working; they are in fact funding the museum.

Don't like it?  Simple answer.  Go to a meeting and talk to them.  Call them and talk to them.  And if that doesn't work, vote them out.

Or just sit in front of a computer.  Bitch on the Internet.  In what world does that accomplish anything?

Still don't know how to read a previous post huh? Mite wanna work on that. I present facts and make a decision based on those. Perhaps you may want to give that a try......

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, baronn said:

I've said many times to research what I post here. I discovered today, that the ISMHOF paid Jim McCormick 95,670 in 2017 and 73,509 in 2016. Thats a total of 169,179. It's on page 28 of their 990 IRS forms. You can find those on guidestar.org

There are a few other charges for other things but, he is by far the largest. And he's the only 1 listed on that page.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, baronn said:

Still don't know how to read a previous post huh? Mite wanna work on that. I present facts and make a decision based on those. Perhaps you may want to give that a try......

Ah, so you are going "bitch on the internet" route.  Let us know how that goes.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, billvon said:

This world.  It is working; they are in fact funding the museum.

Don't like it?  Simple answer.  Go to a meeting and talk to them.  Call them and talk to them.  And if that doesn't work, vote them out.

Or just sit in front of a computer.  Bitch on the Internet.  In what world does that accomplish anything?

Wrong! IF it was "working", we wude have the museum finished. It's only going on 48 yrs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was on the National Skydiving Museum Committee with Bill Ottley and Chris Needles from 2002 to 2006.  From the beginning of the Museum and Hall of Fame project all agreed no financial burden would be on the USPA Members.  The Museum would stand alone financially from donations and charging admission.  Building cost started at $5,000,000 on FREE land next to USPA HQ in Fredericksburg Virginia.  Now we don’t know what the building will cost on land that’s not free in a third location in Orlando.

Giving our dues money to the International Skydiving Museum building should be voted by the Members, not by the BOD who are supposed to represent the Members.

Hall of Fame project all agreed NO financial burden would be on the USPA Members. The Museum and Hall of Fame would stand alone financially from donations and charging admission. Building cost started at $5,000,000 on FREE land next to USPA HQ in Fredericksburg Virginia. Now it $16,000,000 on land that’s not FREE in a third location in Orlando. I was on the National Skydiving Museum Committee with Bill Ottley and Chris Needles from 2002 to 2005. From the beginning of the Museum and Hall of Fame project all agreed NO financial burden would be on the USPA Members. The Museum and Hall of Fame would stand alone financially from donations and charging admission. Building cost started at $5,000,000 on FREE land next to USPA HQ in Fredericksburg Virginia. Now it $16,000,000 on land that’s not FREE in a third location in Orlando.
Giving our dues money to the International Skydiving Museum should be voted by the Members, not by the BOD who are supposed to represent the Members.
And that’s just a Giving our dues money to the International Skydiving Museum should be voted by the Members, not by the BOD who are supposed to represent the Members.
And that’s just a start about what I know.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2020 at 10:08 PM, skypilotA1 said:

He said they were on schedule with their timeline and the money, and were currently looking at about 5 locations in the Orlando area. 

 

Hi Paul, 

 

the one thing that concerns me is that Barron stated that no trustees or Board Members have experience managing design and construction projects of this scale. Could you please confirm is that's the case or not?

If it is the case, I might be able to help out a little. I've been a design management consultant for 15 years on multi billion dollar projects and specialize in the planning and delivery of projects like this.

 

Will

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To yoink:  The Museum trustee roll is comprised of several highly successful owners of multi-million dollar businesses. I believe the Museum trustees, Board of Counselors, and President have the needed knowledge and expertise required for this project.  Check them out. Skydivingmuseum.org.  
      Feel free to contact them if you wish.

Paul Gholson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, skypilotA1 said:

To yoink:  The Museum trustee roll is comprised of several highly successful owners of multi-million dollar businesses. I believe the Museum trustees, Board of Counselors, and President have the needed knowledge and expertise required for this project.  Check them out. Skydivingmuseum.org.  
      Feel free to contact them if you wish.

Paul Gholson

I have. 7 that say they are dedicated skydivers, 5 skydive equipment mfg., 1 ex DZO Radiologist and 1 sports consultant. Nobody with any project development/Construction design /build background. There mite be some crossover from the business owners if they built their own facilities. Most farm that out to someone who specializes in that. You certainly having a lot of confidence in a group that has little to no experience in this field. And a track record of nearly half a century with 0 results. According to their own timeframe, they have till Jan. 13th 2021 to start this. And they don't even have a final site picked out. Good Luck

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

3 3