For some extra information about navigating the forum you can go to Forum Tips
To the Board Members
Quote from ccridr on March 14, 2004, 6:39 pmI posted a question yesterday that has not received a response from any voting board member. I apologize for not stateing the question clearly enough to respond to, so I will try again.
This question is directed to the board members who's names appear below the letter Al Olme posted on this site that is reporting President John Kennedy is defying the Board.
The question to each of the board members is: Was the Constitution and Bylaws of the USCA as they read at the present time followed in the vote concerning the status of Mr.Roach being paid to preform his dutys for the club.
I would appreiate a yes or no answer from each individual board member, as would all the members reading these posts the last few days.
As a club member I feel that for the good of the club this issue should be resolved as soon as possible.
Colby M Cousineau
I posted a question yesterday that has not received a response from any voting board member. I apologize for not stateing the question clearly enough to respond to, so I will try again.
This question is directed to the board members who's names appear below the letter Al Olme posted on this site that is reporting President John Kennedy is defying the Board.
The question to each of the board members is: Was the Constitution and Bylaws of the USCA as they read at the present time followed in the vote concerning the status of Mr.Roach being paid to preform his dutys for the club.
I would appreiate a yes or no answer from each individual board member, as would all the members reading these posts the last few days.
As a club member I feel that for the good of the club this issue should be resolved as soon as possible.
Colby M Cousineau
Quote from Guest on March 14, 2004, 7:01 pmColby, I'm not going to debate the Constitution with you because I know you are an expert. All I know is that this vote was conducted in the same manner that all votes have been done for the last two years. No official meeting, since some of us work, some don't, some log on in the evening others in the morning. There was discussion and debate and the Board members voted based on their best judgement.
Colby, I'm not going to debate the Constitution with you because I know you are an expert. All I know is that this vote was conducted in the same manner that all votes have been done for the last two years. No official meeting, since some of us work, some don't, some log on in the evening others in the morning. There was discussion and debate and the Board members voted based on their best judgement.
Quote from Guest on March 14, 2004, 9:41 pmI belive that it was a legal vote according to the by laws. There has been a prety much continous board meeting going on since before I was on the board. Aperently John also felt the way we voted was legal up until the time that the vote did not go his way. One of his first arguments to the board as to why we could not have a vote was that he had already called for a vote on somting else and there for held the floor. I have lost track of how many times I have asked John just what the vote was on with out recieving and answer.
But even if we had waited the 8 weeks that John now askes for the majority would more then likely still vote the same way. All John is trying to do is cloud the issue. And I have pointed out now several times as well that if John wants to present a valid argument as to why we should keep paying Al Roach, engage in debate convince the board he can call for the vote to be over turned.
Jay
I belive that it was a legal vote according to the by laws. There has been a prety much continous board meeting going on since before I was on the board. Aperently John also felt the way we voted was legal up until the time that the vote did not go his way. One of his first arguments to the board as to why we could not have a vote was that he had already called for a vote on somting else and there for held the floor. I have lost track of how many times I have asked John just what the vote was on with out recieving and answer.
But even if we had waited the 8 weeks that John now askes for the majority would more then likely still vote the same way. All John is trying to do is cloud the issue. And I have pointed out now several times as well that if John wants to present a valid argument as to why we should keep paying Al Roach, engage in debate convince the board he can call for the vote to be over turned.
Jay
Quote from Deleted user on March 15, 2004, 7:50 amColby,
Yes
Dave Szkudlarek
Colby,
Yes
Dave Szkudlarek