You know the odd thing here. John Kennedy has called for the same kind of vote that he now claims is not in the consitution. In fact he did so just a couple of days ago. I feel he is doing this to cloud the issue. The issue as I see it is now two fold. One, Should we continue to pay for a job we can get done for free and Two, Is the president above the majority rule of the board. And it truly only comes down to the second as the majority of the board has already decieded on item one.
This is how the board has been ran in the less then a year I have been on it. Many of the issues John seems to have with the board occured before I was a member and I had no involvement with nor do I even know what they are all about. Did not and does not seem important for me to look into as it is in the past.
What we have here is a case of the board doing what it thinks is best for the club. Then John rather then participating in the debate simply decieded that he was above the board.
The better way to handle this entire issue would have been and still could be for John to give the board his arguments as to why we should continue to pay Al Roach and then if through debate he feels that enough board members agree with him. Call a vote to over turn the last vote. Simple enough? But you see to do that you would also have to be willing to abide by majority rule something thing that John seems to feel he is above.
If we were to use John's interpretation of the consitution then this club would not be the club it is today. It would be as it was before the elections where held 2 years ago. As I see it a dying club ran by and for those people that can take the time to travel to the one meeting a year that the board was holding. This pretty much as the last president would not allow for a national to be held in the west ment that the only people who could participat in decision making were those people who could afford the time and money to travel to a location on the east coast. Oh wait. That is just what John has decieded needs to be done. If people want to have a say in what is going on with the USCA then they must go to the national if John is to have his way. Does this sound like the way a national club should be ran? I think not.
So John. How about giving the board a convincing argument as to why we should pay Al Roach to be registrar when we have a capable volenter willing to do it? If you have a strong enough argument then I for one am open to hearing it. But if you deciede to go this route then you need to be prepared to abide by the majority off the board even if they do not vote your way.
Jay Giese
Thank you Claude.
YES! I agree with Jay stating "..The issue as I see it is now two fold. One, Should we continue to pay for a job we can get done for free and Two, Is the president above the majority rule of the board. And it truly only comes down to the second as the majority of the board has already decided on item one."
WHEN do we vote?
Piero Bassi
#4219
Minneapolis, Minnesota
