Monday's with the BOD, Week 61 Answers
Livendive
BOD members knew the answers, or maybe because they simply didn't want to
get involved in this one. In any case, thanks go to Gary Peek, Jessie
Farrington, Roger Nelson, and Mike Perry for sending answers. Since it's a
3-day weekend, I'll add any late-comers who send in an answer tonight or
tomorrow and post a follow-up with their responses. I would simply wait
till tomorrow, however I've been late with these so many times recently, I
didn't want to add to that total.
Here were the questions:
??????????
The World Freefall Convention is the largest skydiving event in the world.
The event routinely takes out full page advertisements, yet there's no
obvious indication of Don Kirlin having applied for or receiving a USPA
Group Membership. Why is that? Are you aware of any attempt to make the
WFFC a USPA Group Member and how that might have turned out? Alternately,
do you know if USPA has tried to recruit the WFFC to purchase a Group
Membership? Why or why not?
??????????
And the answers:
****Gary Peek****
> The World Freefall Convention is the largest skydiving event in the world.
> The event routinely takes out full page advertisements, yet there's no
> obvious indication of Don Kirlin having applied for or receiving a USPA
> Group Membership. Why is that?
Members won't really see any indication of a DZ having _applied_ for a
Group Membership. They will just see the results of a DZ becoming
a Group Member by their listing in Parachutist and the USPA web site.
DZ's interested in becoming a GM obtain the application and go through
the process with USPA headquarters, which includes a signature of
"approval" on the application from the Regional Director.
> Are you aware of any attempt to make the WFFC a USPA Group Member
> and how that might have turned out?
The WFFC applied for Group Membership, and I approved it by my
signature. The BOD Executive Committee "overrode" my approval and
directed USPA HQ to deny issuance of a Group Membership to the WFFC.
> Alternately, do you know if USPA has tried to recruit the WFFC to
> purchase a Group Membership? Why or why not?
USPA in general tries to encourage Group Membership and does some
followup on DZ's that do not renew. I don't know if that describes
"recruitment".
****Jessie Farrington****
The WFFC has been a Group Member in the past but will not be this year.
USPA has tried to work with them about some basic violations of the BSRs
with no luck, particularly the under age jumping.
****Roger Nelson****
One does not need to be a member to advertise in Parachutist or do you think
we should turn down a Mountain Dew type ad? As far as for a current group
membership they just applied but was turned down due to BSR violations.
Since I was not involved with any of these discussion I will pass the
question to others who will respond who know more.
In the future I encourage you to ask better questions. One's that are
beneficial to the organization.
****Mike Perry****
I have nothing against having the WFFC as a group member. It seems to me it
is a business decision for the staff of the WFFC. I know of no recruiting
efforts.
****************
Blue skies,
Dave Todak
D16842
>In the future I encourage you to ask better questions. One's that are
>beneficial to the organization.
>
You are right. Clearly the world's largest skydiving event, held in the United
States, has absolutely nothing to do with skydiving or the USPA. I guess we
need to ask probing questions about current USPA group members then, MORE
BENEFICIAL QUESTIONS.
Tom B
LORD OF THE SKY
Livendive <live...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:acu2og$sjak8$1...@ID-75676.news.dfncis.de...
> This week's question didn't draw many responses, perhaps because not many
> BOD members knew the answers, or maybe because they simply didn't want to
> get involved in this one.
It is interesting to me that the members of the executive committee
,(Don Yarling, John De Santis, John Goswitz, Lee Schlictemeir,and Madolyn
Murdok) who made the decision to deny the WFFC group member status ,
couldn't be bothered to answer the Memberships' question .
Hopefully they were all too busy because they were finally studying our
Governance Manual and our Rules of Order.
"Treetop" a.k.a. LORD OF THE SKY
Rev. Jim
"D16842" <d16...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020527182045...@mb-mu.aol.com...
He means next time ask questions about summerfest, so he'll get some free
add space on the wreak without spamming.
Geez Tom, I thought you knew how to read between the lines!
--
Blue, Safe Skies,
Rev. (No, I don't hook it) Jim
NCB#398
NHDZ#4
Fancy Lad #16
MikeT's People who care list #69
A-39869
***Remove all GM DZO's from the USPA BOD next election!***
Rev. Jim
> signature. The BOD Executive Committee "overrode" my approval and
> directed USPA HQ to deny issuance of a Group Membership to the WFFC.
>
> The WFFC has been a Group Member in the past but will not be this year.
> I have nothing against having the WFFC as a group member. It seems to me
it
> is a business decision for the staff of the WFFC. I know of no recruiting
> efforts.
From freefall.com, quoted:
"To be registered as a "skydiver" with that wristband you need to have at
least 50 freefall skydives. This does not require a "license" but to expect
some additional scutiny at registration if you don't. These 50 freefalls
must be properly logged!
USPA licenses are encouraged and temporary memberships are available at
registration. <end quote>
Why does it not surprise me that Don was turned down? The WFFC actively
encourages USPA membership, (Didn't they even 'require' it in the past?) yet
are denied a GM? On the other end of the spectrum, Group Members are denying
access to licensed skydivers, yet are allowed to retain the GM status?
Does this only stink to me?
It was explained to me some time ago that Group Members fees are based on
lift capacity. This, in my opinion, would be an extremely high cost for the
WFFC, to be a GM for a week a year.
Don is a hell of a business man, and here is MY guess as to what really
happened. If I'm wrong, prove me wrong!
Don applied for a GM, possibly as a "temp"? Don tried to negotiate a lower
"lift" fee, as it was short term, and the majority of the lift fleet was
from GM drop zones anyway. This met with resistance in the BOD, as we all
know how money centered most of them are, and was shot down. I wouldn't be
at all surprised if Don had withdrawn the GM request, yet was still labeled
as "denied". If BSR violations were the real reasons he was denied, it falls
back on the "Do what I say, not what I do" attitude of the majority of the
present BOD. Judging by BSR violations, and not just age "requirements",
many current GM's should be stripped of the membership.
Solve the whole damn problem. The membership may not want a GM program at
all. The current BOD is dodging this issue. It would be quite simple to add
the vote to the election ballot. Just add:
Referendum 1
a. The USPA presently has a Group Member program benefiting the Drop Zones.
Should the USPA discontinue this program?
1. Yes, discontinue the Group Membership program.
2. No, allow the Group Membership program to remain.
How hard could that be? You BOD members "say" you are representing our best
interests, but how do you know? Ask us!
[posted to news:rec.skydiving and mailed to full...@uspa.org ]
(NOTE and DISCLAIMER: All private replies by email to this post are subject
to public posting on news:rec.skydiving )
LORD OF THE SKY
From: D16842 <d16...@aol.com>
Newsgroups: rec.skydiving
To: <lord...@ellijay.com>
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: Monday's with the BOD, Week 61 Answers
> Don wrote:
>
> > It is interesting to me that the members of the executive committee
> >,(Don Yarling, John De Santis, John Goswitz, Lee Schlictemeir,and Madolyn
> >Murdok) who made the decision to deny the WFFC group member status ,
> >couldn't be bothered to answer the Memberships' question .
> > Hopefully they were all too busy because they were finally studying
our
> >Governance Manual and our Rules of Order.
> >
>
> Treetop, would you like to make a little wager on that one? I bet they
were
> doing anything but that. :)
>
> Tom
Well Tom,
I'd bet Don Yarling is studying the section which requires that
even those who have met all the qualifications to become AFF certification
Course Directors must be approved by the BOD.
Now why is BOD approval a prerequisite? One AFF IE who had met all the
criteria to become an AFFCD recently requested a temporary title as AFFCD .
He was turned down.
Why does the BOD have a say in this?
The qualifications to be a AFF Course Director are now printed in
black and white. Why should a political group have the final say on who can
become a Course Director? Seems if they have passed the requirements they
should have the title and the privileges.
Can any BOD member past or present answer that riddle?
"Treetop" a.k.a. LORD OF THE SKY
here's some "Most Excellent Entertainment")
Posted and mailed to : full...@uspa.org with direct e-mailings to
Roger, Mike Perry, Gary Peek, and Barry Chase
JDobleman
and why?
madjohn
Livendive
:-) What did you think?
Blues,
Dave
"JDobleman" <jdob...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020528014121...@mb-cm.aol.com...
Livendive
was writing this post, because I had his answer in my Inbox less than a
minute after I hit send. John Goswitz also got his answer in yesterday.
Thanks go to both men for their answers which are now included below. That
brings our total number of answers to 6, all of which are a bit more
interesting than one would expect from such an innocent sounding set of
questions.
Blue skies,
Dave
"Livendive" <live...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:acu2og$sjak8$1...@ID-75676.news.dfncis.de...
****Mike Mullins****
The WFFC has always been a supporter of USPA and has been a group member for
many years. Don Kirlin did apply to renew the group membership and the
renewal
was approved by the appropriate Regional Director, Gary Peek.
The Executive Committee then decided to overrule Gary Peeks approval and,
citing various alleged BSR violations, refused to renew the group
membership.
I have talked to Don Kirlin on this issue and he basically said that if the
Executive Committee didn't want his membership and money, then that was
fine.
What stinks about this situation is that the Executive Committee did not
follow
the rules that are set down in our Governance Manual. The Governance manual
clearly states that all disciplinary action is the responsibility of the
Regional Director.
Regional Directors are elected by the constituents in their region, they
answer
to them only, and they have always had complete discretion to serve their
Region as they best saw fit. Evidently the Executive Committee feels that
if
they do not like a decision that the Regional Director makes, they will
simply
overrule him and do as they wish.
I cannot see any way, in the Governance Manual, that the Executive Committee
had authority to overrule the Regional Director.
Some of us on the Board wish to do away with the Executive Committee. In
this
day of instant communication the decisions that the six on the Executive
Committee make should be made by the full board.
As I have always been on record that we should do away with the Group
Membership program, I am not arguing that WFFC should be a Group Member.
What
I am concerned with is the power grab by the Executive Committee and the
illegal centralization of decisions that belong in the Region.
****John Goswitz****
> The World Freefall Convention is the largest skydiving event in the world.
The event routinely takes out full page advertisements, yet there's no
> obvious indication of Don Kirlin having applied for or receiving a USPA
Group Membership. Why is that? Are you aware of any attempt to make the
> WFFC a USPA Group Member and how that might have turned out?
The WFFC has been a Group Member for a number of years. This year when the
membership came up for renewal, Headquarters asked for some guideance on
this matter. This was due to the reports over the years of violations of the
BSR's at the event. The Exective Committee voted to not renew their
membership at this time. Regional Director Gary Peek signed off on the
renewal, but the Exective Committee felt that his approval of the membership
fell under the heading of "Conflict of Intrest". Thus the Committee voted to
overrule his aproval. This matter will be discussed further at the upcoming
BOD meeting in July.
>Alternately, do you know if USPA has tried to recruit the WFFC to purchase
a Group Membership? Why or why not?
I don't know of any attempt to recruit any DZ as a Group Member. I have
never made an attempt to have any of the DZ's in my Region become Group
Members. Any DZ that has chosen to become a member or drop their membership
has done so by their own choice.
********************
Blue skies,
Dave Todak
Livendive
follow-up to the original post in this thread. Both are worth reading.
Blues,
Dave
"LORD OF THE SKY" <lord...@ellijay.com> wrote in message
news:acueh...@enews2.newsguy.com...
Tandmterry
>****Roger Nelson****
>In the future I encourage you to ask better questions.
Why does it matter? You pick and choose what you will answer anyways.
Terry
Rick Schwandt
> directed USPA HQ to deny issuance of a Group Membership to the WFFC.
Hey way to go!!!! This is a real positive step to increasing
participation.
The first thing I look for is a NON Uspa Group Membership event.
TY
D16842 wrote:
Ya, the attitude behind that statement irritated the hell out of me.
Livendive
"Rick Schwandt" <RSchwa...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:r1j7fuctf36etke8c...@4ax.com...
No kidding. So who wants to sponsor a webpage dedicated to promoting
non-USPA dropzones and boogies? I'd do it myself, but my plate's too full
right now. I imagine that between Skydive America, Skydive San Marcos, The
Parachute Center (Lodi), the WFFC, Arizona Skydiving - Coolidge, West
Tennessee Skydiving, Skydive Greene County, and the assorted smaller
non-USPA Group Member dropzones/events, maybe 10-15% of jumps in the US each
year are outside the GM envelope. I think it would be cool to promote those
and see if we can increase that number significantly.
Blues,
Dave
LORD OF THE SKY
>
> ****Mike Mullins****
> What stinks about this situation is that the Executive Committee did not
> follow
> the rules that are set down in our Governance Manual.
Mr. Mullins, It could be that the executive committee just doesn't
understand our rules. The same fault you displayed a few weeks ago when by
your ignorance of the rules you stated that there were two quorums at the
GMM.
I believe the entire BOD needs to take a long look at our rules of
governance and seriously strive to educate themselves as to their meanings.
You guys are fuckin' up way too often.
LORD OF THE SKY
> ****John Goswitz****
> The WFFC has been a Group Member for a number of years. This year when the
> membership came up for renewal, Headquarters asked for some guideance on
> this matter. This was due to the reports over the years of violations of
the
> BSR's at the event.
Wait a second here Mr. Goswitz, are you reporting to the Membership
that the executive committee denied membership to the WFFC due to
*allegations * of BSR violations?
Who made these "allegations"? Have these allegations been
investigated to determine their veracity?
Does the executive committee actually hold a preponderance of
evidence which confirms these allegations of safety violations?
Where is the evidence?
Why don't you share with the Membership the charges and the
evidence.
I trust Gary Peek. If he says they are good to go you better be ready to
provide evidence they aren't or else we'll ride your ass right off the BOD
on a rail!
So where is your proof John G., Madolyn M, Lee the Pisser S., Don Y,
and
John D.?
Tandmterry
> So where is your proof John G., Madolyn M, Lee the Pisser S., Don Y,
>and
>John D.?
Didnt you forget one??
Terry