Return to Home page

Search | Statistics | User Listing Forums | Calendars | Albums | Quotes
Sidecar.com Forum ->  General discussion -> USCA News -> View Thread

You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

Random quote: "If a man is not a radical when he is young, he has no heart -- and a conservative when he is old, he has no brains." C.H. Dodd
- (Added by: DAVE)

Kennedy Defies Board - Member Input Requested
Jump to page : 1 2
Now viewing page 2 [25 messages per page]
View previous thread :: View next thread
   General discussion -> USCA NewsMessage format
 
claude #3563
Posted 3/13/2004 6:53 PM (#2637 - in reply to #2635)
Subject: RE: Hey John, please respond



Expert

Posts: 2480
2000100100100100252525
Location: Middleburg, Pa
Al Olme..AKA Mole...AKA Al Obe wrote:
>>Should the President be able to ignore the Board and do as he pleases or does a majority vote of the Board count for something as is provided for in the USCA Constitution?<<

If this is what the consitution says why are we even talking about it here. If Al Roach is willing to do the job with no pay it is a done deal.
I do not see any good motive for this discussion. If the President does not agree with the present board that is his option. If the board doesn't agree with the president that is their option ...but...if the board's vote rules then the discussion is over and should have been over with no need to make a spectacle of it here.
Why not find out if Al Roach will do the job for free or not before getting everyone in a tizzy.
Claude

Edited by claude #3563 3/13/2004 6:55 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
hdrghack
Posted 3/13/2004 7:06 PM (#2638 - in reply to #2637)
Subject: RE: Hey John, please respond


Expert

Posts: 1346
100010010010025
Location: WESTERN NEW YORK
Thank You Claude well said...............
Top of the page Bottom of the page

Posted 3/13/2004 7:14 PM (#2640 - in reply to #2637)
Subject: RE: Hey John, please respond


Claude wrote: "If this is what the consitution says why are we even talking about it here. If Al Roach is willing to do the job with no pay it is a done deal.
I do not see any good motive for this discussion. If the President does not agree with the present board that is his option. If the board doesn't agree with the president that is their option ...but...if the board's vote rules then the discussion is over and should have been over with no need to make a spectacle of it here."

Boy, I agree with you! The thing is while Al Roach never said he wouldn't do the job for free, he did say that John assured him that he would be paid. I've copied the p[aragraph from the original post below:

"The Board told John Kennedy about the vote and told him that it was his job as President to tell Al Roach that after June of this year, we would no longer be paying anyone to be Registrar and that we would not be paying any officer of the club or allow them to materially participate in providing any services to the USCA. John didn’t answer. In fact, he just didn’t respond at all for about two weeks. During that time, nominations closed and Al Roach is the only nominee for Secretary. Eventually, since John was stone walling the Board, Al Olme contacted Al Roach and gave him the news. During that call, Al Olme was told by Al Roach that he (Al Roach) would still run for Secretary and still be paid to be the Registrar because John Kennedy told him that was the way it would be. John Kennedy had decided to defy the Board’s decision and personally authorize the expenditure of $200 a month for some indefinite time into the future."

So we have a situation where Al Roach is running for Secretary thinking that he will be paid to be "Registrar", a position that isn't mentioned in the USCA Constitution BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT, John Kennedy told him so. It isn't a matter of whether or not the Board agrees with John or if John agrees with the Board. Agreement or not, John has told Al Roach that he will be paid and to ignore the Board. John shold have done as the majority of the Board asked him to whether he agreed or not. We all have done things from time to time that we didn't agree with but we knew we had to do because it was our job or it was the decision of the majority. John ignored that and in doing so has misled Al Roach into thinking that he will be paid. That is irresponsible and in a way cruel.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Goldwing
Posted 3/13/2004 8:02 PM (#2644 - in reply to #2635)
Subject: RE: Hey John, please respond


Read Article IV if this is a constitution argurment and tell me the board followed the rules or went to the backroom. YIC John
Top of the page Bottom of the page
claude #3563
Posted 3/13/2004 8:14 PM (#2647 - in reply to #2644)
Subject: RE: Hey John, please respond



Expert

Posts: 2480
2000100100100100252525
Location: Middleburg, Pa
It is beginning to sound like if the board had spent more time over the last couple of years reviewing the constitution and bylaws maybe this mess would not be with us today.
It is well known by many that there have been those who did not want John elected. But...John was elected in an election that had a decent number of votes from the membership. More than a third I beleve. The amazing thing is that the spread between John and Colby, who came in second was onl five votes. This tells me that the membership thinks a lot of these two people.
To me the USCA IS THE MEMBERSHIP. We talk about an elected board...well the curent board was elected ...but...it was not elected with too much of a vote. Running unopposed it not much of an election.
The USCA, never the less , has come a long way in the last couple of years. Prior to that it was dying a slow death with the reaper in sight.
From what John has posted and from Al has posted I cannot really see where the wrong is other than what appears to be an attempt to crucufy John Kennedy.Technically the wrong was a product of an ineffecient and contridictory constitution and bylaws.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
JayDauntless
Posted 3/13/2004 9:03 PM (#2653 - in reply to #2647)
Subject: RE: Hey John, please respond


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
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Goldwing
Posted 3/13/2004 9:23 PM (#2657 - in reply to #2647)
Subject: RE: Hey John, please respond


Thank you Claude.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
pierobassi
Posted 3/14/2004 9:06 AM (#2670 - in reply to #2653)
Subject: RE: Hey John, please respond



100100
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
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
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to page : 1 2
Now viewing page 2 [25 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

 


Copyright 2004-2008, The United Sidecar Association — Built by BarringtonPress — Send your suggestions and comments to the webmaster
USCA Web usage policy



(Delete all cookies set by this site)
Running MegaBBS ASP Forum Software
© 2002-2017 PD9 Software