Annex

[Ron Van Putte]

Jerry Stebbins wrote:
> Ron, after reading Eric's input, maybe Steve is trying to ensure that 
> the Committee does not vote down your proposal incorrectly. By that I 
> mean erroneously on content, NOT Merit. If that is true it seems that 
> they ( the AMA Board members )should respond with their concerns,and 
> guidance, and give you a window to revise your proposal to accommodate 
> any valid concerns. The input was rather brief, and would probably need 
> fleshing out for NSRCA to implement it properly. 
> I would be willing to help respond, if that is the case, so we can 
> resolve any perceived concerns  they have, and give the Committee an 
> input that is only evaluated on it's Merit, and not voted down because 
> of perceived content/deficiencies.
> I do not how long a window they( the Board ) would give you, but feel 
> they would be reasonable. All you need is to be given a chance to 
> respond to their inputs, submit an updated input,and then they ( the 
> Board ) ensure an early opportunity for the Committee to get 
> it evaluated, and voted on--on it's Merits.

Jerry - The way I read AMAs response is that they want control of the 
maneuver descriptions and maneuver schedules.  Everything else is just 
window dressing.  I won't agree to change the proposal to say that.  End 
of story.

Ron

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, send a message to 
# discussion-request at nsrca.org
# and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
#