<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<p class="MsoNormal">[quote]ORIGINAL: jonlowe<br>
Transparency. I think the spilled milk has been discussed enough,
from the AMA
rules change proposal process by the board, to the bylaws, to the
aborted
officer election.<br>
[/quote]<br>
<br>
<br>
I certainly agree that there were processes that could have been
improved
relative to the bylaw changes and officer election. However to
call them
aborted and imply in various other posts that the board has a
hidden
agenda is over the top. Clearly the board could have and should
have done a better job on the
elections and, for that matter, the treasurer's audit but there
was no intent
to hoodwink or put one over on the membership. We are nothing but
a bunch of
volunteers with a love of pattern. When the call went out two
years ago, noone
else stood up and said "I want to run for office". Various
coercions were
applied to get Ed Alt to run for President and Scott McHarg to run
for
Secretary.I will admit to calling Derek and asking if they had
found a
Treasurer in mid-December. When he said yes, I thanked him and was
about to
hang up when he said "you". Later that year Ed Alt resigned due to
the press of work and Jim Quinn who was then VP reluctantly
assumed the reins of president. Good
choice or not, there was noone else champing at the bit to take
the job and the
board gratefully accepted Jim as president. I didn't see anyone
jumping up and
down to get on the board at that time or, for that matter, now.
Kind of wonder
where all the current contrarians were then. Jon, I guess you were
still
recovering from your retirement so that excuses you but there are
plenty of
others making derogatory comments about the actions of the current
board. Where
are you when we need help? Apparently looking the other way. <span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>Right now John Bruml has been
trying to get
out of being the Advertising Manager almost as long as I’ve been
on the board. Where
are those clamoring to help out? Apparently using their energies
to bash those who
did throw their hat in.<br
style="mso-special-character:line-break">
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--><br
style="mso-special-character:line-break">
<!--[endif]--></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">LOWE>>Oh, and
about the
Contest Board. Their process is well documented by the AMA and
follows a
strict time table. We all had the opportunity to provide inputs
and cross
proposals after the initial vote. We also had the opportunity
to talk to
the CB members, and I did talk to a couple of them. The CB
members are
mostly active members of the pattern community, are well known,
and are charted
by the AMA, not the NSRCA, to look at rules proposals to benefit
all AMA
participants, not just NSRCA members. Problems with the NSRCA
proposals
were hashed out here, and the submitters had the opportunity to
fix issues
during the cross proposal process. How much follow-up contact
did
the NSRCA board initiate with the CB during the process? Were
any cross
proposals submitted?<<LOWE<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Jon, this seems to
have provided
the impetus for your presidential campaign. I can only say that
the NSRCA Rules
committee operated openly, if with a late start, and solicited
input from the
membership on RCU and this list(and outside the membership as
well), ran a
survey, modified proposals to meet objections and finally
submitted proposals
to the contest board. More open you cannot get. I find it
fascinating that to
you, the NSRCA board must be open and direct with its
membership(as it should) but
when dealing with the contest board we are expected to dig, pry
and canvas the
board members in an effort to find out how our proposals are
doing and what
objections might have been raised. Why is the same openness not
required in both
cases in your mind?? While it is clear in the published process
that cross-proposals could
be submitted within a window, we had no way of knowing which or
what part of
our proposals were causing difficulty. There was no contact
initiated by the
contest board. Adding insult to injury, there was no “report
out” published,
listing the pro and con votes by district and any discussed
objections. As I have said
before, I have no more idea what it takes to get a proposal
passed through the
CB then I did a year ago before the NSRCA rules committee
formed. How do you
explain the dichotomy between your views of the contest board
and the NSRCA
board?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Relative to the Nats,
it is clear
to everyone on the board that the Nats are in the control of the
AMA which has
been true ever since NPAC went away. We, the board, present a
candidate to the
AMA, who has always been accepted. After that we lose any
control. Although
since I’ve been on the board, there have been various problems
at the Nats which
many blame on the NSRCA not the AMA. Arch has been good about
keeping us in the
loop but he makes it clear who he reports to. <span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>He and previous EDs and the
AMA staff have
been great about providing logistic support for the banquet, ice
cream social,
etc. However there is no question about the ED having two
bosses, AMA is it. The
NSRCA is responsible for using the funds collected by the AMA on
our behalf to
purchase the necessary scoring equipment and paying the
volunteer staff what we
can. This is never enough to even cover their expenses at the
Nats much less
travel. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">John Gayer<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">NSRCA Treasurer<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11">
<meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11">
<link rel="File-List"
href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CWestEng%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</body>
</html>