<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Back at the Bear Mountain contest on April 23rd I volunteered to Dan to assist him as an ADVP. I also asked to talk to him about NSRCA matters, but that never happened. At the Oakdale contest on June 3rd I was told he did not want my help. So I tried.<div><br></div><div>Tony Frackowiak</div><div><br><div><div>On Jun 18, 2017, at 1:49 PM, John Gayer via NSRCA-discussion wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<div text="#3333FF" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Tony,<br>
<br>
Check with Jon Carter or just use the one in my previous post or
maybe Sean Mersh has one. There's been enough turnover in D7 DVPs
since the document came out that it is asking a lot for Dan to come
up with a copy.<br>
<br>
John<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/18/2017 2:18 PM, Frackowiak Tony
via NSRCA-discussion wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:78F968D8-616D-4167-AD2D-2DBCF18DE04F@sbcglobal.net">Make
it 2 to 2. My middle name is John. I have been trying to get the
charter from my current DVP for 2 weeks. No luck.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Anthony John Frackowiak</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>On Jun 18, 2017, at 12:52 PM, Jon Lowe via
NSRCA-discussion wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite"><p dir="ltr">When I said it is supposed to be in the
charter, the development guide says "current version" of
the charter. I don't know what the current version is or
what it contains. You are correct in that it doesn't
appear to be on the website. Joe addressed that sort of
issue in his email here.</p><p dir="ltr">And it's two against one on the correct
spelling of Jon!</p><p dir="ltr">Jon (no "h")</p>
<br>
<br>
<hr style="border:0;height:1px;color:#999;background-color:#999;width:100%;margin:0
0 9px 0;padding:0;"><span style="font-size:14px;
color:#999999;">On Sunday, June 18, 2017 John Gayer via
NSRCA-discussion <<span style="color:#0000A0"><a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send="true">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a></span>>
wrote:</span><br>
<br>
<div id="AOLMsgPart_1.2_acb654fe-aede-42fd-8473-de7351344fc3">
<div text="#3333FF" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="aolReplacedBody"> Jon, I wasn't addressing the
presidential passing of the baton and I know the
difference between Jon and Jon, even if neither know how
to spell your name.<br>
<br>
The timeline is not <i>supposed</i> to be in the
charter, it <i>is</i> in the charter. The switchover to
FAI scheduling has nothing to do with it as the timeline
I posted from the charter document is in terms of
working back from the delivery date, not absolute
years. Also, the committee chair was supposed to be
determined last October and the members set in November
when the president was Jon Carter. I don't know when
that actually happened but Joe should have received a
full sequence committee including members when he took
over. I don't know that it actually happened on
schedule. There used to be a calendar which Scott
McHarg kept to remind the board of various due dates. In
fact you, Jon Lowe, might have started that because the
board historically wasn't staying on top of stuff.<br>
<br>
As far as the website is concerned, it does take more
than a couple days to get it updated. I see nothing on
the NSRCA facebook page on any of the subjects I listed.
The Sequence committee stuff is six months behind. Where
are we supposed to look for current info?<br>
<br>
John<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/18/2017 12:53 PM, Jon
Lowe via NSRCA-discussi
on wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="about:blank"><font size="3" color="black" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<div>John,</div>
<div>Please remember this is Jon Lowe, not Jon
Carter. I was not involved in the transition to
Joe as president.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>You are correct in saying the sequence
development timeline is supposed to be in the
charter. I was thinking when I talked to Joe
yesterday that it was in the sequence guide. I
pointed out to Joe today that it is supposed to be
in the charter. The committee was formed during
the transition between Jon and Joe. I can't speak
to the status of the charter. On reflection (and
I just thought of this) this situation may be an
unintended consequence of changing the sequence
cycle to match FAI. Forming the committee can now
fall between presidents and boards. When I became
president, I had a few months to get on my feet
before the start of the sequence committee. Joe
did not have that luxury. We still had some
issues with composition of the committee, and
former members not being asked or informed about
being on the committee. I got an earful about it
when I was president. I didn't know that in the
past that the committee had been largely carried
over cycle to cycle. This fact it has come up
again, as Tony points out, is part of the
corporate memory problem NSRCA has. There has
also been a large turnover in the BoD which
doesn't help matters.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Regarding the co-EDs. etc on the Nats; this all
happened in the last couple of days. Give them a
chance to get it on the website.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Now that Joe is on this list, he can see what
the hot topics are and respond appropriately. I'm
sure he will appreciate your post on the timeline
as he moves forward.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Jon (Lowe)</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div style="color: black; font-family:
arial,helvetica; font-size: 10pt;">-----Original
Message-----<br>
From: John Gayer via NSRCA-discussion <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org></a><br>
To: Jon Lowe via NSRCA-discussion <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org></a><br>
Sent: Sun, Jun 18, 2017 11:22 am<br>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] LONG conversation
with Joe Walker on NATs, sequence proposals, and
other NSRCA issues.<br>
<br>
<div id="AOLMsgPart_1.2_de23fb10-2251-47ee-8c62-bb55428b1a43">
<div class="aolReplacedBody"> Jon,<br>
<br>
Relative to the scheduling of the new
sequences, there is a document that addresses
the timeline for the sequence committee. This
document is not on the website, at least not
in the logical place under sequence
development. Here is the section about the
schedule. This document was generated in 2012
to separate the functions of the committee
from the sequence development guide which gets
some updates every cycle.<br>
<br>
<font color="#000066">4 Suggested Sequence
Submittal Process<br>
The following is the recommended timeline
for the development and submission of new
sequences. Sequence<br>
development should always start in two years
prior to when the sequence is to be
replaced. For example, if the<br>
Masters sequence (2 year lifecycle) is to be
replaced in 2015 (X) then work on the
development of a new<br>
sequence should start in 2013 (X – 2). What
follows is a timeline showing the activity
(task) and the month the<br>
activity should start:<br>
TASK TIMELINE<br>
Assign and approve Committee Chairperson
October - year X – 2<br>
Committee Chairperson recruits Committee
Membership October – year X - 2<br>
BoD approves Committee Membership November –
year X - 2<br>
Establish development schedule December –
year X - 2<br>
Review design criteria/receive BoD approval
for changes December – year X - 2<br>
Develop preliminary changes/sequences and
flight test January through March – year X -
1<br>
Publish for public comment on NSRCA
website/K-Factor April through May – year X
- 1<br>
Finalize changes/sequence selection based on
comments June through August – year X - 1<br>
Submit proposed changes/sequences to BoD for
approval October– year X - 1<br>
Publish approved sequences on NSRCA
website/K-Factor November – year X -1<br>
New sequences in use January – year X<br>
<br>
<font color="#3366ff">There is no question
about the requirement for publishing the
proposed sequences. It was supposed to
happen the beginning of April. From your
email it appears that neither you or Joe
were aware of the publication requirement
or the dates involved. I know you
addressed the lack of continuity between
boards in your ppost but I believe the
Committee had this document and should
have shared it with the board. Certainly
all past Committee members had a copy.<br>
<br>
There is another section in this document
that addresses the makeup of the committee
and the oversight function of the board.<br>
<br>
<font color="#000000">2.3 Membership<br>
There should be at least six Committee
members excluding the Chairperson and
should, if possible, contain at<br>
least one member who is currently
competing in each of the AMA classes.
There should be representation from<br>
as many NSRCA districts as possible on
the committee. Non pilots and non NSRCA
members may be<br>
committee members, provided that their
qualifications meet the approval of the
Chairperson and the BoD. The<br>
Committee shall contain at least one
current member of the BoD. All members
of the Committee are voting<br>
members.<br>
<br>
2.5.1 Standard Committee Procedures<br>
• The NSRCA President shall be the
primary point of contact for
communications between the<br>
Committee Chairperson and the Board on
all matters of directive nature, and for
deliverables from<br>
the Committee.<br>
• The Chairperson will select members
for his/her committee and propose a team
to the BoD.<br>
• The BoD will review the Committee for
national (District) balance and
representation across<br>
Intermediate through Masters Classes
and, if necessary, provide
recommendations on the<br>
Committee members to the Chairperson.
The BoD will then vote to accept or
reject the proposed<br>
Committee members.<br>
• The Chairperson and Committee members
agree to work as a team and reach a
consensus on the<br>
Committee’s proposals. They agree to
support the Committee’s proposal and not
submit separate<br>
proposals on these sequences to the BoD.<br>
• The Committee shall perform their
tasks within the schedule of milestones
as defined by the BoD.<br>
• The Committee will produce proposed
changes to sequences based on input from
the membership<br>
and their experience. The sequences will
be published in the K Factor and on the
NSRCA website<br>
for review.<br>
• The Committee will coordinate with the
Rules/Judging Committee Chairperson to
produce the<br>
final proposals, with supporting
rationale, to be approved by the BoD.<br>
• Sequences for Sportsman, Intermediate,
Advanced and Masters Class will be
developed for<br>
presentation to and review by the
precision aerobatics community on the
NSRCA website. New<br>
sequences may not necessarily be
presented for all classes.<br>
<br>
<font color="#3366ff">I have
cherry-picked the pertinent sections
from the document but have also
attached the complete document. It's
pretty clear that the directives
contained here were not followed. The
current committee makeup does not
conform to the document in terms of
consensus, geographical distribution,
number of members or the requirement
for a current board member.<br>
<br>
On another subject, It is my
understanding from when I was on the
board that the NSRCA board proposes
the ED to the AMA. Once that is done,
the ED responsibility is to the AMA
not the NSRCA. At that point, the
NSRCA no longer has any authority over
the ED. If that is still the case, how
is the <i>board</i> creating Co-EDs
or changing the ED? And directing
change to the finals from the
originally published setup when this
is solely up to the ED? It is very
late to be running surveys and
reevaluating procedures with the start
barely a month away. Even the survey
itself seems to be problematic. I've
attended four of the last six Nats,
year before last in Masters but didn't
qualify for the survey? <br>
<br>
Also we are finding out that the F3A
finals have been changed back to the
normal format. We find this out
because Jon had a long conversation
with Joe and posted on the list? I
can't find anything on the website
about the Co-CD change, the survey,
the change to the F3A final or what's
going on with the sequence committee,
committee members or committee members
that have resigned and been replaced.
The Masters finals sequence that was
developed without establishing any
sequence guidelines( at least not that
were published) or buyin from the
board is a case in point of the lack
of transparency of the current
committee.<br>
<br>
John Gayer<br>
</font></font></font></font><br>
<div class="aolmail_moz-cite-prefix">On
6/18/2017 6:25 AM, Jon Lowe via
NSRCA-discussion wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="about:blank">
<div dir="ltr">Joe and I had a LONG
conversation Saturday about the NATS,
sequences, and NSRCA in general. This
email is what I heard based on that
conversation and he knows I'm writing
this. I've known Joe for a number of
years, and we are good friends, so we had
a very frank discussion. I don't think I
swallowed any koolade, but you be the
judge.</div>
<div dir="ltr">First though, I am as guilty
as anyone in reacting to stuff on this
discussion list, without picking up the
phone or calling people directly. No
excuse, but modern media at work. I should
know, as a past president of NSRCA, how
hard it can be to get to ground truth
sometimes, and to make sure accurate info
is distributed. For that, I apologize.</div>
<div dir="ltr">One thing I didn't realize,
was that until yesterday, Joe was not on
this discussion list. He's primarily used
the NSRCA Facebook page. He's catching up
now with all of the discussions here over
the past couple of weeks.</div>
<div dir="ltr">You've probably seen by now
the letter on Mike Harrison and Al Glenn
being co-EDs for the NATS. Joe realizes
that decision and clarification had not
been made either to them, the NSRCA BoD,
or the membership, and it wasn't
documented on the NSRCA website. Joe and
the BoD are working on remedies to make
sure oversights like that don't happen
again. The BoD meeting was a couple of
nights ago, and it was clarified then, and
put out to the membership.</div>
<div dir="ltr">The changes to the format of
the NATS was also discussed. The final
format is the EDs call, as long as it is
by the rule book. But as I reminded Joe,
the finals for Masters was eliminated a
couple of years ago to great hue and cry
when it was unnecessary to use the matrix
system, and was reinstated the following
year. So tread carefully. He pointed out
that this year's NATS is trying something
that hasn't been done in years, and that
some changes happen as a result. This
should have been better communicated to
the membership. The survey that went out
yesterday was to affected entrants to last
year's and this year's NATS. However, if
the changes to the finals are affecting
your decision on whether or not to enter
the NATS, I urge you to contact Joe. His
email and phone number are in the back of
any KFactor. He did say that so far the
survey is about 80% for the shortened
Masters finals. I don't know though how
many responses he's received.
Incidentally, FAI has reverted to a 2-F,
2- unknown finals format, according to
Joe.</div>
<div dir="ltr">He realizes that NSRCA and
the membership is in a time crunch for
vetting and getting approval for the new
AMA sequences for next year. The BoD first
saw them a few hours before we did, and it
became clear during the BoD meeting that
they needed a separate meeting to discuss
and vet them. Significant discussion
centered around the proposal for a
Master's class finals. That isn't
contemplated in the Sequence guide, and
there hasn't been any decision on putting
that before the membership or not.
According to Joe, neither he, nor other
members of the BoD knew that a finals
sequence would be proposed, total
surprise. Obviously, to get feedback to
make necessary changes, get approval from
the membership, final approval by the BoD
and to publish all of the new sequences by
years end is going to be tough. Joe
clearly understands that challenge. In
addition, he said he recalls no discussion
one way or the other during the BoD
meeting about distributing what they got
from the sequence committee to the general
membership. I told him I felt that the
sooner they get feedback the better, and
he agreed. Constructive feedback to Joe or
your District VP is encouraged. I know
there have been some personal issues that
resulted from the distribution of the
sequences, and Joe and others are working
to correct those problems. I hope they can
be resolved also. Those involved will know
what I'm talking about.</div>
<div dir="ltr">It still is not clear to me,
and I think Joe, why the sequences we're
developed in such secrecy. This
definitely didn't help the current
controversy. I told Joe that drafts should
have been out months ago for comment. He
agreed that this needs to be the process
going forward, and the procedure guide for
developing the sequences may need
clarification for timelines and
transparency.</div>
<div dir="ltr">One of the things I faced,
and Joe is facing, is loss of corporate
knowledge anytime there is new leadership
in charge. This is especially true of
volunteer organizations with no central
office. I have some things I think can
help, and I will make sure Joe gets them.
If you have old files or other information
you think might benefit him or the BoD,
please contact him.</div>
<div dir="ltr">I emphasized to Joe the need
for fast communication on hot topics, even
to say they're working on it, and will get
back to us. He gets it, and I think being
on this list he will get and can react to
the hot issues of the moment.</div>
<div dir="ltr">Do I agree with everything
Joe said and the BoDs actions? Of course
not; I'd be surprised if I did. Pattern
fliers are, if nothing else, opinionated
SOB's. Can they do better, especially with
communication? Surely, and I think Joe
gets that. And I'm going to try to improve
my communication with Joe and my DVP,
Larry Kauffman, before I express
displeasure here.</div>
<div dir="ltr">Jon<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="aolmail_mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<a class="aolmail_moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a class="aolmail_moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
NSRCA-<a href="mailto:discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></div>
</font> <br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@listsnsrca.org" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
NSRCA-<a href="mailto:discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send="true">discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a>_______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send="true">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>