franklin_m

I don't know if others picked up on it, but have you noticed the substantial change in narrative coming out of the EC? Compare the statements side by side from just the last two EC meetings:


On Open / Adult memberships:
July - "Overall open/adult membership are up to 76,450 [emphasis added]"
Nov - "Open adult membership renewals are on the decline [emphasis added]."

On Senior memberships:
July - "Seniors are up 471 members to 49,890 [emphasis added]."
Nov - "There was a decline in the Senior adult membership 2015 to 2016 [emphasis added]."

On youth memberships:
July - "Youth members up 6,876 to 54,668 [emphasis added]."
Nov - "The conversion rate on youth members is extremely low [emphasis added]."


In July we got a rosy outlook. Less than six months later, just the opposite. Why the sudden change? Are membership numbers really that fluid or are other forces at play?

rcmiket

I wonder if the EC actually reads the minutes.......................................

Mike

franklin_m

I think in July they were believing their own rhetoric...

EC continues to build "Taj Muncie," meanwhile where the vast majority of members actually fly (the rest of the country), there's a big disparity in the quality of flying field you get for your money. The vast majority of people who fly model aircraft do not fly at Muncie, nor will they ever. They fly close to home. And it's close to home where there's a big difference in what you get for your AMA dollar.

In many ways, the AMA and its club system is similar to a franchise. But what makes a franchise like McD successful? There's one close to most people, and the customer experience is the same. Contrast that with AMA, where a member who happens to live in one location enjoys paved runways and lots of options with respect to what they can fly, vs. others who can only fly what will survive on the local rough grass field.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I think many have noticed the rhetoric and non-response to members' inquiries that has come out of Muncie in recent years. It is one of the reasons I started frequenting this forum. I've largely disengaged from politics and mainstream media for the same reasons, seems the world really is at the mercy of the talking heads. It is a sad day when it has engulfed my beloved hobby as well.

Regards,

Astro

franklin_m

Here's another one... in open session (the EVP report) it mentions a PPT they were shown. Now, per Roberts Rules, since it was presented OUTSIDE an Executive session (minutes have no mention of vote to go into such a session), we should be able to get a copy of that PPT.

However, in a testament to how the EC plays fast and loose with meeting rules, the EVP asked that what was just shared remain secret.


"4. Executive Vice President's Report

A membership report was handed out; the EVP felt the report was critical in Council’s thinking strategically. ... A Power Point presentation followed. The EVP requested it not be shared outside of Council now but should be considered for future action [emphasis added]."

rcmiket

I missed that was it recent?

Mike

franklin_m

Mike. The November meeting. It's in item #4. Also, I noted that they did vote to go into executive session (at very bottom), for one purpose which was to approve a bonus. So this item was definitely discussed in open session, which means the PPT should be available upon request.

Frank

franklin_m

For what it's worth, I just sent EC member MR a request for copies of what was presented in open session. I asked that if they deny the request, to cite a basis for the denial (in the bylaws). I'm not holding my breath though. With respect to conduct of EC meetings, they seem to make up the rules as they go.

rcmiket

Thanks I have no clue how I missed that. It's rather interesting and don't care for the whole don't share this info outside the EC.

Desertlakesflying

My Feedback: (28)

After throwing the rest of us under the bus to appease the drone people and the FAA what did they expect?

franklin_m

The VP from my region denied the request to provide a copy of the "membership report" and "powerpoint presentation" that were presented in open session at the 12 Nov 2016 EC meeting. I just submitted the following formal request directly to AMA via the "ask AMA feature."


----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am requesting a copy of the 'membership report' and the 'Power Point presentation' mentioned in the EVP Report section of the 12 November 2016 Executive Committee minutes. These same minute clearly indicate these were NOT presented in Executive Session.

So that you can identify the items requested by this member, they were described in the minutes as follows: "A membership report was handed out; the EVP felt the report was critical in Council’s thinking strategically. He believes that Council will rally around the newly elected President and he is dedicated to working with Council to accomplish this. A Power Point presentation followed."

Again, I stress that these were presented in open session. I am unaware of any bylaw or rule that allows information presented in open session to be denied to members. If such bylaw or rule exists, and if this request is denied, please provide that rule."
----------------------------------------------------------------------


I will advise if and when I receive a response.

F

tailskid

My Feedback: (34)

I'm not holding my breath.

Hydro Junkie

Sounds to me like they're trying to hide something. You might have to go right to the front desk and demand a copy and then, when denied, ask for a reason, in writing, just to be denied that as well

rcmiket

All I can say is this is extremely disappointing. I expect nothing different with Hanson at the helm.

Mike.

franklin_m

I realize I'm speaking to the choir, but what my VP and the EC seems to miss is that governance exists to provide transparency and act as a check and balance on human nature. That governance comes in the form of bylaws, which I happen to note don't say a word about what set of rules govern meetings. At most, articl 14 says the EC will set rules, but they never say what those rules are - let alone give members a copy. They don't even say they'll follow Robert's Rules.

When you're handling millions of dollars a year, an EC that is not bound by any published set of rules is governing w/o any checks and balances.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Unfortunate.

It is no wonder that most clubs are run in the same manner.

Astro

rcmiket

I can assure you as a club officer in my club this type of stuff would never fly with our group.

Mike

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

I have no doubt!!!

As my kids get older and head off to college, I am looking forward to finally being able to spend the time necessary to infiltrate and break up the GOB network that exists at my club!

Regards,

Astro

rcmiket

Good for you. I wish many more of us felt the same way.

Mike

Hydro Junkie

No offence meant to Franklin but, in my opinion, Roberts Rules is a joke unless you are running a meeting with at least 50 people in attendance.
At club meetings of the square dance club I belong to, there are two people that like to invoke RRO. The problem is they invoke it as they see the need for it, not for the whole meeting. Worse still, they are not the one running the meeting so they are basically hijacking the meeting to follow their agenda. RRO is not a "be all end all" in running a meeting, just another tool that can be used and abused to forward ones way of thinking

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Actually, it is. (No offense). I personally prefer a casual, relaxed meeting environment where topics can be discussed and facts and opinions presented equally from all parties who wish to engage, but it has been proven time and time again that this rarely happens (something to do with human nature it seems). RR's assures that all sides who wish get their fair say and takes whatever (perceived?) power that the meetings' leader has and places it on the assembly where it belongs.
You sound very jaded. RR's are meant to, and are very effective at, doing the exact opposite of what you describe. As with anything, it can be human nature to twist something so much that it is rendered unrecognizable from its intended function.

Regards,

Astro

Hydro Junkie

Actually, I'm not jaded at all. It's just experience in the use of RR that has me see things this way. If it's used and enforced as written, it's a very usable document. When you have a meeting of 15 or less, it slows things down with the procedures that it imposes.
My first contact with RR was back in High School. I had taken a marketing class and, since we elected officers and had weekly meetings, RR was used. Since the class adhered to RR, there wasn't a problem. Fast forward to four years ago(33 years since first contact) and I watched a club that had laid back and informal meetings go to a club that was being run by people using RR as their own way to directing the club the way they wanted it to go. Even the wife, who was running a meeting as VP(the president was not in attendance) was told to be quiet and that she was out of order PER ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER by one of the people trying to manipulate the club. Now I KNOW RR was never intended to be used in that way but, like anything else, it can be twisted into something it's not

franklin_m

My point is that although article 14 of the bylaws require the EC to have rules for running the board meeting, they've been unwilling to provide me a copy. The rules, whether RRO or something the AMA writes, would define whether or not something presented in open session then becomes available to anyone. The problem is that with no written rules, the EC is free to make up whatever they like as to conduct of the meetings.

Not a huge deal I suppose for a small meeting handling hundreds of dollars. I'd argue it's a huge deal for an organization handling millions of dollars.

Hydro Junkie

To me, it's all relative. A small organization dealing with hundreds is the same as a large dealing with millions. That said, I totally agree, "playing it off the cuff" doesn't cut it, regardless who's asking the questions

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Sounds like we are all in agreement then!

Astro