How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

The Headquarters Building and Museum must exist somewhere. NOT taking them into account and discussing the National Flying Site in Muncie ONLY, what amount of your dues is acceptable (acceptable is the key word here) to be spent on the National Flying Site in terms of upgrades, repairs and investments? Keep in mind that the site exists. This is NOT a pole to determine IF IT SHOULD EXIST, but, rather to reflect your opinion of how much we should be spending on it each year per member.

How much of your AMA dues, anually, should be spent on the National Flying Site facility, excluding the HQ building and Museum?

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

My club's flying site has to support itself. I agreee there needs to be a headquarters just for the sake of organization.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

It seems to me that the site, in it's current form & size, can't really be self supporting. So a vote of 'nothing' would really be just a vote to close it down and sell it off. Just my observation.

In that case, some part of my dues needs to support a new nats format of some type (travelling again?). So I vote $5 to the hat for that. In other words... some part of my dues will always be needed to support the competitions. Maybe that is a more relevant poll question?

Gary

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

I agree there should be a headquarters, obviously there should be a place to do business, but why should the AMA, a national organization with modelers from all over the country, have a flying site which is in all practicality unaccessable for the majority of the modelers? I bet less than 5% of the members have ever been to or flown at the national site. The money could be better spent to provide severl flying sites (regional if you will) for others to use and enjoy. For instance, District V is huge, and could certainly benefit from such a site. But why should we in District V have a site if District I or III does not?
Tommy

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

JR, I voted $20, however that really has no meaning. IMO, your poll is flawed as it designates $ amounts. It should reflect a PERCENTAGE of the dues paid. The annual AMA budget should reflect anticipated annual percentages of income earned from both dues and outside sources.

Certainly any decent CFO would have such amounts set in the annual budget and keep that portion of said budget intact. In addition those outside incomes subject to variable amounts throughout the year would not be applied to the budgeted items except to pay off long-term debt of the real properties.

As for myself, as an active CD, my dues were paid up until the recent change in free memberships, therefore $$ amounts do not reflect any value. OTOH my donations to the site exceeded the $20 I voted, and my donation to the museum was usually 5 times the site amount. Before the donation this year for a life membership, I had already donated my usual amount for site and museum.

Therefore I suggest you at least add a couple items to the poll: (1) 10% of dues and (2) Whatever AMA needs. That would help. ;)

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Hi Horrace

The poll is designed to solicit the opinions and perception of the members of this forum.

By the nature of a dues supported organization, deficit budgeting is a way of life (as opposed to deficit financing, please do not confuse the two). Budgets must be based on a dollar amount not known at the time of budgeting, and not a percentage of income. As an example, payments due to banks, or salaries paid to employees can not be subjected to budgeting a percentage of income, but, must be based on dollar amounts. Because of this, some budgeted items must be elective and flexible. It will probably not fly if, for instance, you called the gas, electric, or phone company and suggested they alter their bill because more or fewer members paid dues this year than last. These items must be flexible and can not be set in concrete. If, again, for instance, the weather is unusually warm or cold, some bills will reflect that in the use of electricity and must be flexible. It’s doubtful the electric company would settle for a percentage of income. Elective spending, such as improvements, must by the nature of a defecit budget, be flexible.

The AMA does have a line item budget, which, unfortunately, is not readily available to the membership. The CFO does quite a good job of overseeing the budgeting process. The EC, in the form of the Finance Committee, meets once each year to address exactly this issue.

On the subject of donations, etc, the membership at large is unaware of many donations made. Recently a new road was laid at the National Flying Site. It was entirely funded a donation from the NFFS (National Free Flight Society). New power hook-ups were also recently installed and have been paid for by the users of those facilities, at no cost to the membership at large. To the casual observer, it must appear the AMA is spending a lot of dues money.

During this last election, I was surprised at how many derogatory comments were posted about the National Flying Site and how much of a drain it is on the resources of the AMA. It’s my opinion that the AMA is guilty of another lack of communication. There is no reason that information can not be made available to the membership. In this case, it might very well blunt the negative perception of many if credit was given where credit is due, and the actual dollar amounts spent on the site were disclosed.

In the meantime, it is interesting to see the perception this poll produces. I hope to be able to produce some numbers on the per member dues spent on the NFS soon.

JR

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Some day, the AMA may get a skilled Internet communicator to participate in this forum (someone like Great Plane's legendary AnnMarie Cross), and may actually change some minds. But until then, you can't blame them for ignoring what they probably see as the rants of a few hot heads on a forum that has been repeatedly shown to have views very different from the AMA membership.

I think it's surprising how many derogatory comments are posted here about MA, for example. Should the AMA communicate better about that, particularly when their member survey shows a huge percentage read the magazine cover-to-cover and then save it for years for future reference?

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Sorta like asking a fox, standing inside the hen house, whether he likes chicken . . .

Of _course_ the survey shows a huge percentage read the magazine cover-to-cover, etc., etc., etc..

The vast majority of the folks who filled out the survey are the folks who read it cover-to-cover.

I only skim the thing these days, what with McNeill no loger providing amusement, and particularly after the "technical article" which claimed that model engines don't overheat because of the _refrigeration_ going on inside.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Here is how I truely feel. My taxes pay for forest rangers and state parks, not nuclear weapons, and my AMA dues pay for insurance if I crash into a cop car. On both accounts it is a small price! BTW I usually like MA.

Hoss, this is the first time I agree with you... I thought the way the poll was set-up was flawed for the same reasons.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Well, JR, it looks like the race is on again. However the above paragraph does make a puzzle. The puzzle questions are: Do you insult yourself by displaying a lack of reading ability or -- Are you insulting me with such "talking-down" to me like I'm some 1st grader?[:'(]

Any dolt knows that a budget is prepared in line-item $$$ amounts. However the well prepared budget can well evaluate the total amount of projected income from each source in a percentages of that total.
Once one knows where each $ is coming from, and the relationship of that source to the whole, one can better evaluate how to spend all those $$$$ and when and what lines to allocate those $$ expenditures. When one budgets on anticipated income from doubtful sources, then one can very easily slip into deficit financing. Enron / UAL / Worldcom / and all of us retirees that planned on having defined-benefit pensions for these later years because we listened to those lying, cheating, thieving, managements that promised the good-life and delivered only purple ball-bats![:@]

JR you say, "The CFO does quite a good job of overseeing the budgeting process."

So, JR, I ask you why do you have to say:

>>"On the subject of donations, etc, the membership at large is unaware of many donations made."<<

Why doesn't the CFO tell the members about this rather than parroting the PAID AUDITOR's report or saying 'no info this mo as it's tax time?'

>>"During this last election, I was surprised at how many derogatory comments were posted about the National Flying Site and how much of a drain it is on the resources of the AMA."<<

Again why is your wonderful CFO NOT doing his job and informing the membership in layman's terms just what all is happening and how well he oversees things?


Once more your poll is flawed and I forecast that you will not obtain a true basis to make any objective definitions.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Hi Horrace

First, let me apologize if you felt I was talking down to you. I think I have posted that I have a healthy respect for some of your opinions, but, certainly not all, enough times so that anyone that reads this forum knows that. My post was designed to make others who may not be aware of the budgeting process aware of what that process is. Keep in mind that you and I are not the only ones to read the posts in this forum.

You have posted, several times, about the rift between Doug Holland and yourself. When he had his attorney send you a letter asking that you cease and desist making certain claims, I can understand your position.

Let me now relate a story to you… one that changed my views of the integrity of Doug. During the nomination process in the last EVP election, it came to pass that four nominees for the office of EVP emerged, yourself being one. It came to the attention of Doug that names were submitted by someone to keep one candidate off the ballot. He found that strategy untenable. He caused one name to be withdrawn, and ultimately, you were placed on the ballot. When I first heard this story, I tried to confirm it with Doug. He stated the individual had removed his name from consideration for health reasons. The story, however, persisted. I was able to confirm the story with others. When I finally had the opportunity to ask Doug about it face to face, he would neither confirm it nor deny it. There have been enough other people confirm the story that I now believe it to be true. The upstart is that you were placed on the ballot. The individual who withdrew is still an active AMA participant. His continued good health is a blessing.

It might also interest you to know that Doug is NOT a proponent of funding the captive. His presence on the captive board is prudent due to his knowledge as a CPA. When it appeared that commercial insurance might not be forthcoming, a couple of years ago, the captive was formed, but, not funded. Again, a prudent move to insure continuity, should a commercial carrier not have appeared. Dave Brown has changed his position on funding the captive a few times. When I last talked to DB about it, several months ago, he was opposed to funding it. Personally, I think it should be slowly funded, so that many years up the road, it will become a viable entity.

Now, to answer your question about why more information is not forthcoming in MA from Doug. The only answer I will give you is it is the same reason the VP’s confine their columns to a very narrow range of topics. If you want information on this, you are going to have to do your own digging. There are reasons, beyond his control, that his column is limited. Whether he would chose to dispense more information is unknown, but, currently a moot point.

The validity of any poll placed in this forum is always in doubt. If I can get some numbers to discuss, it may become more interesting. It’s becoming obvious that reducing the expenditures to something everyone will agree on is difficult. The trading of PADCOM, for instance, plays a part. The amount spent on servicing the lease by farmers becomes a part. What I am trying to determine is how much the AMA spends to improve/upgrade the NFS, without regard to buying or selling a lot, or home, on the fringes of the facility, when such purchases and sales cancel each other. I am not looking to include the salaries of maintenance workers, unless they are wholly expensed to the NFS, as opposed to the museum or HQ building.

One thing is becoming obvious. There is a lot of talk about spending on the NSF that never takes place. More to come….

JR

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Correct me if I'm wrong. True, the survey population was randomly selected from "subscribers to MA". But doesn't that align almost 100% with "AMA members"?

If that's true, and since they got over 700 responses to 1,000 surveys, it's hard to see how the membership could diverge too much from the survey results.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Of course it is....DB got re-elected, it doesn't matter what we think.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

i neither responded to a survey, or read the mag covver to covver,

so all the folks that do as i do, skew the results quite a bit.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Mike,
You are sort of right. The survey population was SUBSCRIBERS to MA. Consider who that might be and how you might be able to prove the flaw in THAT survey. The details needed to figure that answer out have been published on this forum.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

The Model Aviation Survey methodology contains the statement “Results are projectable within a range of +/- 3.8% (with 95% confidence) for MOST of the tables that follow.” Besides the fact that the survey was among Model Aviation Subscribers, which left out about 77% of members under 18, that leaves us with a pretty high level of confidence that the survey reflects the facts about the AMA membership at large. Since the tables that do not conform to the projectable range are not specified, it leaves room for speculation. Remember, the primary use for this survey will be to sell advertising, and the secondary use will be to draw inferences about the membership at large.

Without knowing more about the survey results, either, or both of you might be correct.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

That "poll" must have written by a lawyer or politician ! It's a "loaded Question", "Like do you still kick your dog?" If one really wants to know how much of our dues should go to the museum and flying site, one should ask , "How much is needed and what amount is available?" In other words; Good management will work with a budget which considers all expenses, all income, and all necessary improvements.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Yep, JR, there is a rift. The letter was very threating and all the questions were about items fully documented in the EC minutes. My attorney said DH didn't have a leg to stand on but fighting such a lawsuit would still be expensive. Still it cost me a nice new "Big Bird" just to answer the thing. Since the incumbent EVP/CFO has access to AMA funded legal advice for his duties there, I really wonder how much his letter cost him??:eek:


Awww JR, there you go again believing all those manufactured re-thoughts. "Neither confirm or deny"! JR, when I was in the Thermonuclear Weapons Special Delivery business, there were myths abounding such as FailSafe, etc., etc., and I could never 'confirm or deny' without revealing Top Secret information. Not talking positively or negatively is just another way to NOT reveal any information, something which I think Mr. Holland is pretty good at.
Had Mr. Holland, as a member of the nominating committee, been more secure in his position he would have had that 4th person on the ballot instead of the person so chosen, or myself. History has proven that I am no threat, and the other person on that ballot stated in his campaign letter that he supported DH to stay in the position. Now I seem to think that there are one _ell of a lot of incumbents in all elective positions that would love to have that kind of opposition.:eek:

I much prefer to evaluate the results or displayed evidence rather than listen to rumors and stories that surface after the fact. However, JR, if you prefer fables, then that's your chosen thing.


Not moot to me. He's CFO of our currently only model aviation national organization. He is a grown and professional person. I'm not asking JR about DH's business as I perceive his business should be, relative to AMA. I ask you questions about your defending him as you stated things that should be, yet he is the person responsible for those things but does not perform them.
As a grown man elected to an office, IMO he should be making certain info available yet he chooses to not do so as well as ignore direct requests for such info. He gets no sympathy here.

So JR my position is now clearly stated as well as yours is also well stated.

I will now move on to other topics.

Edits: Trying to get the quotes and /quotes aligned. Still shook up about that nice young 14 year old kid new club member, at our field today doing the best 3D I have ever seen.AWESOME!

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Hey Hoss,
Oooooooh........sorry, this is sorta rubbing salt in the wound, but given that it's germane to another thread running concurrently, I just have to ask ..... Did your AMA insurance cover your legal defense costs and potential liability for damage you may have caused to DH? Your HO would have if it's worth the paper it is printed on, as would your PUP if the amount of your liability exceeded the HO limit, both after the deductable you opted for of course.

Abel

edited - format error

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

AMA Liability: Bodily injury or property damage.

Commercial: USAA You can't find better. Been a member for 49 years.

Not worth the filing as NO judgment ever ensued.


Good questions. Would have been interesting had a court case actually happened. Rather remain non-interesting. ;)

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Hi Horrace

Not to belabor the issue, however, you may recall that a motion was passed sometime back, that required the EC to vote on any legal actions filed by the AMA. You should also be well aware that no such motion was ever presented to the EC in this particular matter. The letter and attending expenses were borne exclusively by the EVP, and not by the AMA, in any shape, manner or form. Having letters written is cheap. As we both well know, responding to such a letter is not always an inexpensive proposition.

Recall also, that the campaign statements of nominees are not submitted with nominations. When the statement of the third candidate was disclosed, there were several on the EC that were chagrined by the content of the statement. Still, the rules of the process require three candidates on the ballot if three or more nominations are received. Even if the substance of the statement had been known, the Nominating Committee would have been required put him on the ballot.

This story is not new. As you know, I have advised you to look into the withdrawal of the fourth candidate since it happened, on multiple occasions. I am not in the habit of posting stories just to post stories. I have presented what I know, as completely as is reasonable. I could easily have left out the lack of confirmation or denial by Doug Holland, to make a point. Instead, I laid out the facts, as I know them.

I guess the entire point is that, in my view, you should find out more about your opponent (assuming that you are running against him). The information is there if you are willing to seek it out. I have no interest in trying to defend Doug Holland’s actions, or inactions, as EVP and will not get into a running debate with you about them. His record stands on it’s own, and needs no help from me.

JR

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

Got the numbers to my question. Keep in mind that it is difficult to sort out what I wanted.

In the last three years, that amount has ranged from under a dollar to just over a dollar per member.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

The Munci site should be run on donations....lots of rich people can do it easy. Ask for money also from people that may give $$ in there will. Tis a good cause as any!

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

"Nothing- it should be self-supporting"...doesn't seem like a good answer since the AMA flying site is self supporting. It is an AMA flying site that is self-supported out of the members dues. I don't think that taxpayer money is used and such.

RE: How much of your dues should be spent on the Muncie flying site?
 

I voted $ 2

What is it really ?