New MAAC Executive  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> M.A.A.C. >> New MAAC Executive
Page: [1]

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
New MAAC Executive - 3/19/2006 2:28:33 PM   
Sharpy01



Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline 		Congrats to the new MAAC Executive.

Good luck with the upcoming year.

Pres - Richard Barlow (Ottawa)

VP - Kevin McGrath (N. Ont.)

Exec - Don Forness (Sask)

Exec - Doug McMillan (BC)

Past Pres - Carl Layden (Atlantic)

< Message edited by Sharpy01 -- 3/22/2006 11:39:32 PM >
       Post #: 1

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 1:55:38 AM   
Jason Holdaway


 

Posts: 139
Joined: 4/25/2004
From: Strathroy, ON, CANADA
Status: offline 		and the latest news is that the new constitution rules were passed. And the first new business was that Chuck Smith was removed of his membership (big surprise) motioned by John Boyd, seconded by myself. 3 against, about 500 substained, 6000 for. That speaks volumes. Good work. It was a privledge to meet the new board of directors. The meeting went a lot faster than expected. That goes to show a lot of unity within our board.

(in reply to Sharpy01)
       Post #: 2

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 3:08:11 AM   
jhelps


 

Posts: 163
Joined: 1/9/2003
From: Headingley, MB, CANADA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jason Holdaway

and the latest news is that the new constitution rules were passed. And the first new business was that Chuck Smith was removed of his membership (big surprise) motioned by John Boyd, seconded by myself. 3 against, about 500 substained, 6000 for. That speaks volumes. Good work. It was a privledge to meet the new board of directors. The meeting went a lot faster than expected. That goes to show a lot of unity within our board.



Jason

How exactly and for what reason did Chuck have his membership revoked? According to the new Bylaws revokation is by special resolution of the Board. Is that what happened? Have they indicated that Chuck will have an opportunity to "show cause" as to why this should not happen?

Overall pretty sad that it came to this.

Jeff

(in reply to Jason Holdaway)
       Post #: 3

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 6:12:51 AM   
Rann


 

Posts: 4
Joined: 12/11/2005
From: Ajax, ON, CANADA
Status: offline 		How exactly and for what reason did Chuck have his membership revoked?

Chuck Smith repeatedly refuses to be a director and fullfill his obligations as a member of MAAC's board. Not only that, far too much of the board's time this past year has been spent Carl read a LONG list of issues during his President's Report dealt with this year due to Smith's actions.

eg
- not filing proxies and attendance lists with MAAC headquarters after the AZM (try that when you run a polling station for Elections Canada and see how serious prevention of the accountability is!!!)
- interference with the work of the board (by not maintaining confidentiality, interference with board business such as insurance, sometimes by less than the most truthful means)
- refusing to be accountable for his actions while demanding superhuman accountability of others

According to the new Bylaws revokation is by special resolution of the Board. Is that what happened? Have they indicated that Chuck will have an opportunity to "show cause" as to why this should not happen?

He is to be officially contacted, informing him of the termination. He then has 30 days to contact the president, indicating that he wishes to show cause why his membership should not be revoked (essentially an appeal). Whatever he presents to show cause will be investigated and discussed by the entire board. The board will then vote to uphold or quash the termination of membership.

Overall pretty sad that it came to this.

Yes...... rest assured the motion was not made lightly..... nor dealt with in a light fashion. It has been a long time in coming to this juncture. Unfortunately, after numerous chances to deal with these issues, he resigned at the last moment - thus robbing his zone of any representation in the board meetings and precious little at the AGM itself (only 2 votes from SW) .... all so he didn't have to account for his own actions. There has been far too much time dealing with a very select group of a few egos in the SW that has robbed MAAC time and energy to move forward. However, this actionwas needed so we, as an organization, can move on.

(in reply to jhelps)
       Post #: 4

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 12:45:34 PM   
bbbair


 

Posts: 815
Joined: 1/7/2003
From: Belleville, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rann

.... There has been far too much time dealing with a very select group of a few egos in the SW that has robbed MAAC time and energy to move forward. However, this actionwas needed so we, as an organization, can move on.


Darned well time that it happend!

Here's wishing the SW Z all of the best in the future!

Perhaps this 'Event' will encourage the ordinary people to take more interest in the zone and elect someone 'LESS Controversial' that has the best interests of MAAC at heart.

Oh, dare to dream...

_____________________________

It's Time to Kick the Tires and Light the Fires!

(in reply to Rann)
       Post #: 5

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 2:00:35 PM   
britbrat


 

Posts: 3299
Joined: 6/15/2004
From: Deep River, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jhelps


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jason Holdaway

and the latest news is that the new constitution rules were passed. And the first new business was that Chuck Smith was removed of his membership (big surprise) motioned by John Boyd, seconded by myself. 3 against, about 500 substained, 6000 for. That speaks volumes. Good work. It was a privledge to meet the new board of directors. The meeting went a lot faster than expected. That goes to show a lot of unity within our board.



Jason

How exactly and for what reason did Chuck have his membership revoked? According to the new Bylaws revokation is by special resolution of the Board. Is that what happened? Have they indicated that Chuck will have an opportunity to "show cause" as to why this should not happen?

Overall pretty sad that it came to this.

Jeff


The reasons for this action shouldn't be discussed in detail on a public website. Speak to your zone directors.

(in reply to jhelps)
       Post #: 6

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 2:35:56 PM   
Morison


 

Posts: 97
Joined: 2/3/2005
From: Calgary, AB, CANADA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: britbrat
The reasons for this action shouldn't be discussed in detail on a public website. Speak to your zone directors.


If the the action was just and correctly done, I disagree. Rumours and unfouded speculation shoould not be waved around, but the facts of the action as it occurred at the meeting should be fair game - it was a public event.


_____________________________

Keith Morison
Publisher

(in reply to britbrat)
       Post #: 7

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 3:10:24 PM   
britbrat


 

Posts: 3299
Joined: 6/15/2004
From: Deep River, ON, CANADA
Status: offline 		While I agree entirely with your comment, the reason for my post is that Mr Smith has shown a propensity for legal action. If someone was to inadvertently incorrectly post "reasons", or go beyond what was actually discussed at the meeting, that person just might get bitten by a lawyer. I'm not sure that it is worth the personal risk, but that is up to the individuals who are prepared to discuss this action on a website.

< Message edited by britbrat -- 3/20/2006 3:14:05 PM >

(in reply to Morison)
       Post #: 8

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 3:25:40 PM   
Morison


 

Posts: 97
Joined: 2/3/2005
From: Calgary, AB, CANADA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jhelps
According to the new Bylaws revokation is by special resolution of the Board. Is that what happened? Have they indicated that Chuck will have an opportunity to "show cause" as to why this should not happen?

Overall pretty sad that it came to this.

Jeff


Jeff,
While I wasn't there, I suspect that this action used this clause:
Resignation
10. (2) Any member may be required to resign by a vote of three-quarters (3/4) of the members at an annual or special meeting of members of the Corporation.

As the motion was made and seconded by non board members, this would be the appropriate section, which doesn't actually provide an avenue for appeal. It would appear that the board is allowing for an appeal as a show of good faith or that the motion passed at the AGM was a motion to urge the board to terminate the member(ship), in which case the 30 day appeal window would be in place.



< Message edited by Morison -- 3/20/2006 6:59:26 PM >


_____________________________

Keith Morison
Publisher

(in reply to jhelps)
       Post #: 9

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 4:08:56 PM   
300sflyer


 

Posts: 62
Joined: 4/20/2002
From: ActonOntario, CANADA
Status: offline 		As someone who attended the AGM itself, and listened in on the Board meetings themselves prior to the AGM, perhaps I can clarify a few things.

In my opinion, the entire MAAC Board, [including 5 new Zone Directors] acted in a proper and professional manner through out the entire AGM.

The decision to terminate Mr Smiths membership, [made by a motion from the floor under new business which was allowed under the "new" bylaws] was not taken lightly by the Board itself, the MAAC Executive, or the MAAC members in attendance at the meeting.

In the end, after all of the facts concerning this issue were presented by our outgoing President, the decision was made. It was done so by an overwhelming majority, with only 3 people voting no, a few abstentions from the floor, and one abstention from one Zone Director. Everyone else in attendance, including 11 of 12 Zone Directors, voted in favor of the motion.

If you desire further details about the information that was presented by our now Past President, I would suggest you contact your Zone Director or any member of the new Executive.

With regards to obtaining a new ZD in the SW Zone, to the best of my recollection, it was explained at the meeting, that under the "new" bylaws, the Executive will now appoint a new SW ZD to hold the position, until the SW Zone meeting this fall, or a special meeting is called within the SW Zone to elect a different one.

On a personal note, I want to thank the entire Board for looking after the best interests of MAACs entire membership, especially during their recent difficult time in office. That is what they were elected to do, and IMO they are doing a fine job of it, and will continue to do so.

_____________________________

Mike Clemmens
www.mscprops.com

(in reply to Morison)
       Post #: 10

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 6:40:34 PM   
Rann


 

Posts: 4
Joined: 12/11/2005
From: Ajax, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: britbrat

While I agree entirely with your comment, the reason for my post is that Mr Smith has shown a propensity for legal action. If someone was to inadvertently incorrectly post "reasons", or go beyond what was actually discussed at the meeting, that person just might get bitten by a lawyer. I'm not sure that it is worth the personal risk, but that is up to the individuals who are prepared to discuss this action on a website.


I summarized VERY briefly some of what was put forward by our president as to the difficulties MAAC has had to deal within the past year. This was to give jhelps an answer to his question and present a small taste as to how serious the situation has gotten. This is not a case of personality conflicts gone amok. Nor is it a "one-off" situation - it has been going on, repeatedly, for a long while and has been carefully and methodically documented. I personally had to deal with one situation concerning insurance, causing me (as well as MAAC) a lot of wasted time, money and mis-spent energy. The issues have been serious and have forced a serious reply.

To obtain all the reasons why this action was taken, please contact your own zone director. If you belong to the SW zone, please contact either Kevin McGrath , our new VP, or Richard Barlow, our new president.

As for Mr. Smith's "propensity for legal action", he doesn't have one. Those threatened have not backed down. As far as I know, no answers have been received to the replies. He has not followed through with any of his threats to date.

John Boyd.
#61382

(in reply to britbrat)
       Post #: 11

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 6:56:43 PM   
sivlE


 

Posts: 82
Joined: 8/15/2005
From: windsor, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rann

As for Mr. Smith's "propensity for legal action", he doesn't have one. Those threatened have not backed down. As far as I know, no answers have been received to the replies. He has not followed through with any of his threats to date.

John Boyd.
#61382


Hi John, as one of the threatened, you are correct in stateing that there has been no follow-up to his legal threats. As a matter of fact, it was such a joke to recieve such a letter and false claims I had even thought of lending Chuck the money to sue me. At least I thought I could get an excellent return on my investment.
John Mainwaring
#49738

(in reply to Rann)
       Post #: 12

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 7:05:07 PM   
Morison


 

Posts: 97
Joined: 2/3/2005
From: Calgary, AB, CANADA
Status: offline 		Regardless of the past lack of follow through - I wou;d still err on the sid of caution when making comments. Clearly there is a mindset of threatening or taking legal action when the grounds to do so are marginal at best. Often the threat is enough to achieve the desired results, and even filing suit can lead to 'out of court' settlements ...

In many ways, a 'terminated' member has NOTHING to lose and may just throw caution (and money) to the wind.


_____________________________

Keith Morison
Publisher

(in reply to sivlE)
       Post #: 13

RE: New MAAC Executive - 3/20/2006 7:32:39 PM   
Sharpy01



Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline 		I've no doubt that the previous 10 years of history has made the BOD very good at documentation and justification related to this issue. I've stated my position on this in a previous thread, which was based on the small amount of information available on these sites. What we know is likely a fraction of the total amount of backroom dealings.

As previously stated, I'm sure the drama now continues, but I'm confident that BOD is doing what is best for the membership and will leave it to them. In essence, this AGM kinda closes the history book on my past involvement as a director. Just memories with some good friendships that have outlived the politics.

Good luck fellers.

(in reply to Morison)