I would agree that if candidacy for office is the topic, and part of the platform is spending a boatload of member money on an unneeded (but possibly desired) 2nd flying site, then the candidates views on spending is fair game for discussion.
To me, the issue comes down to three questions:
Is it fair to have a national flying site, that is really only useable for a small fraction of the membership for most of the year?
Do we really need a 2nd site, even if the answer to #1 is, no?
Can we really afford to spend the money, even if the answer to #2 above is, yes?
The point I am taking from CP is that just about everything we are talking about, in the grand scheme, are superfluous, including maybe, the hobby itself.
So it is time, especially with the economy and shrinking membership to step back and take a realistic look at priorities, and I would agree that a
Western site is not one. JMO.