astropuppy

My Feedback: (23)

I think the AMA has the cart before the horse. Everytime I read Model Aviation I can't help but think - Them first me second.
Everyday modelers should be the front line and their organization (AMA) should sit quietly in the shadows. Dave Brown is a fine gentleman and once one of the country's best flyers. But I sure wish he would quit running the AMA like a business and start running it like the non profit volunteer organization it was meant to be.

As for the national flying site I have two issues:
1) Last I heard total AMA membership was less then 200,000 persons total. Can the (flying site) expense really be justified for less then a quarter million people. Let alone the fact less then twenty percent of the membership will ever use it.

2) I think having a model museum is the greatest idea in the world. Why is it in the middle of nowhere? Only modelers are going to travel to its current location. Shouldn't it be (easily) accessible to the general public? Note: I have nothing aganist the town of Munice.

All I ever wanted from the AMA was a set of decent decals. Like in the old days the Red White and Blue ones you could actually use on an airplane.

Bill Lee

Hello, Jean;

FYI, since it has apparently not been said to you in the past: the site at Muncie is ALREADY leased for crop production. I was there a week or so ago for the NATs planning meeting and the heavy farm machinery was out until well after dark harvesting (I think it was ) soybeans. Next year it will be corn.

And all of the land which is open is also a crop: hay. Many times you'll go by after the farmer has mowed and baled and can see the big round bales scattered all around.

As Bill Vargas has said, perhaps it would be wise for you to visit sometime rather than trashing the site out of ignorance.

As to the "finnacial albatross", I wonder what you base that argument on. Is it an analysis of the AMA financial statements that show the amount of money spent there, or is it a guess on your part? I TRULY don't know and would very much like your expertise made available to all of us.

Yes, six million invested in the site. Six million that is the financial reserve for the ongoing operation of AMA. And it has to be invested somewhere. Would you prefer the stock market? Or perhaps AMA should keep all its reserves in a CD at the local bank earning 1% interest? Or maybe even better in a sock under somebody's bed?

Regards,

Bill Lee

J_R

Hi Bill Lee

I am well aware that PART of the land is leased to farmers. That seems like such a great idea that I asked some on the EC about it and it was agreed that if the balance was to be leased (not the HQ or museum) that it would create quite a large additional income. It was also stated that it was unlikely that it would happen.

Oh, and yes, Bill, as you know, I have the lastest audit and I have talked to Doug Holland, the EVP, just as you have.

Hey Bill, I just had a thought. Something I don't have access to is the information that you do about PADCOM. Would you share with us the reports on how much and on what you would like the AMA to spend in the next 14 months or so, and maybe the long range projections of the costs? I do not have that kind of information, but you do.

If any of you have questions about how money is invested in property and it's development, ask Bill Lee. He is on the committee that makes the recomendatons directly to the EC. He and I don't always see eye to eye, but he is a decent guy and I am sure he can answer your questions, or if not, the Dist VIII VP is his close friend and he can ask him and report back. He has always been helpful in that capacatity and I am sure Bill would never duck your questions.

This is a great opportunity for RCU. Bill Lee is one of those guys you would love to spend all day with because he is so open and forthcoming and as an 'insider' he has the answers.

JR

Bill Lee

Hello, Jean;

Got quit a chuckle out of your characterization of me as an insider. Of course that has been thrashed to death elsewhere and I would have hoped you had the courage to not pick those scabs here since as you know, they simply aren't true. But then, we have a whole different group here to talk to, don't we, Jean?

As you already know, Jean, but as I will repeat for all on this forum: here is EVERYTHING I know of PADCOM's activities: ......

Did you miss that? I'll repeat: .......


Did you get the idea that there wasn't anything said? Well, SHAZAAM! You're RIGHT! And Jean, you KNEW that already, but for some reason you felt it necessary to try and "label" me once again. I wonder why!

Insider!?!? ROFLMAO!!!

But I WILL tell what I am! I am a person that trys very hard to build communication paths and working relationships with ALL of the AMA hierarchy. Not always successful, but I always try. I do that based on a history of help, a history of trust, a history of "doing for others". And it really DOES work! As some will never learn, the "in your face" approach will ALWAYS result in your being put off into the "Paranoid Malcontent" file, even if OCCASIONALLY you have something good to say!

And because of those years of trying to work WITH those in control instead of always standing back and throwing turds in the punchbowl, I often DO have insight that many don't have. And as long as I can, I will always share that information.

Too often there are those on these and other forums who deal in speculation, innuendo, half-truths, and even an occasional outright lie. All in the name of politics. It's real hard to place facts in front of folks who are bent on believing the half-truths, etc., as if the were facts. It only leads to being trashed yourself.

As to "part": what %age would you be happy leasing to the farmers? 10%? 50%? 90% Have any idea what is already leased out? I don't, but it seems to me that until we know that number, any speculation about making a bunch of money is just that: speculation. And I hope the readers of this forum would not accept that as fact until we know.

Same thing for the constant bleating about the Muncie site being a money pit. Do you know, Jean, or is it more speculation?

Oh, well...

Regards,

Bill Lee

J_R

Bill Lee

Gee Bill, I am feeling kinda stupid. I KNOW that you are on the Property Acquisition and Development Committee(PADCOM). The EC minutes show that PADCOM has submitted reports. It shows that the EC is going to spend money on the basis of those reports. And you know zilch? You know absolutely nothing?

You don't know about the option that the AMA holds on the airport adjoining the property at Muncie, that the owner values at something over $700,000? You don't know anything about the improvements of the facilities that are slated for Muncie and documented in the EC minutes?

Bill, this next statement was taken, admittedly out of context from a post you made on YOUR D-VIII discussion list:

"Ed, I offer to you that we have that now. According to some private
conversations I have had with Doug Holland, AMA's investements are
managed by an external financial service organization. (He told me who,
but I don't think I have the clearance to give the name.) He acts in an
oversight mode on AMA's behalf"

Now, since you were appointed by Dave Brown, you are the CL cordinator, you run the D-VIII list and you have private conversations with Doug Holland(the EVP of the AMA) and you have a personal relationship with Dr. Sandy Frank ( D-VIII VP) I think that is a fair definition of insider. However if can rely on Webster: insider- a person who is in a position of power or has access to confidential information.

Now, from your first post on this group: "FYI, since it has apparently not been said to you in the past: the site at Muncie is ALREADY leased for crop production."

From your most recent post: "As to "part": what %age would you be happy leasing to the farmers? 10%? 50%? 90% Have any idea what is already leased out? I don't" (again, admittedly out of context Bill)

You see folks, the real Bill Lee has stood up. I hope you all judge his credibility accordingly.

Jean-Pierre Rondot (JR)
AMA 732
CD/LM

P.S. Oh, Bill, do me a personal favor? You can call me Jean-Pierre (my correct name), or John (my friends do) or JR (which I use on the net). If you will do that, I won't address you as Willy.

Bill Vargas

My Feedback: (5)

Bill Lee, Welcome to RCU and Glad you could make it

BV

Bill Lee

You got that right, JR! Not that I am HAPPY about that! As I said (and have repeated for you on any number of occasions), I have had ZERO involvement with PADCOM since I was "appointed" a year ago. I have had ZERO communications with the committee chair, I have had ZERO information flow in either direction, I have ZERO knowledge of what PADCOM has proposed as a committee.

Now, JR, is that sufficiently EMPHATIC for you to understand so you won't try and imply I am lying in this or any other forum?


I know the same as you do, JR: what I read in the EC minutes. I simply haven't bothered to ask about it. Have you? Or is this just another opportunity to further political strategies?

BTW: what is WRONG with holding the option on that property? Oh, yes! You didn't SAY there was anything wrong, but the implication was there! Seems to me that having an option on that property is great protection for the REST of AMA's assets at the Muncie site.

O.k., JR you win. I give up. I'm an insider. But I guess that makes you one, too, since you have also had some private conversations with Doug Holland, you have privately contacted many other EC members, you run the yahoo bash....er, allama group,........ Sheesh!

Just a matter of how inside, I guess. By your innuendo, I should be privy to everything that goes on within AMA. Far from the truth, but, then truth hasn't been a mainstay in previous conversations. :-(

And what is this supposed to mean, JR? The site is already leased for crop production; I don't know how much or what income it brings; you continue to bleat about "...substantially decreased if the NFS were to be leased out for farming...".

I'll repeat the question, JR: how much should be leased? How much already is? How much income would be achieved? How much would it reduce our dues?

JR, you're making the accusations: is it more rhetoric? Come on, JR, inquiring minds would like an answer instead of the constant half-truths and innuendo.

I hope all DO judge my credibility by what I SAY and DO, not by the half-truths and innuendo that others always seem to resort to. I will promise to bring FACTS to the table. I promise I will say what I KNOW and I promise I will always indicate my OPINION as such! (I beg pardon for the occasional editorial comments when I present the facts! :-) I also promise that if I DO know anything of AMA's business which is confidential (which is damned little. zero being the appropriate value!), you will NOT hear me talk about it!

You got it, JR. BTW, my friends DO call me "Willy", but you can call me Bill. :-)

J_R

Bill Lee

Now, after I drag it out, you do know about the option on the airport. That option is a PADCOM subject. The point is simply that you do tell the truth, just not all of it. You do not tell all that you know and you withhold information to make your points, unlike any other AMA leaders that I know. Personally, I would rather be told it is none of my business than to be mislead by a partial truth. That is your style and you have posted as much elsewhere.

Let me ask directly, since we are in a new forum. Do you believe it is the business of the membership to know ALL of what is going on with the AMA, with the one exception of law suit settlements, that must be kept privledged? The truth and the whole truth?

Will you share the full and complete truth, as you know it, when you are asked any question about the AMA? Will you endevor to get the information when asked about things that you do not know?

Now, as to the option on the airport. The reason I did not express an opinion is several-fold. First, I believe Muncie is, indeed a sink-hole for money. The expenditure of that kind of money could be used for other things that I think would be of more value to the membership of the AMA. I still do not understand why the existence of the option was not made available to the AMA membership. That leads to a lot of questions. The second reason I expressed no opinion about it is that the future use of the airport has not been settled. Whether it would be operated as an airport by the AMA has not been determined, as far as I know. It is currently a losing proposition, I am told, and that might or might not make it a bigger sink-hole. Another possability is to just shut it down. Another is to develop it in such a manner that it will not cause future conflicts which might threaten the rest of the NSF. So, in summing it up, the only thing that I know for certain is that it is going to cost a lot of money to exercise that option. Any opinion would be based on assumptions of decisions that have not been made for the other scenerios, as far as I know. Oh, and Bill, this is all in the PADCOM. You really do need to get more involved or get out of that committee.

I guess the term insider just does not bother me, but, then, I am likely to share what I know, unlike some other insiders.


The point about how much is leased. Bill, you came in and in your first post, stated that the land was leased, leading people to beleive that it all was. That was the implication, the truth, but something less than the whole truth. In the second post, you disclosed what you would have us beleive is the whole truth. That is my point. When anyone reads what you say, they must read it over and over to see where the out is. Bill Clinton used the same style about sex. What he said was the truth, it was just not the truth people heard.

Now, as to my opinion on how much to lease. My understanding is that about 30% of the land is leased now. My understanding is that the current lease brings in about $600,000. I can NOT document either number. If you can get more accurate imformation, I am all ears. On the point of how much I would lease out, it would be somewhere around 90-95 percent. Everything that is not the HQ, the Museum or the roads to access them. Keep in mind that that allows the reduction of the workforce, in administration and maintenance as well. The numbers might be a good suggestion for PADCOM to determine.

What do we do with the money? I am all for creating a committee of financial experts to oversee all of our investments. It should be comprised of any EC member that feels comfortable with the duties, and some appointed with expertise in financial investments. Apparently you have some pre-conceived idea of how the money should be invested, I don't. I do not beleive that the burden of those investments should not be placed on one person.


JR

P-51B

My Feedback: (5)

Unfortunatley for us non-competition minded folks (you know, the ones who just enjoy the hobby) it seems that the only ones using the site are the good ol'boy "competitors".

However, I think the site and museum should be kept. Both are VERY important to the future of the hobby. As for the the 3 million dollar office building, first I heard about that.

Future priorities should be in actually BUYING flying sites in EVERY state, so that maybe us non-retired folks could think about that competition thing.

Just the ramblings of an AMA life member.

J_R

P51-B

The headquarters buiding was featured on the cover of MA months ago. There has been no secret about it nor the amount of money spent on it.

I think that one of the reasons that Marc opened this discussion forum for AMA discussions was his realization that all too many AMA members do not know what the AMA is doing. If he can live with the constant bickering, there will be a LOT of information that will pass before you that you have not seen before.

This discussion group is going to drag a few into the battle. For most others, it is going to provide comic relief when they on the RCU site. Right now, the existence of this discussion group is largely unknown. As more of the politically active members of the AMA start to participate your going to be drawing more and more information.

Stay tuned

JR

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Bill Lee said:

O.k., JR you win. I give up. I'm an insider. But I guess that makes you one, too, since you have also had some private conversations with Doug Holland, you have privately contacted many other EC members, you run the yahoo bash....er, allama group,........ Sheesh!


Bill,

I am not sure how productive it is to call any discussions that touch on subjects you might prefer to keep quite and involve people you disdain a bash group.

Not all the people involved in any of the various groups are friends and not all the subjects are pleasant. However, failure to address the unpleasant subjects with whomever frequently leads down the proverbial tubes, and that is not good. I would rather the AMA avoid that type of stupid move.

An observation for your consideration that might make the conversations easier to deal with. Stop using abbreviations as they simply intimidate those who don't know what they stand for. Possibly intimidation is good, but it sure gets in the way of effective communications.

I thought the purpose of this whole thread was to determine the true value of maintaining the site at Muncie. It seems that when the audit documents are carefully parsed, the actual yearly expenses of maintaining and operating the facility itself cannot be effectively broken out. That makes conversation difficult. Would it be possible for you to get those numbers, or is that something we want kept from public view?

Part of the problem is the perceived disregard for the membership that seems to be shown by unrestrained expenditures that have extremely limited value. That seems to be the view about the airport.

Another example of that same disregard for the general membership can be found in the IMS show purchase. The AMA bought that show just after the last dues increase and told us that the purpose was to avoid another dues increase. If you review the audit, it becomes clear that the IMS show NETS the AMA about $0.17 per member per year. Sorry but that is less than 10% of the DUES INCREASE.

These are the things many are concerned about and real answers seem to be extremely difficult to get. As has been noted, innuendos, misdirection, misstatement and partial truths seem to be the rule of the day. We need to get past that and down to solutions and that takes open communications rather than hidden agendas.

I used to think we were all on the same team with the same goals. Today, I wonder.

Sincerely,

Jim Branaum
AMA LM 1428

Bill Lee

Well, here it is, folks. JR's real self emerging. Taking simple, factual statements and distorting and dreaming up things that weren't said.... Sad that he has to resort to such instead of actually telling the truth. For those of you who don't frequent other internet forums, this has been characterized as "Creative Politics": speculation, half-truths, innuendo and an occasional outright ... prevarication.

I ask each of you to go back and reread what I have said previously. And do the same for JR. Draw your own conclusions about who has been truthful and who has not.

An example of JR's stretch to be creative. As you will find when you read what I wrote, nowhere did I say that I knew anything about an option on any property.
What I DID say was this:

"I know the same as you do, JR: what I read in the EC minutes."

Was that in the EC Minutes? I looked at all of the EC Minutes from 1998 to-dat
and found nothing. Note that there is nothing here that says I knew of any option, only that my source of information is the same as JR's: the EC minutes. But
given his later posting, it is obvious that his "insiderness" is apparently quite a bit greater than mine! Maybe he knows more than he is telling us. Creative politicing, JR?

Another one of JR's creative politicing tricks: ask a question which can't be answered! This is one in the category of "Have you stopped beating your wife!".

Here's what I said, so conveniently ignored by JR:

"I will promise to bring FACTS to the table. I promise I will say what I KNOW and I promise I will always indicate my OPINION as such! (I beg pardon for the occasional editorial comments when I present the facts! :-) I also promise that if
I DO know anything of AMA's business which is confidential (which is damned little. zero being the appropriate value!), you will NOT hear me talk about it!"

Now: JR has already excluded insurance claims. But what he FAILED to say (half truths again, JR?) is that there ARE other things that should be excluded! Such things as pending litigation, or property acquisition where timing is critical, or personnel matters, or... perhaps others I cannot think of right now. All of these are deemed confidential in ANY venue such as AMA.

I will ask you the question, JR: do you believe it is proper to expose confidential information before it is appropriate?

I said and will repeat: I promise to bring FACTS to the table. I promise I will
say what I KNOW and I promise I will always indicate my OPINION as such! I also
promise that if I DO know anything of AMA's business which is confidential I will NOT speak of it beyond appropriate venues.

Again, JR's creative politicing is apparent!

MY answer is a RESOUNDING YES! But if one were to ask JR the same question it would have to be NO! And I have to go NO FURTHER than his latest post (to which I am responding) where he FINALLY reveals that he knew ALL ALONG that (at least some of) the AMA site is leased to farmers for crops, and even an estimate of how much they are paying! Yet all along, he has been stringing us along with statements like "...substantially decreased if the NFS were to be leased out for farming...".



More of the CPing from JR.

As a matter of information, I went back and searched the minutes of the Executive Council for the years 1998-2002. I looked for occurrences of the word "option" or "property" or "airport" and I read the minutes in context at each point. And I found NOTHING that talked about any sort of airport option! SHAZAAM! So JR, since my access to "insider" data is apparently not as good as yours, would you PLEASE TRUTHFULLY let us know where your information on options on the airport came from? Or is it just more creative politicing?

What part of ZERO don't you understand, JR. Since you chose to bring Bill Clinton into the discussion, JR, just what IS your definition of ZERO?

Yes, getting off that committee is an option since my presence has been so nonproductive.

As evidenced by your sharing of your insider information regarding the leasing of the land at the NFS? Unfortunately, JR, your track record isn't very good on being truthful and open and honest.

Yes, the point is if it's leased at all. You in several posts made a statement such as

"...substantially decreased if the NFS were to be leased out for farming..."

No, you don't say "the REST of it leased out for farming", Your innuendo and half truths are intended to mislead and inflame. Creative Politicing, JR?

Ah, now we see the insider information being displayed, information that was available all along. But for the sake of creative politicing, JR failed to indicate that SOME of the AMA site was leased. Nope, it's time to mislead and inflame instead of being truthful.


I am sure the numbers can be verified if one is willing to try. I may even do so when I am in Muncie this weekend for the next EC meeting. If I learn any FACTS, I'll be happy to report them.

BTW, the EC meeting is open to ANY AMA member who wishes to attend. Sure, you get to sit in on many hours of tedium, but occasionally the comments like leasing the NFS to a farmer is mentioned, and often other neat stuff that doesn't make the minutes. Not to mention it gives you a WONDERFUL opportunity to build communication paths to your VP and to others on the EC. You might try it some time, JR.
It's probably a good idea if candidates nominated for EC positions did, too!

I think this is an excellent idea! And it should probably include the CFO. And it would probably be called the Finance Committee! (Whoops! maybe it already exists! Better check!)

Oh, really? Tell me about these pre-conceived ideas! Where I have I ever stated how the money should be invested? OTOH, I too believe that one person should not be charged with that whole responsibility. But are they today? I really don't think so. Why, JR, I am sure your insider conversation with Doug Holland revealed that AMA's investments in the stock and bond markets are handled by a professional financial management group of a major bank. Doug surely doesn't make the decisions on how that money is invested. As he told me, and I am sure you, he has oversight responsibilities, and that has been delegated to him by the EC as the CFO of AMA. Seems appropriate in MY mind. But then I don't have a history of making "allegations" that would imply mismanagement and/or personal financial gain as you have. (Reference: the usenet news group rec.model.rc.air)

Oh, yes, it is fun to watch you try and wiggle out of your creative politicing, JR.

Regards,

Bill Lee

J_R

Bill Lee

The initial information about the option on the airport came from YOUR D-VIII discussion group.

On the issue of determining when it is appropriate to disclose information: That is a good definition for censorship, IMHO. Legal issues excepted.

I will let the rest of this stand. I think the reader's can make up their minds for themselves as to who they want to believe on the other issues.

JR

Bill Lee

Interesting! I'll have to go back and see if it's there and who posted it there. Obviously MY D-8 discussion group is of infallible integrity! :-)

Censorship: yes, you can use that inflammatory word if you choose. I would rather call it confidential information. As an example: you live in a city (I assume), you probably have a City Council. Sometime when you have a moment, drop by City Hall and ask for the minutes of the closed sessions that they have. Let me know what they tell you!

Having BEEN a City Councilman in a small city a number of years ago,I can tell you what you'd be told there: not for public release. I will be VERY surprised if your city is any different. But please try.

Now: I maintain that there are SOME topics which MUST remain confidential. Perhaps you and I could discuss what they are, perhaps we might even agree on a few.

And I, too, invite the forum members to reread this thread and make up their own minds.

Regards,

Bill Lee

J_R

Now, back to what I was trying to get around to before I got side-tracked.

As best I know, the following are facts.


The AMA is going through something of an insurance crisis, not so much because of flying activities, but, because of liability suits and 9/11. The insurance policy was about $250,000 in the year ended 12/31/2001. It will be in the $500,000-$600,000 range this year. An estimate was recently received that it will be something over $900,000 next year. These rough numbers do NOT include the self-insured part of insurance claims (AIR.

The AMA has, in the previous three years, been deficit budgeted. The budget was balanced, according the the EVP, by not spending the amounts budgeted for Muncie. There is now a backlog of projects that have not been completed.

A small part of the dues increase was made to start on some of those projects. Something in the range of $2-$3 of the increase.

It is simply my opinion that we may have to batten the hatches. Each time there is a dues increase, it is likely that there will be a membership drop. No such drop was projected into the budget. Instead the 3% growth that the AMA has been enjoying was eliminated. It's my opinion that there will be a drop in the real number of memberships, due to the increase. That, in addition, due to increased insurance costs in the future, it is time to plan now. I have nothing against a nice National Flying Site... as long as it does not necessitate another dues increase nor stand in the way of growing the membership.

At the same time, it is imperative, in my opinion, to try to embrace the park flyers, even if we have to subsidize them. We need political power now and in the future. The larger number of members can give us that, the National Flying Site can not.

It is also my opinion that the NSF is not going to disappear anytime soon. The reason I posted any of this is to see if there is any clear consensus among the readers of what should be done. This group is monitored by some on the EC and your opinions will be taken into consideration if there is a consensus. My opinion is not important, yours is.

JR

J_R

After doing some digging, I found that two of the numbers I had been using are in error.

1) The amount of income generated by the land that is already leased at Muncie is closer to $100,000 than to $600,000 per year that I was told about.

This obviously changes the senario of leasing out the rest of the land at Muncie.

2) The figure that I have been using for the expense allowance of the VP's averages closer to $8,000 than the $15,000 I had been told.

$15,000 is closer to the amount that the largest District (X) gets and was inavertently given to me incorrectly.

I do try to use the correct figures.

JR

DBrown

My Feedback: (-1)

All these figures are openly available to the membership.
So really there is no reason to misquote the figures.
Also the Dist VP's allowances are all fairly close in amounts,

Dave

J_R

DBrown

Are you Dave Brown, the President of the AMA?

Where is such a number and the net amount that the leased land available from?

JR

Bill Vargas

My Feedback: (5)

DBrown, Welcome to RCU and Glad you could make it

BV
Community Moderator

dennis1943

My Feedback: (12)

bill,

consider yourself lucky if this is the true dave brown he has never answered my emails, i dont think that they really care, he can call me at 843-753-3599 and prove it\

dennis w. martin sr.
dirtybird5@homexpressway

fliers1

Mr. Brown has answered my emails on several occasions, but I imagine he received thousands of emails on a daily basis and can't answer them all. Man, I can't imagine anyone would want his job.

Take care,
CCR
http://www.kites.org/rc_instructors

Scotty740

Unless the real Dave Brown just signed up for a Yahoo email address and is currently in Russia I don't think this is the real thing.

IP Address: 212.248.84.15
Official Name: ofmail.vstroyka.ru

Bill Vargas

My Feedback: (5)

I think my bubble just got popped,,, LOL

BV

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Mr. Brown has answered my emails on several occasions, but I imagine he received thousands of emails on a daily basis and can't answer them all. Man, I can't imagine anyone would want his job.

Take care,
CCR
http://www.kites.org/rc_instructors

** I have had a similar experience about as often as not **

Unless the real Dave Brown just signed up for a Yahoo email address and is currently in Russia I don't think this is the real thing.

IP Address: 212.248.84.15
Official Name: ofmail.vstroyka.ru


__________________
Scott Stickle


IRCHA # 1660

** R O F L O L !!! **


Scott,
You sure do know how to make it hit the fan! I know Dave Brown does some traveling. However I find it hard to believe he would be in Russia today since I have had other indications of his location in CONUS and he DOES have an AMA EC meeting this weekend.

In short, you are right on target!

Jim Branaum
AMA LM 1428