[dhmartens]

I cross posted this at SHGA.com:
I just received this email from USHPA but with Alan Crouse deleted but briefly mentioned in Bob Kuczewski's candidate statement.

Could SHGA BOD please look into this possible error.
Doug Martens.

attached:
December 13, 2013
Greetings, Region 3 Pilots!

Mark Forbes here, USHPA elections chairman. Our election for regional directors ends shortly, on December 16th. If you have not already voted, time is running out! We'll be taking votes until the close of business on Monday, and announcing the results a few days later after we get any paper ballots tabulated.

You received an envelope from USHPA at the start of last month. In it were instructions on how to vote for directors in your region, and a one-time-use voting password which lets you cast a ballot. It is NOT your USHPA member website password. If you haven't voted yet, dig around in the pile on your desk (if it looks anything like mine) and fish it out. Go to www.ushpa.aero/elections, click on the link for your region and cast your vote. Easy!

If you run into problems with electronic voting, please let me know about it. Thanks for participating in our annual election!

Attached below are campaign statements from candidates who are running for regional director in your region. These statements are the candidates' own, and are not the position of USHPA, its staff, officers or volunteers. The statements have not been edited, nor have they been checked for accuracy.


Mark G. Forbes
USHPA Elections committee chairman.
Candidate Statement: Corey Caffery

I am not the candidate you should vote for to fight the same old tired battles. USHPA NEEDS YOUTH!!! My desire to remain involved in USHPA is to create an organization focused on growing free flight and creating a positive impression of paragliding, hang gliding and speed flying in the public. I am an executive at a venture capital backed advertising technology company and have the requisite skills to help push USHPA to new heights.

You should vote for me is because I am the ideal candidate to accomplish the 2 things we must focus on to grow and succeed as an organization.

(1) We must continue to grow thesport of free flight.
(2) We must run the organization in an efficient and effective manner.

I believe that now is a great time to truly evaluate the current state and direction of the organization and make the (sometimes) hard decisions that best position this organization to succeed into the future.



Candidate Statement: Rob Sporrer

Elect Rob Sporrer for another two-year term as USHPA Region 3 Director.

Hello Region 3 pilots (Southern California & Hawaii). I'm nearing the end of my third term as a region 3 Director, and asking for your vote in the upcoming regional director election. Please take the time to vote.

Serving pilots and the free flight community is not a hobby, it is my life. I make a living as a paragliding instructor, and have worked to educate myself on the challenges hang gliders and paragliders face. I firmly believe participating in the decisions USHPA has made and is making will help move free-flight in a favorable direction.

All directors volunteer their time to serve the organization. I volunteer for action items, committee work, and new programs like the Wheels Up program helping those bound to wheels chairs to get up flying solo on paragliders. I am a very active participant on numerous committees and work groups aimed at helping USHPA achieve its strategic plan.

I've put in countless volunteer hours of work on USHPA projects; I have also volunteered two weeks of my time coaching the National Paragliding Team at the world championships in Mexico, Spain, and Bulgaria.

My biggest asset to our region is being in touch with the pilots. I spend a great deal of time with hang gliders and paragliders since I fly, teach, and run clinics all year long.
I have a broad scope, and have a great deal to contribute on many topics instead of being focused on one particular issue.

I promise to continue my efforts on your behalf if elected for another term. We have to work to keep our flying sites open and operating. We need to be proactively defending our rights as pilots, and integrate Mini Wing flying in a manner that preserves our flying sites.

I have the experience and knowledge to participate with the USHPA Board, and work together to make a difference. Thanks for taking the time to vote.

Tailwinds,
Rob Sporrer




Candidate Statement: Bob Kuczewski

Hello Fellow Pilots,

How long do you think you can fly (safely) with your eyes closed?
Two seconds? Ten seconds? A minute? Close your eyes right now and imagine yourself flying in traffic or close to the terrain or in turbulence. How long can you keep your eyes closed before you start to get ... very nervous?

We are flying blindly when we elect Regional Directors without knowing how they are voting on the USHPA Board. Every Senator and every Congressman has a voting record, and that's what they have to defend when they come up for re-election. The USHPA Board (that includes Rich Hass, Mark Forbes, and most of the other Directors) have refused to publish their voting records for their members to see. They want us flying blind when we vote.

If you're a regular pilot who's not involved in USHPA politics, it can be hard to know who to support. Rob Sporrer has a nice smile and will shake your hand and tell you he's trying to protect your sport. But is he? How do you know? And most importantly, why won't he vote to publish his own voting record on the Board?

If you want a pilot's organization that really represents pilots, please vote for the two candidates most likely to work for open voting records on the Board: Bob Kuczewski and Alan Crouse.

You can read about my other ideas for USHPA at:

http://ushawks.org/USHPA2013

Thanks for your time,
Bob Kuczewski
H4/P4, Aeronautical Engineer, Private Pilot, Former Region 3 Director
Phone: 858-204-7499 - Please call me directly if you like.
Email: bob@ushawks.org or bobkuczewski@gmail.com
_________________

[SamKellner]

Less than a week before the polls close.

Mark Forbes, same guy, elections committee chair, also seized the opportunity on the Oz Distort, to slander BobK.

And Davis chimed in support with the trite ushPa excuse line, , "BOD votes are unanimous- everything is done in committee". .

Jacmac did a good job to shut them up.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... sc&start=0

With the polls closing in a couple of days the candidates pre-election statements that came out yesterday do little good.

And he completely left out Alan.........................

How did Dr Spin explain that?

All this combined should warrant another Reg3 election.

[Bill Cummings]

WORD COUNT 64 (I CAN SEE WHERE MGF HAS NO TIME TO POST RD VOTES!)

Word count 64.JPG (57.74 KiB) Viewed 4834 times

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Word Count: 845
This is just BobK being his usual self, trying to find a "cause" he can champion.

If anybody wants to know how I voted on some particular topic, all they have
to do is ask. I think all of the folks who serve as regional directors feel that
way. I can only think of a few times when anyone wanted to know, and I told
them how I voted and why.

BobK got on this hobbyhorse a while back and keeps flogging the poor thing
hoping it'll spring to life and carry him to fame and glory. The fact that even
the turkey vultures are done with it deters him not at all. Smile

Nearly all of the votes that the BOD takes end up being unanimous, or nearly
so. If they're contentious or momentous, we do a roll call vote. For example,
at the recent BOD meeting where we held a disciplinary hearing, we took
roll call votes for each of the revocations. The EC held a subsequent re-hearing
on one of these, prompted by claims that there was a technical deficiency in
the notice of the hearing. Even though it was just the four of us on the EC
voting (acting on behalf of the board per the bylaws) we still did a roll-call
vote and recorded the decision for the minutes.

For the record, I voted in favor of the revocations…not that this is a surprise,
since the decisions were unanimous and unanimous-minus-one-vote. I
think the one "no" vote on the second revocation was because he thought
we were being too lenient by not making it permanent.

When it's a straightforward committee report to be adopted as the action
of the board, we take a voice vote. "All in favor say aye". Aye! "All opposed".
<crickets> "Motion carries".

There's not much point in "publishing a voting record" when it's a unanimous
vote with no dissent. If someone does dissent, they can have that recorded
in the minutes. If someone feels strongly about the topic and wants it "on
the record", or if it's a close decision, we'll do a roll-call vote. FWIW I voted
against the choice of venue for the next BOD meeting; I thought it's too
expensive, although it's a nice conference location. But that's just because
I'm cheap; I *like* $35 motel rooms, and I've got a favorite I stay at in
Colorado Springs run by a nice Japanese lady. It's a quirky little place right
out of the mid-50's.

Some people just aren't happy unless they're charging the foe, sword in
one hand and pennants flying. When there isn't a handy cause to fight for,
they'll make one up. That's how I see this "issue" that BobK raises.

MGF
There *is* a record; just go read the minutes, posted on the USHPA website in the members' section.
Nearly all of the decisions are unanimous; for those that are not, we typically record at least the number
of votes for and against. If it's controversial, really important or one of the supermajority questions
where we need a minimum of 17 votes in favor, we'll do a roll call vote. But for routine stuff that's
not controversial, we don't go through the delay of doing an official roll call. In general, if there's a
topic of interest, and your RD cast a vote, it was a vote with the majority unless otherwise noted.
I just ran back through the minutes for the past few years, and in those cases where a vote was
not unanimous, the dissent was recorded by name. There were a few roll call votes in there too,
and they're all duly recorded.

The board operates mostly by consensus; it's much different from Congress in that regard. We
mostly all get along well, and we hash out the details in committee meetings before the general
session. By the time we get to general session, the committee report is what we're voting on,
and it may get tweaked a bit if somebody has a question or problem. Once we've discussed it
in general session it gets voted on, and almost always it's a unanimous approval. For example,
go read the spring 2013 minutes. You'll find that almost all of the reports were approved
unanimously, except Dennis Pagen voted "no" on the Spring 2014 meeting location. Some of the
reports were amended during general session, with the motion and second recorded by name.

If there's some topic on which you think your RD voted "the wrong way", then take it up with
them and discuss it! The minutes are posted for your reference, all the way back to the beginning.
If some energetic soul (you, for example, since you seem to care) wants to go through them and
generate a spreadsheet showing how every director voted as recorded in the minutes, by all
means go forth and do so! Without the context provided by the minutes, so you know what the
topic was, it's fairly meaningless to do so. But if it floats your boat, go right ahead!

MGF

[Bob Kuczewski]

I cross posted this at SHGA.com:
I just received this email from USHPA but with Alan Crouse deleted but briefly mentioned in Bob Kuczewski's candidate statement.

Could SHGA BOD please look into this possible error.
Doug Martens.

I sure hope Alan didn't drop out. I believe he's a good man. I was almost considering dropping out and urging everyone to vote for him, but since voters can (and should) choose 2 candidates, I decided to stay in. Thanks for posting this and calling it to our attention Doug!!!   

Less than a week before the polls close.
Mark Forbes, same guy, elections committee chair, also seized the opportunity on the Oz Distort, to slander BobK.
And Davis chimed in support with the trite ushPa excuse line, "BOD votes are unanimous- everything is done in committee". .

I've been reading some of the Oz Forum's history, and Davis has been USHPA's puppet for a long time. It started showing when Davis selectively removed my posts challenging Bill Helliwell during the recall election. That's how he earns brownie points with the USHPA Board and Mark Forbes. You're right on target with the "unanimous" excuse line Sam!!

Jacmac did a good job to shut them up.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... sc&start=0

You're right on target there as well Sam!! Jacmac is a smart guy and he can see right through Mark Forbes' weasel words. Jacmac has also been President of the Torrey Hawks for over a year now (I've voted for him twice so far myself) ... and he's been watching like a Hawk for much longer.     

With the polls closing in a couple of days the candidates pre-election statements that came out yesterday do little good.

That's how Mark Forbes (USHPA's "Election Chairman" and Treasurer) operates. He'll spend hours telling everyone what he wants them to believe ... while he sits on the actual candidate statements until it's too late for them to be effective. I had to prod him again and again to get these statements out and he continually dragged his feet.

WORD COUNT 64

Word Count: 845

I CAN SEE WHERE MGF HAS NO TIME TO POST RD VOTES!

Bill, your exposition of hypocrisy is   ...   flawless!!       

Gentlemen, it's a wonderful thing to see each of you contributing to this forum. Sometimes I get somewhat depressed thinking that we'll never make any progress with the odds stacked against us - as the are. But your posts tonight are like the light shining at the end of a long tunnel. Thanks very very much!!

[Bob Kuczewski]

I called Alan earlier and left a message (actually a few messages since my cell phone kept dropping out ).

I'll post more information if Alan calls back.

[Bob Kuczewski]

UPDATE

Alan wrote back to me via email:

Bob:

Sorry, lousy cell reception at the house. I haven't withdrawn..

http://shga.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4285

Alan

Alan posted to Sylmar:

Doug:

Thank you. I wasn't deleted; just didn't respond fast enough to a request. Candidates had 2 days or so (if they check the account USHPA was mailing to) for the submission of a final statement. To be fair, we had been told early on that there would be a second mailing. The late timing was the surprise.

As the voting is all on-line, and the magic codes have been out for months, I doubt the last minute effort will have much effect. Folks who are going to vote have probably done so, and the others lost the letter with the code just as long ago.

This does kind of make my point, last minute notice once again (for all concerned, candidates and voters).

So, if you do have that letter with the magic code and are looking for a candidate, remember me, your "no surprises" candidate!

- Alan

Another pilot mentioned the open voting issue and Alan wrote:

Jonathan:

Not surprisingly I've had this asked several times and the response is in my platform (remember, "no more surprises"):

-"After the meeting I will place how I voted on a website set up for our region. What other Board members do is up to them; you will know how I voted".

I have also told anyone who asks, if recording board member votes comes up as an action item, I will vote in favor. So I'm supportive, but my main focus is getting the word out about things coming to the board BEFORE they vote. Yes, I am in favor of recording votes, but voting at all before you really know what is contained in the item and the membership has an opportunity to give you their views I see as a far bigger issue.

I have spoken with RD's and USHPA officers who I consider very good people, honestly doing the best they can to promote our sport, who have told me they voted on this item or that after getting it the previous day, without really understanding some of the issues, with no time to get comments, and basically trusting in the committee. --- That is what I want to change! We have got to provide the membership an opportunity to know what is going on and comment BEFORE the board takes action.

So, I hope you voted for me and that you still think that was the correct choice.

Good flights,

Alan

P.S. - If the moderator decides this belongs in the politics section I won't be offended.

I like Alan, and I think his heart is in the right place. But his idea of "getting the word out" to the members before he votes isn't going to work unless USHPA changes its process pretty dramatically. I think Alan is basically suggesting that all proposed changes have to be submitted in advance of the meeting. That would be nice, but I think he will have a hard time getting USHPA to publish proposed SOP changes a few weeks (or months?) in advance of the meeting and then freezing that version as the one to be voted upon. If Alan is suggesting that Directors could still propose changes at the meeting itself and get them passed (at that meeting), then that puts us right back in the same situation where we are now.

The solution is simple - provide an incentive for Directors to read what they're voting on, and ensure that they are accountable to their members for the votes they cast. That's solves everything very nicely.

I didn't get to say all that on the Sylmar forum, but here's what I did just post there:

Hello Alan and other friends at Sylmar!!

As you may have noticed, I'm endorsing Alan because I believe he's on the right track regarding USHPA's need to publish Director's votes. It turns out the the Canadian association (HPAC) has been doing this for 10 years!! So there's no excuse for USHPA to do otherwise.

I have also told anyone who asks, if recording board member votes comes up as an action item, I will vote in favor. So I'm supportive, but my main focus is getting the word out about things coming to the board BEFORE they vote. Yes, I am in favor of recording votes, but voting at all before you really know what is contained in the item and the membership has an opportunity to give you their views I see as a far bigger issue.

I have spoken with RD's and USHPA officers who I consider very good people, honestly doing the best they can to promote our sport, who have told me they voted on this item or that after getting it the previous day, without really understanding some of the issues, with no time to get comments, and basically trusting in the committee. --- That is what I want to change! We have got to provide the membership an opportunity to know what is going on and comment BEFORE the board takes action.

This is great Alan, and it puts you head and shoulders above Rob Sporrer who's refused to endorse open voting at all.

However, from a practical perspective, how do you propose to get USHPA Directors to read the stuff they're voting on before they vote on it? If there's no penalty for not reading it, and no one will ever know how they've voted, then what is going to make them do what their laziness is avoiding? Are you going to go to everyone's hotel room at night with a stick and beat anyone who's not at their desk reading the SOPs?

That's why a voting record is so crucial. It's the most natural way to get Directors to actually read something ... because their vote will be recorded!!!

Enough said ( for now Very Happy ). I do wish you the best Alan, and I urge everyone to vote for Alan first and for me second. If you can't stand me, then Corey would be a better option than Rob Sporrer.

Thanks!!

[Bob Kuczewski]

In addition to posting on the Sylmar forum, I decided to write to Alan directly regarding his stance on open voting. If I understand it, Alan is proposing that everything the USHPA Board is going to vote on is already nailed down long before the meeting so the members will have a chance to look it over and provide feedback before the vote. I think this is fine, but that puts a very long delay in the process.

Let's say, for example, that the Board proposes to increase membership fees by $20 per year. So they publish that as the proposed SOP change one month before the meeting.

The members provide feedback to their Directors that they'd rather see the USHPA travel budget cut instead so the increase is only $10 per year.

OK, let's say the Board is good with that. Now what? Can the Board pass a $10 fee hike instead of the $20 proposed in the "frozen" proposal? If yes, then what keeps them from changing other things as well (right where we are now)? If no, then that means that we either get a $20 increase or no increase for another 6 months. Now an artificial choice has been forced which is suboptimal because everyone seems to agree on the $10 increase.

I think the better solution is to let the Directors hash out whatever they want, but that they know that how they've voted will be reflected to the members. If they feel they can only justify a $10 increase, then that's what they should argue for and their comments should be in the record. That makes everything work without any artificial "freeze".

Basically a freeze is a handcuff to what might be a bad idea. I prefer Ronald Reagan's slogan ... "Trust but Verify"!!

For the record, here's what I wrote to Alan:

Hi Alan,

I'm glad you're still in the running. I've read the Sylmar topic and I've added my own comments. There's also been some discussion on the US Hawks at:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1457

I hope you'll chime in if you can find the time.

If you're not happy about the notice you've gotten regarding the election emailing, you're not going to be a very happy Board member either. This is how the USHPA leadership (Mark Forbes specifically in this instance) operates.

Your idea of publishing changes first is great, but the devil is in the details. To make this work, you're going to have to "freeze" a version of the proposed changes some time in advance of the meeting. So if there's something "bad" found ("bad" by anyone's definition), then it can't be changed at that Board meeting and has to wait another 6 months to be fixed and re-proposed. I don't think that's the worst way to do things, but I don't think you'll ever get the USHPA Board to agree to that slow of a process. Besides, that means that all the work (discussions, negotiations, etc) will have to be done well in advance of the meeting. The Directors are just not going to want to do that. They're going to want to make changes in real time in response to what they're hearing discussed at the meeting. That's why they have a meeting!! I'm not sure that's so bad.

What is bad, is allowing Directors to vote without having any accountability at all for how they cast their votes. That's the gaping hole in the feedback loop and that's what needs to be fixed. If you did that, then you wouldn't have to come up with some artificial way of "freezing" the changes and handcuffing the Board in real time.

Alan, I've endorsed you because I believe you're an independent thinker and your heart is in the right place. If you're elected, you'll have a chance to see what I've seen, and then we can talk again. Please keep an open mind that I might be right on the need for open voting. That's all I ask ... for now. : )

Good luck,
Bob Kuczewski

[Bob Kuczewski]

I fully endorse Alan, and I encourage everyone to vote for him!!

Having said that, I want to give a concrete example as to why his pre-publication approach (posted below) won't solve the accountability problem at USHPA.

Let's say the USHPA Board decides they want to double our annual fees. So they draft an SOP item which increases the fees. They publish this draft SOP 30 days before the Board meeting for all members to see in accordance with Alan's plan.

Let's say the members recognize the need for an increase, but they'd rather see a 50% increase along with some cuts in USHPA's travel budget. In particular, the members would like to get an accounting of how much money is spent on the Board's travel budget and the travel budget for others like Nick and Martin. That's the overwhelming input from the members to all Directors.

So far, so good. USHPA has published what they want to do. The members have said that they want something different.

So now the Board meeting comes along. The item comes up for a vote, and the original draft passes 17 to 6 with a few Directors absent or abstaining. There's been no compromise, and there's no accountability on the travel budgets that the members wanted. Furthermore, we have no idea which Directors supported this, which Directors opposed this, and which Directors didn't vote at all.

That's pretty much the way things already happen, and Alan's idea of publishing the item first hasn't changed anything.

What WILL change things is publishing how the Directors voted on this - including all motions made by Directors (whether they were seconded or not). So now, we can see that Alan indeed introduced a motion to reduce the increase and provide better oversight of the travel budget. We can see that it was seconded by Dan. We can see that Mark Forbes and Rich Hass argued for the original increase with no travel oversight and that's how they voted. We can also see that Alan, Dan, and Bob voted against it. But most importantly, because all the Directors knew their votes would be published, the votes were actually ... different!! The item didn't pass, and only had 7 in favor of the increase, 18 opposed to the increase, and no abstentions. A second motion was introduced on a 50% increase which also required a 50% cut in Nick's travel budget. This second motion was passed with a unanimous vote ... all Directors voting.

That's how we can make USHPA better. Please vote for Alan and myself and I believe we can make that happen.

Candidate Statement: Alan Crouse

Alan Crouse - Your "No Surprises" Candidate Hello Fellow Pilots!

I am an H4/P3 pilot who has been flying in Southern California since 2002. My 'day job' is in management, serving a variety of governmental and private agencies over the past 30 years with a background in computer science and management. The folks at Crestline and Soboba saw fit to have me as Treasurer (both sites, including currently at Soboba) and President (2 terms at Crestline). My membership dues support SDHGPA and SHGA. I am also the Treasurer for a national information technology group. Finally, I operate the Soaring Predictor http://www.soaringpredictor.info for southern California and beyond.

Being a USHPA Regional Director and Board member is a tough, unpaid position. Why would anyone, in particular me, want it?? Well, it has been my observation that this group is out there trying to do good things for our sport and making the same mistake over and over again. The Board is lousy at communications. Board meetings are held, decisions get made, THEN get communicated and the members go nuts. Can you say: Observers; 'Fly Safe' wristbands; Clubs not allowed to criticize USHPA (this one got rolled back); or (most recently) speed mini-wing restrictions? Every time the opportunity to see and comment on the proposal came after the fact.

Now I am not the only one concerned about this problem. In fact, our current President, Rich Hass, was key in getting the USHPA criticism thing reversed. But, these folks need help and that's what my platform is all about. If elected, I will:

-Establish an e-mail list through a standard service (ConstantContact, VerticalResponse, etc.) and include all instructors and club officers in our region (yes, I will be spamming you);

-Any other USHPA member in our region can opt-in to the list (yes, you too can vote for more spam);

-BEFORE each meeting, list members will get a preview of items on the agenda (there may be 'closed session' items on litigation or personnel issues that cannot be included);

-If an item comes forward that was not provided to the Board in advance, it gets an automatic "No' vote from me. If it wasn't important/critical enough to get the Board, it is not critical/important enough to vote on;

-After the meeting I will place how I voted on a website set up for our region. What other Board members do is up to them; you will know how I voted.

Staying with the 'no surprises' theme, I am not independently wealthy, and do not operate a hang gliding/paragliding business to write off expenses against, so I will accept the airfare and hotel expenses associated with Board meetings. I will fly SouthWest, stay the minimum number of days and provide receipts.

We have an awesome sport that has been a big part of my life for the past decade. With your vote, I hope to make its governance more transparent and accessible to the membership. "No More Surprises!"

By the way, I also posted earlier versions of this to the Sylmar and Crestline forums, but I don't have the time to post to all of the club forums that might be discussing the elections. That's what's so great about the US Hawks forum. Club members have easy access to national discussions, so there's no need to post national topics in each and every local forum.