Separation of Board and Commercial Interest

[Jerome Daoust]

Since Linda (board member) wrote: “I do think anyone with a commercial interest or less than a set number of years in the CSS should be prevented from a seat on the BOD“. And the current BOD is one of the least involved with commercial activities at the site (a good thing) and likely most receptive, I warm up this topic.

Without having any specific people in mind, I propose that…

Current board members hold a membership vote to update the bylaws to disqualify board member applicants from having a significant commercial interest. The “significant commercial interest” will need to be defined, maybe: No school owner and family, no instructor and family, no driver, OK to be part of other club or USHPA leadership.

Commercial sympathizers may still apply, and lobbying can occur, but this bylaw change would still be a good step towards neutral board members. Motivated individuals may be harder to find, but it will be worthwhile.

Zero shame for being disqualified (I would be due to holding an instructor rating). It likely means that you are already busy helping the sport in a different way.

As always, nothing prevents people with “significant commercial interest” who are not board members, to do good things for the club and be praised for it.

[Luke Berger]

The BOD has considered this issue in the past and discussed it again due to events that have occurred in the past 2 years.  I think anyone would agree that it makes complete sense to have that separation of function.  Unfortunately, however, there is a limited of pool of dedicated pilots who are willing to volunteer their time to both the work of the BOD and the physical work that the site requires to be maintained.  The policy in the past has not been to restrict BOD candidacy to those who operate flight instruction or other services, because of people like Rob Mackenzie who have been critical assets to both the club and the sport in their roles as club founders, BOD members, and Instructors for many, many years.

As of now the BOD feels that changing this precedent would not necessarily be beneficial and could potentially sow more discontent in the membership.  The Club’s By-Laws already have rules & policy in-place regarding negative behaviors by any general member or even BOD positions, rules that no one has taken any pleasure in exercising recently .

Also, noteworthy, the previous BOD attempted a last minute Ballot Measure near the very of their term in early 2023, an initiative that would have been very detrimental to the club if successful, which is a major contributing factor to why the current BOD was elected to the current term in the first place.  We feel that it would be in poor taste to press a controversial ballot measure prior to an election.

I would hope that the membership is able to recognize which individuals who are running for a BOD seat do in fact have commercial interest in the club, and they consider the actions, behavior, and past performance of those candidates when voting.

[Bo Frazier]

Luke, I understand and agree with a lot of what you wrote.  However, it seems that the overwhelming majority of conflict and issues that continue to arise at the flight park involve persons with commercial interests.  Give them power and the problems will only escalate.  I have always believed that while money may not be the source of all evil, it darn sure is the source of much evil.  If you want to really know what kind of person you are dealing with, just put some dollars at issue.  Then the “real” person will quickly show itself.

[Tim Ward]

Meh.  I instruct at AJX.  That’s a “commercial interest”.  I don’t think anyone has had a problem with me serving on the board.

Before he retired, Rob McKenzie had a “commercial interest”.  He’s been on the board many times.  I would be hard-pressed to find his participation to be anything but a benefit to the club.

I’ll agree that, yeah, while there could be a conflict of interest, most of that would relate to other people with “commercial interests” in the club, since it isn’t going to be in anyone’s interest to lose AJX.

In any case, members with “commercial interests” in the LZ are generally known quantities to the membership, because they’re local.  There’s no strangers with mysterious motivations moving in.

I’m pretty sure members can figure out for themselves whether people can be trusted to make their decisions on the board with respect to what’s best for the club rather than what’s best for them personally.

Honestly, *generally* what’s best for them personally would be to let someone else do the work.

It’s not like we have such competition for board participation that we need to limit the field artificially.  And if the only people we can get to volunteer are those who have some sort of financial stake…  then that’s who we can get.

 

 

[Artie Roggeband]

Fact is, the “club” has a commercial and financial interest in the members and activities.

That you are considering this topic is a clear sign of how this board is confused on what is expected of them for the promotion and development of the club and activities.

Instead, find ways to do more for hang and para gliding pilots alike, local or visiting, newbie and experienced, even those requiring coaching and behavioral adjustment in a fair and balanced way.

I ask you: How well are we doing to be inclusive, welcoming, encouraging, and simply pleasant to anybody willing to buy in to our amazing club and make it prosper?

Welcome to Andy Jackson!

 

 

 

 

[Jana Pivkova]

Since Linda (board member) wrote: “I do think anyone with a commercial interest or less than a set number of years in the CSS should be prevented from a seat on the BOD“. And the current BOD is one of the least involved with commercial activities at the site (a good thing) and likely most receptive, I warm up this topic.

Without having any specific people in mind, I propose that…

Current board members hold a membership vote to update the bylaws to disqualify board member applicants from having a significant commercial interest. The “significant commercial interest” will need to be defined, maybe: No school owner and family, no instructor and family, no driver, OK to be part of other club or USHPA leadership.

Commercial sympathizers may still apply, and lobbying can occur, but this bylaw change would still be a good step towards neutral board members. Motivated individuals may be harder to find, but it will be worthwhile.

Zero shame for being disqualified (I would be due to holding an instructor rating). It likely means that you are already busy helping the sport in a different way.

As always, nothing prevents people with “significant commercial interest” who are not board members, to do good things for the club and be praised for it.

If we prevent instructors, drivers and family from running for the board, that would disqualify both Kathy and I. This would be a great excuse for me not to run and simply show up, fly & have fun. Yay! BUT,… I had a lot of people ask me to run. I certainly didn’t do it for myself! 😄 Stephen always thought it would just stress me out (and he’s right!), so although he understood why I agreed to do it, he wasn’t exactly begging me to run for his own benefit. If anything, it just causes him more stress seeing me stressed out. 😅

Kathy has been helping with club events for more years than anyone realizes, without ever having been a pilot herself. She makes a great Events Coordinator and I am so glad she decided to take on that responsibility. She didn’t have to, but she loves the club and community. She actually had the same position on this topic as you, but I think she was referring more to preventing instructors from serving on the board (If I’m not mistaken).

Tim, Rob, Dan & others I may not even know about (because I’ve only been aware of AJX’s existence since 2015 and started learning to fly in late 2018)… they all did a great job for many years before any of us even knew what hang gliding or paragliding is. Maybe some mistakes were made along the way, but none of us are perfect. I appreciate them having done so much over the years to keep this club running for decades. Personally I don’t think the club would have benefited if they had been barred from running for the BOD, but I know that we can’t always please everyone at the same time.

Of course I understand that some people might abuse the opportunity, but that is why everyone should be paying attention to what’s going on. We are not a private club where one or two owners get the final say, where the members have little or no say at all. This club belongs to all of us, nobody owns it more than another, and if the majority ignore the red flags, mismanagement and bad things can happen! We could lose this place forever with a few wrong moves. If you love flying, if you love this place and you want to keep flying here for many years to come, then please pay attention to the decisions being made.

————————————-

By the way, you don’t have to be on the BOD to pitch in with the maintenance or events. We would really prefer it if you helped us out, because these tasks can be overwhelming. The club needs money to continue to exist (all kinds of maintenance, mandatory site insurance costs, etc). That means we need everyone to pay their yearly member dues, we need people to help out during fly-in and competitions to raise more money for the club, we need everyone to be polite, welcoming and keep the screaming to a minimum so that this can continue to be a place of leisure (not an insane asylum) and if you have an idea for a clinic, an event, a competition, then please e-mail the BOD and then help us help you make it happen!

[Jerome Daoust]

Keep up the good work Jana.

You are another example of someone related to a school, but doing an overwhelming amount of good for the site.

[Peter Wurr]

Jana. Speaking on behalf of the rank and file (which I typically try to do) I have this to say: You are a shining example of all that is good in people! We are so lucky to have you on the board. You won your seat by an OVERWHELMING majority of the membership. We all love what you do for us. Thank you, kindly.

[Jana Pivkova]

Thank you both for the very nice compliments. 😅 Luckily I’m surrounded by much more knowledgeable people who work hard to make all the good things happen. I credit myself only with the ability to listen to those people and try to make good decisions to the best of my abilities. 🤞

[Alan Coffield]

This may be a novel idea; However, if certain members or the membership in general have an issue with certain prospective or current board members having a “commercial interest” while being on the board, they can vote for someone else, or openly campaign for others not to vote for them.  I take a dim view on being told who I can or can not vote for.  As stated earlier, a rule like this would have prevented Rob McKenzie or a similar person from serving on the board.  That’s No Bueno in my book.

[Author]

Posts