Here’s how I understand it (and please correct me if I’m wrong):

The pond was created for the purpose of irrigating the LZ grass. This was solely made possible by Len and Owen, when years ago they generously purchased the XC ranch property with their own money for no other reason (that I know of) than to keep it out of the hands of developers. This ensured that the club would have clear landing access to the LZ. They had the financial means and they did a beautiful thing for the club.

Naturally they could not incur this cost without the club’s assistance, so the club agreed to pay a certain monthly dollar amount to the XC Ranch to make it sustainable for all. The club benefitted via this land purchase in a few ways, Len and Owen would slowly be recouped by the club over time, and every pilot who flies and lands at AJX wins.

After years of hard work and many club member volunteers, the irrigation pond became what it is today, a great place to relax, take a swim, etc. Club members were allowed to enjoy the pond at their leisure and they did! We had parties, we had club member family gatherings up there, it was the best place to cool off before, or after flying when the heat got out of hand in the summer. Most club members knew it was there and some used it.

Now let’s examine the reason we are no longer able to enjoy this place without direct supervision from Len, Owen and/or perhaps Jamie; I was told that a year or two ago a pilot’s dog nearly drowned a small child in the pond. This probably sent shivers down Owen and Len’s spines, thinking of the liability if something had happened to that child. They had to rethink some things. An insurance policy, a fence around the pond, or supervised pond access only. There may have been other incidents of which I am not aware that led to this.

If you have a pool at your private residence or property, I think you can probably understand the fear of your neighbors coming into that pool without your supervision while you’re not home. If something bad happens, someone gets hurt or drowns, there could be repercussions for you. Same idea with this pond. We’re allowed to hike through, we get to enjoy it during the few supervised pond parties, but unfettered access to it is no longer possible due to the huge liability until further notice.

Now that Len has generously donated the XC ranch to the free flight community by creating a non-profit organization called the Len Szafaryn Free Flight Conservancy (a.k.a. LSFFC), the XC ranch and pond land are safe from developers for many years to come, still there to be enjoyed by all club members under direct supervision. He has also agreed to lower the monthly cost to the club as a result, and has already done so. Now the club gets to keep more of its money for maintenance and savings, which is great news for all.

If you are not familiar with Len’s announcement of the XC ranch donation and creation of the LSFFC, here is his post:LSFFC Announcement

I am led to believe that Dan fixed it and has access to the controls. We (the board) don’t have the login or password info.

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. 🤞

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!

That was Wyatt & the Kooks I believe!

Stephen and I also ran into a new local man by the name of John, who was perfecting some of the weed whacking. Friendly fellow who seemed interested in all the flying.

How about a sign elaborating more on what is expected when you bring your pet and has been in our site guidelines for years? We shouldn’t bend the rules for the very few that do bring pets.

Pets must be on leash and supervised at all times. Pet owners will be responsible for any damage the pet may cause.

Pets are permitted only in the parking lot or on the patio. Pets are not permitted in the landing zone.

 

It is somewhat difficult to enforce many of the rules at the LZ all the time, unless we have a 24/7 security guard policing the area.

1.) We can’t be there 24/7 to see everything that happens at the LZ, which is why we have to rely on our members who are present when these things happen, to say something and then bother reporting it to us.

2.) Since most people don’t want to be confrontational and we’re all just volunteer pilots trying to have fun and to keep this place going as best as we can, unless there’s a real concern coming from multiple sources, we try to handle these things privately.

CSS boards in the past have tried to address the issue of pets at the LZ. Solutions were suggested, but never implemented. Many responsible members (local or visiting) own dogs and either choose, or must bring them along. They should certainly never be left unattended. If you can’t have eyes on your pet at all times, that pet should not be there, or at the very least should be placed in a crate with water and food if necessary.

If/when any of these pets become a repetitive nuisance, we have a chat with the owners. As stated above, we’ve never had more complaints about a specific dog than we did about Max and Sonny (and the horses). The owner was warned multiple times. When that didn’t work, the warning was set in writing. When that didn’t work, the ban was put in place. Should we punish everyone, including the responsible ones, due to the repeated failures of one? We’re trying to do our best under the circumstances. If that’s not good enough, then please consider helping any way you can.

A sign would be nice like we had in the past so people who don’t bring their dogs don’t have to police those who do.

There is already a sign at the LZ stating that dogs must be supervised & picked up after by owner. Next time you’re at the LZ, look at the two framed posters on the wall and read rule #8.

If only people took the time to read signs and follow rules. Maybe then people would actually pay for a membership, wear their helmets when kiting/flying, land at the appropriate time, adhere to the appropriate landing pattern, and stop smoking whatever they’re smoking at the LZ.

Well, it’s been 8 months since Gene was banned from being on the CSS LZ , in part due to claims of his dogs roaming freely and crapping on the LZ and bothering pilots and spectators. Neither Max nor Sonny are anywhere near AJX now, yet large dogs are walking unleashed, and yesterday I barely missed some dogsh*t while packing my wing. Can we either enforce the rules for everyone, or drop the stupidly pointless and hypocritical ban ?

If you see a particular dog defecating in the LZ and the pet’s owner doesn’t pick up after their dog, please e-mail one or more of the board members to let them know what you saw and when you saw it. We will then take the time to speak to that person about the issue and urge them not to let it happen again.

If the owner is found to ignore our warnings, they will also be asked not to bring their dog back. If they bring the same dog back after multiple warnings, they will also be banned from entering the LZ. Thus far we have not received any official, multiple complaints about anyone specifically, other than Gene. In Gene’s case, it wasn’t just about the dogs, it was also about the horses roaming free, posing a risk to pilots landing, and multiple nice and friendly warnings gone completely disregarded.

Also keep in mind that we have stray dogs (dropped off in the hills by irresponsible owners) and coyotes coming around, hunting gophers. They defecate on the grass as well, so if you didn’t actually see a dog defecting, there is a small possibility that it may not have been a pet at all.

In Gene’s case, multiple people on multiple occasions contacted the board privately to complain about specifically his dogs urinating on their gliders and equipment. In one case, one of his dogs urinated on the reclining chair while I was sitting in it. If I hadn’t said anything to Gene, he would have never noticed and never taken the time to clean the chair. If the dog had been supervised, or on a leash, that could have been avoided. This happened just before the ban, and perhaps during the “warning” period.

I don’t know about now, but in the past Max never even had a collar where a leash could be attached. He had to be dragged away by the skin on his neck, so that he could be returned to Gene. He’s a huge dog and if he doesn’t want to cooperate, there’s not much you can do about it without a collar and leash.

When Gene was asked to control his dog, his rebuttal was that the dog couldn’t read the rules. This is true, but you are the owner of that dog and therefore responsible to either train, or restrain him from doing what he shouldn’t be doing. A collar and leash are basic tools to accomplish exactly that.