Dear Board and fellow MLAA members
We have all heard about issues in the transition that did not go as well as they could have .
I would like to tell you something good.
Jean Jenkins brought me a box two days or so after the election. All records she received were in there. Since that time she has given me every assistance I asked for, including a digital copy of the votes at the last election, so that I can help Dave build an accurate data base for future elections.
When I was a store owner with 50 employees, I used to tell my managers that along with corrections, they should make an effort to catch our people doing something right, and acknowledge them. It takes very little effort to find fault. It take just a little more to find and recognize a good effort.
I think its time we apply that to our fellow volunteers on this board, (past and present) and others at our airport.
Thank You to Jean Jenkins. I appreciate your efforts.
Now my challenge to my fellow board members is to go find someone else around our Airport doing something right, and Thank them. Then come share it with the rest of us.
If it is appropriate, I will post it on our airport blog, so anyone interested will know the good things that happen here.
...MARK SHOOK...
Secretary/ MLAA
Friday, May 30, 2008
Sunday, May 18, 2008
REPORT- MLAA Board of Directors Meeting- May 13, 2008
The meeting was called to order at 9:05 pm by senior member Verlin Schauer.
All Directors elected at the May 13, annual meeting of the membership were present, Dave Elliott, Jamie Johnston, Joe Kuberka, Ron Lee, Richard Martin, Verlin Schauer, and Mark Shook
Verlin gave the board an update on the fire protection water tanks the board wants to install on the airport.
The first item of business was the election of officers. Elected were, President = Dave Elliott, Vice President = Joe Kuberka, Secretary = Mark Shook, Assistant Secretary = Jamie Johnston, and Treasurer = Verlin Schauer.
President Dave Elliott asked each board member to come to the next meeting with a list of projects they wanted to work on.
Monthly Board meetings were set for 6pm on the second Tuesday of each month so those association members that work outside the airport area will have the opportunity to attend. Ron Lee suggested the board may need to meet before it's regular June meeting.
Mark Shook then made a motion that the board establish a monthly work session 2 weeks after each regular monthly board meeting for follow-up, accountability for assignments, mutual assistance, and consultation between board members.
Board work sessions were set for the fourth Monday at 10:00am at E/W Systems. (Alternate days when Monday is a holiday.)
It was agreed the secretary would provide an agenda e-mailed to each board member at least 24 hours before each meeting, and post a copy on the airport web site.
There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:25pm.
DRAFT COPY
All Directors elected at the May 13, annual meeting of the membership were present, Dave Elliott, Jamie Johnston, Joe Kuberka, Ron Lee, Richard Martin, Verlin Schauer, and Mark Shook
Verlin gave the board an update on the fire protection water tanks the board wants to install on the airport.
The first item of business was the election of officers. Elected were, President = Dave Elliott, Vice President = Joe Kuberka, Secretary = Mark Shook, Assistant Secretary = Jamie Johnston, and Treasurer = Verlin Schauer.
President Dave Elliott asked each board member to come to the next meeting with a list of projects they wanted to work on.
Monthly Board meetings were set for 6pm on the second Tuesday of each month so those association members that work outside the airport area will have the opportunity to attend. Ron Lee suggested the board may need to meet before it's regular June meeting.
Mark Shook then made a motion that the board establish a monthly work session 2 weeks after each regular monthly board meeting for follow-up, accountability for assignments, mutual assistance, and consultation between board members.
Board work sessions were set for the fourth Monday at 10:00am at E/W Systems. (Alternate days when Monday is a holiday.)
It was agreed the secretary would provide an agenda e-mailed to each board member at least 24 hours before each meeting, and post a copy on the airport web site.
There being no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:25pm.
DRAFT COPY
MLAA Members. What is your opinion ?
MLAA members may give their opinion or comments on any item listed, or any subject they wish.
We prefer you give your name at the end of the comment or post, but you may remain anonymous if you wish.
What do you think about?
The By-Law proposals,
The Board,
The condition of ?,
If you don't want to join, just select anonymous, and then type you name at the end of your comment. To remain anonymous, leave your name off the comment.
Here's your chance to speak out about what interests or concerns you.
We prefer you give your name at the end of the comment or post, but you may remain anonymous if you wish.
What do you think about?
The By-Law proposals,
The Board,
The condition of ?,
If you don't want to join, just select anonymous, and then type you name at the end of your comment. To remain anonymous, leave your name off the comment.
Here's your chance to speak out about what interests or concerns you.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Unintended consequences - RON votes NO
The following are several of the revisions in the proposed MeadowLake Airport Association By-Laws that are not in the best interests of the members and constitute a reason to VOTE NO on 13 May 2008
1). Special Assessments:
a. Proposed by-law: Article VI, Paragraph 2: "In the event that there is a financial need, the Board of Directors may propose a special assessment to the membership, to be approved by a majority vote of the members in good standing."
b. Current by-law: Article IX, Section 2. Major Improvement Assessments: "If assessment of the membership becomes necessary for proposed major improvements not covered by the provisions above and assessment of the membership is required, a seventy-five percent (75%) majority vote of the membership will be required for such assessment."
c. Discussion: The current by-laws require a 75% approval for additional assessments. First we shall assume that this means using the typical wording that 75% is of the "total voting interests of all members in good standing at the time of the vote," Second, for easy numbers understanding, let’s assume that the total voting interest is 100,000 votes.
Under the current by-laws, a special assessment would have to get 75,000 YES votes.
But the proposed by-laws LOWERS that number significantly to 50,001 Yes votes. That is a reduction of 33%.
A worse case interpretation of the proposed change would be that you only need a quorum of votes (50,001) then a majority of those which would be 25,001 YES votes. So instead of the current 75,000 YES votes, one or two people could control the board and impose large assessments on everyone with as little as 25,001 votes which is two-thirds lower than today.
There is a lurking interpretation problem with the proposed change which could be "approved" by a cooperative lawyer and that could mean a majority of whatever votes are returned. That could drop the number of YES votes required to force a huge assessment from 75,000 votes to something below 20,000 YES votes (exact value is unknown).
Any of these scenarios, whether the 50,001 votes, 25,001 votes or lower than 25,001 votes is unacceptable and in and of itself is a reason to vote NO on the Board approved by-laws changes.
2. Mail Ballots:
a. Proposed By-Law, Article III, Paragraph 8: Any action that may be taken at any annual, regular or special meeting may be taken without a meeting if the Association delivers by first class mail a written ballot to every member entitled to vote on the matter. (see article for additional text).
b. Current by-law: Article XIV, Section 1. (c) page 12: "No ballot issues under this article (By-laws...ed) shall be determined by mail-in ballots."
c. Discussion: While the current by-law text was referring to by laws changes, in multiple places throughout the current by laws a quorum (50%) of the voting interest must be at the meeting. Example: Article III, Section 5 (Quorum), Article III, Section 11 (3) on Annexation, Article XIV, Section 1. (c) (By-Laws).
At least one Director was unaware of this mail-in provision until I pointed it out to them. If the Directors are unaware of everything and its implication on a document like this, it is doubtful that most members will take the time needed to review and understand the document or issue.
In addition, the Board failed to point out major changes such as discussed here, calling them a "clarification."
Matters affecting the membership such as these by-laws changes, airport improvements and assessments need to be discussed in an open forum. A mail-in ballot prevents this discussion and in and of itself is a reason to fully reject the proposed by law changes until problem areas are corrected.
RON LEE
1). Special Assessments:
a. Proposed by-law: Article VI, Paragraph 2: "In the event that there is a financial need, the Board of Directors may propose a special assessment to the membership, to be approved by a majority vote of the members in good standing."
b. Current by-law: Article IX, Section 2. Major Improvement Assessments: "If assessment of the membership becomes necessary for proposed major improvements not covered by the provisions above and assessment of the membership is required, a seventy-five percent (75%) majority vote of the membership will be required for such assessment."
c. Discussion: The current by-laws require a 75% approval for additional assessments. First we shall assume that this means using the typical wording that 75% is of the "total voting interests of all members in good standing at the time of the vote," Second, for easy numbers understanding, let’s assume that the total voting interest is 100,000 votes.
Under the current by-laws, a special assessment would have to get 75,000 YES votes.
But the proposed by-laws LOWERS that number significantly to 50,001 Yes votes. That is a reduction of 33%.
A worse case interpretation of the proposed change would be that you only need a quorum of votes (50,001) then a majority of those which would be 25,001 YES votes. So instead of the current 75,000 YES votes, one or two people could control the board and impose large assessments on everyone with as little as 25,001 votes which is two-thirds lower than today.
There is a lurking interpretation problem with the proposed change which could be "approved" by a cooperative lawyer and that could mean a majority of whatever votes are returned. That could drop the number of YES votes required to force a huge assessment from 75,000 votes to something below 20,000 YES votes (exact value is unknown).
Any of these scenarios, whether the 50,001 votes, 25,001 votes or lower than 25,001 votes is unacceptable and in and of itself is a reason to vote NO on the Board approved by-laws changes.
2. Mail Ballots:
a. Proposed By-Law, Article III, Paragraph 8: Any action that may be taken at any annual, regular or special meeting may be taken without a meeting if the Association delivers by first class mail a written ballot to every member entitled to vote on the matter. (see article for additional text).
b. Current by-law: Article XIV, Section 1. (c) page 12: "No ballot issues under this article (By-laws...ed) shall be determined by mail-in ballots."
c. Discussion: While the current by-law text was referring to by laws changes, in multiple places throughout the current by laws a quorum (50%) of the voting interest must be at the meeting. Example: Article III, Section 5 (Quorum), Article III, Section 11 (3) on Annexation, Article XIV, Section 1. (c) (By-Laws).
At least one Director was unaware of this mail-in provision until I pointed it out to them. If the Directors are unaware of everything and its implication on a document like this, it is doubtful that most members will take the time needed to review and understand the document or issue.
In addition, the Board failed to point out major changes such as discussed here, calling them a "clarification."
Matters affecting the membership such as these by-laws changes, airport improvements and assessments need to be discussed in an open forum. A mail-in ballot prevents this discussion and in and of itself is a reason to fully reject the proposed by law changes until problem areas are corrected.
RON LEE
Friday, May 9, 2008
Vote NO on the Omnibus "All or Nothing" By-Law re-write.
The MLAA annual meeting is next Tuesday, May13th.
This year instead of business as usual, I have joined with a wide variety of association members and candidates to promote a new era of cooperation and progress at MLAA. We have listed some goals and promises called a "Contract with Meadow Lake" previously mailed to you. (A copy is posted below. )
For those planning to attend the MLAA meeting, and vote in person, I ask for your support.
I also ask for a NO vote to the Omnibus by-law revision.
It has several "deal breaker " provisions.
Among them are a new provision to allow changing the by-laws by mail in ballot. This is in contrast to a prohibition from doing exactly that in our current by-laws. Many things look good "on paper", but by attending and hearing a discussion of fellow members, you find the "unintended consequences" that prevents a decision we live to regret. Our current Article XIV was designed to require a consensus of a 2/3 majority of all members, before a change was made. It was a compromise to the prior 90% of the total membership requirement. Yes the bar is high, but it should be.
Contained in our by-laws are protections for the membership, including minority protections. Under our current rules, the by-laws have been successfully amended several times. But never without compromise and consensus.
There are several other changes that various members have mentioned including the removal of cumulative voting allowing a small group (like executive hangars) to pool their votes and vote all for one candidate.
Many have complained about the all or nothing design of the proposal, forcing unwanted changes, to get "good idea "changes.
That’s why you will be offered a chance to vote individually on some "good idea" changes individually, after you vote NO on the Omnibus wholesale revision. (Alternative By-law proposals also posted below )
__________________________
Mark S. Shook
This year instead of business as usual, I have joined with a wide variety of association members and candidates to promote a new era of cooperation and progress at MLAA. We have listed some goals and promises called a "Contract with Meadow Lake" previously mailed to you. (A copy is posted below. )
For those planning to attend the MLAA meeting, and vote in person, I ask for your support.
I also ask for a NO vote to the Omnibus by-law revision.
It has several "deal breaker " provisions.
Among them are a new provision to allow changing the by-laws by mail in ballot. This is in contrast to a prohibition from doing exactly that in our current by-laws. Many things look good "on paper", but by attending and hearing a discussion of fellow members, you find the "unintended consequences" that prevents a decision we live to regret. Our current Article XIV was designed to require a consensus of a 2/3 majority of all members, before a change was made. It was a compromise to the prior 90% of the total membership requirement. Yes the bar is high, but it should be.
Contained in our by-laws are protections for the membership, including minority protections. Under our current rules, the by-laws have been successfully amended several times. But never without compromise and consensus.
There are several other changes that various members have mentioned including the removal of cumulative voting allowing a small group (like executive hangars) to pool their votes and vote all for one candidate.
Many have complained about the all or nothing design of the proposal, forcing unwanted changes, to get "good idea "changes.
That’s why you will be offered a chance to vote individually on some "good idea" changes individually, after you vote NO on the Omnibus wholesale revision. (Alternative By-law proposals also posted below )
__________________________
Mark S. Shook
Thursday, May 8, 2008
In memory of Benjamin F. Kelly
Ben Kelly passed away in the morning hours of May 8th.
Ben founded KELLY Airpark in Elbert CO., just north of the Black Forest.
Ben served multiple terms on the Meadow Lake Airport Board of Directors in the 1980's, and was a founding member of EAA Chapter 72.
Services TBA
Ben founded KELLY Airpark in Elbert CO., just north of the Black Forest.
Ben served multiple terms on the Meadow Lake Airport Board of Directors in the 1980's, and was a founding member of EAA Chapter 72.
Services TBA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)