Petition to Leave BoB K alone and let him serve out his term

If your topic lands here, you either put it here yourself or one of the moderators thought it likely too polarizing a subject to stay in the General Discussion area

Should BoB K serve out his term????

Yes---should serve out his term
17
65%
Yes--- Should serve out his term (with conditions)
1
4%
No---should leave on his own
5
19%
No---we should hold special election and vote him out
3
12%
 
Total votes: 26

enoonmai
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:12 pm

Post by enoonmai » Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:20 pm

Yada, yada, yada... lucky for you the host don't charge by the word. You got so much time on your hands why don't you get something done instead of just talking about how everyone ain't on your side?

User avatar
Bob Kuczewski
Posts: 600
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:39 am
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Yada yada?

Post by Bob Kuczewski » Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:49 am

Old Fart wrote:Yada, yada, yada... lucky for you the host don't charge by the word. You got so much time on your hands why don't you get something done instead of just talking about how everyone ain't on your side?
Old Fart (whoever you are),

I've posed 4 changes when I opened this topic:

1. Accountability Amendment
2. Open EC Meetings
3. Balanced Soaring Council
4. Due Process at Torrey

Those 4 things are my current "projects" as Regional Director. If I could snap my fingers and have them done, then they'd be done. Actually, these are such non-controversial items that it should be just that easy.

The reason these things haven't been done, is there are people in power who oppose these simple changes because they're not in their own best interests (or their perceived best interests). And so they put up a big fight to resist them.

Now Bill Helliwell appears to want to have me recalled. Fine. That's his right. Heck, I might just resign and give it to him. But first I want to know where he stands on those issues, and maybe a few more. Do you have a problem with that?

User avatar
dhmartens
Posts: 859
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:36 am
Location: Reseda

Post by dhmartens » Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:50 am

Definition : vote of confidence - an expression of approval and encouragement; "they gave the chairman a vote of confidence"
encouragement - the expression of approval and support

www.voteofconfidencebobk.com (not a valid site)

Its possible if a vote of confidence is held (formerly known as a recall election), Bob could receive double , triple or 10 times the support he got in his first election. Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts just pulled an upset based on many of the transparency issues Bob espouses.

User avatar
Bob Kuczewski
Posts: 600
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:39 am
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Post by Bob Kuczewski » Fri Jan 22, 2010 10:11 am

dhmartens wrote:Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts just pulled an upset based on many of the transparency issues Bob espouses.
Good observation!!

It turns out that the things I'm asking for are actually very hard to argue against:

1. Accountability Amendment - let members know how their Directors vote
2. Open EC Meetings - let Directors know what the EC is doing
3. Balanced Soaring Council - equal representation for all sports
4. Due Process at Torrey - fairness for people being kicked out

Who could really attack any of those items? So rather than attack the message, they go after the messenger.

And to be fair, I'm probably an easy target. I come out and state my case without any sugar coating. If I find someone "telling an untruth", then I'm not afraid to call it a lie. If I find them doing it intentionally, then I'm not afraid to call them a liar.

But more than anything else, I'm focused on actual issues. It's not about "me" or "them". It's about what's right and what's wrong. If Bill Helliwell wants to do what's right and he can do it with more grace and charm than me, then I might resign for him to take over. But if Bill wants to do what's wrong, then I'm going to fight him every step of the way. It's as simple as that.

So the first step is trying to figure out exactly where Bill stands on these issues. So far, his reluctance to make any statements is not encouraging.

enoonmai
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:12 pm

Post by enoonmai » Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:54 pm

And I repeat

Yada, yada, yada... lucky for you the host don't charge by the word. You got so much time on your hands why don't you get something done instead of just talking about how everyone ain't on your side?

jcflies
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:32 am

Post by jcflies » Fri Jan 22, 2010 4:14 pm

you'd think that by the time someone is old enough to be an old fart, they'd have the personal courage and integrity to represent themselves without being cowardly and hiding behind a meaningless photo and no name.

be who you really are.
janyce

"You HAVE to make it..."

TomS
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:26 pm

Post by TomS » Fri Jan 22, 2010 4:43 pm

Who cares who it is ? This whole thread is ridiculous.

User avatar
JD
Posts: 1696
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:05 am

Post by JD » Fri Jan 22, 2010 5:09 pm

jcflies wrote:you'd think that by the time someone is old enough to be an old fart, they'd have the personal courage and integrity to represent themselves without being cowardly and hiding behind a meaningless photo and no name...........
I think the likely author has been sucking too much Oxy-Propane mix
Image Image

OSCAR
Posts: 489
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:47 pm
Location: LONG BEACH,CA
Contact:

Post by OSCAR » Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:21 pm

TomS wrote:Who cares who it is ? This whole thread is ridiculous.
Your right Tom ,the Nae Sayers can't even get enough votes to recall Bob.ridiculous indeed.It's tough to recall someone who really hasn't done anything but look out for our best interests .I for one am glad somebody is .Keep up the good work Bob.Image

abinder
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:19 pm
Location: El Segundo & Sylmar

Post by abinder » Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:56 pm

jcflies wrote:you'd think that by the time someone is old enough to be an old fart, they'd have the personal courage and integrity to represent themselves without being cowardly and hiding behind a meaningless photo and no name.

be who you really are.
Wouldn't surprise me if "old fart" is "barton".


Allen

jcflies
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:32 am

Post by jcflies » Sat Jan 23, 2010 6:54 am

sorry, not fair to barton. he has NO problem standing behind what he says. he doesn't hide, and he's far too serious about what he believes to belittle it with a lame photo like that. (he'd find one that was actually funny!) and tom might be right. this is getting kind of ugly and ridiculous. how can we, the lucky participants in the most spectacular sport known to man, be divided and fighting?

let's get out there and fly in the snow!

and thanks to EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE, who is out there putting their time, effort, and energy into preserving our precious flying sites!

FIN
janyce

"You HAVE to make it..."

User avatar
Bob Kuczewski
Posts: 600
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:39 am
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Post by Bob Kuczewski » Sat Jan 23, 2010 11:21 am

jcflies wrote:sorry, not fair to barton. he has NO problem standing behind what he says. he doesn't hide, and he's far too serious about what he believes to belittle it with a lame photo like that.
I agree with you. I don't think it does us any good to try to guess who these anonymous posters are. We've seen them on hanggliding.org and many other sites. They're mostly from a core group of really hateful pilots (mostly PG pilots) from Torrey who hate me because I challenged Jebb and won. They're the ones behind this effort, and they stoop to all kinds of low and despicable tactics (like anonymous postings trying to divide a community).

While I disagree with Barton on the issues, there's no need for us to attack each other personally, and I appreciate you stepping in to defend him Janyce. Sylmar is lucky to have both of you.

Sincerely,
Bob Kuczewski
Regional Director - USHPA Region 3

User avatar
Bob Kuczewski
Posts: 600
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:39 am
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Looking Ahead

Post by Bob Kuczewski » Sat Jan 23, 2010 11:42 am

I don't know if this recall effort is actually going to get anywhere, but it's a good idea to look one or two steps ahead. So I sent the following message to Mark Forbes who chairs the USHPA Elections Committee:
On January 20th, 2010, Bob Kuczewski wrote:Mark Forbes (cc public forums and others),

As Chairman of the Elections Committee, could you please offer your definitive answer to the following question:

If I am recalled from my Directorship, would I then be able to run in a recall election against Brad Hall immediately afterward?

Please include any references to our bylaws or SOPs. I have done some checking myself, but I'd like your expert opinion.

Thanks in advance,
Bob Kuczewski
I haven't heard back from Mark yet.

Earlier today, I also inquired about the official status of the recall:
On January 23, 2010, Bob Kuczewski wrote:Lisa Tate (copy to members of the Board and others),

I have attached SOP 02-09 below concerning USHPA's Regional Director
Recall Procedure. Paragraph 9.01A states that recall requests must go to the President who shall then notify the affected Director within 15 days. I have heard that there is a recall effort underway to remove me as Regional Director. I have also heard that signatures are already being collected. Yet I have not been notified as required by this SOP.

I therefore formally request to know if such a recall request has been made to you as USHPA President, and the date of that request.

Sincerely,
Bob Kuczewski
Regional Director - USHPA Region 3

=================================================
Regional Director Recall Procedure
Standard Operating Procedure 02-09
Last Amended October 2008

Introduction

The Bylaws provide for the recall of an elected Regional Director by the members of a region. This SOP defines the procedure to be used in this event.

9.01 Request for Recall Vote

A. Any current voting member may present a request to the USHPA President (or, in the event that the President is the Director subject to the proposed recall, then to the Vice-President) for the purpose of initiating a recall of an elected Regional Director in their region (hereinafter, a "petition"). The person who presents the request is referred to as the "petitioner." The USHPA President (or Vice-President) so petitioned, shall notify the petitioner and the affected Regional Director of this procedure within 15 days and shall monitor the recall process for compliance with this SOP.

9.02 Required Sponsor Signatures

B. Within 90 days of initiating a recall petition, the petitioner shall submit to the Executive Committee of the USHPA, the signatures of current members representing at least ten percent of the members of the region, as of the date of submission of the signatures, indicating that those members (hereinafter "sponsoring members") support a recall election.

C. Each signature page shall clearly state that the petition seeks a recall election to replace the sitting Regional Director.

D. Each sponsoring member shall provide their signature, name, membership number, current phone number and the date on which they signed the petition. Sponsoring members must be current members of USHPA both at the time of signing the petition and at the time the signatures are presented to the USHPA President.

E. Any petitioner who fails to present the required number of sponsoring members' signatures within the period outlined in 9.02A may not submit another recall petition for that Regional Director within one year of the submission of the original petition.

9.03 Recall Election

A. Upon the receipt by the Executive Committee of the USHPA of the required number of valid signatures of sponsoring members as required in Section 9.02, the Executive Committee of the USHPA shall set a special election for the limited purpose of recalling the affected Director and appointing a replacement within 90 days of the receipt by the Executive Committee of the required number of valid signatures.

B. A recall election shall proceed as follows:

1. The USHPA office will print and mail a call for nominations to all members in the affected region.

2. Only members residing in the affected region may nominate. A member may not nominate more than one person. The incumbent Director subject to recall is not automatically nominated, but may be nominated for the recall ballot.

3. Only members residing in the affected region may be nominated.

4. Nominations close 30 days after the date of the mailing of the call for nominations.

5. The USHPA will print and distribute candidate statements of up to one single sided 8.5x11 page per candidate for candidates nominated before the close of nominations. Candidates' statements must be received by the USHPA office before the close of nominations.

6. Timely received Candidate statements will be printed along with the recall ballot and mailed by the USHPA office to all members of the region within 15 days after the close of nominations. Original (not duplicated or facsimile) Ballots must be received by the USHPA office by close of business within 30 days of initial mailing by the USHPA office (hereinafter "the Special Election Date"). Ballots not received by the Special Election Date will not be counted.

7. The recall ballot shall contain two questions.

a. "Should <Regional> be removed from office?" (YES/NO/ABSTAIN)

b. "If removed from office, which one of the following candidates should fill the vacant position?" (MARK ONLY ONE CHOICE. YOUR VOTE FOR CHOICE OF REPLACEMENT CANDIDATE WILL NOT COUNT IF YOU MARK MORE THAN ONE.)

c. [List of candidate names, including space for write-in candidate and the choice "ABSTAIN"]

8. The responses to the two questions on the ballot shall be counted independently. If a ballot indicates more than one choice in response to the second question, the response to question number one will still be counted, but the response to the second question will not.

9. The USHPA Executive Committee shall serve as the inspectors of the election.

C. If a majority of voters favor removal of the incumbent Director, then a plurality of votes cast shall determine which candidate shall serve out the remaining term of the position.

D. If the number of ballots returned does not meet the quorum requirement of the Bylaws, then the recall election is invalid and the incumbent Director retains the position.

E. Within 10 days of the Special Election Date, the inspectors of the election shall validate and count the ballots. Write-in candidates that are not members of the region will not be counted as valid.

F. When the count is complete, the results will be announced in the magazine and on the USHPA website.

G. To the extent that this SOP is in conflict with the Bylaws or the Articles of Incorporation of the USHPA, the Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation govern.

enoonmai
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:12 pm

Post by enoonmai » Sun Jan 24, 2010 9:14 am

Hold your horses, BK, the mail hasn't got to the president yet, when he knows, you know and I think you should start a recall of all directors that don't agree with you as a matter of fairness, dont pick on just one. This message is short so BK won't have to spill on to page3.

User avatar
dhmartens
Posts: 859
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:36 am
Location: Reseda

Post by dhmartens » Sun Jan 24, 2010 10:33 am

Actually enoonmai,

We may see at the next general election a large change in directors. Same with the US Congress. The internet is opening peoples eyes. Democracy values all votes, except in the case of the US Senate where Idaho and California have 2 Senators each yet by population California should have 40 Senators.

http://abolishthesenate.org/

sorry to hijack the thread.

Doug

User avatar
Bob Kuczewski
Posts: 600
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:39 am
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Hindsight is 20/20 ...

Post by Bob Kuczewski » Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:20 pm

Hindsight is 20/20

This topic was started over 7 years ago. Bill Helliwell won that election in the spring of 2010. I spent the following year (2011) in Florida. The Torrey concessionaire had no oversight and they did as they pleased. Shannon Hamby was injured under their "instruction" in the summer of 2011. I testified in the case in 2014, and it was settled in Shannon's favor in early 2015. USHPA lost their insurance shortly afterward and expelled me in retaliation. In 2016, Ken Andrews (USHPA's Region 3 Director) refused to renew the Torrey Hawks Chapter as further retaliation.

You may remember my platform in the 2010 recall election:
1. Accountability Amendment 
2. Open EC Meetings 
3. Balanced Soaring Council 
4. Due Process at Torrey 
In this forum (and others) I challenged Bill Helliwell to debate those issues:
1. Bill, would you support some form of the "Accountability Amendment"? 

2. Bill, would you work to open up the EC meetings to all Directors? 

3. Bill, would you work to balance the Torrey Pines Soaring Council by adding the Torrey Hawks?

4. Bill, as you may know, David Beardslee was kicked out of Torrey Pines for life, and I was kicked out for a year. Neither David Beardslee or myself were given a written reason for those suspensions and neither of us were given any due process or recourse. The SDHGPA refused to represent either of our interests and refused to bring it up at the Soaring Council - while you were on the board of the SDHGPA. What would you do to correct that in the future?
Bill Helliwell responded:
Bill Helliwell wrote:If you want to debate, join a debate club.
If you want to fly join USHPA.
Bill dodged all discussions of all real issues. He was your typical evasive politician.

Bill won in the spring of 2010.
Shannon was injured at Torrey in 2011.
USHPA became uninsurable in 2015.

Hindsight is indeed 20/20.
Join a National Hang Gliding Organization: US Hawks at ushawks.org
View my rating at: USHGRS

Post Reply