Info on the Candidates for Region 3

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
Post Reply
User avatar
chadness
Posts: 174
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 10:19 am
Location: Simi Valley, CA

Info on the Candidates for Region 3

Post by chadness » Tue Nov 01, 2016 7:40 am

All I see is a write up on Pete Michelmore, who is not running. Anybody have any info or thoughts on Dan DeWeese versus Chris Grantham? Should we all write-in Ken?:)?

Thanks, Chad

User avatar
JD
Posts: 1695
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:05 am

Re: Info on the Candidates for Region 3

Post by JD » Tue Nov 01, 2016 8:22 am

chadness wrote:All I see is a write up on Pete Michelmore, who is not running. Anybody have any info or thoughts on Dan DeWeese versus Chris Grantham? Should we all write-in Ken?:)?

Thanks, Chad
Ken's already an RD.
I voted for Dan DeWeese because he is impartial and does not have a potential conflict of interest by running one major Santa Barbara PG school in direct competition with another major PG school. Dan has been an RD in the recent past and did a good job when there were some critical issues to be dealt with. The long-term outcomes of Dan's decisions were positive to both the region and the various individuals involved. Dan is not heavy handed by any means. I think it's no secret that free-flight pilots need to be treated like independent-minded adults and not children. Dan does an admirable job in this respect.

If Dan wasn't running I wouldn't hesitate to vote for Chris. He's a good guy and very safety minded. But the potential conflict mentioned above gives me pause. Feel free to call or write to both candidates and get their own views. This has been my 2p worth.
DQ

User avatar
Bob Kuczewski
Posts: 601
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:39 am
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Post by Bob Kuczewski » Tue Nov 01, 2016 7:17 pm

I would vote for Dan. Having said that, I'd like to hear from NME what Dan did (or even tried to do) on the board in his first term that wouldn't have been done anyway by an empty seat.

USHPA is run by the EC. Most of the other directors go along for the ride. That doesn't make them bad people, but they can't fix the problems (like the recent loss of insurability) if they don't have a backbone in the board room.

I'd like to believe that Dan looks back with disappointment on his first term, and now realizes that going along to get along at USHPA has brought the association to the brink of extinction. I would like to think that he'll be more aggressive in standing up for what's right.

Only time will tell, but he's a good enough man to deserve another shot at fixing the core problems.
Join a National Hang Gliding Organization: US Hawks at ushawks.org
View my rating at: USHGRS

Post Reply