Memebership vote?

[orvie6]

I have read somewhere in these forums that the current administration (Rod and perhaps others) were never formally 'elected' to those positions.. Am I correct in this? If so, what, if anything, can the general membership do in regards to this? It would seem to me that ANY serious 'proposals of change' be documented, and made available to the general membership for a 'vote of acceptance' before being put into place.. Did the membership vote to have the Chalets erected? Do the EAA members have a say in the location of a new shower facility? Surely, I feel the mass majority of our membership should have some say in the 'progress' and 'improvement' of the EAA.. There has been a lot said about how the EAA is going too commercial and the grass roots membership is put to the side in favor of 'MORE MONEY'!... Im sure that there is a way to allow the membership a voice where it counts.. Perhaps on any given proposal, it is first sent to the membership by email, where it is read and voted on by the membership.. ONLY current EAA membership can vote, and only one vote per member..Record the members EAA # when vote cast for security perposes.... I think that would eleminate a select few from making decisions that effect the entire EAA community.. Just a suggestion..I may be off base here, but sounds like a plan to me..

[Kyle Boatright]

The simplified version.

The members can either show up at Oshkosh to cast their votes for Class 1 directors, or (typically) give their proxies to a small group of current directors and managers. This year, there was an independant proxy collection process. At the annual convention, an election is held for the Class 1 director openings, where the votes (in-person or via proxy) are cast. The directors then select the officers (Hightower, for instance) to carry out the day to day business of the organization. Theoretically, the organization's direction is set by the directors. It is up to the President and other employees to follow the direction set by the directors.

So, like our government, it is a representative democracy where (generally) members don't get to vote on anything directly, but instead, elect people to act on their behalf.

Having a thumbs up or thumbs down member vote on every issue isn't practical (because nothing would ever get done) but it is important to elect directors whose priorities match with those of the members.

[orvie6]

OK..but are people really away of the 'proxy'?... seems like it is sorta impossible for enough membership to 'show up at Oshkosh to cast thier votes...' and most just select the 'proxy' as a 'convienence'..which if I am not mistaken gives the 'system' a YES vote because the members are not physically there to vote otherwise!! Sort of like saying that if you dont vote either way..the administration uses that as a PLUS vote for thier cause... Just like the government... Still say the membership should have some say as to who is the director..I didnt 'vote' for Hightower...did you?

[FlyingRon]

This is the second time some this has been tried to my knowledge. Jim Wier (the "d" is silent) tried to rally proxies over the old usenet rec. aviation groups for a run at the directors, but really, the bulk of the proxies go to the current board. It's largely symbolic (sort of like is run for Governor of California).

[Jeff Point]

Under the current system, the board selects the president (as they should) but the president in turn decides who sits on the board via the proxy system. It is a system that allows for almost no accountability of the board to the membership, and that is precisely what we are trying to change. A small group of us engaged in a last minute, poorly organized effort to collect alternate proxies at Oshkosh, giving the proxy vote to one of our members rather than to the default proxy holders. In a week at Oshkosh we collected about 460 proxies, not nearly enough to force any change, but we clearly got their attention. Over the next year we will continue the effort to collect proxies for the 2013 elections, while at the same time lobbying the current board to change the bylaws to adopt a direct election system. If I as a member feel that a member of the board is not representing me well, I should be able to vote against that person in a meaningful way, and the current system does not allow for that.

There are many hundreds of individual gripes about EAA, it's leadership, etc., but this movement is not about any of those gripes. Rather, it is about ensuring a level of accountability to the board of directors of this membership organization.

Our effort is called Members4members. You can read more about this effort on our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/members4members/