EAA Direction (split from website feedback thread)

[JerryCPP]

What do you like about EAA.org and why? It is a great sounding board and advocate for homebuilt airplanes.

What would you change about EAA.org and why? More and more the EAA seems to be gravitating toward the $200,000 so-called homebuilts. EAA was formed for those of us who can't afford that kind of airplane. Please return to EAA's roots. The monied types have their own organizations and groups. Keep It Simple.

[steveinindy]

What would you change about EAA.org and why? More and more the EAA seems to be gravitating toward the $200,000 so-called homebuilts.

Not this crap again. As soon as Paul backs down from his "There's room enough for us all" stance then maybe there might be some grounds for your argument but as it stands, the reason EAA seems to be "gravitating towards" those sorts of airplanes is because that is what most people are building (RVs, Lancairs, etc). If you look at the numbers, not as many of us are building Pietenpols or other classics from the days when the EAA was Paul and his buddies hanging out at his house. Times change and organizations adapt or they because stagnant and wither on the vine.

Statement of interests: I am designing a $200,000+ aircraft that I'm going to build so I guess I'm not really a homebuilder because my design is too expensive. The good news is that my LSA design is more in line with the "those of us who can't afford that kind of airplane." In fact, I'll be selling the plans for that to fund my real project.

[Kyle Boatright]

What do you like about EAA.org and why? It is a great sounding board and advocate for homebuilt airplanes.

What would you change about EAA.org and why? More and more the EAA seems to be gravitating toward the $200,000 so-called homebuilts. EAA was formed for those of us who can't afford that kind of airplane. Please return to EAA's roots. The monied types have their own organizations and groups. Keep It Simple.

Hmm, I disagree with the highlited premise.

IMO, EAA is gravitating towards being a vaguely defined aviation organization ("An airshow with a magazine"). The homebuilt, warbird, and antique focus is way down. That focus has been replaced with content built around columnists and certified aircraft.

[steveinindy]

Do we really need another thread about how some of us have our panties in a knot? If you're not happy with the "direction" of the EAA, keep your money don't go to Oshkosh and maybe see how successful you are in starting your own group yearning for the "good ol' days" before Van and Lance Neiubauer ruined things.

[martymayes]

If you look at the numbers, not as many of us are building Pietenpols or other classics from the days when the EAA was Paul and his buddies hanging out at his house.

I'd be interested in seeing "the numbers" from which you are making this claim....

[Kyle Boatright]

Do we really need another thread about how some of us have our panties in a knot? If you're not happy with the "direction" of the EAA, keep your money don't go to Oshkosh and maybe see how successful you are in starting your own group yearning for the "good ol' days" before Van and Lance Neiubauer ruined things.

If you have something more interesting to talk about, start a thread. Nobody is forcing you to read this one.

[steveinindy]

If you have something more interesting to talk about, start a thread. Nobody is forcing you to read this one.

I'm just making the point that this is about the fourth thread since the new forums were put up about the same thing and nothing constructive has come out of any of them. They tend to be the same five or six people griping with no meaningful suggestions about how to improve things other than firing Mac and "returning to the roots of the EAA" (whatever the hell that means). There's room enough in the organization for those of us who want fast airplanes, those of us who want ultralights and those of us who want to relive our childhood fantasies of Cubs and other older aircraft. If someone can't except that, as you say, no one is forcing them to post on this forum, attend Oshkosh or give money to an organization that doesn't meet their expectations. Your admonition that I should more or less mind my own business cuts both ways Kyle. If you want to bash an organization I happen to think is doing quite well in keeping our ability to build planes a viable option and is moving to support the average builder rather than the wishes of a few traditionalists who just like to hear themselves whine, I'm most certainly going to stand up and vociferiously defend the Association. The EAA is my organization as much as it is yours and as my grandmother always taught me, "If you don't have a solution that actually solves the problem without creating bigger ones, then it's usually best to shut the hell up."


I'd be interested in seeing "the numbers" from which you are making this claim....

It's pretty frequently claimed that RVs are the most commonly constructed homebuilt these days with about 7500 of them built so far (Sport Aviation: 15. January 2012 et cetera). Someone without an agenda would generally look at that as a good indicator that the market has shifted.

[Mike M]

IMO, EAA is gravitating towards being a vaguely defined aviation organization ("An airshow with a magazine").

concur. example?

EAA Sport Aviation - March 2011

the cover story was covered better in the june 2006 issue of Kitplanes.

[steveinindy]

What was the topic just out of curiosity?

Regardless, I always argue- as a freelance writer myself- that if someone thinks they can do better, they should start writing. You'd be amazed at how receptive the publishing staff for Sport Aviation are to member-contributed articles about homebuilding topics. This is speaking from recent (within the past two weeks; Chad Jensen can vouch for this) experience. Basically, I was told to put more information pertinent to the average homebuilder into an article where I had tried to keep the discussion light and simple to avoid oversaturating the article with too much with regards to technical matters I was writing about. My experience (admittedly n=1) seems to indicate that a lot of folks who are griping about stuff are basing their opinions on hearsay and assumption rather than on direct experience.

I've had my work published (or about to be published) in three magazines, one newspaper and four peer-reviewed journals. Out of all of them, the experience I have had with Sport Aviation has been the best outside of the one magazine where I'm a conference drinking buddy of the editor. I'm not saying you have to like Mac or the rest of the folks, but I am saying that unless you honestly put the effort into trying to work with them things are unlikely to get better. That old adage about "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" comes to mind. If the EAA falters and fails because we all can't learn to play nice with each other and stop letting disagreements over such things as our preferred types of aircraft and the content of a magazine splinter us into factions that make a kindergarten turf war not look petty by comparison, then the "adversaries" (to use the impression a lot of folks have; my own opinion is different at least with regards to the FAA) we really should be worrying about- namely the FAA and Congress- will do some real damage and none of us will get to build an aircraft whether it's a Fly Baby or a $500,000 people mover. Either we stand together as brothers (and sisters) or we figuratively die as isolated fools with regards to that issue.

[Jeff Point]

I'm just making the point that this is about the fourth thread since the new forums were put up about the same thing and nothing constructive has come out of any of them.

And who is the most prominent poster in all of those unproductive threads?

Those of us who take issue with EAA's direction are not going to take our ball and go home, we are going to work to try to change things. One of the ways that we do that is to use forums like this to persuade others to see things the way we do. That's what this forum is for. Feel free to do the same, but kindly refrain from referring to our opinions as "crap."

[steveinindy]

And who is the most prominent poster in all of those unproductive threads?

Someone needs to provide a counterpoint and Chad and Hal have better things to do that run around trying to quell arguments that probably won't fully go away for at least another 20 or so years and only then through simple attrition.


Those of us who take issue with EAA's direction are not going to take our ball and go home, we are going to work to try to change things.

I don't want that. But lambasting the organization for adapting to change (such as following the transition of a large swath of the builders from rag and tube to metal and composite) or featuring expensive aircraft in their magazines (unless they are warbirds....that's an exception that I don't understand precisely since few if any of us will ever own a warbird such as a P-51). However, I do think that the blaming Mac for all that ills Sport Aviation (when the real problem is a lack of contributions from builders and designers) or misguided attempts to slam a significant part of the homebuilding community are not getting us anywhere. How about hearing some actual suggestions that might be productive and supportive to the folks who are feeling left out but aren't destructive or offensive to those of us who aren't seeing why people are getting so irritated?


Feel free to do the same, but kindly refrain from referring to our opinions as "crap."

The "crap" is just this attitude that if you're building something high performance or expensive, that it's counter to the "spirit of experimental aviation" as though it is synonymous with "slow" and "cheap". That's what I cite as crap and warn about as being divisive.

[martymayes]

If the EAA falters and fails because we all can't learn to play nice with each other and stop letting disagreements over such things as our preferred types of aircraft and the content of a magazine splinter us into factions that make a kindergarten turf war not look petty by comparison, then the "adversaries" (to use the impression a lot of folks have; my own opinion is different at least with regards to the FAA) we really should be worrying about- namely the FAA and Congress- will do some real damage and none of us will get to build an aircraft whether it's a Fly Baby or a $500,000 people mover. Either we stand together as brothers (and sisters) or we figuratively die as isolated fools with regards to that issue.


steveinindy, you are quite the alarmist...lol

[steveinindy]

steveinindy, you are quite the alarmist...lol

Not really...

[martymayes]

It's pretty frequently claimed that RVs are the most commonly constructed homebuilt these days with about 7500 of them built so far (Sport Aviation: 15. January 2012 et cetera). Someone without an agenda would generally look at that as a good indicator that the market has shifted.

If one is not considered a builder until their project is complete, I might be inclined to agree. However, I don't think one can accurately infer that number of completions represents what kind of aircraft are being constructed. It's an apples to oranges comparison.

A 1999 paper published by Attorney Robert C. Owens summarized data from a study that indicated there were four completed kit-built aircraft for every one completed plans built aircraft. The overall completion rate for kit-built aircraft is >60% where the completion rate for plans built aircraft is ~5%.

From your information source I think we can infer that 1) Van's aircraft/kits are very popular and 2) A good kit greatly improves the builder's odds of finishing his project.

While while you do your best to minimize the efforts of those building low, slow, wooden, steel tube and fabric airplanes, they are out there. Construction progress for those builders is likely measured in years, not weeks or months. The aircraft they are working on may never be completed but the builders are just as much a builder as the guy that assembles an RV kit.

[Zack Baughman]

Just a friendly reminder to play nice folks. Everybody is entitled to his/her opinion AND is welcome to share it here, as long as you remember to keep it clean and not go about bashing folks for having a different viewpoint than your own.

Zack ;)

[steveinindy]

While while you do your best to minimize the efforts of those building low, slow, wooden, steel tube and fabric airplanes, they are out there. Construction progress for those builders is likely measured in years, not weeks or months. The aircraft they are working on may never be completed but the builders are just as much a builder as the guy that assembles an RV kit.

I'm not trying to minimize anything. You need to remember that I have more hours in ultralights than I do anything else at this point so I'm not exactly against the low and slow group (I just feel that it doesn't serve my purposes at this point in my life which is no different than someone choosing a Fly Baby over a Pietenpol or a Lancair over a RV-7). I am simply relying on upon the best evidence available that isn't a decade old although that study is interesting. If you have something more recent, I would love to see it but the most reliable data we have is those aircraft that are completed and registered since that is easily tracked. Perhaps a formal survey of EAA members is in order to settle this?


The aircraft they are working on may never be completed but the builders are just as much a builder as the guy that assembles an RV kit.

I agree wholeheartedly. I'm a builder in my book even though I have yet to buck a rivet or do any composite work. I'll even give you a ride in the LSA I designed once I get it built to prove the point. The plans for it will be getting sold to help fund the build of the Goshawk, which is the medium sized homebuilt that meets my current desires.


Everybody is entitled to his/her opinion AND is welcome to share it here, as long as you remember to keep it clean and not go about bashing folks for having a different viewpoint than your own.

Sorry Zack. I don't mean to cause controversy.

[Frank Giger]

I suspect the EAA direction is with all turns to the left (apart from the 45 degree right turn onto the downwind), unless otherwise directed by the A/FD.

[Chad Jensen]

I suspect the EAA direction is with all turns to the left (apart from the 45 degree right turn onto the downwind), unless otherwise directed by the A/FD.
This brought me a chuckle this morning Frank! :D

[steveinindy]

I suspect the EAA direction is with all turns to the left (apart from the 45 degree right turn onto the downwind), unless otherwise directed by the A/FD.

....such as when flying at Anniston, right Frank? ;)

[Frank Giger]

Absolutely! That ridge refuses to yield to aircraft regardless of traffic requests.

[Rod Hightower]

As a 24 year EAA member, I have enjoyed tremendous dialogue with fellow members through the years on a wide range of topics from the AirVenture airshow content, the aviation economy and even to key aviation issues of the day. But throughout that time, there have been two topics that seem to remain constant. One is "AirVenture has become too commercialized". the second is "EAA has forgoten the E". Many of you know that Paul and I work closely together and communicate frequently. And Paul himself will tell you he has been hearing the same two "complaints" since the early days. He will also tell you that he has learned more about people over the years than he has learned about airplanes. Which is one of the reasons that Paul has always believed that EAA welcomes aviators and enthusiasts of all types and interests. At EAA we still believe that, and probably always will.

Trying to fracture and divide members by seeking support for your particular position on a topic never strengthens an organization, it can only harm it. So I offer two questions for some to think about. First - If you love the organization, why would you try to harm it? Second - What is your plan for the solution to your issue?

Finally, I'll even offer a suggestion on how you may more effectively "change things". Perhaps you should gather a group of those that share your viewpoint as passionately as yourself, draft a letter to me, our senior leadership team, or even our board of directors, that outlines your key issues and prescribes a plan to solve those issues. You are always welcome to Oshkosh to present that plan, and I'll make sure that the entire senior leadership team is present. Or, we can come to your location, either way works for us.

Thank you for being part of the world's most dynamic aviation organization. An organization that grows participation in aviation by inspiring people to fly, build, restore, volunteer and outreach. And one that welcomes all who have a love of aviation.

Rod Hightower

[Bill Berson]

I joined EAA about 38 years ago, but have recently dropped my membership. My comments on this and other forums were meant to strengthen EAA, not harm. First you say that dividing members to seek support for a particular position is harmful to EAA and in the next paragraph suggest that we do just that by forming a group. :confused:

My suggestions were carefully crafted and submitted on this forum to Chad and everyone. I feel the situation is hopeless because EAA does not let members vote on anything. As mentioned, Paul has had this growth policy since the early days, why would anything change now?
Why should I form a group? The effort is likely to be ignored, since Paul has total control of EAA.
As President of EAA, this is your primary job. (to define EAA's direction)

good luck,
Bill Berson

[Bob Meder]

Rod -

To your point, I have to agree, but I would like to broaden it somewhat. It's not just EAA, but all of general aviation needs to pull together. This would include all of the alphabet groups; EAA, along with AOPA, NAFI, SAFE, Women With Wings, etc., etc. It saddens me to see people denigrate one group or another in aviation, when there truly is room for all.

As I don't have any good statistics for this, I can only talk about the issue on a personal level. I get just as excited at seeing a friend's Stearman take flight for the first time in four years after a major restoration (as I did this past weekend) as I do at seeing another friend's Lancair come together, finding another friend's Voisen Bomber replica at Oshkosh, as I do watching a 747/P-51/Connie/Cessna/Piper/Beech/RV-anything/Glasair/you-name-it take off or land. In particular, my own greatest satisfaction is seeing a pilot, at any level, in any aircraft, whether it's my student or another instructor's, pass a check ride.

The notion that there are "factions" of any kind in aviation pains me. I commute between two cities (in the back of 737's) and hang out and instruct at several airports in both of these locales. There seems to be a general divide between the home-builders and the certified aircraft pilots; and each airport's community likes to talk about "those guys" at the airport across town. Does it really have to be this way?

I don't know the answers. I wish I did. I do know that we are a dwindling community and that we had better think, hard and fast, about how we can support each other before we lose something magical that we have in this country.

[steveinindy]

Does it really have to be this way?

Sadly, given human psychology, probably. People have a natural tendency to think their "stuff" doesn't stink as much as a member of another "group". One of my friends used to say that 99% of murders, wars, genocides, fistfights, racist beliefs, family feuds and other negative aspects of society arise from one or more parties involved in each of those taking themselves way, way too seriously given the circumstances.

[Jeff Point]

Rod,

Welcome to the forums, glad to have you aboard. It’s good to see that more of the senior leadership folks are participating in this forum. Allow me to address a couple of your points that I disagree with.


Trying to fracture and divide members by seeking support for your particular position on a topic never strengthens an organization, it can only harm it. So I offer two questions for some to think about. First - If you love the organization, why would you try to harm it?

I do not accept this premise. Just because some of us believe that, as you say, the E in EAA is being de-emphasized, does not mean that we are trying to fracture and divide. Quite the contrary, a little intra-agency competition can be good for an organization. As an example, a few years ago the Antique/ Classic folks undertook to build some new facilities for their group, and by doing so (in spectacular fashion) they increased the visibility and presence of their group, at the same time “raising the bar” for the other groups. At least partially in response to this, the Warbird group has made some excellent improvements to their area. It is not exactly a tit-for-tat, but this sort of competition between groups in an organization (if handled properly) can be good for the organization. We as the homebuilders have watched this go on for a few years, and have some plans of our own to improve our facilities, but more about that in a moment.

EAA has recently come out with a new mission statement, to “grow participation in aviation.” I will submit to you that no single segment of EAA has done more to grow that participation than the homebuilders. True, big, expensive and exciting airplanes like the Dreamliner, Concorde, and Harrier are what tend to draw the general public to our airshow. Pilots and pilot wannabees (not meant as a derogatory term) like to drool over P-51s and Staggerwings, and this is what draws many of them to the show, and this has driven the emphasis on Warbirds and A/C over the years, leading to the creation of separate divisions for these groups. However, while many EAAers are Warbird or Antique enthusiasts, the fact is that most of these aircraft are beyond the reach of most EAA members. Homebuilts, on the other hand, represent an attainable dream. The average EAA member has the means, should they put their mind to it, to build and fly a homebuilt in whatever form. Homebuilts represent the straightest bridge between the dream of flight and the realistic goal of flight.

Well over 30,000 homebuilts have been completed and flown. We know that these airplanes tend to fly more hours per year than the average privately owned Cessna or Cherokee. This results in a lot of gas sales for FBOs, participation in local fly-ins, and Young Eagles being flown. The large number of homebuilts have given rise to businesses and entire industries to support them, and these firms turn around and buy full page adds in Sport Aviation, which is read by members who are potential homebuilders, thus perpetuating the cycle. In the same way that the velocity of money results in a dollar circulating around the economy many times, the completion of a single homebuilt aircraft has a ripple effect on all of aviation. In this way, we the homebuilders are really driving participation in aviation, and I will put this record up against any of the other EAA divisions. If EAA is serious about growing participation in aviation, then they should do what they can to encourage homebuilding.

To address the second part of your challenge:


Second - What is your plan for the solution to your issue?

You suggest that we form a group and present a written plan to you. Such a group already exists, and such a plan has been created. The Homebuilt Aircraft Council was created to represent the interests of the homebuilders to the management, given that we do not have our own EAA division. This group is staffed with some enthusiastic, talented, passionate members. For the last couple of years the council has worked hard at developing plans to improve both the facilities and the activities in the homebuilt area on the convention grounds. Our area is frankly an embarrassment and has become even more so as the other areas have made improvements. I’m fortunate to serve on the site planning committee which has spent the last two years developing a comprehensive plan to make big improvements to the physical facilities on the grounds; aircraft parking and camping, amenities like food, shower and restrooms, aircraft displays, commercial exhibits and homebuilding- centered activities like the workshops. We have identified funding sources for some of our plans and are working on others.

Our goal is to raise the level of the physical facilities in the homebuilt area to the world class level of other areas of the grounds, not only to improve the lot of the existing homebuilders, but to make it more inviting and appealing to the potential homebuilders, the “dreamers” who come to the show every year. A survey some years back identified about a third of EAA members as homebuilders, and another 10-15% who would like to become homebuilders, and it is this 10-15% that we need to reach out to and embrace. Added together, homebuilders and wannabees approach 50% of the membership, and a much higher % of “core” members.

This plan has been presented to the leadership team and the board of directors. It seems that, for a number of reasons, the brakes have been applied to most of the ideas that we put forth. In your post you challenged us to come up with a plan and present it. My response is that we have already done this, and my challenge back to you is to help us implement the plan as it was presented, or to work with us to identify ways to tweak the plan to make it workable. There are real, identifiable needs in the homebuilt area of the grounds, particularly in the areas of aircraft parking and camping and our plan addresses these.

[Chad Jensen]

I joined EAA about 38 years ago, but have recently dropped my membership. My comments on this and other forums were meant to strengthen EAA, not harm. First you say that dividing members to seek support for a particular position is harmful to EAA and in the next paragraph suggest that we do just that by forming a group. :confused:

My suggestions were carefully crafted and submitted on this forum to Chad and everyone. I feel the situation is hopeless because EAA does not let members vote on anything. As mentioned, Paul has had this growth policy since the early days, why would anything change now?
Why should I form a group? The effort is likely to be ignored, since Paul has total control of EAA.
As President of EAA, this is your primary job. (to define EAA's direction)

good luck,
Bill Berson
Bill,

I think you've missed Rod's point in the forming of a group. He isn't talking about division of members here. He has asked that a group of like-minded folks within EAA to come together to form a letter of resolution to your key issues and offer suggestions and solutions to him. That isn't to say he is suggesting factions within the membership.

[cluttonfred]

I generally agree with the opinion that EAA is moving, perhaps irretrievably, from being a grassroots aviation organization to being, as someone put it so well, "an airshow with a magazine." What is EAA doing to promote aviation in schools? When is the last time EAA sponsored a design contest or released plans in installments in the magazine? What about EAA scholarships for flight training?

Anecdotes and personal impressions aside, I can't think of a more objective source of data on the state of U.S. light aviation than checking the FAA registry. If you go here http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/ and click on "Recent Registrations" and sort by date you can see the new entries in the FAA database, both new aircraft (factory and amateur built) and re-registrations of older aircraft. SPORT AVIATION, the magazine, and EAA generally should reflect the balance you see there. If 90% of the sport-type aircraft are delta wing trikes, then that should be the focus. If 90% are turboprop Lancair IVPs, then so be it. Going through just the first 100 on the list, putting aside the business aircraft and airliners, you will still find quite a variety of aircraft of interest to the various EAA communities. Here are a few that jump out at me:

Maule M-5 (an older bushplane)
Aeromot AMT-200 Super Ximango (motorglider registered to a Sherrif's Department)
RANS S-9 (homebuilt aerobat)
Air Creation ARV Tanarg (delta-wing trike)
Vans RV-7A (of course)
Quicksilver Sport II (still going)
American Champion 8KCAB (a classic)
Quad City Challenger II (another tried and true ultralight all grown up)
Albatros DVA-1 (NZ-made replica for Kermit Weeks)
Stits SA-7D (how's that for a classic homebuilt?)
Piper PA-12 (a ragwing Piper is always good)
Grumman AA-5A (a Cheetah with the Jime Bede connection)
Powrachute Airwolf 912US (powered parachute)
RANS S-12 (high wing pusher kitplane)
Helicycle (homebuilt single-seat helicopter)
Sonex (John Monnett has left his mark)
and plenty of older Cessnas, Pipers, etc.

That's just a snapshot, one day, but a magazine and an association with that kind of diversity would be just fine with me. Imagine the above spread among a couple issues as the table of contents? IMHO, that's what sport aviation is really all about.

Cheers,

Matthew

[Bill Berson]

Bill,

I think you've missed Rod's point in the forming of a group. He isn't talking about division of members here. He has asked that a group of like-minded folks within EAA to come together to form a letter of resolution to your key issues and offer suggestions and solutions to him. That isn't to say he is suggesting factions within the membership.

As a non-member at this time, I don't see how I can contribute within EAA.
But if I get an Airventure 2012 weekly pass in the mail soon, I will offer to serve on an EAA/SportAviation Direction forum panel. Maybe even be the moderator if you want.

I like Airventure, and attended the past three years, but had no plans to go this year.

My complaints are strictly the content of Sport Aviation. (and a bit of EAA's advocacy with the FAA rules)

Bill Berson
172 Haada Laas rd
Port Townsend WA 98368

[cluttonfred]

I should add that I am still an EAA member and have no immediate plans to change that, though I am concerned that I am seeing less and less of the principles and practices that really attracted me in the first place. I have recently joined another organization that has kept its focus on lighter and less expensive aircraft and especially on plans-built aircraft. Here, for comparison with SPORT AVIATION and as food for thought, is a link to recent covers and tables of contents of LIGHT AVIATION (http://www.lightaircraftassociation.co.uk/magazine_archive.html), the magazine of Britain's Light Aviation Association (LAA, ex-PFA). Now if I can only get them to stop putting those extra letters in the words. ;-)

[Bill Berson]

As a 24 year EAA member, I have enjoyed tremendous dialogue with fellow members through the years on a wide range of topics from the AirVenture airshow content, the aviation economy and even to key aviation issues of the day. But throughout that time, there have been two topics that seem to remain constant. One is "AirVenture has become too commercialized". the second is "EAA has forgoten the E". Many of you know that Paul and I work closely together and communicate frequently. And Paul himself will tell you he has been hearing the same two "complaints" since the early days. He will also tell you that he has learned more about people over the years than he has learned about airplanes. Which is one of the reasons that Paul has always believed that EAA welcomes aviators and enthusiasts of all types and interests. At EAA we still believe that, and probably always will.

Trying to fracture and divide members by seeking support for your particular position on a topic never strengthens an organization, it can only harm it. So I offer two questions for some to think about. First - If you love the organization, why would you try to harm it? Second - What is your plan for the solution to your issue?

Finally, I'll even offer a suggestion on how you may more effectively "change things". Perhaps you should gather a group of those that share your viewpoint as passionately as yourself, draft a letter to me, our senior leadership team, or even our board of directors, that outlines your key issues and prescribes a plan to solve those issues. You are always welcome to Oshkosh to present that plan, and I'll make sure that the entire senior leadership team is present. Or, we can come to your location, either way works for us.

Thank you for being part of the world's most dynamic aviation organization. An organization that grows participation in aviation by inspiring people to fly, build, restore, volunteer and outreach. And one that welcomes all who have a love of aviation.

Rod Hightower

I am back from Arlington 2012, where I presented a tent forum about building, designing and flying motorgliders and other affordable options. A few minutes were spent at the forum collecting comments about EAA's direction. Also, I interviewed EAA types everywhere on the grounds. Some members and former members.

The consensus seems to be EAA has headed in the wrong direction, especially the content of Sport Aviation (not much sport content, mostly GA).
Several people said Kitplanes was better. One guy said Sport Aviation is high quality (I agree) but had mostly the wrong content, too much like AOPA.

I don't understand why Rod Hightower is not getting this message directly from members he meets. Perhaps members are afraid to speak in person. I know that I was afraid to approach Tom a few years back and offer my thoughts directly, when I saw him standing near me at OSH. What Tom did to grow Airventure and EAA was truly amazing and expressing some criticism is hard to do.

But the idea that continued growth of EAA (by absorbing AOPA types) will promote growth in the aviation population, should be reconsidered. It is the lack of growth of private aviation in general, and especially affordable personal aviation that concerns me, not so much the future of EAA itself.

I did not gather a group, as suggested by Rod, but I will continue to gather thoughts and opinions.

[martymayes]

Keep us posted Bill.

[sleddriver]

I recently received this email. It is going around our chapter and really gaining support:

Hi Everyone,

If many of you follow =VAF=, you're probably aware that there is a campaign within the EAA Membership community to participate in the upcoming election of the EAA Board of Directors. We figured that instead of just complaining, we should actually participate in the democratic elections.

This simple idea led to more than 1 month of stone walling from the EAA. Still to this day, they have not provided a simple document that allows their members to participate in the election. So we copied their language that assigns the proxy rights to Rod Hightower and changed the name on it to reflect me. The EAA has admitted that this is a document that they can't turn down at the elections in a few weeks.

In the past there were 3 choices for EAA members to participate in the election:

1) They could choose not to participate.
2) They could show up in person to cast their vote at the annual business meeting.
3) They could assign their vote to Rod Hightower. (This is a check box on your annual renewal)

Long story short, the elections would look like 13 votes for some members and 16,000 votes for those that Hightower wanted. So they ended up being appointments and not elections by the members.

I am receiving proxy forms from all over the globe and if you are frustrated with the EAA, I would appreciate it if you would do that same thing. The form can be found at this link.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26343935/EAA%20Member%20Proxy%20Statement.pdf (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26343935/EAA%20Member%20Proxy%20Statement.pdf)

You can send me a scanned copy or the original to:

Phillip W. Perry
C/O David Carr
1100 W Monroe St
Austin, TX 78704

Here are the votes we will be placing and the justification for selecting them:

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showpost.php?p=678549&postcount=68 (http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showpost.php?p=678549&postcount=68)

Today the EAA retaliated against their members and sent out a link asking them to assign proxy votes to Rod Hightower. Please don't give total control of EAA to the current membership and choose to put control of the EAA back in the hands of the membership. Here's some details on that message:

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=679285 (http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=679285)

Please don't assign your proxy to the EAA Leadership, and if you feel compelled I would be honored to carry your proxy vote forward at the business meeting at AirVenture. This is the first time (that I'm aware of) in the history of EAA that the members have found a way to legitimately participate.

We need to get this word out to everyone who supports the effort ASAP. So if you agree, please highlight this proxy effort and share the message on every message board you can before some unknowing soul gives his vote to Rod Hightower and his buddies.

We are going to be continuing this effort going into 2013 too and can use your support and even you active participation.

Thanks,
Phil Perry

RV-10 #40750
EAA Lifetime Member

The Van's Airforce Website pulled down the threads in questions after some pressure from someone claiming they were too political. Giving Mr. Perry our proxies won't make a difference at this point compared to the number at Mr. Hightowers disposal, but will make a strong statement regarding the direction of the EAA. Hopeless causes CAN be worthwhile!

[RV8505]

This was also on the RV web site.

My name is Rick Beebe and I'm a current Board member. I've been on the board since 2006. I'm a member of Chapter 27 in Meriden, Connecticut and I've been the newsletter editor for the past 12 years. I am not a homebuilder--I don't have time--but I have helped others. I will be in the market for an RV6 or 7 as soon as I sell my Cherokee. I don't need four seats any more and want more speed!

I've read this entire thread and there are some asked but answered questions and some mis-information that I'd like to clear up. I'm not speaking officially for the board, of course but as an EAA member.

Board nomination is easy. The process is detailed in the January issue of Sport Aviation every year. Basically you need a petition with 10 signatures of current EAA members. You must be an EAA member. You send it with a bio and your photo to the nominating committee.

Despite his name on the proxy, Rod does NOT determine who the proxy votes are cast for. The other two names, Louis and Eric are elected board members (chairman and treasurer). All of the candidates are discussed at a closed board meeting held during AirVenture week and the board as a whole decides who to cast the votes for. If you show up with more proxies than the board holds you will get to elect whichever 5 candidates you want. There is no provision for write-in votes so you'll need to get your candidate(s) nominated next January. I believe (but I'm also not a lawyer) that the proxy posted earlier should be fine. Some of us on the board ARE trying to get the proxy process changed to allow you to write your vote on your proxy. Sort of a write-in ballot.

Someone guessed correctly: we believe the decline in the number of proxies is directly related to on-line renewals and the autopilot (automatic renewal) program.

Just being an enthusiastic EAA member, however, should not be why you elect someone. The Board's primary job is to generally offer guidance and approve management's overall strategy for the organization and to make sure that it is being run in a fiscally responsible way. If you don't know how to read financial documents, please learn before you nominate yourself. The board does not (and should not) get to dictate details of how Rod does his job. Also, be prepared to travel to Oshkosh at least 3 times a year and to participate in 3 or 4 other teleconferences--usually of 2 hours each.

Regarding the previous CEO search. I was one of the people who voted against hiring Pete Bunce and I comfortably stand behind that decision. He's a great guy and does a wonderful job with GAMA but I firmly believe he was not the right man for our job. Frankly the directors who resigned over it had their own agenda and it did not align well with EAA. Contrary to what someone posted, EAA did not spend $400,000 on these two searches. The real number was less than $200,000. I'm also happy with Rod as President. Yes, he's a successful businessman. Why would we entrust our organization to someone who didn't know how to run a business? But he's also one of us. His two planes are a T-6 and a Stearman that he restored from a pile of rusted tubes.

The economic crisis of 2008 affected EAA as much as the rest of the country. One of the specific tasks that the Board directed at Rod was to bring costs inline with revenue. That is not an easy, or popular, task but one that he has done well. There is not, as some have intimated, a huge profit motive here. As a 501(c)(3), EAA cannot really make a profit. There are no sharedholders getting paid and the Board is all volunteer. It needs to make enough money to cover its expenses, create new programs, and sustain itself in times of trouble. In years past (prior to 2007) EAA was in serious debt. I'm happy to say that for the most part we have remained debt free since then (two exceptions--we use short-term debt to some extent prior to AirVenture and the $10 million IRB that we're using to improve the grounds) in large part to the board insisting on a balanced budget and instituting a rolling five-year plan.

We also, of course, expected Rod to be a leader and a visionary. His six areas of focus for EAA were published in the March 2012 issue of Sport Aviation. There was an internal reorganization to help align the organization with those goals. People don't like change so it's not unusual that some have left.

Making EAA another AOPA is not one of the goals although I encourage greater cooperation between the two groups. The threats to flying from Washington are real and dangerous and the more voices the better. EAA has always had a strong advocacy presence in Washington but have not been very good about telling the members about it. That's something the board has been asking for which is why you see more articles in SA about what EAA has been doing. It's an important member benefit that was too invisible before.

If you read the annual report you'll note that AirVenture accounts for approximately 1/3 of the EAAs $35 million budget. So it is important to EAA. I was on the committee that was responsible for the site improvements and a CONSTANT message from us was that improvements we made to generate more income should be paying for improvements that the members see. Like the rebuilt/new shower buildings and flush toilets. Also that things put in place for benefit of our corporate sponsors should not be in-the-face of the average member. That said, management does not need board approval for everything they do. But I can assure you those chalets WILL be a topic of discussion at the next board meeting.

There is not a grand conspiracy to abandon the homebuilders. Many of the board members are or have been homebuilders and not forgetting the organization's roots is important. However our member surveys show that only one-third of members are homebuilders and it is important that we also pay attention to the other two-thirds. EAA started as a homebuilding organization because that (and restoration) was the easiest way for someone to get into flying inexpensively. All aspects of recreational flying is really what the EAA's core mission is about.

The board membership is not a secret. It used to be listed under the 'Members Only' section of the web site. It does seem to have disappeared. They have been struggling with the website, though, so I'm sure it's inadvertent. I will ask to have it put back.

I hope that's cleared up some of the mystery. Phil I encourage you to show up with your proxies and I encourage all members who are at AirVenture to come to the annual member meeting on Saturday morning. It's a rare year when there are more than 50 people there (and most of those are families of people running for the board). At the very least you'll get to meet the members of the board. We're generally all there.

That said, I will say that I did not see in this thread an answer to the question of what, specifically, you're trying to change. Or why I, as a member, would want to assign my proxy to you. It's irrelevant to me as I will be there in person, but if you expect to collect 15,000 proxies next year, you're going to need a solid advertising message.

--Rick




lordryck


View Public Profile (http://www.vansairforce.com/community/member.php?u=16114)


Send a private message to lordryck (http://www.vansairforce.com/community/private.php?do=newpm&u=16114)


Visit lordryck's homepage! (http://www.eaa27.org/)


Find all posts by lordryck (http://www.vansairforce.com/community/search.php?do=finduser&u=16114)







#173 (http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showpost.php?p=679865&postcount=173)
file:///C:/Users/William/AppData/Local/Temp/post_old.gif Yesterday, 11:36 PM

[Junius]

I've read this entire thread and there are some asked but answered questions and some mis-information that I'd like to clear up. I'm not speaking officially for the board, of course but as an EAA member.

Thanks for participating. It is good to see a Board member involved.


Frankly the directors who resigned over it had their own agenda and it did not align well with EAA.

Maybe some of them, but I consider myself a friend of Mike Dale and believe you have just made an unwarranted slur on his character and motivations.


Why would we entrust our organization to someone who didn't know how to run a business?

A more pertinent question would be "why would we entrust our organization with no experience of running a serious non-profit, mission-driven business?"


a Stearman that he restored from a pile of rusted tubes.

You do know that a checkbook and Kent McMakin at Brodhead were involved in the story ?!


People don't like change so it's not unusual that some have left.

I'm interested to know what you would consider a normal number of departures, from a staff of less than 200.

Is the Board adequately informed, with unfiltered information, of what's actually happening? The word is out that Rod refused to provide the Board with a list of employees that left, and that departures can't be mentioned any more in the staff newsletter.


I can assure you those chalets WILL be a topic of discussion at the next board meeting.

Again, I appreciate your willingness to participate in the discussion. The apparent lack of Board transparency over the proxy questions has been quite shocking to the average member. It really helps to have some dialogue, even if we don't agree. I do respect your position on these issues.

[RV8505]

I just cut and past from the Van's web site. I am not on the board.

[sleddriver]

It's too bad the VAF guys didn't have the stones to leave the threads up.

[RV8505]

It's too bad the VAF guys didn't have the stones to leave the threads up.

I disagree, I found their methods were somewhat tactical. There really wasn't any common defined goals or objectives other than seeking proxy forms from members. Maybe the cause was nobil but they need to be more strategic if they want to affect change. Personaly, I think you should be a lifetime member or a member over 20 years to participate in the direction of the EAA.

[Flyfalcons]

Leaving threads with disagreements or opinions contrary to the site owner's up is not really VAF's style.

[FlyingRon]

Jim Weir tried to collect proxies on the internet one year, but there just isn't any way that an independent operation is going to garner enough to counter the ones blindly signed over to the board.

[Kyle Boatright]

I disagree, I found their methods were somewhat tactical. There really wasn't any common defined goals or objectives other than seeking proxy forms from members. Maybe the cause was nobil but they need to be more strategic if they want to affect change. Personaly, I think you should be a lifetime member or a member over 20 years to participate in the direction of the EAA.

I'm one of the posters in the deleted VAF thread. One of the things the open discussion allowed was for people to go back and forth and develop some common goals and ideas. If there are 1,000 pilots in the room, there are 1,000 individual goals. It appeared that things were moving towards some straightforward objectives for this year and subsequent years. I think losing those threads is a real loss to the effort to build concensus around how much input members should have with the EAA.

I do respect the site owner's choice in removing the threads, but I also wish they had simply been locked, not removed. We could have at least looked back at the threads and built on the best ideas .

[Jeff Point]

Personaly, I think you should be a lifetime member or a member over 20 years to participate in the direction of the EAA.

To each their own. Personally, I think if one is going to offer controversial statements on a forum, one should post one's real name.

[RV8505]

To each their own. Personally, I think if one is going to offer controversial statements on a forum, one should post one's real name.

On another note, since you volunteer in aircraft parking, live in the local area, and as you have stated repeatedly being somewhat dissatisfied with the direction of the EAA, do you have any knowledge of or could you shed some light on the rumor that some rogue members are planning a aircraft parking protest / slow down during Oshkosh. If so what is the exact point of that and why Jeff?

[mnewb1]

I would certainly hope that is nothing but a rumor...as I would expect such an action would create a backup while Many planes are trying to land at the same airport in a short amount of time... dangerous situation.

[Fred Stadler]

From the text comments attributed to Rick Beebe:


The board membership is not a secret. It used to be listed under the 'Members Only' section of the web site. It does seem to have disappeared. They have been struggling with the website, though, so I'm sure it's inadvertent. I will ask to have it put back.


The full EAA Board of Directors continues to be listed, along with biographical information for most, at http://members.eaa.org/home/eaa_board.html

[Jeff Point]

do you have any knowledge of or could you shed some light on the rumor that some rogue members are planning a aircraft parking protest / slow down during Oshkosh. If so what is the exact point of that and why Jeff?

That is a legitimate question, and one that I have been asked more than once in the last week or so, and I think it's an important one (even if you phrased it in a baiting way) so I'll tell you what I know. To my knowledge (and frankly I would have heard) there is absolutely no plans by the parking volunteers to conduct any sort of slowdown, work stoppage, strike or whatever you want to call it. My area is Homebuilts, I cannot speak for N40, Warbirds or Antique/ Classic, however I have friends in these areas and if something was afoot, I think I would have heard.

I'll also state this publicly- if there were such an action planned, I would be very much against it and would do what I could to prevent it. Yes, there is a lot of dissatisfaction with the current leadership and the direction they are taking us. However there are right ways and wrong ways to express this dissatisfaction, and damaging the convention and hurting individual members through a work stoppage is not the right way.

[Floatsflyer]

Personaly, I think you should be a lifetime member or a member over 20 years to participate in the direction of the EAA.

Sorry, not the best qualifications for determining BOD selection. Anyone with $900.00+ can become a lifetime member and 20 years membership is arbitrary and not at all significant for performing accountabilities of a BOD.

BOD's are carefully selected and vetted by any current organization CEO( NFP, publicly traded or private) to support the vision, agenda and direction of that CEO. Given the current structure of EAA and its voting procedures and qualifications, what is the opportunity to be a dissenting voice? The voting structure/covenants within EAA's constitution needs to be ammended first and foremost before membership can affect desired change with respect to BOD selection. Good Luck!

[RV8505]

Sorry, not the best qualifications for determining BOD selection. Anyone with $900.00+ can become a lifetime member and 20 years membership is arbitrary and not at all significant for performing accountabilities of a BOD.

BOD's are carefully selected and vetted by any current organization CEO( NFP, publicly traded or private) to support the vision, agenda and direction of that CEO. Given the current structure of EAA and its voting procedures and qualifications, what is the opportunity to be a dissenting voice? The voting structure/covenants within EAA's constitution needs to be ammended first and foremost before membership can affect desired change with respect to BOD selection. Good Luck!


It is significant! Think about it. What I'm talking about is vested interest. The thing is with that $900.00, twenty years membership, points for volunteering or a combination there of, you have a vested interest in the direction of the organization. In essence it taps the core vales of the EAA. As it is now, a non flying resident of Oshkosh that buys a membership to attend the airshow and has very little interest in the EAA has the same voting rights as you. There are many more of them then us. I believe it would be much easier to administer and make organizational changes with a dedicated core of EAA members.

[FloridaJohn]

There really wasn't any common defined goals or objectives other than seeking proxy forms from members.
I disagree with that statement.

The purpose started out as simply an idea to elect people to the board that were thought to better represent the homebuilder community. Nothing wrong with that, just some members exercising their rights in a membership organization. The initial idea was to (as a group) figure out who they wanted to vote for.

Then someone wondered exactly what the mechanism would be for a group of like-minded people to cast a group of votes. The obvious answer seemed to be via proxy. After all, that's how the current EAA leadership gets to cast votes for people who are unable to attend the annual meeting.

Since there were rumors that the last time this had been tried all the proxies were rejected by EAA because they did not conform to the proper standard, someone thought the group should ask EAA for a blank "blessed" proxy form so that there was some assurance that the collected proxies would be counted. That led to an entire month of time passing, with no one from EAA seemingly able to approve or locate a simple form. First, the EAA lawyer was required, then the EAA Executive Committee was required, and in the end, that still did not produce a form from EAA that was "pre-accepted." Finally, in frustration, the members who were interested in casting votes just copied the existing proxy that assign the voting rights to the EAA leadership and changed the appropriate fields. This got some tacit approval from EAA, but there was still no definitive statement that these would be accepted as legal proxies.

At this point, the "movement" adjusted it goals slightly. In addition to trying to cast a group vote for those they thought would best represent the group, and new goal was to see if the proxy process is broken, or if a group of like-minded individuals can exercise their rights in voting for who they want to represent them. That part remains to be seen.

As part of the process of trying to squeeze an approved proxy form from EAA, it was discovered that the EAA by-laws, minutes to the Board meetings, minutes to the Executive committee meetings, and several other key documents were impossible to find. These documents were thought to be very important for members of the EAA to be able to review, since that would give them some insight into how the EAA is run, and also which board members were looking out for any particular group's interests. With this information, a member can see if a board member voted for or against the things a particular group of members cared about. So the goals were adjusted a little bit more to try and get EAA to be more transparent in it's governance. After all, as a voting member, you want to make sure the people you are voting for have your best interest in mind, right? In this internet age, making these documents available to members should be no harder than creating a "governance" section on the EAA website that members can access anytime they are interested.

All this controversy came about because a group of members wanted to exercise their rights in a membership organization. They were trying to work within the organization to make changes, not against it. That turned out to be an extremely difficult task that revealed the lack of transparency in the way things are currently run. Obviously, changes like this are not made overnight, so a multi-step process was outlined:

Step 1. Collect proxies and see if they can be used by a group to cast votes for "preferred" candidates.
Step 2. If that was successful, see how board members can be nominated that are preferential to the group for next year. If not successful, find out why.
Step 3. Work with the EAA to make the governance more transparent to the members. Realize this may not happen until said group has enough members on the board to force a change.

This initial group happened to be a group of homebuilders, but the same thing could be done by a group of warbirds, antiques, aerobatics, or others. Over time, the board would begin to more represent the groups that were organized and voting in a block. This is a way to make sure the EAA is going in the direction the membership prefers.

So, the initial push was to get proxies, because that is what can be done now, and before Oshkosh this year. The other stuff will take longer and require more work over a span of several years.

The main goal was well-defined: More transparency in EAA governance. Everything else were just ways to get there.

[Phil]

Hi Everyone,

I am the individual who volunteered to represent the group of VAF members initially, as well as anyone else who would like to participate in the election this year. This thread was brought to my attention by a friend of mine, so I apologize for not joining in earlier.

FloridaJohn did a really nice job of providing the complete history up to this point. He also identified the turning point that riled up the VAF members and that is simply the ability to participate in an election.

There are a number of policy issues that are debatable among EAA members. Some of those are even embedded in this thread such as the 20 year requirement. The thing about policy is that it can be debated until the sun goes down and no one will ever win the discussion. There are reasonable merits on both sides of any policy debate and those are better left in the hands of the Board of Directors. The reality is that we, as EAA members, simply can't write (or re-write) policy in a way that is convenient to each of us.

However, as members of the organization, we all (well almost all - you have to be 18 years old) have the right to participate in the election of the Board of Directors. So it's our responsibility as members, both satisfied and dissatisfied, to elect board members that we believe will best serve our needs as members of the organization. Any policy decision can be debated publicly but it can (and should) only be made by the BOD members that we elect to represent us.

Today, EAA members have 3 choices to participate in the election:
1) They can simply not participate; or
2) They can assign their vote to the leadership team of EAA; or
3) They can show up in person and vote for the specific candidates they believe best represent their interests.



The fourth option is missing and that is simply allowing all EAA members (who can't attend in person) an opportunity to cast their own voting ballots electronically.

I will attempt to put it in the simplest terms....... If an EAA member's vote is valuable enough to assign to the leadership team, or if a member's vote is valuable enough to be counted when they attend the meeting in person, then ALL member's votes are of equal value and should be accounted for at the time of election.

I should stop right here and not put blame on Mr. Hightower for this either. This hole in the voting membership is something that pre-dates his arrival at the helm of EAA. He should, however, be made aware of the inequity of votes that does currently exist. No EAA member's vote should count more than any other member's vote, and today there is discrimination between members who can attend in person and those who can not.

To ease the minds of many of you, we aren't going to have enough proxy signatures to impact this election in any way, shape, or form. However we will have enough signatures to express concern about these inequities and shine a spotlight on a key issue that all EAA members should be concerned with.

With regards to the proxy forms, you should know that this isn't a great position to be put in. However I know it's the right thing to do and I promised my peer EAA members that I would represent them at the annual meeting. I'm a man of my word and will represent them in a reasonable and professional manner. I am hopeful that others who choose to attend the meeting will do so in a respectful manner too.

On a side note, none of you should let this collection of proxy forms overshadow your time at AirVenture. AirVenture is our event. It is our opportunity to meet other members, to make new friends, to learn about the latest developments in aviation. As birds of a feather, it is our opportunity to flock together and we are fortunate to have such a terrific place to do it. The business meeting on Saturday isn't the highlight of the show and it shouldn't be something everyone is focusing their eyes on. So go, have fun, relax, and be a kid for a week. I'm planning on enjoying myself catching up with old friends, making new ones, and hanging out with airplanes.

Hopefully that explains what the proxy collection effort is about and how we're campaigning to bring all EAA members the freedom to participate in a truly democratic election.

Thanks,
Phil

[Bill Berson]

My history with EAA goes back about 40 years.
I was told that the proxy came into use after Paul nearly lost an election. So that is the legacy left by Paul.
Mr. Hightower is not to be blamed for the past, but the future is another matter.


A total removal of this proxy system is required (replaced with direct member vote only) to restore my faith in EAA. If that is possible.

[Floatsflyer]

My history with EAA goes back about 40 years.
I was told that the proxy came into use after Paul nearly lost an election. So that is the legacy left by Paul.
Mr. Hightower is not to be blamed for the past, but the future is another matter.


A total removal of this proxy system is required (replaced with direct member vote only) to restore my faith in EAA. If that is possible.


Removal, at least voluntarily on the part of the most senior management, will never, ever occur. The proxy voting system was initiated to insure that absolute power and control remained in the hands of the founding family, a CEO now chosen by that family and a BOD selected by all of the foregoing. Quite the stacked deck and not to be penetrated. It's similiar to the "Poison Pill" provisions adopted by publicly traded companies to prevent hostile takeovers.

As I said just previously, the changes must come in the form of ammendments to the voting covenants and procedures as currently contained in the EAA constitution. Since this is 100% unlikely to be accomplished by those heading up current initiatives for change then other methods must be considered. One such method is the launch of a Class Action law suit to challenge and test the validity of the voting covenents with respect to their legality and reasonableness for NFP's. The hiring of a lawyer with expertise in NFP's and administrative and constitutional law who would be willing to at least look at the issues Pro Bono to make an evaluation with respect to the merits of a Class Action might be warranted.

[kmacht]

Jeeze. All this talk about laywers, boards of directors, covenants, class action lawsuits, etc. It is getting out of hand. If you are that dissatisfied with the way things are moving at EAA you need to remember that nobody is forcing you to be a member. Vote with your wallet and just don't renew your membership. Start another organization that caters to what you enjoy. It will be far easier and cheaper than all that was proposed here. Yes it won't happen over night but neither did EAA.

Keith

[martymayes]

Jeeze. All this talk about laywers, boards of directors, covenants, class action lawsuits, etc. It is getting out of hand. If you are that dissatisfied with the way things are moving at EAA you need to remember that nobody is forcing you to be a member. Vote with your wallet and just don't renew your membership. Start another organization that caters to what you enjoy. It will be far easier and cheaper than all that was proposed here. Yes it won't happen over night but neither did EAA.

Keith

I guess one could argue that the "leave if you don't like it" comments are not very productive either.

Nothing wrong with passionate members speaking what's on their mind, too bad, so sad if you don't agree with what they have to say.

[Floatsflyer]

Jeeze. All this talk about laywers, boards of directors, covenants, class action lawsuits, etc. It is getting out of hand. If you are that dissatisfied with the way things are moving at EAA you need to remember that nobody is forcing you to be a member. Vote with your wallet and just don't renew your membership. Start another organization that caters to what you enjoy. It will be far easier and cheaper than all that was proposed here. Yes it won't happen over night but neither did EAA.

Keith

Hi Keith,

I don't believe you have a grasp of the BOD voting issue being discussed here. Perhaps you don't understand the implications or you just don't care. Either way, please allow me the opportunity to put it in a comparable context that might provide a better understanding.

There's a general election this November, perhaps you've heard. How would you feel if the President sent you a Proxy instead of allowing you to vote your free will for the candidate of your choice? He says by signing this Proxy over to me, you are authorizing me to select your Congressman who will represent you.

Your attitude of "love it or leave it" is reminiscent of the early years of the Vietnam war. Many who advocated this, sharply divided the country but had a quick change of heart and mind when their son or their neighbours son or there sisters son came home in a box. You are entitled to your opinion and your right to disagree but in doing so, please don't denegrate those that see an inequity or unfairness or possible illegality that undermines basic democratic principles and prohibits individuals from meaningfull participation in their own membership driven organization.

If it wasn't for those who were "dissatified with the way things are", you'd be singing God Save the Queen as the national anthem at the Super Bowl

[kmacht]

I am very aware of the goings on with the BOD, the covenants, etc. I have followed this both here and over on the VAF before it got pulled. I do not like the way EAA is heading and have expressed that in a number of postings. I wasn't planning on renewing this year but will ultimatly have to in order to save money on airventure admission next week. I don't have any problem with members working within the system to try and get a board member elected or to at least send a message regarding their displeasure. I just think it starts crossing the line and getting out of hand when people are suggesting laywers and a class action lawsuit or now comparing it to the vietnam war.

Keith

[Phil]

I agree that simply letting your membership expire is a viable option and I've been contacted by many members who are seriously considering letting their membership lapse. I've also exchanged messages with former EAA members who re-joined so they can simply participate in raising the members awareness about an inequity of votes issue.

I can offer my perspective on the issue and will communicate what I've communicated to those considering the lapse of membership route.

In order to understand my perspective, we all have to agree that the EAA is far to valuable to the aviation community to destroy or let waste away. There is a tremendous amount of value within EAA in the softer areas such as legacy and brand recognition, but also value in the more defined areas such outreach to Young Eagles, work in Washington, and cooperative partnerships that mutually benefit GA. Regardless of how anyone feels about the overall effectiveness of EAA in these areas, we all have to agree that the EAA is valuable and it is worth fighting for.

With that said, my message to those considering the lapse of membership route is to please keep renewing their membership. I can understand not wanting to pay for something that you don't feel you are receiving equal value for, but without members the EAA would struggle to survive and we would all be destroying a great organization. Members are needed to keep the chapter communities healthy, they are needed to volunteer as staff members at AirVenture, they are needed to fly Young Eagles so our neighbors kids can have an opportunity to become pilots someday too, they are also needed to be the barometer of EAA leadership so that at the highest levels the organization can be managed in way that reflects the needs of the general membership body.

So whether you agree or disagree with this specific effort, I would encourage all of you to maintain your memberships. And if you feel like there is a specific area where the EAA can improve, then be the barometer for the leaders and get involved in rallying other members to bring it to their attention. That's what we are doing here and without members it wouldn't be possible.

On the topic of lawyers and class action lawsuits, I don't even want to go down that road. I'm a believer that litigation has become the crutch of our society and that common sense is a far more reasonable approach. In this case, there is clearly an inequity of votes issue and we don't need a lawyer to demonstrate it exist. As members, we can spotlight it and then ask the EAA to do something about it. It's really a common sense issue and I have no intention of leading a class action lawsuit against the EAA for a common sense issue.

Thanks,
Phil

[martymayes]

my message to those considering the lapse of membership route is to please keep renewing their membership.

I just renewed my EAA membership this week. And like the last 10 yrs, I did not sign the proxy!

[lordryck]

Maybe some of them, but I consider myself a friend of Mike Dale and believe you have just made an unwarranted slur on his character and motivations.

None intended. I like Mike a great deal and always enjoyed listening to what he had to say at the meetings. Mike did not resign over that issue, he decided to retire when his term was up a year later.

[Phil]

None intended. I like Mike a great deal and always enjoyed listening to what he had to say at the meetings. Mike did not resign over that issue, he decided to retire when his term was up a year later.

Things like that are easy to do on the internet and especially on message boards. It's even easier to let it happen when you're dealing with a topic such as this one fueled with some level of emotion and passion. When you're simply trying to make a basic point its easy to add some emotion when it's really unnecessary or counter productive.

God knows I have said some pretty stupid things before or have come off the wrong way too. I've fallen victim to letting emotions do the typing in the past. It's happened a couple of times related to this campaign and of course once or twice earlier in my lifetime. :)

It's something that's hard to keep under control, but I'm forcing myself to get better at it.

Phil

[TimRVator]

A copy of the proxy/EAA governance thread that was deleted from Vansairforce.net (mentioned earlier in this discussion) is now located in the "files" section of the Facebook "Members4Members" group. http://www.facebook.com/groups/Members4Members (Unfortunately, Facebook membership is required to reach Facebook group contents.)

A Facebook page (no membership required) with links to various discussions and the text of Dick Koehler's article is here: http://www.facebook.com/Members4Members

[jimmight]

I wish we could do something to get the organization back on track. I was thinking about emailing all the EAA Chapter Presidents and ask them to bring this topic up at their meetings to get an idea of what everyone else thinks. I am working twelve hour shifts and trying to make progress on my plane, so I don't have much free time to devote to the issue.

[Gary.Sobek]

I agree that simply letting your membership expire is a viable option and I've been contacted by many members who are seriously considering letting their membership lapse. I've also exchanged messages with former EAA members who re-joined so they can simply participate in raising the members awareness about an inequity of votes issue.

I can offer my perspective on the issue and will communicate what I've communicated to those considering the lapse of membership route.

In order to understand my perspective, we all have to agree that the EAA is far to valuable to the aviation community to destroy or let waste away. There is a tremendous amount of value within EAA in the softer areas such as legacy and brand recognition, but also value in the more defined areas such outreach to Young Eagles, work in Washington, and cooperative partnerships that mutually benefit GA. Regardless of how anyone feels about the overall effectiveness of EAA in these areas, we all have to agree that the EAA is valuable and it is worth fighting for.

With that said, my message to those considering the lapse of membership route is to please keep renewing their membership. I can understand not wanting to pay for something that you don't feel you are receiving equal value for, but without members the EAA would struggle to survive and we would all be destroying a great organization. Members are needed to keep the chapter communities healthy, they are needed to volunteer as staff members at AirVenture, they are needed to fly Young Eagles so our neighbors kids can have an opportunity to become pilots someday too, they are also needed to be the barometer of EAA leadership so that at the highest levels the organization can be managed in way that reflects the needs of the general membership body.

So whether you agree or disagree with this specific effort, I would encourage all of you to maintain your memberships. And if you feel like there is a specific area where the EAA can improve, then be the barometer for the leaders and get involved in rallying other members to bring it to their attention. That's what we are doing here and without members it wouldn't be possible.

On the topic of lawyers and class action lawsuits, I don't even want to go down that road. I'm a believer that litigation has become the crutch of our society and that common sense is a far more reasonable approach. In this case, there is clearly an inequity of votes issue and we don't need a lawyer to demonstrate it exist. As members, we can spotlight it and then ask the EAA to do something about it. It's really a common sense issue and I have no intention of leading a class action lawsuit against the EAA for a common sense issue.

Thanks,
Phil

Phil:

Just getting caught up with all the action that has taken place. I was following your thread on the "other" forum and did provide you with a Proxy. Will be following along here.

As a Lifetime member, not renewing is not an option but agree with your ideas of getting more transparency and member involvement so must work with you and EAA to make it happen. I refuse to join Facebook but am willing to help with Google+, Twitter, or a Yahoo Group.

[Phil]

Gary,

Thanks for chasing us down.

I understand that Facebook won't work for everyone. We simply started the Facebook group shortly after the previous board removed all of the content contributed by his members.

For the record, the Facebook group has ~550 members today and is located at:
http://www.facebook.com/groups/Members4Members

We have also started a twitter presence: @Members4Members

Earlier today I started a Yahoo! group too, for people like you. Since it's only a couple of hours old, the membership count is low at the minute, but it will ramp very quickly as soon as word spreads. There's no doubt that we'll have several hundred participating there in a few weeks too.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/m4m/

It would be great if you can help us spread the word. I wish we could get more cooperation from the previous board owner to update his members that participated in the proxy effort for 2012, but that's not going to happen. Most people are in your shoes and they're working to chase us down for an update on what happened in 2012 and what we will be doing in 2013.

Thanks again for taking the time to chase us down and for your support.

Phil

[hydroguy2]

Phil, I posted those links on VAF....hopefully Doug will allow them to stay for a while.

[Hstaton]

They're already gone.

[rickatic]

They're already gone.

...along with a pleading to not post that stuff there...disappointing but expected...

Regards

[hydroguy2]

kinda sad that VAF doesn't support it's own members. I got censored based on being political. I don't see the political message in what I posted


Here was my exact post:

just a quick note for those searching to find out about the EAA members seeking
direct elections info. Here is 2 sites:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/Members4Members

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/m4m/

[Mike Switzer]

I am saddened to hear from a local EAA member that Charlie Becker is no longer with EAA.

(and that his new "Boss" at EAA wasn't even a pilot but some so called "communications manager" that was hired early this year)

I was also told that several long time employees, including Charlie, were put in the position that if they wanted to continue to provide for their families that they needed to pursue alternative employment opportunities

several years ago I attended a SportAir workshop in Indy, the conversations I had with Charlie were what made me renew my membership.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Charlie for encouraging me to pursue my aviation goals.

[RV8505]

I am saddened to hear from a local EAA member that Charlie Becker is no longer with EAA.

(and that his new "Boss" at EAA wasn't even a pilot but some so called "communications manager" that was hired early this year)

I was also told that several long time employees, including Charlie, were put in the position that if they wanted to continue to provide for their families that they needed to pursue alternative employment opportunities

several years ago I attended a SportAir workshop in Indy, the conversations I had with Charlie were what made me renew my membership.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Charlie for encouraging me to pursue my aviation goals.

I agree, As a condition of employment the EAA should only hire employees with a private pilot or A&P mechanic certificate.

[martymayes]

I am saddened to hear from a local EAA member that Charlie Becker is no longer with EAA.

?????

[Chris In Marshfield]

Charlie has moved to Maryland to be on staff with AOPA. Best of luck to Charlie! I know he'll do great work there!

[Hal Bryan]

Charlie left EAA on June 1st to take a prominent product development position at AOPA. It was my pleasure to work with him for about 3 of his 12 years here, and I miss having him around. I got to see a couple of times at AirVenture, and he seems to be loving the new position and adjusting well to the move.

[Mike Switzer]

I was shocked when I heard it yesterday. Charlie was the "face" of EAA for me. I met him at my first Sportair workshop & he was very encouraging. If my only contact with EAA had been the local chapter I never would have joined, as I have nothing in common with most of them (no builders to speak of).

Charlie was responsible for most of the programs at EAA that I found useful.

[Joda]

Charlie was responsible for most of the programs at EAA that I found useful.

I had the pleasure of working for Charlie for all the 10 years that I was an EAA employee. He is top shelf in all respects. EAA upper management doens't realize it yet, but they're going to miss Charlie as time goes on.

AOPA's gain is definitely EAA's loss in this case.