January 23 2010 Minutes

011 ec minutes

Executive Council Meeting
January 23, 201
Muncie IN

Official

Introductions

The President called the meeting to order at 8:02 a.m. The EVP, District VII VP and District XI VP were not in attendance. District X was represented by AVP M. Brown who was not eligible to vote.

1. Opening Business

Introductions: President Dave Mathewson, Baldwinsville, NY; CFO Doug Holland, Raleigh, NC; District Vice President: I-Andy Argenio, Smithfield, RI; II-Gary Fitch, Franklinville, NY; III-Bob Brown, Bradford, PA; IV-Bliss Teague, Hickory, NC; V-Tony Stillman, Brunswick, GA; VI-Charlie Bauer, Norridge, IL; VIII-Jim Rice, Universal City, TX; IX-Jim Wallen, Arvada, CO; X-AVP Mike Brown, Redding, CA; Legal Counsel Felix Gora, Rendigs, Fry, Kiely and Dennis; and Executive Director Jim Cherry. HQ staff in attendance was Joyce Hager, Greg Minch, Shawn Grubbs, John Hawley, Greg Hahn, Rob Kurek, Michael Smith, Ilona Maine, Jeff Nance and Craig Schroeder. Others in attendance were District III AVP Jim Martin, District VI AVP Bob Underwood (also a member of the Education Committee and FAI Executive Committee), Education Committee member Gordon Schimmel, AMA GRA Rich Hanson, AMA member Sandy Frank, FAA rep James Sizemore, FAA rep Stephen A. Glowacki, Lynn Cherry, Rae Underwood and Shirley Teague.

Additions to the agenda: Committee reports: Publications, Safety; New Business item: Members/Health issues.

Final Flight recognition: a moment of silence was observed for John Nicolaci, Daniel Echevarria, Robert Perkin, William Burgess, Pauline Nelson and Dail Clark.

It was moved, seconded and approved by acclamation to approve the minutes of the October 31, 2009 Executive Council meeting.

The President deviated from the published agenda to allow for an update from FAA representatives James Sizemore and Stephen Glowacki.

FAA Update (Appendix) R. Hanson indicated that the ARC working group has taken the rules, procedures and safety guidelines that have been established over the last several years, consolidating, enhancing and organizing them into a fashion that the group could look at as a comprehensive set of guidelines/standards. These went to Council in October and since then has been evaluating the recommendations and refining them. The FAA representatives included the following in their presentation:

  • The intent of the FAA is to encourage continuing growth of model aviation and it is the opinion of the FAA leadership at the senior level on down, that AMA knows what they are doing
  • They are here today to help AMA transition to a way that will be accepted and acknowledged formally and adopted in the rule making process
  • The rule that is being addressed will be titled Aviation Rule (SFAR) Part 107; it will contain Priority 1 standards (recognized by the administrator); guidance material/advisory circulars will be issued, as well as a handbook to explain the FAA perspective and interpretation of the rules (looking for assistance from AMA for the handbook)
  • All of this needs to be completed by the end of 2012
  • The rulemaking process was reviewed; currently in the NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rule Making) stage of the process
  • As soon as the rule comes to some formation of a draft (hopefully within the next 30-60 days) the FAA will do a safety assessment then develop standards
  • The format of the rule was then presented: Subpart A-General (applicable to the whole rule); Subpart B-Small UAS (NOT models) and Subpart C-Recreational (delineated into ‘model’, which AMA represents, and ‘toy’, which K-mart, Wal-Mart, etc. represents)

Council was afforded the opportunity to comment and ask questions of J. Sizemore and S. Glowacki; these included:

  • Must make the members understand the separation between UAS (Subpart B) and recreational modeling (Subpart C)
  • Sizemore stated that it is important for the members to realize that if the alternative standards do not happen, members will be forced to adhere to the very restrictive general standards. Sizemore also indicated that the alternative standards will not be a ‘cut and paste’ of what AMA has today; there will have to be substantiation from AMA so the FAA is sure they can rely on the alternative standards
  • The alternative standards should address those areas that are outlying (such as turbines and sailplanes)
  • Glowacki indicated they are looking at a 400 ft. cap (within certain distances of airports and populations); lateral distances of 150 feet from the pilot in command location, visual observers, no nighttime operations and the need for a pilot training
  • The OMB A-119 is what guides the FAA in how they work with developing standards
  • J. Rice informed S. Glowacki that Council is expecting to present a ‘package’ for their review and comments on what was submitted; then AMA would massage the ‘package’ if necessary before final presentation to the FAA. Glowacki indicated this is not the way A-119 recommends doing this; A-119 recommends a relationship between the FAA and the other entity (in this case AMA) in the development of a common package
  • Hanson stated AMA needs help in understanding the process for presentation so that AMA has a reasonable expectation of success. Glowacki stated the AMA may want to enlist the aid of someone who is fluent in developing standards
  • The FAA is expecting to have a rule written that will be out for public comment in Summer 2011; AMA should have their standards ready to present at this time as well
  • Glowacki will pass along to AMA the name and contact information for their Standards Development colleague for this ruling; this individual will be available to assist AMA in the requirements for standard submission; the FAA also can provide the AMA with specialists in the various subjects of the standards
  • President Mathewson asked S. Glowacki whether as part of the timeline, model aviation (Subpart C) will have to go through the safety assessment process that UAS (Subpart B) is required to go through; Glowacki did not give a definitive answer
  • Mathewson then stated, internally FAA is going to decide what the ‘OR’ (alternative standard) is; and asked, in deciding the ‘OR’, who is going to be the SME for model aviation in that process? The response was the FAA will not determine what the ‘OR’ is, the FAA will evaluate what was submitted and find it acceptable or not. President Mathewson stated that is where there is disconnect as the FAA ultimately decides what is acceptable. S. Glowacki reiterated the necessity for a relationship between AMA and FAA in developing the standards
  • Mathewson expressed concern that although this is suppose to be a collaborative effort, the FAA internal rules prohibit Sizemore and Glowacki from being completely open
a. VP Replacements
  • EVP- absent
  • Dist. I- Barry Schubert, Carl Vogel
  • Dist. II- Peter Seiffert, Eric Williams
  • Dist. III- JoAnne Brown, Mark Radcliff
  • Dist. IV- Ron King
  • Dist. V- John Fuqua, Jose Soto
  • Dist. VI- Bob Underwood, Frank Roales
  • Dist. VII- absent
  • Dist. VIII- John Matlock, Mark Johnston
  • Dist. IX- Jim Tiller, Bruce Ream
  • Dist. X- Mike Brown, Jerry Neuberger
  • Dist. XI- absent
b. AMA Business Strategy (Appendix)

This item addresses a long term strategy for the Academy. It was developed following numerous conversations between President Mathewson, A. Argenio and L. Zellers on where they thought the Academy should be in 10-20 years and how the AMA might get there. The document is a compilation of thoughts and ideas expressed during those conversations. The document titled AMA ENTREPRENEURIAL TASK FORCE summarizes the proposed redefined business strategy.

Review of the Redefined Business strategy included:

  • Where AMA is now and where it wants to go
  • Reasons for why a redefined strategy is necessary
  • Causes for the decline
  • Entrepreneurial Paradigms
  • Recommendations
  • Specific duties of the Task Force
  • Suggested Task Force members
  • Timeframe and Logistics

Discussion included:

  • The SLRP Council has been working on should be ready for adoption within the next month; this will be the roadmap for the next 4-5 years; the proposed business strategy is more long range and will redefine the way AMA does business in the future
  • Ideas expressed include marketing more to clubs; possibly create regional shows (similar to the AMA Expo); look at the IAC to generate dollars (what flying events draw the most people); capitalize on the AMA website to obtain ‘traffic’ commission; corporate outreach and grants
  • Identify resources within the membership that may be willing to provide expertise pro bono
  • Council must be open minded about the results of the Task Force discoveries
  • AMA needs to triple the amount of non-dues revenue they currently generate
  • The President would like to see Council move forward with some research and identify people for the Task Force; this will require a financial investment (in-person meetings in Muncie and a number of conference calls). Council will give them the leeway to vet the issue and give them the amount of time they need to present a new direction for AMA
  • The individual who leads the Task Force will have ultimate responsibility for seating the members (with Council input)
  • Recommendations for the lead individual, as well as others with particular expertise that could benefit the group should be forwarded to the President

MOTION I: Moved by G. Fitch (II) and seconded by J. Rice (VIII) to proceed with the AMA Redefined Business Strategy. MOTION passed unanimously

c. AMA Political Consultant (Appendix)

The President and EVP went to Washington, D.C. and met with Mitch Rose, who is a lobbyist. They discussed AMA’s relationship with the FAA, where AMA wants to go with the FAA, the problems AMA perceived having and what AMA needs to do for its’ members. During discussion it was revealed that he possesses strong lobbying efforts with the FCC, which could be beneficial to the AMA in the future relative to holding on to the 72 MHz frequencies. He is well respected within the Washington, D.C. community and has been involved with the legislative process. J. Gaffney stated he comes very highly recommended by colleagues who have worked with him.

The President stated that AMA needs to position itself to make sure they do the best they can for its’ members, in advocating for them before the FAA and FCC. He reported the cost of the contract and noted that the only fee on top of this would be if the individual was asked to do something extraneous to his normal job function.

There is no way to gauge the value of what he can do for AMA. It is very important to prepare for the worst but work to achieve the best in this endeavor with the FAA and to do this we need the services of someone like Mitch Rose.

F. Gora stressed that the contract must include provisions of accountability; Council will receive regular activity reports. Council will provide direction to him through the President and in return he will help build AMA strategy. The collateral advantage is that the members will see this as a benefit.

MOTION II: Moved by B. Brown (III) and seconded by C. Bauer (VI) to hire Mitch Rose as AMA Political Consultant contingent on the development of an acceptable contract. MOTION passed unanimously

d. Indiana Society of Association Executives

The President reported that the Publications team, and specifically R. Kurek, was recently presented with an award from the Indiana Society of Association Executives in recognition for his and the departments work with Model Aviation. The award was for Model Aviation 2009 Award for over $750k. (Recognizing revenue from advertising) Kurek wished to give total credit to everyone on his staff for their hard work. Council asked Kurek to pass along their congratulations to his staff.

Kurek then reported on three initiatives that were discussed during the Publications Committee meetings which could be executed quickly:

  1. Changing the Table of Contents to include lumping all product reviews (regardless of what they are individually called) into a subcategory named ‘Product Reviews’
  2. Begin to list a portion of the four month out editorial calendar on the EC Only website which would allow Council to be aware of what will be published in the next four months
  3. A tour of the Publication Department will be offered on April 23, 201 (Friday before the next EC meeting) and is open to all Publication Committee and Executive Council members

MOTION IV: Moved by B. Brown (III) and seconded by G. Fitch (II) to hire the position of Media Manager. MOTION passed unanimously

• 201 Membership Drive - put emphasis on the Sign Three, Fly Free program for the drive; it was suggested to offer new members a $10 certificate to the AMA Store. An AVP category will not be included in the membership drive. Some on Council felt that the membership drive was not a success in 2009 but Nance indicated that by fine tuning it, and continuing to build the program (the e-newsletter will help with bringing attention to the drive) it will garner results.

Discussion included: give support material to AVP’s so they can push the drive within their clubs; there is no way to determine if a new member actually came in as a result of the membership drive; design a metric to determine the success or failure of the drive; Nance would like to develop a member value database strategy (what are the costs to get a new member and what are the costs to retain that member); J. Cherry noted that the program needs to be fine tuned but AMA should continue with the drive for 4-5 years to determine the validity of the program; the individual members are the ones who are more likely to bring in new members; and the Sign Three, Fly Free program has been in existence for 10+ years but has not been promoted.

It was suggested HQ do some hard fact finding relative to clubs-find out what the attitude is toward new members, senior members, some clubs have no desire for growth, some have a membership cap, and some clubs won’t allow flying of particular types of airplanes/helicopters at their fields. The focus of the membership drive should be on individual members and the hobby shops. Nance will take the comments made today and develop a program for Council approval.

The President noted that he has heard nothing but good comments about the EXPO and complimented Jeff and the staff.

7. Old Business

a. FAA Update R. Hanson will do a follow up to the FAA representatives’ presentation on Sunday morning.

MOTION V: Moved by A. Argenio (I) and seconded by J. Wallen (IX) to renew Rich Hanson’s contract. MOTION passed unanimously

The President told R. Hanson that a unanimous vote should be considered a vote of confidence in the work he has done for the AMA in the last year.

8. New Business

As a result of Executive Session the following motions were presented:

MOTION XI: Moved by C. Bauer (VI) and seconded by B. Teague (IV) to proceed with the Museum Directors’ recommendation with the new job title of Museum Educator. MOTION passed unanimously

MOTION XII: Moved by J. Wallen (IX) and seconded by G. Fitch (II) that the Executive Council accept the ED Evaluation Committee’s recommendations as proposed. MOTION passed unanimously

a. PDF downloadable documents It was noted that the PDF documents are non executable and must be printed or copied and pasted in Word to make changes. It is proposed that over a period of time AMA take the PDF documents and make them an executable document where they can downloaded, completed, saved and returned to HQ. This will be discussed with the IS Dept. A Council member reported that the list should be updated, made easier to find, compressed and made more useable. Any documents that need to be filled out should have the capability to be done on the screen and be sent back. Hanson indicated that G. Fogel is willing to assist with the PDF library structure and process. J. Cherry will come back to Council (within a week) with a deadline of when this can be accomplished.

b. Petition for Redistricting (Appendix) The President read a note he received from B. Oberdieck regarding the Petition for Redistricting. Oberdieck noted that neither he nor anyone he has spoken with has received any additional information to substantiate the position, or explain the reasoning for it. Argenio noted Section V, Article IX gives the authority to redistrict to the Executive Council; it is not a bylaws change. Bauer reported that this has been brought up several times in past years and there are numerous ramifications, including many SIG’s have adopted the AMA district breakdown as their own.

The President noted that since the VP was not here to present the item it will be deferred and it can be raised again at the April meeting. If Council concurs that it needs to be looked at, the President will appoint a committee to research the possibility of redistricting.

c. Member/Health issues (Appendix) A Council member presented some government type information regarding the U.S. population; over 23% of the population is over 55 years of age and estimates show this number increasing over the next 40 years. This group is where many of our members will come from because they have the money and the time to participate in our sport/hobby. He then presented some statistics relative to weight concerns and noted that overweight people are losing years off their life; and this is a loss of a [potential] member for the AMA.

d. Youth Discount Two district VP’s received similar requests that AMA offer a discount to AMA members, age 19-23, that are enrolled in college; there is a thread on the AMA forum addressing this also. It was noted that if AMA tried to do this based on being in college it would be discrimination; an alternative could be to offer a discount to everyone in a certain age bracket (extend the Youth category) or create a new age category for young adults. Either of these alternatives would have a negative impact on dues received for OPEN members. A straw poll reflected that Council was not in favor of creating another age category. The ED suggested that if the youth are involved and working with a club, they might ask the club to sponsor their membership. No action was taken.

e. Safety Committee J. Rice reported that it would help the turbine engine community in determining and enforcing the 200 mph speed limit if they had the ability to check speed. It was requested that Council approve an expenditure of 2k to buy a speed gun that would be maintained at HQ but would be sent to major turbine events to let a CD educate members as to what 200 mph is and help them conform to the JPO guidelines. JPO is willing to manage the details and use of the equipment; JPO would cover the expense of shipment.

MOTION VI: Moved by J. Rice (VIII) and seconded by C. Bauer (VI) to approve expenditure not to exceed $2,000 for Headquarters to purchase a speed gun that will be used by JPO for educational purposes only. MOTION failed: 3-Y; 6-N (I, II, III, IV, V and IX)

f. Membership Meeting Council determined there would be numerous general membership meetings in 201, with the Official General Membership Meeting being held during the IRCHA event at the IAC. A Council member felt the meeting during the Joe Nall has been by far, the best attended general membership meeting that AMA has had in years; he recommended Council members attend the meeting during the Nall. (The format of the meeting should be as in the past with Council there to report on issues and answer questions).

MOTION VII: Moved by B. Brown (III) and seconded by B. Teague (IV) that the funds for Council attendance at the AMA membership meeting during the Joe Nall be taken from the General AMA Budget. MOTION passed: 8-Y; 1-N (VI)

AWARDS

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

Sunday January 24, 201

Following a problem at a flying field in District IV, B. Teague reported that an individual’s attorney got information off of the AMA web site that was detrimental to AMA’s cause. It is recommended that such things as data about insurance claims, information that could be harmful if used in the wrong manner be taken off the general public area and placed under the Member’s Only section (password protected.) The ED reported he has talked with staff and this is being done.

Follow-up on FAA Presentation

  • R. Hanson sensed that a number of Council members came away with skepticism about whether we were getting the straight story from S. Glowacki and J. Sizemore. Hanson noted he still has questions about what twists and turns AMA will face in the future, but believes they gave straight answers in terms of their intentions in where they intend for this process to go
  • Hanson noted their PP presentation changed the default path from what was published in the ARC; S. Glowacki defined them as being high level changes, but until Hanson sees the changes we won’t know
  • Hanson pressed the issue with them on the default path and indicated that if AMA is to work on the standards in areas where aero modeling falls out we need to know what is in that default path. They agreed to allow us to see a draft; they must check with their legal department and AMA may need to sign a non-disclosure agreement
  • Their presentation noted that the alternative standards would be established in accordance with OMB A-119. There are groups that can assist AMA in developing these standards however in discussion with D. Mathewson, R. Hanson noted this would not be cost effective
  • Up to this point, Hanson had been told that the program office was going to find simpler way for model aviation to achieve a means of complying with the SFAR; however now that Tarbert is retired from the FAA it makes for a difficult track ahead
  • The only alternative would be to talk with the administration of FAA and explain that making AMA go through this process is not feasible and press for reconsideration; this would be difficult but not impossible. It may be necessary to go as high as Peggy Gilmore (Aviation Safety Director)

Discussion included: AMA does not want to shoulder any more regulations than absolutely necessary

Conflict was expressed relative to two comments the reps made regarding increasing the number of pilot training hours and the possibility of having to provide numerous field layouts (depending on the type of aircraft)

They referred to having seen our documents. It’s believed they were referring to the documents that were submitted early on in the ARC process (including the turbine waiver program, safety code, experimental program, membership manual and flying site recommendations.) It seemed as though they had a positive picture of our current program

Glowacki and Sizemore did not exhibit much cooperation; they stated they wanted this to be a collaborative effort but were not forthcoming

Hanson is of the opinion that they were not trying to be deceptive and they are not trying to do something that might kill the hobby

Mathewson stated that AMA will stay the course which is to continue finalizing the document once the risk assessment portion is complete. The package will then be sent to R. Hanson’s group for final refinement and packaging as a complete unit. Once that is accomplished the package will be returned to Council for final review.

AMA has a responsibility to advocate for their members and protect their privilege to fly model aircraft and that is what AMA will do

Release Date
Sat, 01/30/201 - 01:00

Notes: The original page has been reformatted into HTML for readability. The content has been preserved verbatim.

Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
Original Link
Original page
Extracted date
2009-10-31