USPSA BOD Meeting Agenda

[BritinUSA]

For those that have not seen this; there are some significant changes being proposed for the next BOD meeting, specifically:

 

Bylaw 7.9 Removal of Presidential Duties: 

 

If the President does not fulfill their obligations, as outlined in these bylaws or as directed by the Board of Directors, whose role is to ensure the success of the organization, the Board may reassign specific duties and authority to another person of their choosing and remove those specific duties and authority from the President. A motion to remove the President's role and duties shall require a three-fourths majority affirmative vote of the Board of Directors present to be approved and become effective. A motion to reinstate the President's role and duties shall require a simple majority affirmative vote of the Board of Directors present to be approved and become effective.

 

New Business

Presidents duties and responsibilities

 

• Remove the President's roles and duties for making committee appointments as specified in bylaw 8.4 and other related bylaws or policies.
• Remove the President's roles and duties related to the Nationals Match Director as specified in bylaw 7.2.iv, 7.2.v, and other related bylaws or policies.
• Create a 2025 Nationals Planning Committee to be chaired by Alan Turner.
• Remove the President's roles and duties related to the US Regional Director to the International Practical Shooting Confederation as specified in bylaw 7.2.vii and other related bylaws or policies.
• Nominate Leighton Oosthuisen as the US Regional Director to the International Practical Shooting Confederation.

 

My comment: The last item may fly in the face of IPSC Constitution 4.6(8) regarding the election of the IPSC Regional Director.

Edited September 3 by BritinUSA

[shred]

I've heard there are complaints about YML and people wanting to go to various IPSC matches, but hands-down he did the best job of communicating with the US contingent at a World Shoot (handgun) I've ever seen in Thailand, and I've gone to every one since 2005.

 

[BritinUSA]

I've read similar comments from others. Regardless of the job he is doing at the moment, I am deeply troubled that they are going to strip the IPSC Regional Director position and hand it over to an AD that did not seek re-election and will have to leave the BOD at the end of the year.

 

There is no indication in the agenda that states how long A2D will hold the Regional Director position and whether the position will be open for election at some later date (if so, when)?

 

YML was democratically elected per IPSC 4.6(8) by the members and the wishes of the members are now being dismissed.

4.6 It shall be the responsibility of each Regional Directorate:

:

(8) To democratically elect one of its members to be its Director (hereinafter referred to as the Regional Director) who shall also be its voting member at the Assembly. Should the Regional Director be unable to attend, the Regional Directorate shall appoint an alternative.

[Schutzenmeister]

WTF, Over?

[Schutzenmeister]

29 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

4.6 It shall be the responsibility of each Regional Directorate:

:

(8) To democratically elect one of its members to be its Director (hereinafter referred to as the Regional Director) who shall also be its voting member at the Assembly. Should the Regional Director be unable to attend, the Regional Directorate shall appoint an alternative.

I believe the constitution also defines the Regional Directorate as the governing body of the region.  Hence, the BoD can (if I'm reading things correctly) by majority vote elect a member to be the Regional Director.

 

Not saying I agree with what's going on, but it MAY pass muster under the IPSC Constitution ...

[Racinready300ex]

I'd imagine when AD2 leaves the current BOD will just appoint another AD to the role until a long term solution is found. No idea what that solution may look like, with not really knowing what the problem is. 

 

Seems like they're stripping the president of a lot of is duties. Maybe they're finding it's to much work for a part time job? 

[BritinUSA]

2 minutes ago, Schutzenmeister said:

I believe the constitution also defines the Regional Directorate as the governing body of the region.  Hence, the BoD can (if I'm reading things correctly) by majority vote elect a member to be the Regional Director.

 

Not saying I agree with what's going on, but it MAY pass muster under the IPSC Constitution ...

The problem is precedent; YML was elected by the members across ALL areas..

 

Leighton was not. He was elected by A2 only, and did not run for re-election this year. He is a lame-duck director.

 

They are undermining the democratic process that was open to 25,000 members, and replacing it with a democracy of 9. 

Two of those nine will be out of office in less than 4 months.

 

If it can be an AD that will be out of office in 4 months, why can it not be assigned to any other member in good standing, there are probably dozens of people in the organization who would be qualified to serve as RD until an election could be organized.

Why have they chosen A2D ?

[BritinUSA]

9 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

I'd imagine when AD2 leaves the current BOD will just appoint another AD to the role until a long term solution is found. No idea what that solution may look like, with not really knowing what the problem is.

We don't know that, there are no details in the agenda on how this will work. 

 

1. How long will he hold the position of RD ?
2. Will there be an election for the position, and if so when ?

I think the BOD needs to clarify how exactly this is going to work, then members can contact their AD with their opinions. The meeting is only 6 days away.

[Schutzenmeister]

6 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

 

If it can be an AD that will be out of office in 4 months, why can it not be assigned to any other member in good standing, there are probably dozens of people in the organization who would be qualified to serve as RD until an election could be organized.
 

Again, as I read the constitution,  ANY member can be elected by the Regional Directorate (i.e., the BoD) to serve as the Regional Director.

 

That would include you or me ...

 

Again, I've no idea what's going on or why, but this smells like a power play to me.

[BritinUSA]

USAIPSC.org was registered by A2D back in January 2017. There is no website there at the moment.

During this time there was a lot of conflict between USPSA and IPSC, so this may have been a preemptive plan in case USPSA was stripped of its Regional Directorate. Nothing wrong in having a plan in place in case something bad happened but again, the members need to know what is happening, why it is happening and what the future plans are.

[Schutzenmeister]

Concur.

 

I would like to know exactly WHY the BoD feels YML has not been fulfilling various duties in order to have grounds to strip him of those duties.

[outerlimits]

seems like a great time to dump IPSC in general.  

[BritinUSA]

If they do that then another organization can take over as Regional Directorate. 
 

There’s no reason why both USPSA and USIPSC could not coexist.

[Schutzenmeister]

2 hours ago, outerlimits said:

seems like a great time to dump IPSC in general.  

And what, pray tell, does that solve in the overall picture?

[Cuz]

I feel for you all. My USPSA membership expired on 8/31 and I did not renew. I’ll sit passively on the sidelines and watch this fiasco repeat itself. I don’t have the time or energy to get involved, so I voiced my displeasure with my wallet. 
 

[Gunner66]

10 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

If they do that then another organization can take over as Regional Directorate. 
 

There’s no reason why both USPSA and USIPSC could not coexist.

would be just one more reason to cry about why one is better than the other (PCSL)

 

[Racinready300ex]

17 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

The problem is precedent; YML was elected by the members across ALL areas..

 

Leighton was not. He was elected by A2 only, and did not run for re-election this year. He is a lame-duck director.

 

They are undermining the democratic process that was open to 25,000 members, and replacing it with a democracy of 9. 

Two of those nine will be out of office in less than 4 months.

 

If it can be an AD that will be out of office in 4 months, why can it not be assigned to any other member in good standing, there are probably dozens of people in the organization who would be qualified to serve as RD until an election could be organized.

Why have they chosen A2D ?

 

The BOD has also been elected by members across all areas. Didn't they vote unanimously on this? They probably chose him because he's active in traveling to IPSC matches and likely more involved then the rest of them.

 

 

17 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

We don't know that, there are no details in the agenda on how this will work. 

 

1. How long will he hold the position of RD ?
2. Will there be an election for the position, and if so when ?

I think the BOD needs to clarify how exactly this is going to work, then members can contact their AD with their opinions. The meeting is only 6 days away.

 

We don't know that, you're right. But from things they've done in the past it's likely. Have you reached out to your AD? What was his response?

 

12 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

There’s no reason why both USPSA and USIPSC could not coexist.

 

I don't think they can. Why would anyone in this country pay to be a member of IPSC? There are vary few matches and most of our equipment is illegal anyway. Up against USPSA and PSCL, IPSC will struggle to go anywhere. A few dozen people that wish to travel outside of the US will need to be members. Maybe that's all it'll need. 

 

[Nolan]

On 9/4/2024 at 5:53 AM, Racinready300ex said:

 

The BOD has also been elected by members across all areas. Didn't they vote unanimously on this? They probably chose him because he's active in traveling to IPSC matches and likely more involved then the rest of them.

 

 

The board was elected to REPRESENT their area members, who have elected the current president, TWICE.  Doesn't seem too representative of their area membership.  It certainly does NOT represent my votes, seems more like the board RESENTS YML and doesn't care how the membership voted.  Appointing the IPSC Regional Directors position, seems very much like the current Democrat Presidential candidate, nobody but the back room voted, the guy who got 14 million votes gets moved out of the way and an appointee gets moved in.

 

Nolan

Edited September 6 by Nolan

[Racinready300ex]

9 hours ago, Nolan said:

 

The board was elected to REPRESENT their area members, who have elected the current president, TWICE.  Doesn't seem too representative of their area membership.  It certainly does NOT represent my votes, seems more like the board RESENTS YML and doesn't care how the membership voted.  Appointing the IPSC Regional Directors position, seems very much like the current Democrat Presidential candidate, nobody but the back room voted, the guy who got 14 million votes gets moved out of the way and an appointee gets moved in.

 

Nolan

 

I wonder what the rest of the story is. This is basically a completely different BOD then we had just a couple years ago. And most weren't sitting when YML was first removed, nor did they vote to make the job part time prior to his 1st election.

 

[392heminut]

4 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

I wonder what the rest of the story is. This is basically a completely different BOD then we had just a couple years ago. And most weren't sitting when YML was first removed, nor did they vote to make the job part time prior to his 1st election.

 

I think the issue here is that the BOD is making decisions with no input from the members at all. Things of this nature should probably at the least be discussed withe the members if not put up for a vote!

 

It's pretty much a Dewey Stokes move! He was president of the Fraternal Order of Police back in 1986 and went on national television and said the FOP was supporting the Gun Control Act of 1986. He also said he had not asked the membership and said he didn't need to, they elected him to make these types of decisions. The majority of the members were totally against that bill and it didn't go well for Dewey Stokes!

[Racinready300ex]

7 minutes ago, 392heminut said:

I think the issue here is that the BOD is making decisions with no input from the members at all. Things of this nature should probably at the least be discussed withe the members if not put up for a vote!

 

It's pretty much a Dewey Stokes move! He was president of the Fraternal Order of Police back in 1986 and went on national television and said the FOP was supporting the Gun Control Act of 1986. He also said he had not asked the membership and said he didn't need to, they elected him to make these types of decisions. The majority of the members were totally against that bill and it didn't go well for Dewey Stokes!

 

But we did elect the BOD to do this stuff. The president answers to the BOD doesn't he? The BOD were the ones to decide to make the position full time under Foley, then roll it back to part time after that. So clearly it's not new for the BOD to make changes to the presidents responsibilities. 

 

If the membership has to vote on every move we'll never get anything done.....maybe not a bad thing lol. 

[warpspeed]

[Darqusoull13]

Has a single person in this thread emailed their AD to inquire WHY the board is voting to limit duties (8/26) or requiring reimbursements be pre-approved by the Board of Directors (7/8).

This seems very much like a, "Did you contact the manufacturer?" type scenario where instead of asking the source, everyone just goes straight to the internet to blab. 

[warpspeed]

2 minutes ago, Darqusoull13 said:

Has a single person in this thread emailed their AD to inquire WHY the board is voting to limit duties (8/26) or requiring reimbursements be pre-approved by the Board of Directors (7/8).

This seems very much like a, "Did you contact the manufacturer?" type scenario where instead of asking the source, everyone just goes straight to the internet to blab. 

 

My AD is AD2 - he hasn't responded to my emails for quite some time.  I feel very confident that I am not alone.

[392heminut]

3 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

But we did elect the BOD to do this stuff. The president answers to the BOD doesn't he? The BOD were the ones to decide to make the position full time under Foley, then roll it back to part time after that. So clearly it's not new for the BOD to make changes to the presidents responsibilities. 

 

If the membership has to vote on every move we'll never get anything done.....maybe not a bad thing lol. 

I don't see it that way! They don't have any issue with having us vote about optics on single stacks and revolvers, but not polling the membership about major decisions about the office of the president isn't just as important? I just don't accept that.