[Garnet Burke]

Keith.. did all the zone directors attend this years AGM?

[J_Helps]

Here Here Keith

If anything good is to come of the accident the circumstances surrounding it and suggestions for corrective action should be spread far and wide to prevent it from occuring again. While that may have to wait until any legal action is settled, in the end there is probably a lesson learned that would be valuable to all.

Jeff

[Kevin McGrath]

I very much doubt there is anything to learn from this accident since virtually all procedures,equipment checks,safety rules,frequency rules were done and obeyed and against all odds the accident happened.
Loose chatter here will serve no purpose .
Resolution is now in the hands of the courts and lawyers and cases like this in Ontario can get dragged out,and five years is not out of the question.
I strongly suggest everyone move on from this subject and I wont participate in any more discussion here.
If anyone has a valid reason and must know more talk with your zone director who has been kept fully informed.

[Morison]

Garnet -
All 13 zone directors were present when the AGM was called to order. The South East zone director left the meeting before the resolutions were voted on, without any comment or explanation.

[Morison]

Originally Posted by Kevin McGrath

I very much doubt there is anything to learn from this accident since virtually all procedures,equipment checks,safety rules,frequency rules were done and obeyed and against all odds the accident happened.
Loose chatter here will serve no purpose .
Resolution is now in the hands of the courts and lawyers and cases like this in Ontario can get dragged out,and five years is not out of the question.
I strongly suggest everyone move on from this subject and I wont participate in any more discussion here.
If anyone has a valid reason and must know more talk with your zone director who has been kept fully informed.

Kevin, and all, I want to be clear that I was not suggesting that there be an open discussion about the accident itself. But I was simply passsing on information made public at the AGM that the member has the right to know.

[usedtobedevil]

Originally Posted by Usetobechair

Kieth

The suit is not a topic that should be brought forward on this form. We need to respect the victims privacy.

Chuck

Give me a break. Morrison is bang on.

As soon as the civil litigation starts, it's has been decided by those involved that "privacy" in no longer a concern.

Particularly as far as members of this association are concerned because it has a tremendous impact on what we love to do. It opens the door to question, debate and analyze of what went wrong and where fault may or may not lie.

Originally Posted by Kevin McGrath

I very much doubt there is anything to learn from this accident since virtually all procedures,equipment checks,safety rules,frequency rules were done and obeyed and against all odds the accident happened.
Loose chatter here will serve no purpose .

It brings into question how MAAC would be liable in an isolated unavoidable accident. It brings into question actions of clubs and individuals, including those injured. It brings into question the future of MAAC and our hobby itself. It is very relevant if we are to be sued for no purposeful reason. If a police investigation found no fault, I want to know why OHIP would now want to sue as well? Talk about double-jeapardy. We already pay huge sums for our public health care and now the "system" is considering suing for an assumed risk each one of us takes when we go to the field? It's very relevant and important.

Sorry, but this issue is much more important that droning on about constitutional knitpicking because without insurance, the rest is academic. I agree, names are not important, but actions and consequences definately are.

Originally Posted by Morrison

All 13 zone directors were present when the AGM was called to order. The South East zone director left the meeting before the resolutions were voted on, without any comment or explanation.

........why would SE ZD Els leave the meeting before voting? He represents MAAC's largest zone. About the only acceptable reason for not representing his members would be health related.

It's our dime he was there on and is expected to perform his duty? My apologies if he was sick, but if not, this is something that certainly needs to be addressed as well. What gives?