[Jabba]

Originally Posted by Morison

Palmer - are you saying that you'd rather have the board cancel the Nats rather than give the committee more time to answer questions and provide supporting documentation?
From what I have heard, the information that was desired for the board to say yes wasn't abvailable ... which left them the options of either saying no or providing more time.

Today was the boards deadline not mine!

[Guest]

Originally Posted by Dean

It is easy to see that many want to see something happen, so...who can tell me haw many pilots would be expected, how many spectators, and haw far you'd be willing to drive? You don’t have to post here…you can pm me.

Later,
Dean

As long as it happens and the dates dont conflict with something of greater importance travelling is of little consequence It is extremely cheap to take an airplane on Air Canada within the country!

[Morison]

Originally Posted by Jabba

Today was the boards deadline not mine!

Sorry about that - I was unaware of the Nov 30 deadline.

But in any case, would you rather the board extend (again) their own deadline in order to keep the chance of a 'yes' alive, or simply say no because they didn't have what they needed to say yes by a self imposed deadline.

[Gelcoat]

Hey Palmer,

How come you are not up to date on the new developments? It's amazing how the spokespoison is not aware of the bombshell that Chuck and Gerry just dropped in your face.

Do us a favor and please get the info. and post it up for the rest of us.

Boy, I'm looking forward to retaliate on this one.

Jean

[Jabba]

Originally Posted by Gelcoat

Hey Palmer,

How come you are not up to date on the new developments? It's amazing how the spokespoison is not aware of the bombshell that Chuck and Gerry just dropped in your face.

Do us a favor and please get the info. and post it up for the rest of us.

Boy, I'm looking forward to retaliate on this one.

Jean

How do you know I'm not up to date.....

YOU have the info and your a Board member you POST IT!!!

plus now your threatening me!!????

[sivle]

Are there any facts that we can review to ease our minds.

[Morison]

Why do people insist on pointing fingers all of the time.

If the board has set a deadline of Nov 30th, I am confident that an announcement will be made tomorrow regarding a decision - if one has been made - or a continuation of the process.

Through all of this process, one thing that has not often been said is that this executive committee is one of the hardest working, cohesive and dedicated executives that MAAC has seen in a very long time. Even last year's board was one of the best collections of directors we've seen for a long time.

We may be missing the point here that MAAC is being steered by a group of people that take their responsibilities to the Association and its members extremely seriously. This dedication is what is making them ask for a greater level of accountability and if that requirement isn't met - they may face some difficult decisions.

We should all be able to agree on the basics here.

1) There should be an annual National Championships event
2) There needs to be a 'Nats Hosting Committee' to plan and run the event
3) As the event is the MAAC Nationals, the event committee should report to the board on all aspects of the event, including a financial report that is satisfactory to the board
4) A bid detailing the committee's plan needs to exist to protect both the interests of the association and the hosting committee. (The purpose of the document is to outline the event operations and plans for recovery of a deficit or distribution of a surplus.)

Beyond this we start entering into finger pointing - which is extremely unfortunate.

It is clear from the 'talk' that the 2005 Nationals were a success for the events that were held. I think it would be extremely unfortunate if the 2006 (and 2007) events were not awarded because a complete or reasonable bid was not supplied.

I guess time will tell what will come of this.

[JimMcIntyre]

Originally Posted by Morison

I think it would be extremely unfortunate if the 2006 (and 2007) events were not awarded because a complete or reasonable bid was not supplied.

To this I can agree ... wholeheartedly.

The contentious part may be defining the terms 'complete' and 'reasonable'.

[Morison]

Originally Posted by JimMcIntyre

The contentious part may be defining the terms 'complete' and 'reasonable'.

The Board's expectations for a bid were open and clear

Originally Posted by MAAC BOD

Proposals should include the venue(s), budget plan, registration fee(s), estimated entrants, regular updates for MAAC board, and discipline(s) that can be accommodated. The budget plan should include details such as requested MAAC funding, expected expenses, plans for a surplus, etc.

Answer all the questions and the bid is complete. Answer the questions without too much 'fudge factor' and don't miss any of the critical questions and the bid is reasonable.

The more detail in the bid, the more strength and protection for the hosting committee.

[JimMcIntyre]

Keith, you know as well as I do that asking for that information could result in a one pager or a 300 page document, that's what I was referring to....

Terms like completeness can be interpreted as simple as "is there an aswer for all terms requested" or "background provided justifying estimates and calculations".

I have no knowledge of the proposal submitted, nor do I know what the exec is looking for in a 'complete' and 'reasonable' submission. Is a detailed prospectus required, or simply an overview touching on the requested terms? Maybe something in between?

Like many others commenting here, I have no experience in these matters and fail to see why seeking approval to run a contest by a group with a proven successful track record ... and no competition (i.e. no competing bids) .... must be an arduous annual task?