[aceplant00]

Received this in my email this morning.

> To all members of MAAC and the board of directors.
>
> It is my opinion that during the past 20 months the majority of the members of the board have demonstrated that
>
> They have no issue with and are fully supportive of members who have violated the not for profit act, and the laws of Canada either remaining as or becoming officers of the corporation .......I do not agree
>
> The majority of the board agrees to tolerate those who ignore and or violate the act in order to accomplish a specific goal which they say is " for the betterment of M.A.A.C. "..........I do not agree with this
>
> The majority of the board agrees that serious offenses that I and some board members believe have been committed should not receive disciplinary action....I do not agree
>
> The majority of the board has decided that for the " betterment of M.A.A.C." it can either disregard or ignore opinion passed by our legal counsel and or the constitution representative appointed for a specific duty.........I do not agree
>
> The majority of the board has tolerated what I consider insulting and verbally abusive language by some board members towards a respected member of the constitution committee......I do not agree and cannot tolerate it
>
> The majority of the board has decided on Monday Dec 10 2012 that it has the " authority " to deny a member or officer his civil rights by passing a motion to prevent him from speaking at any time with any lawyer regarding anything related to M.A.A.C. without their permission............ The board does not have that authority, ( to remove civil rights) and I strongly object
>
> The majority of the board has seemingly agreed at a recorded board meeting which took place on Dec 6 2012 that it has the power and the authority to do anything it wishes......I do not agree
>
> The majority of the board is of the opinion that " for the good of M.A.A.C." it is permissible for a board member to threaten certain actions in writing towards our corporate lawyer in order to affect a specific action that he wants..................I do not agree
>
> The the majority of the board has decided that the action of an officer making a material misrepresentation on a financial document does not require disciplinary action..........I do not agree
>
> The majority of the board sees nothing wrong with Linda Patrick our Secretary Treasurer being told she could not approach the board on this matter and threatened with disciplinary action and or termination of her employment if she did....I do not agree
>
>
> It has become obvious, in my opinion, that my ethics... personal code of conduct, and view of fiduciary duty and responsibilities to the corporation are diametrically opposed to the majority of the board's
>
> I cannot participate as President in an organization where there is seemingly no regard for the Act, the bylaws or fiduciary duty to the corporation.
>
> For those reasons, I am submitting my resignation as president of the Model Aeronautics Association of Canada effective immediately.
>
> It is my sincere wish that members of the " Model Aeronautics Association of Canada " become actively involved in order to affect change for the betterment of M.A.A.C
>
>
> Ron Dodd
>

[Carlisler]

I will be following this with much interest.

[craneman32]

So I will assume a new president will be voted in and all will carry on as normal? How does this affect our 2013 renewal? It sounds like MAAC has some house cleaning to do.

[Max]

I just got this email

Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:40 PM
12:40 PM
Message starred
FROM MAAC TO You
Letter from the President
Show Details

From

MAAC

To: Me

To all members of MAAC and the board of directors.

It is my opinion that during the past 20 months the majority of the members of the board have demonstrated that

They have no issue with and are fully supportive of members who have violated the not for profit act, and the laws of Canada either remaining as or becoming officers of the corporation .......I do not agree

The majority of the board agrees to tolerate those who ignore and or violate the act in order to accomplish a specific goal which they say is " for the betterment of M.A.A.C. "..........I do not agree with this

The majority of the board agrees that serious offenses that I and some board members believe have been committed should not receive disciplinary action....I do not agree

The majority of the board has decided that for the " betterment of M.A.A.C." it can either disregard or ignore opinion passed by our legal counsel and or the constitution representative appointed for a specific duty.........I do not agree

The majority of the board has tolerated what I consider insulting and verbally abusive language by some board members towards a respected member of the constitution committee......I do not agree and cannot tolerate it

The majority of the board has decided on Monday Dec 10 2012 that it has the " authority " to deny a member or officer his civil rights by passing a motion to prevent him from speaking at any time with any lawyer regarding anything related to M.A.A.C. without their permission............ The board does not have that authority, ( to remove civil rights) and I strongly object

The majority of the board has seemingly agreed at a recorded board meeting which took place on Dec 6 2012 that it has the power and the authority to do anything it wishes......I do not agree

The majority of the board is of the opinion that " for the good of M.A.A.C." it is permissible for a board member to threaten certain actions in writing towards our corporate lawyer in order to affect a specific action that he wants..................I do not agree

The the majority of the board has decided that the action of an officer making a material misrepresentation on a financial document does not require disciplinary action..........I do not agree

The majority of the board sees nothing wrong with Linda Patrick our Secretary Treasurer being told she could not approach the board on this matter and threatened with disciplinary action and or termination of her employment if she did....I do not agree


It has become obvious, in my opinion, that my ethics... personal code of conduct, and view of fiduciary duty and responsibilities to the corporation are diametrically opposed to the majority of the board's

I cannot participate as President in an organization where there is seemingly no regard for the Act, the bylaws or fiduciary duty to the corporation.

For those reasons, I am submitting my resignation as president of the Model Aeronautics Association of Canada effective immediately.

It is my sincere wish that members of the " Model Aeronautics Association of Canada " become actively involved in order to affect change for the betterment of M.A.A.C


Ron Dodd

What's going on?

[teknokraze]

The unfortunate thing here is this is a one sided statement that we, as members, would probably have a hard time verifying.

I tend to be a person of high moral values and if what Mr. Dodd is saying is true, I'll find it hard to even want to continue with MAAC membership.

Would definitely like to know more specifics about what he is saying, but I doubt that will happen.

Regards...

[JKovats]

Congratulations Ron! You lasted a lot longer than I did. Gotta love the "small town politics" mentality.

I know there are many sides to the story. This will be an interesting thread to follow.

[CarlC]

God forbid a majority should decide anything... WOW

He obviously has no respect for democracy or a majority vote.... highlighted by the fact he sent a mass email no one can reply to... So here's my reply

MR DODD!

DON'T WASTE EVERYONE'S TIME WITH YOUR WHINING JUST QUIT QUIETLY. LET SOMEONE WITH RESPECT FOR DEMOCRATIC PROCESS PRESIDE OVER MAAC SO THEY CAN GET BACK TO CORE BUSINESS.

OH AND GROW A PAIR; DON'T SEND MASS EMAILS NO ONE CAN RESPOND TO. ALL YOU DID WAS WASTE OUR TIME.

CarlC (no.. not a maac board member)

[waylander]

My concern is that if what he says is true and the majority of the board is truly as he portrays then they'll just push a new president that agrees with their agenda.

Regardless of the truth of the statement or not, it might be a good idea for the membership to push for an audit of MAAC.

Carl, do you really think that the majority should rule if the majority is breaking MAAC's own rules and regulations?

[teknokraze]

Post no longer valid...

[CarlC]

Originally Posted by waylander

My concern is that if what he says is true and the majority of the board is truly as he portrays then they'll just push a new president that agrees with their agenda.

Regardless of the truth of the statement or not, it might be a good idea for the membership to push for an audit of MAAC.

Carl, do you really think that the majority should rule if the majority is breaking MAAC's own rules and regulations?

Audit yes I agree!

We weren't treated to specifics.. what regulations specifically? Ron treated us all as a captive audience but failed to substantiate anthing with specifics. Why? hmmm?