nomadpete

Thanks FlyT, Yes, it seems that a few things noted on these forums have resulted in 'coincidencidental' action by the board. It works when letters and phone calls have no effect! Can I thank you for us losing 30% of our members? Seriously though, thanks for your positive contribution. There are too many uncertainties in what the board feeds us. As a member, I feel somewhat helpless and that makes the anxiety caused by lack of board communication all the worse. But to go deeper int othe financials needs the work of people who have the ability and also the credibility if they bring an anomoly to light. Yes the board clearly needs a shake-up. Lets not shake them up too much though - we still need a functional board.

I'm new on this forum. Looking over the RAAus threads here, I am surprised to see that there has been so little activity. Especially considering the significance of events since the last AGM at Heck Field. I believe that meeting was probably the best attended AGM in RAAus history. People who attended have reported that there were many more members present than was officially reported (an unknown number of attendees were not able to sign the attendance book). Numbers around 300 were reported. Whatever the real numbers, that unprecedented amount of member involvement should send a signal that things allegedly happening have shaken many members out of their fog of apathy.Yes, there were upset members present. Although some were feeling that there was too much aggression shown at the time, I personally think they were just trying to get some answers from an uncommunicative board. Normal polite requests had failed to satisfy their questions (prior to the meeting). As for the constitutional change, it only brought the requirement for calling a GM up to the same standard required by all other corporations (100 signatures). Anyway, I just thought that a forum thread titled "RAA - upset" might have attracted a few more postings reflecting the latest developments in an upset RAA. A dot point summary would make it easy for people to find here where there is none of the clutter found on other web forums. Any volunteers?

From what I have heard quite a number of RAAus members have tried to get information updates from the offices of RAAus that would reassure the members - but without success. That silence is deafening ! The biggest trouble is that because the Board fails to properly inform the members, it simply encourages people to fill the void with gossip and rumour. I really have no idea what the board is doing to resotre order, if anything. They just down't tell us. There seems to be some paranoid fear of telling the truth. Alternatively the truth may be too incriminating...... If the board could pluck up the courage to lay out before us the facts (the true facts, not the sanitised ones) surrounding the numerous issues that have caused all the concern, the GM would probably be a boring non-event. We do appreciate that the board are volunteers, but they still have obligations and duties to fulfill. Our biggest fear is that the board themselves don't have a grip on the size and implications of the problems. The absence of frank information, combined with what appears to be incompetence, people are getting extremely concerned. The consequences of that unanswered concern may be an over-reaction by worried members, which has the potential to do more damage to RAAus than has already been done by the board and executive. PeterT

Ouch ! but point taken. Seriously, I'm just curious. I totally appreciate the investment of time, effort and cost that is being offered by our knowledgable analysts. When it comes to analysing account statement, I do not have the skills required to know what I would be looking at. Apologies to those concerned. PeterT

Ar you guys still wading through those heavy tomes? Fallen asleep maybe? There's lots of us common unwashed folk waiting with baited breath for some gems of wisdom to fall. (Or bombshells, strike out that which does not apply) It must require a supercomputer called "deep thought"........

Thanks Andy.Well said. Yean: I have no qualms about sending my proxy. This is because I have spent considerable time debating the possible issues which may come up at the GM, with numerous people. My proxy holder has a very good idea of my sentiments about the politics that have been aired on the rumour mills (bearing in mind that these all need to be clarified at he meeting by the members of our board). I fully expect some of the agitation has been blown out of proportio. I equally expect that there will be some genuine issues come to light that will require further debate and tabling of motions. If any of the allegations mentioned in the various forums are true, we shall definately see some action taken by members. Not all the information I have heard has come from the forums. For instance there has been robust debate in our club, over the past year or so. There have been stories shared by members who have had personal experience with some of the "issues" mentioned in these forums. However none of this is as good as getting full and frank answers from our Board or executive. That is what the GM is all about. So I fully trust my proxy holder to carry out my wishes with integrity in regard to votes on any motions tabled at the GM. This is not a lynching party as some detractors fearfully suggest. It is simply members of an association asking for honest open answers from their Board and executive - in a fair, democratic and constitutional manner.

Seems that there no recent posts here. Has the discontent surrounding RAAus executive and board resolved itself? The General Meeting is coming up soon.

Jim, Thank you for starting an open channel of communication. I believe that there is not much that should be kept 'in camera' or secret. After all we, the members are better able to understand the reasons for actions and events if we are provided with all the relevent inforamtion about stuff. And that includes the lead up information that is essential to put things into context. The only reservations that folk may harbour is a fear that a personal circulation list may become a selective way to communicate with a target group. That willprobably be used (by those afraid that truth is a problem) as criticism of your efforts. I fully understand your intentions are simply to provide a pathway that RAAus is at present reluctant to employ. I believe that the larger your circulation list is, the better it is. Preferrable please don't differentiate based on geographics or demographics. That way the messages will not be seen as being selective information. Hopefully the content will eventually become rather boring reading. Then we will know that things are improving. When thing are going well in an organisation there are no exciting press releases and no shocking bombshells to read in the bulletins. Most of all thanks for including the members in the information loop. You have the support of many members to back up your courageous move. From where I sit, you are showing the integrity that we are all crying out for. Keep up the good work. PeterT

It appears to me that it is not possible for one individual to hijack the complete control of a board all by himself.

No, it all looks good to me. The board DOES have a system in place.......

Has anyone considered the possibility that SR is already planning to abdicate his throne just proir to the Feb meeting to avoid facing the music? That would alow the rest to use his departure as proof of "It's alright folks, WE've fixed it" and thereby keep the status quo - and just appoint another figurehead.

Thanks, Nev. That's what I was trying to say. The rules should be relatively simple, but they must have teeth. There will be no responsibility taken unless there are consequenses for poor behaviour.

Rather than pushing the roundabout of structural modelling, or fine tuning of org charts, I think it is rather more important to focus the Feb meeting on the first, most fundamental priority - 1. Establish specific events where person/s have actually broken our rules (spelled out in the constitution) 2. Bring about appropriate consequences to those individuals identified as having broken our rules (as the rules stand now). Only after that has occurred, will we be in a position to make the important revisions of the constitution, and of the org structure. Only then will the communication channels down to the members start to open as they should. Only then will the members be able to see which of our quieter board members are not part of the problem. We should not expect to 'fix' all our woes in the one meeting. Just look after the first step of the rebirth of RAAus. This will require a couple of specifically targetted questiions to be tabled at the meeting, followed by specific requests to be actioned by the board. No matter how hard you try to prevent it, there will always be individuals who make their success by breaking the rules, or by bullying. At this time we just need to take a stand against those who may lack the integrity to do their jobs properly. Just my opinion, don't take it too seriously.

Sure, the lead up questions are required first. I hadn't thought of that. 1. Did SR send an email resigning as President ? 2. Did SR send an email resigning as Nth QLD representative. ? 3. If 2 is correct, then why did (a majority of) the board feel they had the authority to reinstate a regional representative who had resigned, without reference to the electors of Nth QLD ? 4. Bearing in mind that SR's resignation apparently rendered him no longer a member of the Committee under the constitution,will the board please remove him (in accordance with the constitution) from the board, and from his present position of acting as President of RAAus, until such time as the conditions stated in our consititution have been fulfilled in regard to his appointments? 5. Has the Board informed the RAAus members that the Elected Committee member for Nth Qld has resigned, and that the constitution requires a by-election to select a replacement? If not, will they please do so? When is this planned to occur? Now that I look at it, the process does seem to demand a lot of separate questions, and maybe a flow chart. Peter T

So to bring it up at the special General Meeting which has an especially general agenda........ Question No:2 for the Board: Please advise the members now, on what points did RAAus fail the four successive audits? I feel that we need to have a list of specific questions to table at the meeting. How about that one? Is there any reason to keep the questions to ourselves at this point? Would it be more productive to air the questions in advance? Peter T

Back to the topic - the alleged Accounting Issue...... I am not much good when it comes to deciphering the accounts. A bit like decoding a weather report. Can anyone please spell out the accounting "Issues" in laymans terms for me? I need more understanding before I take up the cudgel. Peter T

OK, here goes......... Question No:1 to the board: Bearing in mind that SR's resignation apparrently rendered him no longer a member of the Committee under the constitution,will the board please remove him (in accordance with the constitution) from the board, and from his present position of acting President of RAAus, until such time as the conditions stated in our consititution have been fulfilled in regard to his appointments? Please feel free to add all and any tuppence worth's to that starting point (time for me to get kevlar suit!). Peter T

Thanks Maj. Happy New Year.

Thanks Pete for such a good summary. We should all start from that summary and discuss / refine / craft our questions in readiness to present at the Special General Meeting. That is the only way to make a positive contribution toward navigating RAAus out of the darkness. PeterT

Maj - I'll second your nomination

I had been avoiding getting into the detail of my problem, but I may as well air it.... The fuel tanks are mounted in the wings. They are a glassed basin rivetted up to a alloy top skin which forms part of the torque structure of the wing. Whilst replacing the tanks I discovered that one tank had two rows of rivets along the main spar, and the other had one row of rivets along the main spar. So I called up the master and put my question to him - which arrangement was intended? After some email exchanges it was revealed (to my shock) that the original plans were stored on a hard drive which has been mislaid. So no definitive answer was available from Ballina. Yes, the GA-55 looks similar, but you can never be really sure. If I can get a copy of them it would certainly help. Maybe the GA-55 was the kit version of the factory built GA-912, or more likely I have the Rotax powered version of the GA-55?

Well, Desky, Howie will make anybody just about any 'derivative' that you can think up. For instance, tricycle GR-912 could also be called a derivative of a GR-912. Or you could call it a Lightwing with a training wheel. Anyway, I'm after design info on the main spar and wing tank mounting. That is specific to the GA_912 derivative. PeterT

Kaz, Thanks for your contributions to this forum. Balanced, informative and clear. If ever I get into trouble, I'd be content to have the services of a 'bush lawyer' like you any day. Unfortunately your information only adds to my concern for our collective future. Anyway, February will hopefully clarify a lot of things for us, and hopefully resolve some too. Have a great festive season in spite of all that. PT

OOPS ..... P4D - I was rather hoping that someone would say "Hey, thats a great idea - I'll set one up right away!" So far it is a pretty short list. Deskpilot - The GA-912 has same fuse and engine as GR-912, but smaller wings, and half as many lift struts. PeterT