Printable View
I just got my latest copy of the journal. I find it interesting and disturbing that the board decided for itself it was going to reduce its number for 2010 and then hand pick the ones it "nominates" to stay. This sounds like a bit of a coup, and not very democratic. I don't think the board should or can make this decision w/o consent of the members. What do other members think?
By laws were printed and voted on in the Winter 2006 GCA Journal. Did you read them and vote on them? No one "decided for itself it was going to reduce its number for 2010," the by laws state that the Board "shall be comprised of no less that 7 nor more than 13 members." There are 12 candidates for 9 positions and a nominating committee, per the by laws, endorsed nine they felt were the best choices of the 12 (per the bylaws).Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ballcane
Aren't you about three and-a-half years late on this?
The GCA, being spread out all over the country, is not like a local organization where you would know all the canidates and there track records. I believe those on the Nominating Committee are in the best position to determine canidates best suited to lead this Association. Most of the membership know very few, if any, of the Board members personally and must rely on the Nominating Committees judgement. Without them making a recommendation most of us would be left to the flip of a coin to determine which canidate to vote for.
As far as the reduction of Board Members from 13 to 9, that was brought to the attention of the membership in the "Chairman's Column" of the Summer 2009 edition of the GCA Journal so, if you read your Journal, it should not have come as a surprise. And as previously stated, this is a non-issue as it is well within our BYLAWS.
I'm lucky to have one of the board members as a personal friend, one who's opinion I can trust. Since I don't really know any of the other candidates at all ( know one a little bit), I can ask my buddy for advice. We are pretty like minded when it comes to the GCA.
www.m1buddy.com
I know none of the candidates, so I have no bias one way or the other. The bylaws set forth the board size and there are rules to govern the elections.
But, I won't ever know anything about the election or the candidates, because I miss the fall issue each year (the last three, including this new issue) because when I renew my membership, it never goes through until after the issue has been sent out, so I don't get it. This year I renewed in August and still no issue. :help:
No one at GCA will read this anyway, since they are all in preparation for the convention in Anniston and the opening of the cases of returned rifles for the select few to chose their newest acquisitions. The leftovers will be what the rest of us get when we order or go there.
A logically thinking person that didn't receive an issue would call their office and have one sent to them, wouldn't you agree?Quote:
Originally Posted by mack
You didn't submit for the Anniston convention?
An EMAIL to the GCA should get things back on track and get you your Fall edition of the GCA Journal.Quote:
Originally Posted by mack
As far as "no one at GCA will read this anyway". Not true. A member of the GCA Board of Directors has already responded to this thread.
Also, as you know, the convention was limited to 250 people. This limit was imposed by CMP not the GCA, do to the limited amount of space at CMP Anniston. All of us had an equal opportunity to respond in time to be one of the "select few". I also was late responding. I did not respond untill the convention became a topic of conversation on the CMP Forum. I was still able to get in under the wire.
As far as "opening cases of returned rifles for the select few to choose their newest acquistions". I think not. Most of the GCA members attending will be more interested in observing these returned rifles for historical purposes and not to add to their collections. Also, if by chance, a rifle out of the norm turns up it will go to auction, not to one of the select few.
Be advised that next year the GCA Convention will be held an Springfield Armory. If you wish to attend that one be sure to make your intentions known ASAP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe W
Where did this info come from? I checked with the GCA to see what month they were going to hold the meeting in Springfield and they replied back there are no plans at all. If you know something the rest of don't, I would appreciate knowing what month it will held so I can block out time for it.
E-Mail from the GCA:
Hi John,
I'm sorry, I'm afraid you have received some bad information. There are no plans at this time for the 2010 GCA convention at all. We won't start planning that until after the 2009 convention is over.
Thanks a bunch!
Carl A. Palermo
GCA Member Services
(816) 471-2005
FAX (816) 421-1991
carlmbrservices@aol.com
John,Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnF
Your information is correct, there are no plans for SA next year.
Joe,
It's much too early to even think about the 2010 convention.
:nono::crying:Quote:
Originally Posted by mack