My "gut" reaction to the well written suggestion is that the proposed
changes would result in the splintering of the organization and the
resultant arguments for "turf" and the dividing of the budget would result
in it's demise.
I believe that there is much greater strength as one association for all
model aircraft disciplines than there would be in multiple associations for
individual disciplines. I definitely fear that the suggested changes would
cause such a breakup.
I support the concept that the AMA is not working as well as it might
currently, but I am not sure that the geographical regions concept is at
the root of any problems. Most successful large national companies have a
"Regional" structure within them.
I think there needs to be more geographical "responsibility and
involvement" for the individual disciplines. Reporting to the Regional VP
should be small Committees (3-4 people?) for the various disciplines of the
model aircraft hobby active in that region. The committees would coordinate
activities and support the AMA members in their region involved in the
individual disciplines. In todays "wired" world, communication between
regions should be relatively effective. Members of the Regional committees
could report to a National level Committee for their discipline. National
decisions could be reached through coordination of the national committees.
I would like to see an AMA Flying Field Acquisition Program started that
would take a set amount of money from each annual dues ($5?) plus donations
and use that money to acquire land in each region. That land could be
leased to local AMA club(s) for $500 per year to cover AMA administration
costs associated with the land management. Over a few decades all regions
should have one or two flying fields that shouldn't be closed on them. I
suspect we all wish that such a program had been started 20 years ago.
Perhaps each AMA region should form an AMA Review Committee to review
regional input on organization changes and pass that up to AMA HQ for
membership vote. I do suspect that regional inputs will differ based on
local regional perceived problems... that will need to be resolved at the
national level and through voting.
As to the future of the "Nats" - I think it would be brighter if it toured
the Nation, perhaps using a future "network" of AMA flying fields. But that
is an old issue that was resolved by "centralized" AMA thinking. I can't
seem to locate a membership number in the AMA mag (I think it should be
right up front with the list of officers, but I may have missed it.) but I
suspect that the number of entrants in the Nats is a very small percentage
of the membership and that a "hard core" number of entrants come from the
AMA "center of the universe" area... year after year. If it were to move
about the country I think more total members would attend and/or participate.
My 2ยข
Bob Goldsmith
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe
messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Email sent from web based email
such as Hotmail and AOL are generally NOT in text format
