For those of you who can't, or won't, come to next Tuesday's (Dec. 2) meeting, it's time I issue an official reply to the mistruths and innuendo's written in the threads from Misters Grande and Billave entitled "ROPA: still the good old boy's club". Also to the replies of Mrs. Grande (Bonnie Outlaw) to the Paul Kermis thread "My 2 cents". I urge you to reread these threads first as I will be referring to them, point by point, in the order in which they are written.
First from Johnny Bravo- John Grande. I never "stepped down." I had decided not to run "step aside" for Dan Gray. I'm glad you agree it's "not wrong" to change my mind and only did so after the urging of several members ( please read my column in the November ROPA newsletter at
www.rochesteroffshore.com ).
First of all, I never "actively" or inactively campaigned. I dare to find one person who can swear that I called, mailed, emailed, etc., anything asking them to vote for me and Dan has assured me the same for him. That other people took it upon themselves to do so for both candidates, either with or without their knowledge, is perfectly legitimate. What country have you been living in that requires candidates to "let the opposing candidate know" they are campaigning or what form or group they campaign to?! Of course if it would be improper if done with club funds, but nothing along that line was done on either side.
He claims there were problems with some members voting and that it was "presented to the board" and "rebuked by the new administration." Nothing was "rebuked." And what "new administration"? One person has left (Dan) and one person (Donna) is now on the board. At an emergency Board of Directors meeting on Nov. 11th the details of all the issues were heavily discussed and every member of the board had their opportunity to present their views. A majority vote reaffirmed the voting. This was due to there being very vague and few bylaws on voting and multiple problems with our constitution as it was written for an offshore racing club (Article III- the Objects of the Association: to develop a knowledge and taste for offshore racing, etc.). Nothing about our mission as a club involved with promoting fun or poker runs). Over the years we have corrected many items but not even one member foresaw the issues that were raised after the election. Matter of fact, not one person even presented these issues at the meeting and elections on that night. If we lived by the details they wish to use as their main reason to gripe, the board looked at how many club members would actually have been allowed to vote. It would be less than 20 and Mr. Grande would not have been one of them as he only attended 2 meetings (we take attendance). Of course neither would his wife (Bonnie Outlaw), or anyone else's wife, significant other, etc., due to it not being written in the bylaws of our "Family" oriented club. However, this is a procedure and routine we established a few years ago that entitles a membership based on "family" with 2 adults being considered as members for particicipation. This, of course, gives both the right to vote as has been evident by the past precedents involving such families as the Bogino's, the Dunlaps, the Tom Grays, the Dan Grays, etc. where only one membership is paid for but both participate,even serve as volunteers for the club , and vote. The board has a plan to correct items in the constitution and set up more detailed voting bylaws. Obviously, and as always, no one is "disregarded" - problems are dealt with using the current mission of the club using logic, rationale and what is "realistic."
As for there being "many" people that voted who are not members - once again a statement devoid of facts (a politically correct term). In actuality, we only discovered 3 people, who were former members, who had not paid their dues in 2003. Two others renewed their 2003 membership before the meeting even started, quite properly.
I won't even go into any detail of Mr. Grande's criticism of attendance at the runs. There are many factors including a tighter economy where people can't go to every event all the time, as well as other competing events. The committees are the most critical of the runs and we are always aware of things we could have done and may do better to help people enjoy the events and come back. It seems that Mr.'s Grande and Billave even made a good suggestion, last fall, about docks at The Showboat. The committee ran with their plan and not one member, not even the 2 who suggested it, participated in it. How do you spell hypocrisy?!
On to P29- Duane Billave. He feels that it would be "wonderful" if the people that showed up at the election meeting "actually participated in the club. He claims he"didn't even recognize most of them." Except for the 3 nonmembers most of those people were either long time (much longer than Mr. Billave)members and or very active members. For example, Roger Fisher and Dave Spanton were actually at every ROPA event, and Buffalo, this year. You didn't recognize them?! I think the photosensitive lenses you wear are staying permanently dark! That they live in Albion, or others who live in Massachussetts, Geneva, Auburn, etc., and can't get to many meetings due to distance does not make them good or "active" club members, according to your definitions, is a supreme insult to them and all members. We'd all like to know how you feel you have the right to define what a good or "active" "club" member is-"one who participates in as many club events as possible." If,due to distance, finances, etc., a member can only attend one or 2 events a year they would appear to have participated in as "many club events as possible" for them and therefore should be "active","actual" or "real" club members according to your definition. Yet you dismiss them and their vote at the election meeting because you "didn't even recognize most of them." Is it possibly because you feel they voted for other candidates you did not vote for? Now we can add the word biased along with that word hypocrisy again!
Now about his comments about me not attending the Hospice Regatta and what a problem it is that the President doesn't attend "club sponsored events." First of all it was not a ROPA sponsored event. It was a Rochester Yacht club event that we were invited to participate in, thanks to the efforts of Colleen and Dan Gray and their relationship to one of the organizers of the event. That said, the more "aware" (a politically correct term for unbiased) members of the club realize that I didn't have a functioning boat for the entire season, due to engine problems. I begged a lot of rides this summer and, if I didn't actually have a life or at least one outside of ROPA, I would have begged another ride for this event. Alas (gasp!) I do have another life and had plans for that day, with my daughter and fiance, well before this event ever came up. I showed up to support the members who chose to support this worthy charity event. I'm sorry Mr. Billave feels the President has to be in attendance and totally involved in every event and this was not good enough for him. Maybe next time I should help him in some way, like wash his boat, cook him lunch and dinner or clean his glasses so he can see all the members he doesn't recognize (like the ones at the club picnic he missed)! I attend and direct 10 club meetings, 11-13 board and committee meetings, every "ROPA sponsored" event year in and out, spend countless hours on the phone and in person with other boating organizations and interests to help ROPA, yet still find time to have other interests and another life. Maybe that's not good enough for the Billaves and Grandes but it is good enough for me and probably every one else who has other lives besides ROPA.
He also states that the election was "not about winning or losing as conceived by our President." I do not "conceive" the election as any more than the opportunity for all the members to have a say in who runs their club and decided to run again due to the input, response and support of members to urge me to do so. Also he claims "MOST of the people that voted our existing President back in, weren't at any of our events and have no idea what they missed out on." Again another"mistruth". In actuality there were very FEW people, out of the 58 votes cast, who voted that weren't at ANY of our events (only the 3 who were not members and the 2 who renewed before the meeting, that I can think of).
In closing with Mr. Billave's thread, he states that he will "probably attend SOME of the events this coming year" but will not "waste" his time anymore at meetings.
This is certainly one of the freedoms this country and his membership afford him. He also has the right to get in on the committees and see what actually goes on, he has the right to actually go out and start his own club with everyone who thinks just like him. He also has the right to, not come to "SOME" events but to come to NONE and leave the club. Oh, that would mean he'd have to follow the club constitution Article IV: section 7 and "may resign from the Association by written notice to the Secretary." Again, another small part of our constitution that no longer pertains to the current climate of the club and one, through our past precedents and current routines and procedures, we do not enforce as being practical and realistic.
As for some brief points of Bonnie Outlaw's (Mrs. Grande's) posts. She acknowledges an "emergency meeting" was held (before this knowledge was even made public- hmmm) but that there "weren't active steps taken to remedy the situation". Please refer to the top of this post for the actions of the Board. Obviously, there are steps being taken and will be worked on at the Board meetings over the winter. Let's not forget, when you start presenting "hanging chads" and political law that this is a club not the government. It is also not a club just for "Rochester" people as we have evolved into a club with an international roster and, as a government with a national vote as opposed to a limited state vote, all members should be allowed to vote as are all registered US citizens in a national election. They all pay the same dues. In referring to your comment "a lot of votes counted that shouldn't have", that is not the opinion of the Board of Directors and whomever gave you the information, before it was public, should have made sure they gave you all the information so you won't come out as presenting misleading information. Also, it is no ones job or responsibility to personally report on minutes of Board of Directors meetings directly to you, or any other member, immediately. That is part of the reason we have club meetings where all the information from all the Board and Committee meetings is presented to the membership in attendance. Like everyone else, you either have to wait for a meeting or contact a Board or Committee member who hopefully will provide you the proper information, if they are willing. I also take it upon myself to pass on some information in my President's column, in the newsletter, for those who may unable to attend meetings as often as they would like or at all
The last time I saw this much misleading mistruths and misinformation was in our local newspaper, the "Demagog and Comical." Perhaps you all missed your calling as newspaper writers!
For the rest of the members (all "real" members) please feel free to come to the club meetings or contact more than one Board member for confirmation before trying to mislead everyone else. Unless bias and deception are your goals! After all, you have the freedom of speech and the internet as do we all.
ROPA President Bill Krystan
Charter Member
It's nice that you have been around so long, and have seen many things evolve in the club over time. You no doubt, have knowlege of how things changed and why and can offer a lot of insight. The value in that really can't be measured.
