Say it ain't so, Bill! leaf season is close. Hurry up and get up here. WC
Check out the post below that I copied from another thread here on FChat... This is a guy from GA... Isn't that where Charles is from? It sounds like they should work on their Chapter a bit... Just sayin'... elgin328 Formula Junior Silver Subscribed Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: near Atlanta Full Name: Mark Posts: 741 Keep up the good work we have nothing in Ga. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We have nothing in Ga. no events, NOTHING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! sad to say but I dropped out for this reason I don't even know who our rep. is ??????????????? We get all of our info & events from Ferrari chat. members. If we do have a rep. in Ga. there are no post to tell anyone about up comming events. Hats off to David Scott We need him in Ga.
Just examining the list of those who want to vote Dave out: claussen - the original perpetrator Ryan from VA who owns a Honda and Mazda (not even in the region) A used car dealer from London - I bet he's had a lot of personal contact with Dave!!!!!!!!! carraragt558 and I quote "Personal Ferraris N/A Wanted Cars None Other Cars Owned N/A" A foot model (??????) from CA (Also a bit out of the region) And, of course, a professor from SC who owns a 1980 GTSi How impressive!!! And I'll bet that each and every one of these gentlemen have met Dave personally and can substantiate their reasoning for voting against him. Could there be just a tiny bit of subterfuge in the mix?????????????????????? Bob Z.
This is a thread from the GA section talking about Mr. Claussen's leadership: http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=224112 Funny, I remember Charles coming up to David after one of the events and telling him that he'd better slow down with all these events or he was going to make him look bad!
i was not aware that you could actually see the poll results by voter until your post. black jag and huskerbill surprise me as i would have expected them to justify their vote. they are both good car guys and good f-chatters.
I made the poll results open for only 1 reason.. since I pretty much felt the attacks against David were more personal (personality conflicts) than legitimate FCA grievances..the reason why is because I did not want the poll results "skewed". If the poll was private it could have been too easy to manipulate the voting values.. ie: false "yes" votes for those personal friends of Charles. I really would hope those voting "yes" to out David are doing so for a valid reason... not because a "friend" says to. I am not making any accusations, just seems odd that someone from London England as well as several others from far away states are voting "yes" to remove him.. It would help that if a "yes" is entered - help us understand what made you enter that vote.. I really hated to comment on the polling because my fear was as I said prior.. skewing the poll results & having an inaccurate reflection of the actual truth. I will add I have received NUMEROUS emails for support of David in his current serving position, many of these people do not have F-chat accounts or not enough posts to vote in the poll.. those numbers would greatly increase the "no to remove" votes...
Wait a minute, not my region, but since I work closely with FCA National and I was a 4 year FCA DFW President let me share some information. There is a 4 year term limit on FCA Regional Directors, but some regions apply that to Chapter Presidents too. I was subject to the 4 year term limit in the South Central Region as a Chapter President. I don't know anything else, but I've heard the reason for David Scott being removed is because of the 4 year term limit. Anything else or other politics over my head. Ill leave now.
I think it's rather suspect that the six that voted against David, voted but yet had no comments to make. He's not perfect, and we would expect some grievances, but if you are willing to condemn a man, you should be man enough to tell us why!
Nothing has been found in the bylaws for SC president limit of 4 years has been furnished. Someone else had looked into that & cannot find that rule. Your input of course is always welcomed One would only guess that if this was the written rule Charles would have been more than happy to present his "side of the story". Regional directors I could see a term limit (larger pool to find responsible ambitious apointees), in a state if you had one ambitious individual it seems would be ridiculous to replace them with a "lesser" candidate..just to satisfy a 4 year rule. As stated prior - no proof of that being a bylaw in this region has been provided. for example, here are the ACTUAL term limits for the northwest region - I imagine ours would be similar (notice NO term limits other than regional director): C. Terms of Office The Regional Director shall serve for a term of two years and may not be elected for more than two consecutive terms. All other elected officers shall serve for a term of one year, with no term limits. Terms of office will begin on May 1 and end on April 30. OK- HERE ARE THE ACTUAL BYLAW TERM LIMITS OF THE SE REGION ADOPTED MARCH 15,2007 TERM OF OFFICE Section A - Term of Office Term of office for Regional Director is two years, with an optional second term with at least 75% consensus of the Regional Governing Board. If such consensus is not reached, then elections shall be held. In no case shall elections be held less than every two terms. Term of office for other Regional Officers is two years with automatic renewals, subject to majority vote of the remaining Regional Officers. THATS IT- THERE IS NOTHING IN THE BYLAWS OF THIS REGION REGARDING A 4 YEAR TERM LIMIT FOR DAVIDS' POSITION. ANYONE WISHING TO RECEIVE THE BYLAWS OF OUR REGION IN .PDF FORM - I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SHARE THEM- MESSAGE ME.
Has anyone talked to Charles or heard anything from him about this...? I can't understand why he's letting this drag out without at least responding here...?!? He sent me a PM on FaceBook yesterday telling me that "David Scott was being replaced by Buddy Delaney as of Oct. 1st"... I emailed him about this thread and asked him to respond before it became "messy"... He hasn't even emailed me back. Has anyone talked to Buddy Delaney yet...? I would like to know what his take is on all of this...
I did contact Charles about this to get his take on it, and according to him, David Scott has been there 5 1/2 years which is over the 4 year term limit, which explains the replacement. I am an active FCA member and don't get involved in politics at all, but if this is in fact a legitimate rule, then I am afraid Charles may be 100% correct. On the flip side, if I could change the rules, I would, and make David Scott a lifetime president. Just my 2 cents.
Thats a fabrication - no term limits on davids position: Amazing that the regional director is unaware of his own bylaws... or, this sounds like a great "excuse" however- its false. TERM OF OFFICE Section A - Term of Office Term of office for Regional Director is two years, with an optional second term with at least 75% consensus of the Regional Governing Board. If such consensus is not reached, then elections shall be held. In no case shall elections be held less than every two terms. Term of office for other Regional Officers is two years with automatic renewals, subject to majority vote of the remaining Regional Officers.
I didn't major in politics, but in reading section A "Term of office for Regional Director is two years, with an optional second term". Doesn't this mean 4 years total or am I not reading it right? So what happens after the 4 years? Can that same position be re-elected?
Regional Director is Charles's position. That is a 4 year term. The Term of office for other Regional Officers is two years with automatic renewals, subject to majority vote of the remaining Regional Officers. (no cap on the term of regional officers) only the regional director is bound to a max term.
If a 4-year term is the reason for all of this, then why wasn't David asked to step down or name a successor two years ago? Why did it all of a sudden come up at the same time that Charles was having "issues" with David? Things are really starting to smell of BS!
The southeast region has NO LIMIT to term on Davids position (Regional OFFICER). The ONLY term limit is Charles Claussens Regional Director position (Regional DIRECTOR). If you read the bylaws below, you will see the 2 different positions are qualified: TERM OF OFFICE Section A - Term of Office Term of office for Regional Director is two years, with an optional second term with at least 75% consensus of the Regional Governing Board. If such consensus is not reached, then elections shall be held. In no case shall elections be held less than every two terms. Term of office for other Regional Officers is two years with automatic renewals, subject to majority vote of the remaining Regional Officers.
I can answer that. *I* received those postcards as FCA Regional Secretary, and counted them. NO personal/individual vote choices were shared with anyone on the Board, only the totals. Written comments were shared, but kept anonymous. I've been in FCA-SE as a member for around 20 years. Postcards have been used for as long as I can remember, long before I did anything with the club other than just attend events. It *could* be done electronically, but it would take programming to make sure the person voting was who they say they are, and that no one votes twice.
Potentially as written, yes... but in practice, NO. FCA National prefers that new blood is infused into the leadership slots, and I think there's substantial benefits to that practice. The State Chapter Presidents are also considered "Assistant Regional Directors" and in practice are appointed as such by the Regional Director and I've seen them having been replaced or swapped out for a variety of reasons during a R.D.'s tenure. I'm speaking as someone who has been in FCA for around 20 years, and having served in the past as a State Chapter President and Regional Director. I see that Rob Lay's observation was similar.
This comment isn't directed at you, Mike, as your information seems to be both informative and objective. But the content of that statement to me is just a kind of cheap semantics.
I'm back! Answer one question, your Chapter presidents are not elected positions, they are appointed positions? In South Central even Chapter presidents are elected.
Guys, I think we are getting off on a tangent here. The term issue is one that seems to be being raised out of convenience. If you could find a rule that says chapter presidents are term-limited to 4 years, would the way to handle that be to wait 1.5 years past the 4 year point and then notify a chapter Pres via email that he's done in 2 weeks... only "coincidentally" as an email response to said chapter Pres telling the RD that he would be filing a formal complaint to national about him? David's removal is not about term limits. It is about an agenda against someone with whom the RD had friction, someone the RD liked to antagonize, someone who asked more questions than were comfortable to the RD, and ultimately someone the RD wanted to displace as a demonstration of his own perceived authority, something that is clearly of high priority to him. This is a car club and I think everyone here is able to be mindful of that with the exception of the RD. We have a great time in NC and a great time in SC and only a couple specific people trying to get in the way, something that has become a pattern.
Yes. In addition to the elected position of Regional Director and expected positions such as Secretary Treasurer, etc, officers include up to six Chapter Presidents, one per state within the Region, who act as Assistant Regional Directors (may also be referred to as Region Co-Vice Presidents). Per the bylaws, the Regional Board decides how Chapter Presidents come about (appointment versus election), but for as long as I've been aware of it, our State Chapter Presidents have been appointed by the Regional Director with confirmation by the Regional Board, though individual state leadership often suggests individuals they'd like the R.D. to consider appointing.