.

.

All things hang gliding. This is the main forum. New users, introduce yourself.

Moderators: sg, mods

User avatar
By magentabluesky
#403311
USHPA: Governance proposal 2018

A proposal from the Strategic Planning Committee for changes to USHPA's governance structure.

Proposing a new structure for USHPA's governance

Link to USHPA Sign In Required

By James Bradley
The Strategic Planning Committee has been examining how the USHPA structure is working.
Now things are different. As USHPA moves to communicate better and to be transparent in its operations, committee proposals must be posted to the membership for comment at least 30 days before they are voted on. Anyone can point out a flaw in reasoning or suggest a better idea. The board, too, can weigh in. After the comment period, the committee has a chance to incorporate the feedback into its proposal before presenting it to the board.
Another problem with the current structure became apparent during the insurance crisis. There was no way for the 26-member board to manage the fast-moving situation. . . . . .
With these challenges in mind, last fall the board asked my committee, the Strategic Planning Committee, to develop a proposal for a 7-member board of directors, with a transition plan for how to make the change.
Please send your concerns and ideas. I will personally read every comment and we will consider all suggestions.

USHPA governance proposal PDF

Now is your chance to volunteer for committee work and/or provide feedback on this Proposal.

Any discussion on the topic?
User avatar
By magentabluesky
#403340
Prior to the USHPA governance proposal, there was the summit meeting as reported by James Bradley.
James Bradley wrote:Before the recent USHPA board meeting in Golden, Colorado, there were two several-hour sessions about creating a new future for hang gliding. Led by Bruce Weaver and facilitated by me, they were also attended by Matt Taber, Jayne DePanfilis, David Glover, Paul Murdoch, Martin Palmaz, Joe Greblo, Steve Pearson, John Harris,and Nick Greece. They weren't official USHPA sessions, just some of us sitting down in a room for the first time.
Culture change is hard. This piece alone might need disciplined determination from every US hang glider pilot, not just to be welcoming and inclusive yourself, but to no longer tolerate another hang glider pilot acting like a d- -k. You have to be willing talk to those people. This difficult effort is required because we don’t have time to wait for a generation to die off.

The summit was about the six year plan for the Hang Gliding Renaissance?

Full report by James Bradley as reported by the Other Report. Link

The white board is also very interesting. Link (zip file)

Highlights on the white board include easier flying hang gliders, easier to teach, no lumber racks, better entry level products, better training gliders, be willing to have the difficult conversations and, be willing to coach others about choosing to be Inclusionary of Everyone.

This is right down the line of conversation of the Future of Hang Gliding and Should we go back to our roots?

James Bradley is looking for your feedback.

Feedback?
User avatar
By remmoore
#403347
DAVE 858 wrote:
Tue Apr 24, 2018 2:04 pm
So instead of 26 people they are going down to 7. How many of those 7 will be hang glider pilots biwingle or otherwise?
You can bet promises will be made to assure you HG will be equally-represented. Those promises are never broken.

RM
User avatar
By Rebardan
#403349
The restructuring is not a done deal. It is being PROPOSED. James is seeking feedback on the restructuring PROPOSAL.
He wants to know what the MEMBERS think. There are lots of members who read this forum regularly. I am surprised that there is not a single objective comment on this topic yet. The logo got more reaction than this proposed radical change to the org governance. Remember?
Attachments
Untitled.jpg
Untitled.jpg (62.52 KiB) Viewed 1855 times
User avatar
By mtpilot
#403350
They have ignored all objective comments, like just start over, or go back to a HG only assoc. I do like the old
USHGA logo, thanks.
User avatar
By remmoore
#403360
Rebardan wrote:
Tue Apr 24, 2018 5:26 pm
The restructuring is not a done deal. It is being PROPOSED. James is seeking feedback on the restructuring PROPOSAL.
He wants to know what the MEMBERS think. There are lots of members who read this forum regularly. I am surprised that there is not a single objective comment on this topic yet.
For those of us who have been around long enough to remember, the problem is that we've seen this process unfold before. "It's just a proposal." "We need your input." Too many times, the proposal has become reality and our input has been dismissed.

Now our backs are against the wall. The numbers are no longer in our favor - not that it seemed to matter much when we were in the majority. It's even easier now to ignore our input, but I'm going to provide it anyway.

I want to keep the larger number of representatives. It increases the odds that we won't be further marginalized, if we have more chances to have HG pilots representing us.

RM
User avatar
By AlC
#403447
I hope everyone receiving today's (5/7) USHPA Spring Newsletter takes a minute to provide their thoughts on the Governance Proposal. As you will read, there has been a lot of discussion and debate on the topic and the Board is very much undecided and seeking broad input. We don't see many tie votes on the USHPA Board. We are looking to the membership for the next steps.

Thank you,

Alan Crouse
User avatar
By mgforbes
#403449
remmoore wrote:
Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:13 am
I want to keep the larger number of representatives. It increases the odds that we won't be further marginalized, if we have more chances to have HG pilots representing us.
RM
Thanks for the opinion on this. I am part of the strategic planning committee, and I have distinctly mixed feelings about the proposal, despite being in the group that developed it. Our job was not to make a change, but to explore what a change would look like IF we made a change, and how we'd go about doing it. The board asked us to work out a proposal for consideration. When we got to the meeting there was a lot of thoughtful discussion, and over all of it was the general understanding that IF we decided to move forward with this proposal, the next step would be extensive consultation with the members to get their input. After a lot of discussion we took a vote and came out tied. I voted in favor, despite some reservations, because I felt that moving it forward for membership discussion was worthwhile.

I understand your concern about being marginalized. Can you point to specific decisions made by the USHPA board which negatively affect hang glider pilots, compared to paraglider pilots? I fly both, and a powered ultralight, and I don't view our decisions through a lens focused on what craft I'm flying. I don't think other board members do either.

It is true that hang glider pilot membership is down. Demographics have been telling us that for years now. New pilots joining up are moving toward paragliding, for a variety of reasons that have nothing at all to do with USHPA's training and rating standards. (At least, so far as I see it.) The percentage decline of hang glider pilots is because "back then", hang gliding was all there was, so everybody who joined up was a hang glider pilot. Now that cohort of pilots is in late middle age, and they're aging out of the sport. Many have moved on to other forms of aviation. I know some of our old-time hang glider pilots around here are flying powered, or sailplanes, or have moved on to RC modeling, or helicopters. They started with hang gliding because that's what they could afford back then. Life happened, they became more affluent and their range of choices expanded. Also, spouses and kids happened, and that cuts down on free time for flying. Speaking for myself, I get a lot more trike flying time than hang gliding, because I can stop by the airfield, do a preflight, get an hour in and still be home in time to take my wife out to dinner and a show.

Your concern is about representation of HG vs PG. Ok...but do you have any other thoughts on the matter? One of my big concerns is the loss of a broad spectrum of viewpoints, and the risk that we miss something important due to lack of experience in a particular area. Our hope is that the committees will play a larger role in setting overall policy, with the board acting more in an oversight and final approval role. But you should read the whole proposal through, several times I hope, and think about it from a national-organization-management perspective.

MGF
User avatar
By NMERider
#403450
I'll chime in. I really don't worry about hang gliding being marginalized by paragliders. What I worry about is regional representation. It is my belief that free-flight is inherently regional in nature and without geographically diverse representation everyone will be hurt in the long run. Free-flight across the U.S. is many thing but is not homogeneous by any stretch of the imagination for a vast number of reasons. I vote to stay diverse and avoid consolidation. I hope it's the right call.
User avatar
By mgforbes
#403458
NMERider wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 12:26 am
[...] Free-flight across the U.S. is many thing but is not homogeneous by any stretch of the imagination for a vast number of reasons. I vote to stay diverse and avoid consolidation. I hope it's the right call.
This is one of my concerns as well. Flatland aerotowing in Florida is much different from coastal soaring in Oregon, or winch towing in Illinois, or high desert mountain launching in Nevada. But the size of the board and diversity of opinion can be a problem too, when there's a necessity to move fast and respond quickly. I was in the middle of that process too, during the insurance work. It was unavoidable that we had to make significant, organization-changing decisions in a small group without the time to consult the entire board and get consensus. Had we done so, we would not have succeeded in getting the self-insurance program running in time to maintain coverage for our sites, schools and association members. The consequence was that some board members felt like they were out of the loop (they were correct!) and that added conflict and pressure to an already difficult situation. But we got through it, and now we're trying to clean up the details and fix the areas which are still unfinished.

One of the problems this proposal tries to address is the need for a diversity of geographic knowledge and experience, by pushing the detailed work down to the committee level where we can have more representation across a broad spectrum. The smaller board then functions to ratify the committee decisions, rather than the current structure where much of the board is involved both at the committee level and later in approving it formally as policy. This assumes that we can get interested volunteers to participate at the committee level, and they get the work done in advance of the board meetings. It requires more involvement by regional members, and their willingness to take on the work.
User avatar
By NMERider
#403459
mgforbes wrote:
Tue May 08, 2018 6:35 pm
.....the need for a diversity of geographic knowledge and experience, by pushing the detailed work down to the committee level where we can have more representation across a broad spectrum. The smaller board then functions to ratify the committee decisions, rather than the current structure where much of the board is involved both at the committee level and later in approving it formally as policy. This assumes that we can get interested volunteers to participate at the committee level, and they get the work done in advance of the board meetings. It requires more involvement by regional members, and their willingness to take on the work.
The small board/diverse committee approach sounds like a viable way to go. The existing RD structure consists of volunteers as does 99% of everything that keeps the sport alive.
User avatar
By joefaust
#403479
MGF wrote:
Can you point to specific decisions made by the USHPA board which negatively affect hang glider pilots, compared to paraglider pilots?
Example: Yes:
1. Keeping PG in org. while PDMC is fact. Cure: Drop PG. :thumbsup:
2. Unfairly tossing out good HG pilots. Cure: Revoke the tosses. :thumbsup:
User avatar
By flysurfski
#403481
MGF wrote:
Can you point to specific decisions made by the USHPA board which negatively affect hang glider pilots, compared to paraglider pilots?
Torrey Pines Gliderport

You asked the question.... :surrender:

Btw if you want a specific example I will pick just one. Ignoring the Different ridge right of way rules policy for commercial PG tandems than solo flights. Pretty dangerous stuff IMO. :popcorn:
User avatar
By SlopeSkimmer
#403489
joefaust wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 1:16 am
Also,
When the board decided to remove a good HG pilot for testifying in court.
You can't kick someone out of the sport of hang gliding!

IMO, the USHPA has become a monopoly by design. This organization which started with good intentions, under the guise of safety and self preservation has morphed into a self righteous group of common street thugs. The USHPA has no governing authority. The Federal Aviation Administration is the only national authority with powers to regulate all aspects of civil aviation.

We have challenged the legal authority of the USHPA at our largest flying site in Northern California and won. Ed Levin Park is now a non-discriminatory, non-exclusionary hang gliding site open to all hang glider pilots regardless of their affiliation with any local or national organizations.

I beg you, please stand up for your right to free flight and the rights of all human beings to enjoy the sport of hang gliding.
User avatar
By joefaust
#403491
joefaust wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 1:16 am
Also,
When the board decided to remove a good HG pilot for testifying in court.
SLIGHT CORRECTION: Unfortunately the board removed a good HG pilot from the USHPA org, but not from the sport of recreational hang gliding, for simply being a good citizen and testifying in court.
CURE by the board? Revoke the expulsion soon and avoid doing similarly in the future.

=========================
Send injury-amending funds or helpful funds to
https://www.paypal.me/joefaust
to be used to help form an association in USA dedicated to serving only recreational hang gliding. :goodidea:
By dshman
#403493
Write a letter to all your state representatives. Ask them to make it clear why, or explain why you can’t access the same land fellow fliers is using to fly on. By law they have to investigate if hand written, and give you a explanation or be liable to a law suit. On average once they start to dig thru what’s going on red flags will start to come up. Then they start questioning the state agency’s making them nervous, and almost every time I have done this, it turns out someone’s breaking the law, and it’s not me. So if you simply want answers, ask the right people responsible to provide them. The key to this proses is tell no one your doing it, and let it fall from the top down the ranks, while no ones prepared a defense for themselves, catch them sleeping. The result of this proses will open your public land and drive the idiots back in there communistic hole they belong in.

Morph info video just posted. https://www.youtube.[…]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Me3srOy7Ac

Waffle iron for GEEKS

it seems like I have to try it. wkwkwk also visit […]

"THERMAL CHASERS"

"THERMAL CHASERS" https://www.youtube.[…]