[KCDXC] Rough times at KCDX Club... but impeachment???

[Mike ZooLoo]

I can never tell where these things are being emailed when they are
emailed under group addresses and the true recipients are hidden.  I
don't think this was a private email to me so I will respond to the
club.  My apologies if I am wrong.

--- On Mon, 7/6/09, Tom Hammond <n0ss at embarqmail.com> wrote:




 
>>Greetings to my friends in the KCDX Club. Friends are supposed to
be able to talk 'straight' with each other... discussing things 'right'
and 'wrong' WITHOUT it materially effecting they friendship...

I agree.  However seldom it is put into practice.  It takes grown adults to accept this.




> IMPEACHMENT is generally sought for an official who
has been derelict in his official duties, 

and there ya have it.

> NOT just because he's managed to piss off a
few of his constituents with some possibly mis-chosen (but not
necessarily libelous) words or phrases.

Yes, not JUST because however being snide and undiplomatic, fracturing the Club, is part of the reason not JUST the reason.


> When the current KCDX Club president was first nominated for the
position, we must assume that this nomination was made because the person
MAKING that nomination felt that the person he was nominating WOULD DO A
GOOD JOB IN THAT POSITION. If the nomination was made for ANY other
reason, then shame on the nominator!!!  Furthermore, it should be
assumed that those voting in favor of the nominee's election also felt
that he would be a good person for that position... or they should NOT
have voted for him as well.

This is true for any elected official who later gets impeached.  They are elected because the electorate feel they will perform and they are removed for failure to meet the electorate's standards.  The fact that they were popularly elected has nothing to do with their removal from office.  Call it a vote of confidence if it makes more sense.


 > From everything I've read and heard during my discussions of the
problem, I have not heard ONE WORD to indicate that the current President
has been derelict in his duties, 

We must have differing standards.

>  In fact, everything I've
been told, even from his detractors, seems to indicate that his efforts
have been to further 'formalize' Club operations and to bring it more up
to date with regard to record keeping, etc.  Though this may not be
'the way it's always been done before', it is certainly NOT an
impeachable offense... and it'd probably benefit the Club in the long
run.  

Yes, the club has made many changes.  Some for the positive.  Those issues were voted on and passed by the membership.  Not only that but there has been some nice presentations as well.  Because someone is being considered for removal does not make them ALL BAD.  Richard Nixon was a great foreign policy president.  Look what he did for China.



> Granted, it is regrettable that there may have been some 'language
barrier' points which may have resulted in ruffled feathers and some
members having taken comments a bit more 'personally' than necessary,
causing them to become less than 'thrilled' with the new President and
his way of doing things. But, again, this is NOT an impeachable
offense... 

I find it a cop out to hide behind "language barrier" for the communication.  The language is intentionally caustic.  Many have given him the benefit of the doubt and I am sure others, beside myself, have sent him private emails asking him to try to be more diplomatic and respectful...to apologize to those he offended.  That has not only fallen on deaf ears, the banter continues.  Yes, fracturing the club and alienating people with coarse remarks is reason to remove someone.

> From my discussions of the problem with a few of those involved, it
appears that this problem has degenerated to a war of personalities,
rather than a problem of Club management. Some members, and some of their
close friends, are upset that the new President isn't allowing them to
continue to do things (with regard to management of the Club) just as
they've been done in the past. Again, not an impeachable offense. Other
members feel that change (in the proper direction) is a good thing. 
This has created two opposing 'camps' of membership within the
Club.  Change, just for the sake of change, is often NOT a good
thing. However, change for the sake of making the Club better, stronger,
or more easily run/managed in the future can generally be considered to
be a good thing... and moving the Club in the right direction. This
appears to be the direction in which the current President has been
attempting to move the Club.

Seems simplistic to me.  Maybe I am of the minority.  I have not been a club member since the dark ages and was excited about a progressive movement in the club.  As I said before, there are some good things that have occurred.  Sadly the good changes have been nullified by the negative actions of the president.  This started with the keeping of funds from the treasurer based on his own whims, continued through computer vs pencil whims on the pileup contest, and other whims regarding club meetings, etc.


> At the same time, the President should remember that he was elected BY
THE CLUB MEMBERSHIP and that he does answer to them... he does not wield
uncontested power in the Club and is supposed to represent those who
elected him. 

Exactly and that has not happened for the most part.  It has become whatever the president thinks is best, the president does.  Well, now is the time for the president to answer.  He has been given so much benefit of the doubt, leeway, and even platitudes to shine him on before laying some criticism, so as not to hurt his feelings or friendships.

I have been the president over an organization before.  My job was to be neutral.  To present a floor for all sides of an opinion.  To preside over votes.  I did not make proposals and voting schemes.  I presided over the floor.  I certainly did not engage in muckraking and behind the scenes scheming.

>As a result, there should be meaningful, AND PRODUCTIVE,
discussion between the President and the Club members... it cannot be
totally one-way without problems evolving. If the President cannot 'work
with' the Club members (from BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE), then something
needs to be done... he either should consider resigning (because he no
longer has the support of the Club), or the Club may consider a RECALL
ELECTION... but NOT IMPEACHMENT!

I think that time has passed.  Recall election, impeachment, resign, vote of confidence....why get caught up in semantics?  Even by his own words he has no interest in remaining in the club when his term expires because he has better things to enjoy.  He doesn't even like his own club.


>Personally, and this is probably the hardest thing for ANY group to do, I
think EACH NEEDS TO 'GIVE IN' A BIT, and to work through its differences
TO MAKE THE CLUB STRONGER rather than letting differences tear the Club
apart.

There has been plenty of give.  As I said...SO many gave him the benefit of the doubt clear back to the beginning over the check withheld from the treasurer.  So many stuck up for him and asked him to hang in there.


>When the time comes, if it does, I will be voting FOR retention of the
current President, however, with the hope that he will be able to
'soften' his stance and with the hope that ALL other parties who feel
they are directly involved will be able to bury the hatchet and move on
to much more productive pursuits within the Club.

When the time comes I will be voting AGAINST retention of the current President as I have given up hope that he will soften his stance and he has fractured the club to such an extent that they can no longer work with him.  He has had his time and warnings and he has for whatever reason refused to answer to those he was elected to represent.  I do not want a President who runs things on whims nor do I want a President who does not want to be a member of his own club.  I do not want a President who dismisses those he represents as only $15 members.  I do not want a president that alienates members and elected officers.  These issues do IN FACT make him derelict in his duties as President.


If you don't know the details behind the current impeachment effort, I
urge you to find out before you cast your vote.

Yes, I think his name was Jeff, AC0C, who said it best.


73 and without rancor to our current President,

Jim Klingler, AA0MZ