Executive Council Meeting

April 24, 2004
Muncie IN


Note: All minutes are unofficial until approved at the following Executive Council meeting (April 24-25, 2004).

In Attendance
President's Report
Executive Vice President's Report
Executive Director's Report
NAA Report
Committee Reports
Old Business
New Business

Motion I: to accept the recommendations of the Flying Site Grant Committee ...
Motion II: that the FAI Committee have the authority to grant waivers to the ...
Motion III: to modify Safety Code Radio Control item 9 by deleting the following ...
Motion IV: to adopt the new Contest Board Procedures effective January 1, 2005 as ...

The following were approved by acclamation:
To approve the Minutes of the February 4, 2004 Executive Council meeting.
To accept the Audit Report presented by Bob Reynolds of Brady Ware.
To approve the ADCOM plan as presented.
To form a document that would contain a glossary of terms used……..
To require all AMA charter clubs to supply the latitude/longitude coordinates……

Action items from April 24, 2004 Executive Council meeting:

  1. Membership to produce report that shows what percentage of AMA membership is new each year. The report should track the last five years. Ref: ED report.

  2. Headquarters to research and return with policy addressing times the National Flying Site is available for open flying. The policy should include a means for waiving the shut down time and a statement to the effect that events cannot be scheduled past 5 p.m. unless a waiver is obtained from the EC. Ref: ED report.

  3. Sanction & Liability ad hoc Committee to review motion from February 2002 which was rescinded at the April 2002 meeting, and address the issue of sanctioning only rule book events and listing or registering the other events. Ref: Sanction & Liability ad hoc Comm. report.

  4. Headquarters to send out for a vote by Leader Members those items that have been changed in the by laws. Ref: Bylaws Committee report.

  5. Headquarters to randomly select club bylaws per district and send to VPs for review and suggestions. Ref: Bylaws Committee report. (See report for other items that must accompany the bylaws.)

  6. AMA attorneys to develop wording for sign that can be placed at each flying site. The ED will advise Council of the cost. Ref: Safety Committee report.

  7. T. Schwyn to send report to Council on local support that has been garnered for the CL WC. Ref: CL World Championships Update.

  8. Safety Committee to review Safety Code General Item 7 for clarification. Ref: Discussion of smoke emitter’s w/regard to Safety Code.

The meeting was called to order at 8:05 a.m.


President Dave Brown, Hamilton OH; Executive Vice President Doug Holland, Raleigh NC; District Vice Presidents: I-Don Krafft, Duxbury MA; II-Dave Mathewson, Baldwinsville NY; III-Bob Brown, Bradford PA; IV-Bliss Teague, Hickory NC; V-Jim McNeill, Birmingham AL; VI-Charlie Bauer, Norridge IL; VII-Bill Oberdieck, Southgate MI; VIII-Sandy Frank, Weatherford TX; IX-Russ Miller, Carrington ND; X-Rich Hanson, Scottsdale AZ; XI-Bruce Nelson, Spokane WA; NAA Representative Don Koranda; Executive Director Joyce Hager and Joe Gelwicks, General Counsel. In attendance from AMA HQ were Carl P. Maroney, Ilona Maine, and Vicki Barkdull. Others in attendance were Bob Underwood, AVP District VI/Frequency Committee member; Frank Roales, AVP District VI; Bob Reynolds, representative from Brady Ware and Shirley Teague.


  • President Brown has been in talks with the IMAA president regarding ways they can help their association with its shrinking membership and at the same time work with the AMA in terms of Giant Scale fly-ins. The IMAA president was thought to be attending this Council meeting but was not present at this time. If he arrives later it is expected that he will address Council.

  • The president and others attended the FAI meetings in March. The United States has made great strides in terms of its influence on what goes on in the international aeromodeling arena.

  • CIAM President Sandy Pimenoff is expected to attend the July 2-3, 2004, Executive Council meeting as a guest of the AMA president. (Pimenoff will be in attendance for the CLWC beginning July 4.) J. Hager stated that any Council members planning to attend the Welcoming Barbecue must inform S. Kaluf so HQ will have an accurate headcount. She reiterated that this is a large world championships (possibly 350 competitors) and HQ wants to ensure they can accommodate everyone.
    International aero modeling activities regarding the Opening Ceremony are quite formal and attending Council members should be dressed appropriately (suit coat/blazer).

  • The Safety Committee has generated a Safety Bulletin – EMERGENCY SAFETY ALERT regarding lithium batteries. This bulletin was distributed to 85,000 members via E-mail on April 23; it will appear on the Web site; and will be sent to all members in a bulk mailing.

  • There was some discussion on the BPL issue (Broadband over Power Lines). This topic will be covered in the Frequency Committee report.

  • An AMA youth member placed third in a world cup competition (F1B). The president requested that the individual's District VP (X) arrange to have the diploma presented to him.

It was moved, seconded and approved by acclamation to approve the Minutes of the February 4, 2004 Executive Council meeting.


Bob Reynolds delivered a summation of the audit report. He began by thanking Council for the opportunity to continue working with the AMA (11 years thus far).

  • Tremendous turnaround financially in 2003 vs. 2002. Reasons include increased dues; in 2002, investments lost approximately 350K in value, in 2003 they gained considerable value due to a market rebound; significant litigation settlements in 2002 and there were none in 2003.

  • As a result of the WORLDCOM, TYCO, and ENRON situations, Reynolds noted things Brady Ware is required to do. These include having formal communications with the organizations audit committee (Executive Council in AMA’s case) on various subjects including the appropriateness of the accounting policies; making AMA aware that the financial statements include estimates (the most significant estimate is the useful life for capital assets); audit adjustments (those proposed to management were reflected in financial statement and agreed to by the EVP); any disagreements with management on accounting issues (there were no such disagreements); and consultations with other CPA firms (the AMA did not enter into communications with any other firms.)

  • Brady Ware is encouraging every non-profit organization they work with to at least once a year have the board (Council) identify if they have a direct financial interest in a company that the Academy does business with. The board (Council) should approve/acknowledge this relationship and it should be reflected in some type of written communication. This practice should also apply to the paid staff, particularly those responsible with procuring goods and services with vendors.

  • Brady Ware suggests that the Council officially recognize in their minutes that they have hired an external auditor. Reynolds indicated they will have an Engagement Letter (for next year’s audit) to the Executive Director by the October meeting.

It was moved, seconded and approved by acclamation to accept the Audit Report presented by Bob Reynolds of Brady Ware.


  • Membership currently running at 99% of last year—getting ready to do a third renewal notice.

  • Since turning on on-line renewal system, have received 702 renewals that were processed automatically; also received 869 new members. This has only been on since March and the ED expects numbers to get better as time goes on.

  • 90-day Trial Memberships: have received 457, and of those 61 have updated to a regular membership.

  • 2,103 club charters have been processed and mailed; 398 have not renewed and will be getting a second notice. Of the 2,103 clubs, 30 were new clubs for 2004.

  • Ambassador program has signed up 1,325 new members for 2004.

  • Camp Jeep has decided not to include model airplanes for 2004. They are expecting that in 2005 model airplanes will be included and are looking for one AMA official and the District VP of where it takes place to attend.

  • Expect to be busy preparing the site for the Nationals, World Championships as well as other scheduled events. Privacy fences will be put up around the outside showers. The ED notes that the wind tends to take the doors off their hinges.

  • M. Smith is meeting with people regarding scanning and reproduction relative to the plans service. Would like to have this service up and running by the end of summer.

  • The president would like to see a report showing what percentage of our membership is new each year. The report should show that track over the last five years. Membership will produce this report. Headquarters is dealing with two different marketing approaches: one to new members and one geared toward retention.

  • There was a discussion addressing how often the national site is closed (due to various events), especially during the prime flying season. It is thought that PADCOM had originally stated that the site must be open to open flying one weekend each month and during a contest, the contest must shut down at either 5 or 6 p.m. Headquarters thought that the site must be available for open flying two or three weekends a year. The AMA Site Committee (not met for a number of years) did draft rules which include that the site would be available for open flying at 5 p.m. Headquarters will research and return with a recommended policy at the July EC meeting. The policy should include a means for waiving the shut-down time. It was also suggested the policy contain a statement such as events cannot be scheduled beyond 5 p.m. unless a waiver is obtained from the Executive Council; an individual extension to an event may be granted by the Executive Director or Technical Director. Additionally, a statement should be included that the venues are always open as possible; there will be no all site closures except when the event is approved by the Executive Council. Whatever policy Headquarters puts in place must be enforced.


  • NAA is revising its Web site. An area that has been focused on is records; when complete a person will have the ability to go online, identify, and search different kinds of records. One of the challenges will be identifying all the records for the various air sport organizations and getting them listed on the site. The Web site will also be used to enhance the fact that NAA will be celebrating its 100th anniversary (in 2005). The Web site is expected to go live in the fourth quarter of the year. A calendar will also be placed on the site that will allow aviation/air-sport-related groups to personally list their activity—the NAA will review what has been placed in a particular format prior to its actual listing on the calendar. Koranda is extremely proud of the NAA staff, as they are making the changes to the site for just about $20,000 and they maintain full control of the Web site.

  • An air-sport organization meeting will be taking place; the AMA president and Executive Director will be attending. They will also participate in the NAA Spring Awards Program; Koranda noted a few of the awards that will be highlighted. Special recognition will be given to NASA, JPL, and the Mars Rover team.

  • Koranda will be stepping down as NAA president at the end of May but will continue to serve until such time as a replacement is in that seat. A search committee is in place; AMA’s president does sit on the committee. Koranda expects a smooth transition and will convey to his replacement that AMA is extremely important and he hopes the relationship continues as in the past.

Break/Executive Session 9:35 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.


Flying Site Grant (Appendix II)
Chairman Bauer handed out copies of the report; he stated that the information contained therein is not to be released until the recipients are informed by the committee. The committee was pleased that almost all districts were represented. Two clubs that did not follow the rules withdrew their applications; otherwise all clubs were awarded a grant. The combined grants totaled $22,834.

MOTION I: Moved and seconded to accept the recommendations of the Flying Site Grant Committee.
MOTION passed unanimously.

AMA/FAI World Records – ad hoc
Chairman D. Brown indicated that the committee was charged with establishing procedures by which waivers to the AMA Safety Code could be granted for an FAI world record attempt in those instances where the AMA and FAI rules are in conflict. Following a short discussion Council was in agreement that the FAI Committee should be granted authority to give this type of waiver.

MOTION II: Moved and seconded that the FAI Committee have the authority to grant waivers to the AMA Safety Code for FAI record attempts.
MOTION passed unanimously.

The president noted that in the ongoing bylaws revision, the FAI Committee will be included as a required committee.

Nominating Procedures Review – ad hoc
It was recommended that the revised material (in agenda) be referred for inclusion in the bylaws discussion scheduled for Sunday morning.

Legal Defense for Clubs - ad hoc
No report at this time.

Sanction & Liability – ad hoc (Appendix III)
The chairman thanked C. Maroney and L. Johnson for their work with the committee. He indicated that as a result of conversations with B. Underwood, D. Brown, and C. Bauer, he realizes the committee has strayed from the original charge. After going through the report with Council, Oberdieck requested an affirmative vote to accept the concept of the report. The president stated that he was not in disagreement with what was contained in the report however the original charge of the committee was to look into the liability generated on part of AMA as a result of sanctioning events, particularly Class C events over which AMA has no control over the rules. He requested a copy of the report be given to Don Lowe/Safety Committee.
The committee did present a report to Council previously that included what should and should not be sanctioned (proposed that AMA ‘sanction’ only rule book events—sanctioned and listed in contest calendar, and all other events would be ‘listed’ for purposes of the contest calendar). Also proposed at that time was the concept of contest directors (for rule book events)/event directors (all other events). The president noted that in the discussion last year it was determined that nothing could be done with the term event director until the bylaws had been changed, however we could do something about using the term sanction when using it in connection with Class C events. J. Gelwicks explained how liability is premised on the right to control. He also confirmed that by accepting payment for ‘instant membership’ at a contest, a CD is acting as an agent of the Academy but by removing the authority for a CD to do this, does not necessarily mean he is no longer considered an agent.
Conclusion: The item was referred back to Committee to review the motion from February 2002 which was rescinded at the April 2002 meeting and address the issue of sanctioning only rule book events and listing or registering the other events.

Lunch 12:10 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.

Clubs outside the U.S. – ad hoc
This item was the result of a person in Guatemala asking whether he could form an AMA club in his country. After C. Pierce contacted him, it was determined that he wanted to form a structure similar to the AMA clubs. It was not their desire to be covered by any insurance; they wanted to set up flying sites and rules like the AMA. The AMA should consider what the value in doing this is to AMA, what AMA expects of them, and what are AMA’s overall goals and objectives in reaching out to them. AMA cannot be all things to all people. AMA must be mindful of not infringing on the aero club in their territory.
Conclusion: No action will be taken other than the ED possibly providing assistance relative to club structure.

The Bylaws committee as spelled out in the bylaws has not been active; Chairman Hanson indicated that as Council has offered changes (from their Sunday morning sessions), they have been incorporated into the bylaws. It needs to be determined whether this process is effective. The ED suggested that those sections that have been updated be sent to the Leader Members for a vote. (She specifically mentioned the EVP job description; this should be voted on prior to the next election for this position.)
The president explained that Council had started out by reviewing the bylaws and identifying the areas where problems had been encountered. What has happened is they have actually been reviewing the bylaws word for word. He would like to see Council refer the conceptual changes to the Bylaws committee and the committee would make the actual wording changes. At a previous meeting a list was developed indicating what bylaws items each Council member felt needed to be addressed.
Conclusion: It is recommended that the items Council has changed (that don’t have an effect anywhere else in the bylaws) be sent out for a vote by the Leader Members.

Discussion then turned to club bylaws. The ED noted that when Council mandated clubs submit bylaws, it was implied that AMA would review them and make recommendations. At a later meeting, it was stated that AMA just wanted to have copy of the clubs bylaws. She is of the opinion that a review of them still should be done in an effort to inform clubs where they might be deficient. Since there is a large number of clubs, it is suggested that AMA do a random review.
Conclusion: Headquarters will randomly select bylaws of 10% of clubs per district and send to the District VP for review along with the AMA’s suggested guidelines. Headquarters will also develop and include an evaluation/compliance to the guidelines rating form (numbered 0-5, zero being they do not address the issue, 5 being the issue is well defined). This would assist in Headquarters compiling of the information. In an effort to identify trends in areas that the clubs may be lacking, VPs should submit this form to Headquarters, where this information will be consolidated.

Tier Level Achievement Program – ad hoc
The purpose of the committee was to investigating the feasibility of introducing a tiered level of proficiency program to the modelers. Items discussed by the committee included what would constitute the levels of proficiency; what are the criteria to achieve those levels; how would an individual attain each level; how would the system be implemented; who would administer the system and what would be the motivation for an individual to participate. A single program that addresses all aspects of aeromodeling is not feasible. The committee is hoping to contact the SIGs to identify if they have a level achievement type program. The president is of the opinion that AMA needs a way to evaluate the flying capabilities of the average AMA member in order to identify those members who would be qualified and capable of flying types of models that may have greater potential damage than other types of models. At this time we have neither a system which identifies the better pilots nor a system that gives the noncompetition sport flier the incentive to improve his or her flying skills. A system needs to be developed that offers an incentive for an individual to strive to improve his or her flying capabilities; possibly a certificate award after achieving each level. It was pointed out that in the 1980s, Headquarters acquired (Maroney still has) many training programs that use various means of awards. These programs were set up and administered by the clubs. The president noted that whatever program is developed, it must be an AMA program.
Conclusion: Committee continues work on the subject. They are currently acquiring information from the clubs that have training programs; it is suggested the committee solicit from clubs information regarding any achievement level programs and the method of achievement.

The major issue being addressed is BPL (broadband over power line) activity. Comment letters must be filed with the FCC by May 3, 2004; the attorney is currently working on that. The committee is attacking BPL from the standpoint of a potential safety issue. Underwood noted frustration with the lack of FCC technical information and being unable to determine exactly what is going on. The committee is monitoring the situation (via D. Williams) in Pen Yan NY; working with the ARRL; sending a rep (F. Marks) to IEEE meeting in June; and has discussed the concept of a letter-writing campaign (as was done in connection with 92-235), but this is not recommended at this time.
With regard to RCMA and site separation, there has been no movement on the part of RCMA. D. Mathewson sat in on the Frequency Committee meeting in Toledo and specifically asked about this issue. He did not receive a response.
The committee continues to look at spread spectrum and the problems associated with it. Advertising indicates s system will be available in July. The committee is not convinced the system is legal.
Underwood noted J. Albrecht pulled some information from Polk’s regarding AristroCraft radio-controlled trains. The information contained a typo regarding the MHz range in which it operates. The situation has been corrected.
There was information on the AMA Web site regarding how two clubs should perform tests for a frequency-sharing agreement. The committee noted it is incomplete and not entirely correct. This has been extracted from the Web site and D. Williams is in the processing of revising it; the revision is expected shortly.
There was a brief discussion on interference between cell phones and computerized radios. R. Hanson related a report of such interference and questioned AMA’s position. Underwood noted that the committee has done some testing along these lines, including testing when the computer system had been open for programming. The situation has not been able to be duplicated. Testing included various makes of cell phones and radio systems. There are so many variables that may cause this problem, that to establish and police any policy would be impossible.

The committee was asked to review the matter pertaining to Safety Code Radio Control item 9. They voted four to one to recommend to the EC that the Safety Code be modified to drop the requirement that eliminates tail touching. Maroney related D. Lowe’s opinion that the danger associated with this act is minimal. Discussion included: everyone is sensitive to the issue of a 40% big bird doing tail touches 25 feet in front of the pilot however, Council continues to make rules that have unintended negative consequences on other flying styles; and the code should reflect safety principles, not specifics.

MOTION III: Moved and seconded to modify Safety Code Radio Control item 9 by deleting the following: “nor should any part of the model, other than the landing gear touch the ground.” Effective immediately.
MOTION passed: 7 yes, 5 no (I, IV, V, VII and XI), 1 abstain (NAA).

Following discussion of possible liability incurred by the AMA and spectator-setback guidelines, it was recommended that some sort of sign be designed that can be placed at flying sites, indicating that spectators are assuming risks when attending an event. Gelwicks indicated this would be good to have in a defense situation but it would vary from state to state how effective it would be.
Conclusion: taking the key states (CA, TX, FL) into consideration, the attorneys will develop wording for such a sign that would apply to various states. The ED will advise Council of the cost.

At this time the District II VP asked whether the Safety Committee had reached a conclusion on an item he submitted for a member in his district relative to introductory flights without the use of a buddy box. Maroney indicated the committee exchanged E-mail and the conclusion was they were not in favor of modifying the rule to require the use of a buddy box for an introductory flight.

Air Show Team (Appendix IV)
Council received a communication from R. Hanson to M. Harrington, ADCOM Chairman. The ADCOM is the guidance board that manages the AMA Air Show Team program. Their business primarily consists of reviewing the Air Show Teams’ performances over the previous year; reviewing requests for new membership in the Air Show Team program and to consider actions necessary to teams that may not be meeting performance guidelines. They also look at ways to improve the Air Show Teams.
It was noted that many clubs, as a result of being more involved with their community, are holding open house demos, air show demos, and school demos and there is the need to differentiate between what the clubs do and what the AMA Air Show Teams do. The ADCOM board thought it was time to look at the Air Show Team program in its entirety. They propose to do long-range strategic planning between now and the October Council meeting and come up with a preliminary program restructure and new guidelines for Council to review. If the documentation was approved at that level (at October meeting) the program would continue as it exists today through the end of 2005 using that year as a transitional year to start introducing the changes to the existing Air Show Teams, giving them time for feedback and input. A final document would be submitted for Council approval at the October 2005 EC meeting. They would also submit any budgetary changes to the Budget Committee prior to the EC meeting.
The Committee was commended for proposing the changes in a reasonable way, and allowing input from all those involved.

It was moved, seconded and approved by acclamation to approve the ADCOM plan as presented.

Break 3:40 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.


Contest Board Procedures (Appendix V)
At the last meeting Council received proposed changes to the Contest Board Procedures document and was asked to review them. There were no questions or concerns noted by any Council members.

MOTION IV: Moved and seconded to adopt the new Contest Board Procedures effective January 1, 2005 as presented.
MOTION passed unanimously.

It was noted that within this document is a statement which makes the Web site version of the contest rules (Competition Regulations) the official version.

CL World Championships Update (Appendix VI)
The handout is the tentative schedule for opening ceremonies. T. Schwyn will send a report to Council on local support that has been obtained.


Definitions and other Safety Code Ambiguities (Appendices VII, VIII)
This concept was presented by B. Underwood to J. Hager last October. There have been some instances that have come up in the last month or so which highlight Bob’s concern. As the Safety Code has grown over the years it now includes several words that have convoluted meaning or no meaning at all. There are several items in the code that can be interpreted several different ways depending on who is reading it and who is doing the interpretation. B. Underwood’s concept is to create a stand alone document for staff and council member use that can be referred to in reviewing the intent of a particular item in the Safety Code and definitions of words used in the code.
It is being proposed that a committee be formed to study the concept of developing a document that will be two-part. The first being a glossary of terms; the second would be a document that will supplement the Safety Code in much greater detail. This second part would allow the items posted in the code to remain brief and therefore less convoluted. The suggested approaches to creating these documents were reviewed. Records should be kept to retain a litany of what occurred with a particular item.

It was moved, seconded and approved by acclamation to form a document that would contain a glossary of terms used in the Safety Code, and an explanation of the intent and reasoning considered when creating a Safety Code item. This committee shall also review the wording of the current Safety Code.
Committee: B. Underwood, Chairman; D. Mathewson; R. Morgan and HQ support. (The ED will name HQ support)

Don Koranda had to leave at this point in the meeting. He expressed his gratitude in being able to be a part of this group. He has great respect for what this organization has done for model aviation. He especially wanted to thank D. Brown for all the work he has done for the Academy and for his involvement in FAI.

Review Turbine Waiver Forms (Appendix IX)
Some Council members have expressed concerns relating to the AMA Web site. It has grown so rapidly that no one person knows, and there is no plan for, where items are on the site. Bauer indicated that he teaches how to develop, design, and maintain Web sites. He explained how reorganization would make it easier to maintain. He specifically noted the turbine documents (PDF files/numbers). Maroney and Bauer will work on reorganizing the turbine documents on the Web site.

Revisit Tabled Item from February 2003 – MOTION II
The Safety Committee’s original recommendation was explained. They recommended dropping theft and vandalism coverage as there is much fraud associated with these types of claims; and increase fire coverage from $1,000 to $5,000 as the committee regarded this to be the more meaningful benefit. The president explained his reasoning for not wanting to revisit the item at this time. The motion to remove from the table Motion II of February 2003 for further action was withdrawn.

Discuss Smoke Emitters w/regard to Safety Code
The president gave the background on this item. An individual questioned numerous people as to whether it is legal to use smoke cartridges in model airplanes. In February when the individual asked the question of his District VP, the VP stated to him exactly what the Safety Code said. A week or so later when Headquarters was asked the same question the interpreted response was the AMA Safety Codes states that smoke bombs are not permitted by AMA members unless handled by AMA Show Teams however, smoke cartridges are acceptable for members to utilize as long as the device stays attached to the model. In March the president received the same question and his response was that he was of the opinion that those devices violate the Safety Code. He would however ask that the EC look into this issue before issuing a formal opinion. It should be noted that in each case the individual inferred he did not receive a response from the previous individuals he tried to contact.
The subject in question (Safety Code General Item 7) is a specific case of the type of problems generated as mentioned in B. Underwood’s report on definitions and Safety Code ambiguities. How is the line drawn in differentiating between a smoke bomb and a smoke cartridge? Council needs to absolutely define this one way or the other. Comments offered include most people know that a smoke bomb is dropped and releases smoke as it descends and a smoke cartridge is something that stays affixed to the model; the president is convinced that the original intent of this item was to prohibit smoke capsules being attached to the model airplane; and a straw poll taken indicates that the majority feel smoke-burning cartridges should not be allowed on model airplanes. The ED recommended that this item be referred to the Safety Committee.
Conclusion: the Safety Committee was charged with reviewing Safety Code General item 7 and providing clarification. The president feels that while this subject is under deliberation by the committee, AMA should not approve the use of smoke cartridges.

Review Process for Pylon (exceptions) Waiver (Appendix X)
The item addresses the pylon waivers that VPs are allowed to grant for deviations to a course layout. In the ED’s discussion with other Headquarters staff, it was felt that a standard should be set. C. Maroney indicated that AMA’s legal counsel was concerned with the lack of consistency in how the waivers are granted. He provided a handout to Council that depicts all the waivers that were granted for two and three pylon courses and their deviations. This document is provided to VPs for reference in future waiver requests.
Comments offered include when a waiver is granted upon a requester, is the waiver for a specific person, for the club, for a specific site, for an undetermined amount of time…the intent is unclear; the ED is of the opinion that whatever the requester has submitted that states why they are changing the course and/or what the deviation are, the VPs letter regranting the waiver should reflect those specifics; and a number of VPs told of the various information they require before granting a waiver.
It was pointed out that the handout contains some incorrect information; C. Maroney will fix that and send a corrected version to Council.

Club Information
This item stemmed from a previous meeting where Council discussed a club wanting to establish a flying site in the proximity of an existing site. It was reported that over the years, Headquarters has tried to develop a database of latitude/longitude positions of all the flying sites but it is not complete. To this point, filing this information on the part of the clubs has been voluntary. If this is to be mandated, AMA must be specific in terms of where the latitude/longitude position is to be taken. Following discussion,

It was moved, seconded and approved by acclamation to require all AMA charter clubs to supply the latitude/longitude coordinates of their flying site(s) effective 2005. The latitude/longitude location is to be taken at center flight station.

The awards were approved by acclamation.
The Fellow award was approved by acclamation.

The ED informed Council of the pricing on a Fellow ring mold. The president instructed the ED to have the mold made so rings are available for purchase by Fellow award recipients. The idea of lapel pins was also introduced. Council then viewed various plaques that would replace the existing Fellow award. The ED will get pricing on the ‘NAA’ type award (with inset medallion).


July 2-3, 2004

The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted by JoAnne Brown, recording secretary for the April 24, 2004 Executive Council meeting.