Attendees:  Mike Karnes, Charles Youngblood, Samantha McKinney, Phil Vance, Brad Davy, Doug Pilcher, Michael Verzywelt, and Rusty Fried

Meeting began 8:02 p.m. CST

Treasurer’s report – Phil Vance

Phil reported the following balances:

End of January 2016 – checking account $21,758.50, PayPal account $23,975.56, for a total cash on hand of $45,734.06.

As of February 22, 2016 – checking account $21,264.88, PayPal account $25,156.73, for a total cash on hand of $46,421.61.

Phil received a notice from PayPal requesting our EIN (Employer Identification Number).  Without this number, the account would be cancelled.  He reported that he sent all paperwork to PayPal that was requested.  All regional directors’ reports have been emailed.  A concern was raised on the balances for each regions accumulating every year.  If this continues and the regions request all their funds, this could empty the account.  Michael thought that each regional fund was supposed to get $1,000 per year for their budget.  Per December 2014 BOD meeting minutes, the BOD approved of the regions receiving $10 per member in their region.  There are currently two regions that do not have as many members as the others.  Michael was concerned about not having enough in these regions’ budget to cover expenses.  BOD decided the best way to handle this is to approve expenses on a case-by-case basis when asked.

One concern that was mentioned that we currently have 2 regions that has less than 100 members.  In turn, these 2 regions receive less money allocated to their budget at the beginning of each year.  Phil mentioned that these 2 regions should at least get $1,000 allocated to make it fair to each region.  Rusty motioned that the South West region would donate funds to these 2 regions to bring them up to $1,000.  It was discussed that some of these regions don’t even use the money allocated to them each year and may not need the funds.  Two options were considered.  One option was that if the region needing additional funding to present it to the BOD on a case-by-case basis.  The other option was that each region would receive a minimum of $1,000 budgeted each year.  BOD decided to have the regions come to the BOD on a case-by-case basis if the additional funding was needed. 

Phil received a letter about IMAC becoming incorporated.  AMA has documentation posted on their website about becoming incorporated.  The EIN was registered years ago in Florida.  Rusty would like to see the organization become incorporated to protect the BOD and its members.  We would currently like to pursue becoming a 501 ( c ) 7 organization.  Phil is going to be doing some more research on what needs to be done.

RCP – Mike Karnes

Mike reported that there wasn’t many members who responded to the polls for the RCPs. 

RCP 2017-3 Mechanical Failure use of a different plane – Only 15 members voted and all voted yes.  Motion was made to send this on.  Motion carried.

RCP 2017-4 Start and Finish of a Figure – Only 7 members voted, 5 yes votes and 2 no votes.  Ty Lyman thought some of the wording should stay in, such as they removed the line between figures.  It was omitted because it repeats itself in Rule 6.2.  The question comes to the wings-level horizontal flight.  It is reinforced in Rule 7.  It establishes the next figure begins after 1 fuselage length.  Motion that since it is already in Rule 7.1, to leave as written.  Motion carried.

RCP 2017-1 Should vs. Must – Only 6 members voted and all were no votes.  There were only 2 comments made.  Some BOD members believe that the words were just changed out.  Michael believes that more time should have been spent on this RCP from the rules committee.  We, as the BOD, has a duty to make sure that each RCP gets wrote correctly.  It was the consensus of the BOD to go back to what Brad had done and to submit an RCP.  He will focus on the areas that are important. Brad also recommended that we replace must with shall and the BOD agreed. It will have to go back in front of the membership for 30 days, which is customary.  Brad would like to resubmit this RCP with the right proposal and put it out to the membership for a week and then send it on to the rules committee.  Brad will post the RCP in the forum for the BOD to review before it is posted to the membership.  BOD agreed that this is RCP needed to be modified before approving. 

RCP 2017-2 Benefit of the Doubt – There were a total of 20 votes, with 9 yes votes and 11 no votes.  Mike’s issue with this RCP is that there were too many examples added, which brought on more issues.  As a general rule, the judges do give the pilots the benefit of the doubt, but it doesn’t need to be written in the rules.  This issue should be handled at the judging schools.  Motion was made to remove this RCP.  Motion carried.

RCP 2017-5 – Calling in the Box – Only 15 members voted with 9 yes votes and 6 no votes.  Some comments mentioned is that they like the way it was written.  The only change on this RCP was zeroing the sequence, instead of zeroing the round and it doesn’t involve illegal maneuvers. One question arose about it conflicting with illegal turnaround maneuvers.  The original rule refers subject to other standard constraints stipulated in this rule, such as time limit for entering, no aerobatics before entering, etc.  This brought up the question of changing Rule 13.5.  Brad and Mike both believe that Rule 13.5 should be modified, and Rule 10.1.1 would remain the same.  Motion was made for an RCP for Rule 13.5 to change from zeroing the round to zeroing the sequence.  Motion carried.  Charles brought it to the attention of the BOD that we need to write up how illegal maneuvers would be zeroed prior to entering the box, between sequences and landing.  The BOD agreed that the RCP needs to include that prior to entering and between sequences, if an illegal turnaround maneuver was performed, the succeeding sequence would be zeroed.  If an illegal turnaround maneuver is performed on a landing, the preceding sequence would be zeroed.  Mike will write the RCP and get it out in the BOD forum.

There were 2 member RCPs that the BOD reviewed and did not accept.  The first RCP was RCP-IMAC-17-00, which was sound presentation.  The way this RCP was written made it seem like we were going back to scoring sound with a 0, 5, or a 10.  Different fields have different restrictions.  Our sound rule always comes up.  We need judges to apply the existing criteria to the sound score.  This RCP doesn’t actually define it any better on how to score sound and it is too broad or strict enough to consider.  The second RCP was RCP 2017-00 Legal Turn-around Maneuvers.  The main reason for not accepting this RCP was due to the half-cuban being eliminated and specifying the aerobatic turns.

Regional Issues – RDs

Brad is hosting an online judging school for the North East region and is going to open it up to all regions.  The online judging schools will be on Wednesday nights, starting March 2, from 7:00-8:00 p.m.  These sessions will be hosted on a Go-To-Meeting and will continue through the month of March.  He also mentioned that we will have a presence at the WRAM show again this year.  For the North Central region, Mike and Ron are getting things together for the Toledo show.  Rusty had a concern about a contest that was held in the South West region.  This contest was given an unknown from a previous contest from the month before.  This also happened at a contest Mike attended last year.  It was recommended for the CDs to look at the unknowns a head of time just in case there are any problems.  If there are any issues, the RDs can give Mike a call. 

Meeting adjourned 10:17 p.m. CST.