We had been suffering a loss of membership as a result of online competition for many years. From what I've been lead to believe, though, prospective ACE members are starting to see the limitations of online-only enthusiasts clubs and some of the individuals who serve as proprietors of same. We must strike while the iron is hot.
We need to establish a widespread online presence. We've done a good job starting to make inroads on Facebook, but from what I'm led to believe, Facebook is destined to slowly decay over the next five to ten years in the same way Myspace has. I currently don't use platforms such as Twitter, Instagram, or SnapChat, but I am told by those in the know that these kinds of social media are destined to grow in the wake of Facebook's speculated decline. I am told that ACE is starting to make its presence known in these arenas, and that's a good thing. We need to be all over them with hashtags that lead back to ACE and our events.
We also need to develop web-based message boards for both members and non-members. For members-only forums, we must relax our code of conduct--no one wants to post anything the slightest bit negative in a forum where their post can be deleted by moderators and get brought before the Disciplinary Committee. And without the ability to post criticism of ACE policy, parks, coasters, manufacturers, or other industry trends without fear, we lose our credibility and infringe upon the First Amendment rights of our members. It's time to start worrying less about how some members attitudes and opinions reflect upon ACE and more about how ACE behaving like Big Brother lowers the bar for all of us and puts the so-called "good of the club" ahead of the well-being and basic freedoms of its individual members.
Wednesday, July 9, 2014
What would you do to grow membership?
Growth of our membership should be an important goal of ACE, as the larger we are the more influence we have within the amusement industry and the more opportunities we have to bring educational and historical content to the masses. I believe that we either need to:
1. Create a membership department, where specific members in each region who feel up to the task will become membership officers, asked to retain current members and recruit new ones within a geographical territory. Membership officers who meet or exceed a given quota will be rewarded in some way (a free one-year renewal of their own membership, a discount on event registration, a free t-shirt, or something of the like).
or
2. Create a program similar to the one I've outlined above, but make it open to all members. In this case, members would be rewarded for the number of new members they sign up in a year. The more new members they bring in, the greater the reward.
Part of the recruitment effort should involve exposing prospective members to our publications so that we may favorably contrast ourselves against less expensive online clubs that simply cannot compete in this regard. Another part of it should involve highlighting our preservation victories over the years as well as our academic resources (i.e. research materials stored in our existing archives as well as in the NRCMA collection). This is another reason why it so important to get Coaster Con back on track (pardon the pun) as the premier enthusiast event for intellectual discourse within our hobby in addition to being an event for riding some great coasters.
1. Create a membership department, where specific members in each region who feel up to the task will become membership officers, asked to retain current members and recruit new ones within a geographical territory. Membership officers who meet or exceed a given quota will be rewarded in some way (a free one-year renewal of their own membership, a discount on event registration, a free t-shirt, or something of the like).
or
2. Create a program similar to the one I've outlined above, but make it open to all members. In this case, members would be rewarded for the number of new members they sign up in a year. The more new members they bring in, the greater the reward.
Part of the recruitment effort should involve exposing prospective members to our publications so that we may favorably contrast ourselves against less expensive online clubs that simply cannot compete in this regard. Another part of it should involve highlighting our preservation victories over the years as well as our academic resources (i.e. research materials stored in our existing archives as well as in the NRCMA collection). This is another reason why it so important to get Coaster Con back on track (pardon the pun) as the premier enthusiast event for intellectual discourse within our hobby in addition to being an event for riding some great coasters.
What would you do to make new members feel welcome?
First of all, I seem to remember that when new members or first-time event attendees showed up at a national event, we would give them "New Member" ribbons they could wear on their event badge. If we're still doing this, we should continue to do so and veteran ACE members should be encouraged to make contact with these new members. If not, it is a program we should re-implement. We should encourage the passion of these new members, especially if we meet someone who is already enthusiastic about history and preservation, as we need people who are ready and willing to contribute to this very important aspect of our hobby.
Elected and appointed officials must also be accessible to new members. Too often, Executive Committee members work in such close quarters with each other that they don't remember to reintegrate and interface with the rest of the membership when not directly pursuing their duties. When I was a regional rep, I would often hold informal gatherings at our local parks, mainly so that if members wanted to talk to me one-on-one, they knew they could meet me and chat. Sometimes numerous members showed up to these gatherings and sometimes I was the only one there, but the opportunity for interface existed. It might not be a horrible idea for EC members to designate "office hours" at national events they attend. These would be two or three hours of guaranteed availability to any member in attendance in a specific location where members could be afforded the opportunity to chat without feeling like they're being a distraction or risking getting ignored. Email makes things expedient but there's nothing like a one-on-one chat to really have a clear exchange of ideas.
Elected and appointed officials must also be accessible to new members. Too often, Executive Committee members work in such close quarters with each other that they don't remember to reintegrate and interface with the rest of the membership when not directly pursuing their duties. When I was a regional rep, I would often hold informal gatherings at our local parks, mainly so that if members wanted to talk to me one-on-one, they knew they could meet me and chat. Sometimes numerous members showed up to these gatherings and sometimes I was the only one there, but the opportunity for interface existed. It might not be a horrible idea for EC members to designate "office hours" at national events they attend. These would be two or three hours of guaranteed availability to any member in attendance in a specific location where members could be afforded the opportunity to chat without feeling like they're being a distraction or risking getting ignored. Email makes things expedient but there's nothing like a one-on-one chat to really have a clear exchange of ideas.
Monday, July 7, 2014
What are your thoughts on preservation?
My other posts here point to the need for emphasizing preservation once again, like we have in the past. It seems almost as though we saved Leap the Dips and then took our foot off the proverbial gas, proclaiming our work to be done. It isn't. I am alarmed by the number of wood coasters we've lost in recent years. Even more alarming is the fact that we've lost many of these rides not as a result of their host park closing but as a result of their host park deciding that these rides aren't important, that they don't generate enough profit. This is proof that we are failing in our educational mission with both the public and with industry decision-makers.
Wood coasters are treasures that cannot be replicated. With proper care and maintenance, they can run indefinitely for decades and remain the most popular ride in the park while other industry fads come and go. With neglect, on the other hand, management, the public, and even some misguided enthusiasts may perceive certain wood coasters as being beyond help and lacking any potential for greatness. In recent months and years, too many neglected wood coasters have been deemed lost causes, torn down, and replaced. Sometimes they are replaced with reasonably enjoyable steel coasters, though they'll never have that intangible excitement of a wood coaster. Sometimes they are replaced with nothing but a queue for another ride or maybe even nothing at all.
Take, by contrast, the amazingly great condition the wood coasters at Holiday World and Knoebels are in. Most of the wood coasters at each park have been around long enough that they could be in bad shape by now, but that hasn't happened. Management at both parks has recognized that a wood coaster is not a turnkey investment. Wood coasters must receive tender loving care every off-season. They cannot sit neglected and unloved. As a result of spending the proper amount of time and money on their woodies, they remain great and, in turn, remain popular with the public. The same approach at other parks would likely yield the same results. We need to do a better job of educating park management that an old wood coaster on their property isn't a liability, it's an asset--one that can drive revenue just as powerfully as any of their other assets if they're willing to invest time and money and consult with experts to keep those assets in tip-top shape. If we continue to under-perform in this regard, we will continue to hemorrhage losses of wood coaster after wood coaster--a bleak future indeed.
In the meantime, Conneaut Lake Park is hanging by a thread and is in as much jeopardy as its ever been in. The Blue Streak is a masterpiece that must be preserved. If Conneaut makes it though the current storm and lives to operate for the 2015 season, ACE should make a significant contribution from its Preservation Fund to the park. We have given to the park in the past and, as one of few parks set up as a non-profit trust, it's one of the few we can legally make a contribution to. Conneaut is one of the gems that make Pennsylvania such an amazing state for our hobby and we should do anything we can to aid in its survival. If you live near Conneaut Lake, please consider volunteering to help them when you can.
Wood coasters are treasures that cannot be replicated. With proper care and maintenance, they can run indefinitely for decades and remain the most popular ride in the park while other industry fads come and go. With neglect, on the other hand, management, the public, and even some misguided enthusiasts may perceive certain wood coasters as being beyond help and lacking any potential for greatness. In recent months and years, too many neglected wood coasters have been deemed lost causes, torn down, and replaced. Sometimes they are replaced with reasonably enjoyable steel coasters, though they'll never have that intangible excitement of a wood coaster. Sometimes they are replaced with nothing but a queue for another ride or maybe even nothing at all.
Take, by contrast, the amazingly great condition the wood coasters at Holiday World and Knoebels are in. Most of the wood coasters at each park have been around long enough that they could be in bad shape by now, but that hasn't happened. Management at both parks has recognized that a wood coaster is not a turnkey investment. Wood coasters must receive tender loving care every off-season. They cannot sit neglected and unloved. As a result of spending the proper amount of time and money on their woodies, they remain great and, in turn, remain popular with the public. The same approach at other parks would likely yield the same results. We need to do a better job of educating park management that an old wood coaster on their property isn't a liability, it's an asset--one that can drive revenue just as powerfully as any of their other assets if they're willing to invest time and money and consult with experts to keep those assets in tip-top shape. If we continue to under-perform in this regard, we will continue to hemorrhage losses of wood coaster after wood coaster--a bleak future indeed.
In the meantime, Conneaut Lake Park is hanging by a thread and is in as much jeopardy as its ever been in. The Blue Streak is a masterpiece that must be preserved. If Conneaut makes it though the current storm and lives to operate for the 2015 season, ACE should make a significant contribution from its Preservation Fund to the park. We have given to the park in the past and, as one of few parks set up as a non-profit trust, it's one of the few we can legally make a contribution to. Conneaut is one of the gems that make Pennsylvania such an amazing state for our hobby and we should do anything we can to aid in its survival. If you live near Conneaut Lake, please consider volunteering to help them when you can.
What are your thoughts on documenting ACE and coaster history?
My printed platform reads "Redoubling our efforts in regard to documenting both ACE and coaster history." Because I had limited space I couldn't expound on what I really meant by that. It's entirely possible that ACE has been documenting its own history and the history of the roller coaster just as vigilantly as it was ten or twenty years ago. If it's not, it should be and should resume its efforts immediately. If it has been all along, it hasn't been very forthcoming with the general membership about what progress it is making. These are precisely the kind of presentations at Coaster Con that we need to restore. We need to know what kinds of interesting things have been discovered in our archives. We need to know if we've found information that enhances or contradicts what we already know about coaster history. This kind of material should not be a footnote in meeting minutes or reserved solely for publication (though publication, where applicable, would be nice too). It should be a topic for discussion at Coaster Con and/or our winter events. It is my hope that a lot of great work has been done over the past ten years and we just don't know about it because we haven't made a priority of showcasing it at our events. If that's the case, let's rectify this situation. In the event that this is entirely false, let's make documentation and discussion of ACE and coaster history a priority once again.
Why do you want to make the word "education" part of ACE's mission statement?
As can be seen from my views on Coaster Con, I feel that education is an important part of ACE, yet we don't formally recognize it by using that word. We use the word "knowledge" instead, which is a little more ambiguous and allows us to distance ourselves from involvement in academic and historical discussions regarding coasters--something we absolutely should not be doing. In addition to reforming Coaster Con to restore and enhance its educational components, ACE should be at the forefront of research.
In a club of over 5,000 members, there must be one person with the tenacity and passion for history and education that Dr. Robert Cartmell had back when I was a new member. We need to find someone like that, offer them the position of Historian (assuming there will be a separately identified Historian should the reorganization be approved), and empower them to bring as much accurate information as possible about coasters to the public and our members.
We also need to continue the ACE Designer Series on a regular schedule, with a new book coming out at least once every three or four years. We've covered Traver and Schmeck. Now we need books on Miller, Allen, Cobb, Prior/Church, Dinn/Summers, the Vettels, and maybe even Toomer. We also need a second edition of the Traver book that corrects any inaccuracies that may exist in the first and second printings of the first edition. We need to make back issues of all issues of RollerCoaster! available to the membership. If financial concerns are the major hurdle to making this happen, we should investigate funding these endeavors via a "crowd sourcing" web site such as Kickstarter.
We should be sponsoring or co-sponsoring academic talks about coasters on college campuses or at major libraries. Little museum displays at parks during Coaster Con (often with content that must be approved by a host park) are not sufficiently fulfilling our educational purpose, in my opinion. We need to again become a leader in educating the masses about our hobby because only with education do we cultivate passion for the classic wood coaster. In turn, only with passion do we succeed at preserving endangered wood coasters (and the occasional endangered steel coaster worthy of a preservation push). Our lack of education, both externally and internally, is putting our wood coaster heritage at risk! Once the last Schmeck or Miller coaster is destroyed, it will be lost and gone forever--they won't be coming back...not without major modifications to the track and trains that drain the soul right out of them.
In a club of over 5,000 members, there must be one person with the tenacity and passion for history and education that Dr. Robert Cartmell had back when I was a new member. We need to find someone like that, offer them the position of Historian (assuming there will be a separately identified Historian should the reorganization be approved), and empower them to bring as much accurate information as possible about coasters to the public and our members.
We also need to continue the ACE Designer Series on a regular schedule, with a new book coming out at least once every three or four years. We've covered Traver and Schmeck. Now we need books on Miller, Allen, Cobb, Prior/Church, Dinn/Summers, the Vettels, and maybe even Toomer. We also need a second edition of the Traver book that corrects any inaccuracies that may exist in the first and second printings of the first edition. We need to make back issues of all issues of RollerCoaster! available to the membership. If financial concerns are the major hurdle to making this happen, we should investigate funding these endeavors via a "crowd sourcing" web site such as Kickstarter.
We should be sponsoring or co-sponsoring academic talks about coasters on college campuses or at major libraries. Little museum displays at parks during Coaster Con (often with content that must be approved by a host park) are not sufficiently fulfilling our educational purpose, in my opinion. We need to again become a leader in educating the masses about our hobby because only with education do we cultivate passion for the classic wood coaster. In turn, only with passion do we succeed at preserving endangered wood coasters (and the occasional endangered steel coaster worthy of a preservation push). Our lack of education, both externally and internally, is putting our wood coaster heritage at risk! Once the last Schmeck or Miller coaster is destroyed, it will be lost and gone forever--they won't be coming back...not without major modifications to the track and trains that drain the soul right out of them.
What do you want to change about Coaster Con?
First of all, I salute the seemingly endless amount of energy ACE's last two Events Directors, Paul Blick and Yvonne Janik, have put forth in making all of our national events memorable. I have no issue with the job they've done with our national Conferences. Even those aspects of Coaster Con they've chosen to emphasize were done extremely well. It's what they've chosen to de-emphasize over the past ten years or so that bothers me.
When I first started attending Coaster Cons in the early 90s, the typical approach was that we would have a primary host park that we'd be at Sunday through Wednesday of Con. Then we'd typically either have one secondary host park that we'd spend the next two days at or a couple of secondary host parks that we'd spend a day each at. Newer members might wonder, "How could you spend four days at the same park?" Indeed, I had to answer this question a few times and my answer was always the same: "If you're getting everything out of Convention that is intended, you actually shouldn't be spending all four days, open to close, at our primary host park!" The Sunday of Coaster Con then was much like it is today, except there were more sales tables, displays, and interaction between members that did not require a mixer event in order to occur. This would be followed by our first coaster ERT of the Con Sunday night. The Monday of the event would usually be a full day or nearly a full day at the park, with both morning and evening coaster ERT (and possibly some surprises, but nothing on the scale we've seen recently). Then on Tuesday, we'd have morning coaster ERT then we'd all go back to the hotel and have presentations, the business meeting, the video contest, and any number of additional activities. Tuesday night, we'd be back at the park for coaster ERT. Wednesday morning would typically be our last coaster ERT of the event then we'd have more Con activities back at the host hotel followed by the banquet at the host hotel that same evening.
I want to see the return of this format. I want our photo contest, video contest, business meeting, platform speeches, presentations, and other similar events to take place in hotel conference rooms or a convention center rather than at our host park. And I want to see more of these kinds of activities! I want more educational talks, more discussions about roller coaster physics, panel discussions about everything from ACE politics to famous coaster designers to historical talks, video presentations of coasters and ACE in the media since the last Coaster Con, discussions of ACE's projects (including preservation efforts and the state / growth or our archives), guest speakers from the NRCMA, IAAPA, Amusement Today, and anyone else who could add to our knowledge base, and games (like Tim Baldwin's Jeopardy! presentation from a few years ago or Bob Prentki's ACE Feud). You get the idea--I want actual intellectual content and stimulation at Coaster Con, not just swag, meals, and ERT (as great as they might be). My dream when I first started going to Coaster Con is that we'd grow in this kind of content to the point of being akin to a sci-fi convention...that is to say, three or four things going on at the host hotel or convention center at the same time so that you couldn't possibly do it all, happening essentially all day on Tuesday and part of Wednesday--a true showcase opportunity for anyone in the world to come learn virtually everything they'd ever possibly want to know about the past, present, and future of coasters. Instead, we've gone the complete opposite way, the wrong way in my opinion. We've pared down this kind of content to the bare minimum and located it in the host park which, while it's kind of them to offer in each applicable case, often has a poorly (or non-)air conditioned venue and an equally poor or non-existent PA system. Add this to all the distractions of an amusement park, and it is simply not an appropriate place to be having an academic discussion or a meeting that determines ACE's future. Coaster Con should be about SO much more than riding, but when we do ride, well, keep reading....
You'll notice that I kept referring to "coaster" ERT rather than simply saying "ERT." This is by design. The sole emphasis of Coaster Con was not necessarily ERT, but what ERT we did have was scheduled with an eye towards quality over quantity. We typically didn't have water park ERT or ERT on family rides or kiddie rides back then, and if we did, we did not sacrifice having ERT on the most important coaster(s) in the park (and by this I typically mean wood coasters) in order to do so. When it came to kiddie coasters, it was more important to arrange for our adult members who might usually not be allowed to ride them to do so during an ERT than to have them open only for their legitimate intended audience. And most importantly, wood coasters were nearly always part of nearly every night ERT. Everyone knows wood coasters run best at night and all of the most legendary ERT sessions I can recall were night rides on amazing coasters...from (the KD) Grizzly and Timber Wolf during my first two Coaster Cons to Texas Giant in the late 90s to Boulder Dash and Voyage more recently, all of those rides earned my highest accolades at the time as a result of night ERT sessions.
Coaster Con should transcend the typical coaster event. For the week or so that it is in session, it should be nothing short of the roller coaster epicenter for the entire world. It shouldn't matter if Hoffman's Playland, Memphis Kiddie Park, or Santa Monica Pier act as our primary host park--there should be so much going on at the host hotel during those first four days that you'd hardly notice that the coasters at those places are, maybe, not quite as appealing as at some of our more typical host parks.
The last thing I'll add on the topic of Coaster Con is that I find it distressing that Knoebels has never been the primary host for a single ACE Coaster Con. It hasn't even been a secondary host! Closest it ever came to hosting was as an optional add-on day during the 2001 Convention. While I would not presume to speak for the park, I have heard through the grapevine that they would love to have us if we'd only ask. As not only my personal favorite park but as one of the top parks among many long-standing ACE members, it is my mission to bring Coaster Con to Knoebels, preferably as the primary host park, as soon as possible (regardless of the outcome of this election). So long as we can confirm that Knoebels would, indeed, be willing to host a future Coaster Con, this unfathomable oversight needs to be corrected with great urgency.
When I first started attending Coaster Cons in the early 90s, the typical approach was that we would have a primary host park that we'd be at Sunday through Wednesday of Con. Then we'd typically either have one secondary host park that we'd spend the next two days at or a couple of secondary host parks that we'd spend a day each at. Newer members might wonder, "How could you spend four days at the same park?" Indeed, I had to answer this question a few times and my answer was always the same: "If you're getting everything out of Convention that is intended, you actually shouldn't be spending all four days, open to close, at our primary host park!" The Sunday of Coaster Con then was much like it is today, except there were more sales tables, displays, and interaction between members that did not require a mixer event in order to occur. This would be followed by our first coaster ERT of the Con Sunday night. The Monday of the event would usually be a full day or nearly a full day at the park, with both morning and evening coaster ERT (and possibly some surprises, but nothing on the scale we've seen recently). Then on Tuesday, we'd have morning coaster ERT then we'd all go back to the hotel and have presentations, the business meeting, the video contest, and any number of additional activities. Tuesday night, we'd be back at the park for coaster ERT. Wednesday morning would typically be our last coaster ERT of the event then we'd have more Con activities back at the host hotel followed by the banquet at the host hotel that same evening.
I want to see the return of this format. I want our photo contest, video contest, business meeting, platform speeches, presentations, and other similar events to take place in hotel conference rooms or a convention center rather than at our host park. And I want to see more of these kinds of activities! I want more educational talks, more discussions about roller coaster physics, panel discussions about everything from ACE politics to famous coaster designers to historical talks, video presentations of coasters and ACE in the media since the last Coaster Con, discussions of ACE's projects (including preservation efforts and the state / growth or our archives), guest speakers from the NRCMA, IAAPA, Amusement Today, and anyone else who could add to our knowledge base, and games (like Tim Baldwin's Jeopardy! presentation from a few years ago or Bob Prentki's ACE Feud). You get the idea--I want actual intellectual content and stimulation at Coaster Con, not just swag, meals, and ERT (as great as they might be). My dream when I first started going to Coaster Con is that we'd grow in this kind of content to the point of being akin to a sci-fi convention...that is to say, three or four things going on at the host hotel or convention center at the same time so that you couldn't possibly do it all, happening essentially all day on Tuesday and part of Wednesday--a true showcase opportunity for anyone in the world to come learn virtually everything they'd ever possibly want to know about the past, present, and future of coasters. Instead, we've gone the complete opposite way, the wrong way in my opinion. We've pared down this kind of content to the bare minimum and located it in the host park which, while it's kind of them to offer in each applicable case, often has a poorly (or non-)air conditioned venue and an equally poor or non-existent PA system. Add this to all the distractions of an amusement park, and it is simply not an appropriate place to be having an academic discussion or a meeting that determines ACE's future. Coaster Con should be about SO much more than riding, but when we do ride, well, keep reading....
You'll notice that I kept referring to "coaster" ERT rather than simply saying "ERT." This is by design. The sole emphasis of Coaster Con was not necessarily ERT, but what ERT we did have was scheduled with an eye towards quality over quantity. We typically didn't have water park ERT or ERT on family rides or kiddie rides back then, and if we did, we did not sacrifice having ERT on the most important coaster(s) in the park (and by this I typically mean wood coasters) in order to do so. When it came to kiddie coasters, it was more important to arrange for our adult members who might usually not be allowed to ride them to do so during an ERT than to have them open only for their legitimate intended audience. And most importantly, wood coasters were nearly always part of nearly every night ERT. Everyone knows wood coasters run best at night and all of the most legendary ERT sessions I can recall were night rides on amazing coasters...from (the KD) Grizzly and Timber Wolf during my first two Coaster Cons to Texas Giant in the late 90s to Boulder Dash and Voyage more recently, all of those rides earned my highest accolades at the time as a result of night ERT sessions.
Coaster Con should transcend the typical coaster event. For the week or so that it is in session, it should be nothing short of the roller coaster epicenter for the entire world. It shouldn't matter if Hoffman's Playland, Memphis Kiddie Park, or Santa Monica Pier act as our primary host park--there should be so much going on at the host hotel during those first four days that you'd hardly notice that the coasters at those places are, maybe, not quite as appealing as at some of our more typical host parks.
The last thing I'll add on the topic of Coaster Con is that I find it distressing that Knoebels has never been the primary host for a single ACE Coaster Con. It hasn't even been a secondary host! Closest it ever came to hosting was as an optional add-on day during the 2001 Convention. While I would not presume to speak for the park, I have heard through the grapevine that they would love to have us if we'd only ask. As not only my personal favorite park but as one of the top parks among many long-standing ACE members, it is my mission to bring Coaster Con to Knoebels, preferably as the primary host park, as soon as possible (regardless of the outcome of this election). So long as we can confirm that Knoebels would, indeed, be willing to host a future Coaster Con, this unfathomable oversight needs to be corrected with great urgency.
How do you feel about amending ACE's Constitution to allow for restructuring of the Executive Committee?
I'm divided on the issue, but ultimately will likely be voting against it. Here's why: I think both the current structure and the proposed new structure is problematic. I've always felt that the Executive Committee consists of too many people who are not directly elected by the members. This means that, should we elect both a President who tries to make misguided policy decisions and other officers who are either unaware of it, apathetic, lacking in courage, or (worst of all) in agreement, we could see an Executive Committee stacked with individuals who would essentially be "yes men" for the President. This proposed restructuring does nothing to address or mitigate this possibility. Indeed, with fewer positions to fill, and with potential managerial/department-head types filling those positions rather than people who are "hands-on" and passionate about the department they are overseeing, this potential for abuse becomes even more pronounced. I recognize that the size of the EC may be a bit unwieldy for the challenges ACE faces today, but I would be more comfortable with this plan if one of the two following modifications to it were made:
1. Make the six newly created/consolidated positions also directly elected by the membership, just like the President, Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer are;
or
2. Add two elected member-at-large positions to our Executive Committee. The sole duty of these members-at-large would be to represent the views of the membership directly on the EC and to report back to the membership on the EC's decisions. They would be our watchdogs making sure our EC is acting in our best interests. These two elected officials could also be delegated tasks, but they would have the right to refuse if they feel as though it would bias them in any way or get in the way of their primary duties to represent and report for the average ACE member. This would also make for a more balanced EC: six directly elected officials (President, VP, Secretary, Treasurer, two members-at-large) one indirectly elected official (Immediate Past President), and six appointees (Member Services Director, Communications Director, Publications Director, History and Preservation Director, Region Director, and Events Director).
Without either of these two ideas implemented, the restructuring proposal does not, in my view, adequately insulate us from the prospect of a misguided and power-hungry President in the future. Granted, I do not necessarily foresee this happening anytime soon, but (in my opinion) we had at least one such individual in ACE's past and those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. For those reasons I must withhold my endorsement of the proposed revisions and modifications of Bylaws Two, Five, and Six.
1. Make the six newly created/consolidated positions also directly elected by the membership, just like the President, Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer are;
or
2. Add two elected member-at-large positions to our Executive Committee. The sole duty of these members-at-large would be to represent the views of the membership directly on the EC and to report back to the membership on the EC's decisions. They would be our watchdogs making sure our EC is acting in our best interests. These two elected officials could also be delegated tasks, but they would have the right to refuse if they feel as though it would bias them in any way or get in the way of their primary duties to represent and report for the average ACE member. This would also make for a more balanced EC: six directly elected officials (President, VP, Secretary, Treasurer, two members-at-large) one indirectly elected official (Immediate Past President), and six appointees (Member Services Director, Communications Director, Publications Director, History and Preservation Director, Region Director, and Events Director).
Without either of these two ideas implemented, the restructuring proposal does not, in my view, adequately insulate us from the prospect of a misguided and power-hungry President in the future. Granted, I do not necessarily foresee this happening anytime soon, but (in my opinion) we had at least one such individual in ACE's past and those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. For those reasons I must withhold my endorsement of the proposed revisions and modifications of Bylaws Two, Five, and Six.
Wednesday, July 2, 2014
How do you feel about amending ACE's Constitution to allow for Associate Memberships?
I have reservations, but I am tentatively in favor of this and am likely to vote to approve it. My deepest concern is that this could one day lead to a situation where ACE News and/or RollerCoaster! magazine cease to be available in hard copy form as a right of membership to all non-Associate status members. This could happen because, as the ratio of Associate members to non-Associate members goes up, the available budget for printing costs and postage for these publications decreases, potentially making them untenable going forward. If the amendment passes and the slightest indicator of danger that this scenario may play out becomes evident in the future (whether that be a month, decade, or century from now), it must subsequently be repealed or modified to prevent the end of printed publications. The death of ACE News and, especially, of RollerCoaster! magazine as hard copy publications would be tantamount to the death of ACE as the organization I know, love, and want to be the best it can for it's members.
What is your view on the Vice Presidency? Do you have any ambition to become ACE President in four years?
I and the other candidate for Vice President present were asked this question during the platform speeches at Coaster Con. My view is that the Vice Presidency is a separately elected position for a reason. Moreover, I have fought (and plan to continue to fight, if need be) to keep it that way. The notion that the person serving as Vice President should just automatically be assumed to be the next ACE President (or frontrunner for that job) in two to four years doesn't gel well with me. I would dare say that that point of view sends mixed messages...that is to say that often, a lot of the people bemoaning the fact that members don't want to run for positions in ACE are the same ones saying that there should be a smooth transition of power that automatically (or nearly automatically) elevates the Vice President to the Presidency at the end of the President's term limit. All this succeeds in doing is creating one more office that people don't want to run for as they may feel obligated to serve for the next 12 years as Vice President, President, and Immediate Past President. Some people can excel in a Vice Presidential capacity and proceed to become a less than ideal President (and the reverse is true, also). I don't think such people should be pressured into running for and accepting the Presidency, only to be left feeling like they're letting the members and themselves down with the job they're doing, especially when someone who could do a better job but doesn't happen to be the most recent Vice President is available for the task. I am sure that being a member of ACE's Executive Committee is a lot of hard work, but it shouldn't be so much work that the average ACE member can't handle it. If it is, there's something wrong.
Indeed, any good democracy can handle a smooth transition of power to someone who was not involved with the previous administration of the applicable government. Is ACE's democracy so broken that the club would just fall to pieces if a qualified candidate who had not served as Vice President or in another recent Executive Committee capacity ran and won the Presidency of the club? I sure hope not. If it is, ACE has much bigger problems than the possibility of electing an official who wants to serve for less than four (or eight or 12) years!
As for the future in regard to my plans, I find it a bit presumptuous to make solid long-term plans. The past and the future are out of our control. All we can control is what happens right now. In the now, I want to be your Vice President in an effort to enact the changes to ACE's Constitution and Bylaws as outlined in my platform. Will I be ready and inclined to run for President in four years? I do not know. If elected, will I be inclined to seek a second term as Vice President? Again, I don't know. I am a full time grad school student with a desire to use my talents and education to heal the world. If the work load proves too cumbersome or the other Executive Committee members prove too obstructionist to my agenda for me to be able to accomplish the things I want to accomplish for the benefit of all ACE members, I may well choose to bow out in 2016. In such an event I would wait until I'm out of school, my practice is up and running, and the political climate in ACE is more favorable to my goals before I would try to come back and finish what I'm attempting to start. I cannot promise anyone ambition to serve beyond 2016. I can promise that so long as I remain passionate about this hobby, ACE, and the rights of ACE's membership, I will not be silent on those matters that I consider important to our future.
In the event that I am elected and something unforeseen happens to (presumed) President-Elect Willard, I would be seeking help from ACE's membership, the other members of ACE's Executive Committee, and any past ACE Presidents willing to assist in guiding me through my duties until such time as the President can resume his duties or a new President can be elected. I may be stubbornly passionate about many issues but at the same time, until I've made a firm decision on a matter, I prefer to lead by consensus. That would be my most likely approach if ACE Presidential duties were thrust upon me in an unforeseen fashion.
Indeed, any good democracy can handle a smooth transition of power to someone who was not involved with the previous administration of the applicable government. Is ACE's democracy so broken that the club would just fall to pieces if a qualified candidate who had not served as Vice President or in another recent Executive Committee capacity ran and won the Presidency of the club? I sure hope not. If it is, ACE has much bigger problems than the possibility of electing an official who wants to serve for less than four (or eight or 12) years!
As for the future in regard to my plans, I find it a bit presumptuous to make solid long-term plans. The past and the future are out of our control. All we can control is what happens right now. In the now, I want to be your Vice President in an effort to enact the changes to ACE's Constitution and Bylaws as outlined in my platform. Will I be ready and inclined to run for President in four years? I do not know. If elected, will I be inclined to seek a second term as Vice President? Again, I don't know. I am a full time grad school student with a desire to use my talents and education to heal the world. If the work load proves too cumbersome or the other Executive Committee members prove too obstructionist to my agenda for me to be able to accomplish the things I want to accomplish for the benefit of all ACE members, I may well choose to bow out in 2016. In such an event I would wait until I'm out of school, my practice is up and running, and the political climate in ACE is more favorable to my goals before I would try to come back and finish what I'm attempting to start. I cannot promise anyone ambition to serve beyond 2016. I can promise that so long as I remain passionate about this hobby, ACE, and the rights of ACE's membership, I will not be silent on those matters that I consider important to our future.
In the event that I am elected and something unforeseen happens to (presumed) President-Elect Willard, I would be seeking help from ACE's membership, the other members of ACE's Executive Committee, and any past ACE Presidents willing to assist in guiding me through my duties until such time as the President can resume his duties or a new President can be elected. I may be stubbornly passionate about many issues but at the same time, until I've made a firm decision on a matter, I prefer to lead by consensus. That would be my most likely approach if ACE Presidential duties were thrust upon me in an unforeseen fashion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)