34 + ME

[Gary Matczak]

The directors had a packet containing a number of proposed changes in advance of the meeting. I can't confirm whether the minimum membership rule was in that packet, but I believe it was.

Great point, Liz - you were not alone.

From what I have gathered, it would have had to have been, as no proposals were to be taken from the floor,...................

[BOBSMYTH]

DCA needs to define the area between Mini-Corps and Class A. It makes no sense to have legal groups of all sizes - except for 22 to 34 members.

IMO, I would even go one step further and allow for some cross over: perhaps Mini Corps can have a max of 25, Class A starts at 35 and from 26 - 34 members the corps gets to decide where they best fit to achieve their mission. (If you don't like those exact numbers, propose your own.)

There is precedent for this - this is the manner in which DCI currently defines the line between Division II and Division III.

[Gary Matczak]

DCA needs to define the area between Mini-Corps and Class A. It makes no sense to have legal groups of all sizes - except for 22 to 34 members.

IMO, I would even go one step further and allow for some cross over: perhaps Mini Corps can have a max of 25, Class A starts at 35 and from 26 - 34 members the corps gets to decide where they best fit to achieve their mission. (If you don't like those exact numbers, propose your own.)

There is precedent for this - this is the manner in which DCI currently defines the line between Division II and Division III.

one thought could be to take the 50" x 70" performance area, as defined by the mini corps rules, and allow class A's smaller than 35 and mini corps to be adjudicated at regular season contests in that type of format,...................however, that doesn't fill the 22 to 34 gap, but an idea none the less, that could further be developed,..............thoughts?

[Vagabond Skyliner]

I believe the only rule up for discussion WAS the "Renegade rule"...and then ONLY because lee brlough it up here in the first place.

Unlike DCI, DCA did not post the list of proposed rules for public viewing prior to the meeting. If they HAD, we could've discussed this as well, and all our arguments against it could've been brought up.

As it turned out, some people at the meeting DID speak out against it...Darkman for one...but it fell on deaf ears....and the ORIGINAL minimum number was 40....which means Govies would've barely made the field if it'd been in effect THIS year. He was able to talk it down to 35, but that's still going to be tough for some corps.

Culture of secrecy = BAD for small corps....and now they're stuck with it...of course, if all corps had a vote on the activity they're involved in (instead of the top 10), it may not have passed...but that's another issue...

Although I agree with you in this.

BUT

Since you say "Unlike DCI, DCA did not post the list of proposed rules for public viewing..."

I will add:

JUST LIKE DCI "of course, if all corps had a vote on the activity they're involved in (instead of the top 12), it may not have passed"

[Vagabond Skyliner]

Clearly adding a Class B would have been the better way to go.

In my OPINION:

10 to 25 --- Mini Corps

20 to 35 --- Class B

30 to 70 --- Class A

60 to 135 --- Open

All groups would have to declare which division they were in by June 1st. Bye that date I think most groups know what they are going to have.

Edited January 21, 2007 by LucysSkylinerAlumni

[TomPeashey]

clarification

the rules congress - to keep sanity and consistancy - is only held every 2 years... once its date is set, let's use hypothetical dates... say Jan. 15th... then in November, all directors are urged to provide via a simple form proposed changes... these submitted changes must reach the secretary by Dec 15th (30 days before the congress) at that time the secretary sends these proposals to all corps directors... (unedited and without comment from the dca management I might add) this gives the directors a month to review the proposals, consult their staff and have a pretty good idea what they think might have merit and what might not prior to the congress... proposals are then discussed and either passed or rejected by a simple majority of the voting members... compromise and slight modification of a proposal is often an element...

In the first hour of the congress... proposals that lack support, have little merit or were someone's political statement not being practical are routinely dismissed by a quick vote - again with the end goal being a smooth and productive rules congress... after that first culling of the proposals, caption groups split up and make recommendations to the directors and work out specific changes to the judging sheets ... their work is then presented to the directors for approval...

However, the only way a rule could pass would be if it was in the packet... OR if a unanimous vote of the voting member corps allowed the consideration. This is done to keep the congress sane and productive. If people were allowed to muddy the water by submitting massive proposals at the congress that weekend - it would bog down and become ineffective - forcing the directors to consider potentially drastic change proposals without proper consideration and consultation with all of the corps individual "think tanks"...

[audiodb]

but that is a big part of my question ~ if this rule has far greater impact on DCA overall why if Lee brought one thing public did he not bring this as well?

Gee, I don't know.

1. Have you asked him?

2. Perhaps, sensing how much grief he would endure for raising just one issue from that packet of proposals, he figured a double-helping was too much.

3. Maybe he figured a 40-member minimum was so ludicrous that it would be summarily dismissed or tabled.

4. Or, perhaps, he just doesn't have enough time and energy to crusade for every cause, between assignments with Renegades, Skyliners, whatever his day job is, etc.

To be frank, I am still surprised there could even have been a proposal that would have rendered the current class A champion potentially ineligible for competition in the future. I would never have expected the same body that created class A in the first place to give that proposal serious consideration. In contrast, the proposed change in voting rights already had some support, and thus a realistic chance of passing.

And a key distinction - the "Renegades Rule" had come up previously. It was rejected after spirited discussion, and not expected to come up again.

[Gary Matczak]

Gee, I don't know.

1. Have you asked him?

2. Perhaps, sensing how much grief he would endure for raising just one issue from that packet of proposals, he figured a double-helping was too much.

3. Maybe he figured a 40-member minimum was so ludicrous that it would be summarily dismissed or tabled.

4. Or, perhaps, he just doesn't have enough time and energy to crusade for every cause, between assignments with Renegades, Skyliners, whatever his day job is, etc.

To be frank, I am still surprised there could even have been a proposal that would have rendered the current class A champion potentially ineligible for competition in the future. I would never have expected the same body that created class A in the first place to give that proposal serious consideration. In contrast, the proposed change in voting rights already had some support, and thus a realistic chance of passing.

And a key distinction - the "Renegades Rule" had come up previously. It was rejected after spirited discussion, and not expected to come up again.

I am not sure where this all goes, all these perhaps and maybes,................and quite honestly, with his involvement with Skyliners, it could have potential to directly effect them,....................so I'll ask, and maybe not so much directly of Lee, but of all directors of corps this directly effects,..............How come you didn't bring it up?,,,...............and also to audiodb,............did you ask him?,.............or others?,....................my guess is all directors were asked to keep a lid on all proposals.....................and Lee chose a different course,..................

[Vagabond Skyliner]

clarification

the rules congress - to keep sanity and consistancy - is only held every 2 years... once its date is set, let's use hypothetical dates... say Jan. 15th... then in November, all directors are urged to provide via a simple form proposed changes... these submitted changes must reach the secretary by Dec 15th (30 days before the congress) at that time the secretary sends these proposals to all corps directors... (unedited and without comment from the dca management I might add) this gives the directors a month to review the proposals, consult their staff and have a pretty good idea what they think might have merit and what might not prior to the congress... proposals are then discussed and either passed or rejected by a simple majority of the voting members... compromise and slight modification of a proposal is often an element...

In the first hour of the congress... proposals that lack support, have little merit or were someone's political statement not being practical are routinely dismissed by a quick vote - again with the end goal being a smooth and productive rules congress... after that first culling of the proposals, caption groups split up and make recommendations to the directors and work out specific changes to the judging sheets ... their work is then presented to the directors for approval...

However, the only way a rule could pass would be if it was in the packet... OR if a unanimous vote of the voting member corps allowed the consideration. This is done to keep the congress sane and productive. If people were allowed to muddy the water by submitting massive proposals at the congress that weekend - it would bog down and become ineffective - forcing the directors to consider potentially drastic change proposals without proper consideration and consultation with all of the corps individual "think tanks"...

Tom;

Yes all of that you posted makes sounds like a fine way to run things. No Problem there.

BUT

Perhapes a way for the general public it see the proposals BEFORE the voting is done. God knows I am not a DCI fan, but the way way they put that info out sure makes them look more open than DCA. I don't even care how ,WHO voted each item.

But knowing Who Proposed what and why, Yes.

That way we and members of the different Corps could give our representatives an idea of how we all feel.

Can you really believe that this and the cuting back the voteing to just the Top 10 will help Improve and Grow DCA and the All Age movment?

Edited January 21, 2007 by LucysSkylinerAlumni

[darkman]

We were asked stated our opinions... And we did...

Remember it was 40 members, & Dream requirements 25 members, it got lowered to 35... And since we don't get a vote I asked the Renegades to vote against it... But the motion passed anyway. So now we have to make sure the other groups recruit their butts off the meet the 35+.