Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Changes to SEAOC and SEAOSC, SEAONC, SEAOSD and SEAOCC

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Sorry, Rick, but I just call 'em the way I see 'em. I have been a (dues
paying) member for 18 years and I have seen very little in the way of
responsiveness to the membership. I have written letters to the President
(past not current) of SEAOSC and not gotten responses and I know others have
as well. I am disappointed that so few participate on this listserv and
kudos goes out to you, Bill Warren, James Lai, Don Gilbert and Rawn Nelson
for your contributions.

I understand the need/desire to strengthen the state office in order that we
have a stronger voice. However, this voice will be hollow if it does not
have the support of the membership. A classic example is the recent $10 dues
increase to operate the state office without having a dialog with the
membership seeking its support. The operations remind me of a smoke filled
back room where all of the decisions are made and directions decided. Even
if you perceive this as an exaggeration, the organization should make more
of an effort to dispel this image. I don't believe one topic should be
discussed without full disclosure to the membership.

Should SEAOC proceed with a reorganization plan to centralize, I believe a
serious effort should be made to make the Internet part of the plan. I
believe a separate, password enabled listserve or Intranet should be set up
for members only to discuss issues that we may not want aired in a public
forum. I think it would be really nice if the seaosc website was updated
with all of the committee reports. If you go check these out, very little
has been done to keep this data current. If the committees are made up of
"old geezers" who don't know how to turn on a computer, maybe it would make
sense to actively recruit some "young pups" for committee membership to fill
this role. This would be "win-win" in that the information would get
processed and the younger engineers would feel like they are making a
contribution without feeling like they have to be an expert to participate.

While I understand the need/desire to strengthen a state presence, I would
like to discourage the organization from disbanding the regional offices
altogether. Representation is done best locally (we have found this out
after 222 years of practice).

A good start would be to post the minutes of tonight's Board of Directors
meeting.

Regards,
Bill Allen

-----Original Message-----
From: raranous(--nospam--at)pacbell.net [mailto:raranous(--nospam--at)pacbell.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 4:28 PM
To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
Subject: Re: Changes to SEAOC and SEAOSC, SEAONC, SEAOSD and SEAOCC


Bill,

You are being somewhat unfair in your response.  However, in the same sense
you
are right in your response.  To me, as a SEAOC delegate representing SEAOSC,
I
am interested in what the membership thinks.  I can also assure you that the
rest of the SEAOSC delegates and SEAOSC also care what the members think.
So
please present your views.

Bill Allen, S.E. wrote:

> Does it REALLY matter what the SEAOC membership thinks? Up to now, the
> organization has demonstrated that it is not interested in the opinions of
> its membership by discussing this (and other) issues within a small
circle,
> making a decision and then announcing the results of that decision with
very
> little input by the general membership.
>
> I understand the need and/or desire to create a stronger (state and
> national) voice but I am also concerned that we as members will become an
> even more distant entity.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Allen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Williston Warren IV [mailto:billw4(--nospam--at)pbs1.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 01, 1998 4:19 PM
> To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
> Subject: Changes to SEAOC and SEAOSC, SEAONC, SEAOSD and SEAOCC
>
> As a member of the SEAOSC Board of DIrectors I read the May 1998 SEAOC
Plan
> Review article by the SEAOC President with some startle.  On page 3 of the
> May plan review our SEAOC President noted:
>
>      "The Board unanimously passed a motion ot establish a committee to
> explore options and study the governance and adminstration of SEAOC.
> .....    Included in their review will be the question of whether SEAOC
> should continue as a federation of autonomous member organizations."
>
> Is this a proposal to centralize the four existing operations of the FOUR
> members of SEAOC, which are SEAONC, SEAOSD, SEAOCC and SEAOSC. It is my
> reading of the SEAOSC Association By-Laws states that members are members
> of SEAOSC and that SEAOSC contributes a portion of each members dues fee
to
> SEAOC for state expense, resulting in that the SEAOSC does not pay SEAOC
> dues, just SEAOSC dues.
>
> I am interested in membership opinion.  The beginning of the month means
> the four member Board of Directors meeting and if you have an opinion,
> comment or experience, please post it to the list server.
>
> Does the centralization of the existing four associations in the State
> Office or the continuation of the four organizations as the members to
> SEAOC.
>
>         Bill Warren, S.E.
>         Newport Beach, CA.
>
>