Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Ron Hamburger's comments on SEAOC vs SEAOSC

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
In response to Ron Hamburger, as does Shafat, I welcome your insight.  Let
met provide a little of mine.  At the SEAOSC Board meetings for the last
year, our board was provided threats and ultimatums.  As Shafat noted it
was decided at the last convention that SEAOC wanted control of the
website.  No thought was given as to how or why, SEAONC Board members
attended our meetings to express their concern for the revenues being
generated by the website and their fair distribution.

The website topic has mutated several times, we attempted to create a
contract that allowed for SEAOC to "control" the website until SEAOSC had
be reimbursed for out of pocket expenses of the website and then SEAOC
could do what they wanted.  This took may forms, but the revisions that
came back and one was to exclude the verbiage that contained the other
three associations of SEAOC, the agreement was to be between SEAOC and
SEAOSC and we all know successful the SEAOC take over of the ON-LINE
Newsletter was.

Also when Allen Goldstein descended from mountain, to our Board Meeting, he
told us (several times) the internet and the associated technology was a
mer blip and completely insignificant.  Now this is the person who would be
responsible for the management of the SEAOC Website when "controlled" by

Ron's comments regarding Allen Goldstein might be correct, but my
experience has not been the same.  When I asked Allen directly about some
of the SEAOSC concerns with his operation of the State office, I received
excuses to explain the original excuses, it is not my job, I work for the
Board, etc.  Mr. Goldstein does not understand our history with new
technology and computerization of society.  

We as a profession tend to be very quick in adopting technology and using
it, example the list server, the web site and all of the SEAOSC having
e-mail and our meeting minutes being distributed via e-mail.

Ron's comments were correct that the SEAOSC Board has directed it's SEAOC
Delegates to vote no on matters were a result of ultimatums or threats or
lack of understanding.  Yes, SEAOSC questioned the "BALANCING" of the SEAOC
budget upon the back of special projects, requiring the funds from special
projects to balance the budget.  Our comment was what is going to be done
when SAC funding stops, "Well Allen's is pursuing additional special
projects".  That is why a dues increase was voted for the upcoming year,
the minutes reflect and assumption that another increase will follow as
well will another the following year.

We all also understand that the SEAOC organization could use some
revisions, but I would like to know why certain provisions of the bylaws
are BROKEN is it so:

1.	All dues to be sent to the State office and local funding be provided
from the State after the State's needs are met.

2.	So the State Office can organize all the monthly meetings of the four
sections, along with the pre-meeting seminars.

I would like to know what changes have to be made to the BROKEN bylaw after
the voting requirements are revised and why can't this wait till the new
State Board and Delegates are inplace at the next Convention and why the
membership can't be allowed to be informed?

Questions, Questions, just call me curious.

Bill Warren, SE
SEAOSC Board Member
Newport Beach, CA