[Lobido]

Tiz-
I just skimmed the thread and missed the link to the lease. What is the link?

Be aware, I tend to doff my lawyer hat when posting here, and I only hold an inactive license in California. Any comments I make will be made without the intention that they be relied upon as legal advice, and I do not represent any persons or entities relating to the matters at issue.

[designbydave]

[DocSoc]

[DocSoc]

[knumbknuts]

[sg]

[bobk]

I think we should let it sit for now and discuss it over the
weekend. I've sent out an email notice to all club members
that we should try to get together Saturday or Sunday (or
both) so we can discuss all of these ideas.

The Torrey Hawks already are a USHPA chapter (#270), and
I think the investigation into the insurance wouldn't hurt. But
to actually make a decision to proceed should take greater
concensus than those of us on this forum. If you want to look
into it and give us a report on what you've found, I think that
would be excellent.

[knumbknuts]

[bobk]

Thanks to all for the discussion, and I do mean all.

[DocSoc]

[bobk]

Socrates writes:

> I have conf numbers we can all use? If that would be cool to the Hawks?

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean. What are conf numbers?

Sorry for the ignorance.

[DocSoc]

[bobk]

Oooohhhh,

"confernece numbers" not "confirmation numbers"
. . . as the light goes on in my head!

That sounds very cool indeed!

Sure, post the instructions and pick a time.
I'm up for it.

Thanks.

[Lobido]

[Roger]

Let’s see if I can add to this discussion without getting flamed.

First about me: I’m a PG pilot, and proud of it. But at the same time, I respect everyone that has a passion for flight. It’s not a matter of better or worse, just different. BTW, I voted to keep USHGA as USHGA out of respect for all the pioneering efforts (and lives paid) to get OUR sport where it is today. Furthermore, I’m no fan of Torrey management. But I do think they are a valuable asset to our sport. I think there are lots of things they could do better, but I prefer not to take shots from the cheep seats.

I am a board member of the San Diego club, but my comments here are my own. In that position, I have been a party to much of what has preceded in this debate.

So here (in no particular order) are a few points to ponder:

1 If it is so unfair that Hang pilots operate under different rules at Torrey, why is it that PG pilots are excluded completely from “Hang only” sites? There are three in California that I know of. Fort Funston, Yosemite, and Lake McClure. It seems that discriminating against PG pilots is an institution in central California. I wonder how you would respond if “we” PG pilots were “rocking the boat” at one of those sites. Frankly, I’d be in favor of a USHPA policy that required equal access under the threat of having the site insurance pulled.

2 With regard to Dave B, here is a quote from Bob “But the first time that Dave B made one small mistake (like forgetting to sign in) he was kicked out again for life (this time I was there myself to see that David Jebb had called the police to remove Dave B.)” Our sport lives or dies because of the liability waivers and insurance that protects the property owners of the sites we fly. Do I need to explain how that “small” mistake could have cost us all the privilege of flying at Torrey. Did Torrey management act unreasonably? How would you react if your child or employee was disciplined for breaking the rules, and the VERY FIRST thing they did was to break the rules again? Think about that in the context of your child’s safety, or your employee’s actions depriving you of your livelihood. In a more direct way, our sport is very unforgiving of “small” mistakes. With regard to the tandem issues. Torrey is a business. Who they choose to employ as tandem pilots is, and should be, up to them. Many of you are business owners, how would you like Bob telling you whom you would employ. How would you like him threatening your business if you didn’t employ who he said you should? The state of California has labor laws that are way biased towards the employee. That is the proper forum for those issues.

3 Bob is a crusader, and it takes all kinds. One thing most crusaders have in common is the undying belief that they are right, and that anyone who opposes them is wrong. Most of us in San Diego had never met Bob before he showed up at a club meeting asking to be our “representative” to the TPSC. How do you represent a group of people that you don’t associate with? He was never “promised” anything except that we would consider it. In very short order it became clear that he had an agenda that he was going to pursue regardless of how anyone else felt. For example, once it became clear that he would not be appointed, here is his description of an acceptable alternate: “Ideally, I would also like someone who openly endorses my vision (as expressed in the message). I understand that the third point (seeking the lease) is quite controversial, and I would therefore be supportive of someone who fully endorsed the first two points even if they were a little soft on the third.” Funny thing is, seeking the lease is the one point that I am most in agreement with. If he thinks he can do a better job, have at it. When it’s his livelihood and assets on the line, then he can run the place as he sees fit. The next time you go to Torrey, look at the dead grass as a reminder of what someone with an axe to grind cost us. Before you consent to have Bob represent you, be sure in your own mind that he represents all of your views and that your not just being used to provide him with a platform to pursue his own agenda.

Roger

[sg]

Dave B forgot to sign in once so he got kicked out for life?
Or Dave B didnt fill out the waivers for the year? Hard to imagine since every time ive been to torrey this year the shop guy comes running out yelling at me to get out of the LZ if I havent signed the waiver for the year. He has a bad memory so I get harassed whenever I show up and have to show my ushpa card even though I always wear my whistle as a "clue" that im a pilot.


Interesting. So you can forget to sign in once and you are gone for life?
But a tandem instructor can dangerously swoop thru the crowded section of the eating area and no one says a word?


A PG instructor plays chicken with me head on, almost gets me killed and Daves only action is to try and calm me down.


Youre just reinforcing the double standard for me. Do we know EXACTLY the reason Dave B got kicked out??? This is still too fuzzy for me.

[Radwhacker]

Roger,

I've stayed out of this fray for various reasons, one of which is the discussion I had with you and the other PG'ers on the subject at Carl's house last weekend (great party BTW - but what a hangover the next day!) For what it's worth, I think that anybody that can put away as much liquor as you SD PG boys and remain standing can't be all bad.

From my perspective, I would just caution HG pilots from jumping too quick, without really gathering all the facts first. It would be a shame to create a bigger problem in our quest to remedy a smaller problem(s).

Doug

[sg]

[sg]

I have to challenge an underlying double standard here.

Why does everyone jump all over bob for "having an agenda", when Dave who runs Torrey clearly has an agenda too?? (To run a profitable PG business at the site).

I have this sense that everyone assumes its "evil" or something to have your own agenda, but Dave gets a free pass???

Its a free market. The site can be bid on. Why does everyone immediately assume some evil ulterior motive?? Why is this automatically an evil thing or something???

Isnt it perfectly reasonable to get a new concessionaire who could potentially be more fair and do a better job?

Maybe a non-profit club as the new concessionaire?

Or just get the current concessionaire to be more fair, when they realize they could get out bid on the site if they dont make more people happy?

I have a problem with people simply waving their hands and automatically assuming that change is a terrible thing. Seems pretty closed minded to me.

[Radwhacker]

Here's my take:

There are obvious inequities with the current situation. However, there is much to be said for working with the current management to rectify the situation rather than throwing out the baby with the bath water.

You really would have a new, unproven, situation if a "consortium" were to out bid the Jebbs and gain control. Would they be up to the task? Would there be any real motivation (read "money") to insure that the operation is ran professionally? What is the business expertise of the potential management team?

Lots of variables - it could work out all warm and fuzzy for everyone involved (PG'ers and HG'ers), or it could go pear shaped in a hurry.