I don't know how many of you US Sailors have taken the time to read the restructuring plan for US Sailing. But the Annual General Meeting starts tomorrow, and I just today got a request for suggestions and comments about the new plan as it might affect multihulls.

If anyone wants to take the time to read the Task Force Report and the new Structure Plan and has any feedback, put it in this thread, and I will forward it to the Multihull Council people. The link is below:

Please use the following link to review the latest edition of the Structure Task Force Report

http://www.ussailing.org/organization/taskforce/structure/

For those arguing that US Sailing is the answer for us and that NAMSA doesn't matter, where are you now?
Rick

Here are the comments that I sent to the chairman of the Multihull Committee and to the V.P. in charge of the restructuring committee:

As far as how this restructuring might affect multihulls, I see a few things:

Sailing organizations will no longer have a vote. That means the multihull class associations will not have a vote. Like the Hobie Class, the Wave Class, the Tornado Class, the A-Class, the Shark Class, NAMSA, etc. This is going to make it more difficult for multihulls to have an impact. In fact, it makes it look as though there is no longer any reason for those organizations to even belong to US Sailing.

Under the restructuring the Multihull Council does not have a delegate to the Nominating and Governing Committee. I’m not sure what the implications of that are, but it doesn’t sound good.

The restructuring recommends, at one point, merging the Multihull Council into the Multihull Committee. And at another point, it recommends merging the Multihull Committee into the Multihull Council. Which is it? And which will be more beneficial to the multihulls? Or might both be eliminated entirely?

* * * * *

Those are just a few things that might affect multihulls specifically. I won't go into my opinions about the entire restructuring, because it would take pages.

I looked it.

Contrary to what was said it appears to me that the strength of racing increases

This dilutes the strength of popular groups, Multihull, PHRF, community sailing etc.

The multiple special interests were in general the counter to "racing"

There is a nod to recreational sailing. Recreational sailing and cruising are by their nature not organized and I fail to see what relevance a national governing body has to them

I oppose having coaches and industry on the N&G Committee. They should have delegates but should not be on the N&G committee

The governing board should NOT have the right to act "for the good of sailing" that is a blank check. Anything outside the charter should require a vote from the delegates or the area representatives

Mary do you want to send these comments in as a group?

Thanks, Carl. I have sent your comments to both Dan Mangus, Chairman of the Multihull Council, and Tom Hubbell, Chairman of the Restructure Task Force.

I sent my comments to both of them yesterday. I hope they are able to receive them at the meeting in Portland.

They confirmed they have received the comments. Anybody else have anything to contribute?

There has been quite a bit of conversation regarding this issue, although not on this forum.
My concern is the repositioning of the multihull Council on the organizational chart below the newly formed Coaches Council and the Industry Council. Whereas these two Councils would represent the multihull community to US SAILING and the Multihull Council will have to work through them. After nearly 20 years of work this appears to be a giant step backwards. I advised Dan Mangus and Tom Hubbel of my position.
Hopefully, our chairman and delegates that are at the meeting in Portland can voice our concerns and maintain our position within the organization.

Thanks, Gordon. Your opinions should carry a lot of weight, since you were there from the beginning of the Multihull Council. I wish you were out there in Portland to plead our cause.

P.S. to everyone else: The conversation gisco was referring to was not on a forum; it was via e-mails among interested parties involved with the Multihull Council. So our multihull representatives did go to Portland armed with some good input.

Hi Folks -

Based on buckets of input, the draft of the restructure was changed significantly. The idea is still to take the current, unwieldy, slow-acting Board of over 50 members down to around 9 or 10. The way it is now:

1. The make-up of the Multihull Council stays exactly the same, with the Multihull Committee and the Alter Cup Committee continuing to report to it.

2. The Board of Directors is no longer constituency based - they are advised by a new House of Delegates, and regulated by a new Nominating and Governance Committee.

3. Multihulls GAIN representation! Right now, we have ONE seat on the board. Under the proposed set up, we'll get THREE seats in the House of Delegates, and ONE seat on the very small (10 people) Nomination and Governance Committee.

The new Board is required to attend all House meetings, and Board actions are reviewed by the N&G folks. Don't like where someone on the Board is taking things? N&G takes them off the Board.

Also, every single US SAILING member will get to vote for the new Board on line. I like this. Family memberships get two votes.

The current Board voted to send the current draft to the Bylaws Committee, which means we (multihulls) still get at least one more whack at it next March, and we're still probably a year away from implementation.

Now we need four volunteers... interested?

Finally someone who knows what they're talking about chimes in.

Now we are talking.

John,

I'm glad our input had an impact on the final reorganization decisions.

Hopefully, I will be available if needed.

Gordon

John-

It was good to see you in Portland. Let me add my two cents.

First, something had to be done. The governance of US Sailing had become disfunctional, with a 52 person board. It makes it kinda hard to have a productive conversation. Something had to be done and this is a good if not perfect solution. And they did listen to our concerns.

Second, the new board will be elected for the good of the sport, rather than to vote just for their constituency's narrow interest. This is good for multihull sailing since we are relatively underrepresented in the current structure.

And Direct Elections will probably also help multihullers because we all communicate through this site. In other words we have a much more effective get-out-the-vote mechanism than almost any other group in sailing.

So net-net, this is a good thing for multihullers IMHO.

Hunt Stookey
18HT USA-14

John, well stated. Gordon, we missed you, hope your wife is better. All, keep checking the US SAILING website for updates. State any concerns here, or directly to John, and we will take to the rest of YOUR US SAILING Multihull Council.

Caleb Tarleton, Multihull Council