Page 29 of 29 FirstFirst ... 19272829
Results 281 to 286 of 286

Thread: Arnburg out as A3?!!!!!

  1. #281
    Chasing the Horizon RJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Central FL
    Quote Originally Posted by DMF13 View Post
    When does Leighton's term end? If he won't resign, hopefully he will get voted out.
    I believe his term ends December this year, with the election slated for July, according to the USPSA contact directory:

    https://uspsa.org/contact

  2. #282
    Chasing the Horizon RJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Central FL
    ...and logging in the latest on the Rutkowski lawsuit, I have not refreshed this in a while.

    Name:  Screenshot from 2024-02-21 07-08-44.jpg
Views: 312
Size:  58.8 KB

  3. #283
    Chasing the Horizon RJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Central FL
    I guess I will complete the updates by posting the remaining part of the name index, these are other people or personalities one sees involved in the discussions.

    Name:  Screenshot from 2024-02-21 07-17-48.jpg
Views: 304
Size:  60.8 KB

  4. #284
    Site Supporter CleverNickname's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    TX
    Quote Originally Posted by RJ View Post
    ...and logging in the latest on the Rutkowski lawsuit, I have not refreshed this in a while.

    Name:  Screenshot from 2024-02-21 07-08-44.jpg
Views: 312
Size:  58.8 KB
    Stanton was the A4D, and I believe Cabana was A7D.

  5. #285
    Member DMF13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Nomad
    Anyone know what was said about Scott Arnburg, at the second half of the meeting, tonight?
    _______________
    "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Then I said, "Here I am. Send me." - Isaiah 6:8

  6. #286
    Member DMF13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Nomad
    I finally watched the 2/28/24 meeting, which is available here:
    https://youtu.be/1U_E8hdogDM?si=0-fujLx--SIIVDFg

    They are awaiting a "memorandum of law," which may, or may not, be followed by a "legal opinion."

    "Attorney Jim" explained that the "memorandum" could be based on firm policy, and/or the lack of a definitive answer. According to him, an "opinion," would be the result of a definitive answer, if firm policy allows for that.

    IMO, if there is no definitive answer, the board should bring Arnburg back, saying that due to a lack of a definitive "legal opinion," they are bringing Arnburg back to avoid potential costly litigation. That way they actually avoid the cost of any litigation, and get to "save face," by painting the move as the fiscally responsible decision, rather than what it really is, which is reversing their ham fisted attempt at removing someone who was serious about reform, which resulted in open revolt by the members.

    They really should have done that long before spending money on lawyers, to get a "memorandum of law," and/or "legal opinion.". They could have simply n said that due to the questions about the legality of the move they were nullifying the removal of Arnburg, and brought him back. They would have saved thousands of dollars in legal fees, and slowed, if not completely stopped, the revolution.
    Last edited by DMF13; 03-02-2024 at 01:21 AM.
    _______________
    "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Then I said, "Here I am. Send me." - Isaiah 6:8

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •