Questions for KCBS BOD Candidates

[Funtimebbq]

Sorry Gene,

Your conflict of interest by being on two BBQ BoDs this year, causing you to abstain from voting on CA issues will result in me not voting for you this year. However, if you focus your attention to KCBS only, you have my vote.

Benny

[Gene01]

actually, I have already stated that I will not run in California...

[Plowboy]

Originally Posted by Jeff_in_KC

Absolutely support it! I would also rather see the board member be a liason to the committee he serves rather than the chair. Let members head the committees and run with it but report to a specific board member. This makes it to where powers are more spread out and no one gets too much of it. Maybe a long term goal because that's a big change but I think in the long run, more beneficial to KCBS and the members.

If you think about it, supporters of regional representation (which I'm not at the BOD level), would be pushing for representation within the committees. Would you rather have one BOD member or one per committee, however many there are?

[LostNation]

I just re-joined KCBS to vote for the "Fab Four", good luck Steve, George, Jeff and Dave. You all have my votes.

[Tarheel]

Originally Posted by Gene01

I am of the hopes that whoever is elected to the Board, that they can retain their ideals throughout their term, I hope that the new Board can all do what is best for the membership as a whole, I stand behind my votes and believe that every one of them was for the membership.

I sell nothing and have nothing to gain financially through the Board or BBQ in general, I just love the BBQ world. I have enjoyed my time as a cook, judge, rep, BBQ judging instructor and as a board member..



I hope that you will all vote for me again

Gene, my question for you then would be did you not act as a orginizer for the Sams club? Did you not find that to be a conflict of intrest since the board votes on MMA's contract every year and then MMA in turn assigns those positions to board members.

[Gene01]

I actually was not originally one of the MMA/Sam's event organizers, I filled in for Arlie who was sick at the time and could not attend this event as the organizer... I was filling in for him....... as far as I know, the attorneys determined that this was not a conflict, Sam's only wanted people (Board Members) who had the best interest of KCBS and Sam's Club at heart, there was also a requirement that the Organizers had the experience of 10 contests (successful) or more under their belt, that really limits the field....

[bbqbull]

Originally Posted by LostNation

I just re-joined KCBS to vote for the "Fab Four", good luck Steve, George, Jeff and Dave. You all have my votes.

Ditto.

[Jeff_in_KC]

Originally Posted by Gene01

I actually was not originally one of the MMA/Sam's event organizers, I filled in for Arlie who was sick at the time and could not attend this event as the organizer... I was filling in for him....... as far as I know, the attorneys determined that this was not a conflict, Sam's only wanted people (Board Members) who had the best interest of KCBS and Sam's Club at heart, there was also a requirement that the Organizers had the experience of 10 contests (successful) or more under their belt, that really limits the field....

Gene, you may have filled in because Arlie was sick but it's funny that it was another board member who "got the job". By the way, which Sam's event was it?

I think the requirement of ten "successful" contests is a bit much anyway. I have no doubt there are organizers with five or more years experience that could have done a heck of a job.

My apologies on the information I was given. Was told it was Mike Budai who was up for re-election.

[nukenight]

There are some regional or state BBQ organizations that follow under more than one sanctioning body. Here is Louisiana, KCBS contests are in the strong minority. Why would I want to send the KCBS board a report on anything? If you want the KCBS-dominated local or regional groups to have some kind of representation within the structure of KCBS that is fine. In fact, that is a good idea all by itself. However, what about places where KCBS and its contests are in the minority? I think regional board spots make sense in that case. The old rule of thumb about KCBS is very true: the farther you are from KCMO, the less they care about you. Well friends, we are along way from KCMO......

[Jeff_in_KC]

Originally Posted by nukenight

There are some regional or state BBQ organizations that follow under more than one sanctioning body. Here is Louisiana, KCBS contests are in the strong minority. Why would I want to send the KCBS board a report on anything? If you want the KCBS-dominated local or regional groups to have some kind of representation within the structure of KCBS that is fine. In fact, that is a good idea all by itself. However, what about places where KCBS and its contests are in the minority? I think regional board spots make sense in that case. The old rule of thumb about KCBS is very true: the farther you are from KCMO, the less they care about you. Well friends, we are along way from KCMO......

I don't find this to be the case at all. I've been to contests all over the country with the exception of the northeast and northwest and found great events with quality reps and lots of happy teams. I cannot agree that no one cares if you are farther from KC. Now in areas where KCBS is overshadowed by other sanctioning bodies (such as the IBCA in Texas and Louisiana), you may be right. But it's not that KCBS doesn't care - it's more a matter of gaining a foothold there. My idea is not to have specifically members of a regional BBQ organization be members of a committee. It could be anyone but most likely there would be members of other associations who would serve KCBS as well. And they would not send reports to KCBS as the other organizations. It would be a KCBS committee.

[Tarheel]

Originally Posted by Gene01

I actually was not originally one of the MMA/Sam's event organizers, I filled in for Arlie who was sick at the time and could not attend this event as the organizer... I was filling in for him....... as far as I know, the attorneys determined that this was not a conflict, Sam's only wanted people (Board Members) who had the best interest of KCBS and Sam's Club at heart, there was also a requirement that the Organizers had the experience of 10 contests (successful) or more under their belt, that really limits the field....

Gene, I didn't know you were just filling in. Did you get the money too? I hear the part about the lawyer determining there was nothing wrong. I just find it hard to believe that when you vote on a companys contract and that company comes back and gives you a paid position that it is not a conflict of intrest. And I think there were some on the board that had reservations about it as well. I think that is the main reason the job of selecting was given to MMA.

[Jeff_in_KC]

Originally Posted by LostNation

I just re-joined KCBS to vote for the "Fab Four", good luck Steve, George, Jeff and Dave. You all have my votes.

Thank you, Rich! It was great visiting with you in Lynchburg!

[Plowboy]

Originally Posted by nukenight

The old rule of thumb about KCBS is very true: the farther you are from KCMO, the less they care about you. Well friends, we are along way from KCMO......

I think members outside of Kansas City WANT to believe that... and at one time, it was probably true. I don't think it has been for a few years now.

[ique]

Originally Posted by Plowboy

I think members outside of Kansas City WANT to believe that... and at one time, it was probably true. I don't think it has been for a few years now.

I agree, now as long as your check clears every thing is cool.

[bover]

Originally Posted by Tarheel

Gene, I didn't know you were just filling in. Did you get the money too? I hear the part about the lawyer determining there was nothing wrong. I just find it hard to believe that when you vote on a companys contract and that company comes back and gives you a paid position that it is not a conflict of intrest. And I think there were some on the board that had reservations about it as well. I think that is the main reason the job of selecting was given to MMA.

The simple fact that the attorneys even needed to be consulted should have been a very obvious sign that it shouldn't be pursued. Legality is one thing...integrity is another. The whole thing stinks and I'm really looking forward to seeing some new blood on the BoD in 2012.