AOPA Petition to Board of Trustees

Yep.
Board keeps digging a deeper hole.
:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
So, my take is that they care about public opinion enough to alter other people's actions, but not enough to alter their own actions.

That does kinda sound like corporate america.
 
Tone deaf bunch of scalawags. This action has 'Bud Lite' marketing brilliance written all over it. :frown2:

Hoping the paid membership will fall below 100k, and most of their outside revenue(not investment) dries up.
 
"advised him by phone that it’s AOPA’s position that Bowers’ involvement with SaveAOPA.org violates disparagement provisions in the separation agreement Bowers signed when he left his AOPA job in November."

I wonder if others can pickup the pieces and bring back the spirit of saveaopa.org.
 
I believe the site (before it was taken down) said that membership is now below 200k? Is that accurate? Wow.
 
I don't believe I have ever seen corporate 'culture' actually change. If the entire board isn't replaced nothing much will differ moving forward. .
 
Is there any other organization taking up the torch? EAA I guess, but I don’t fly an experimental.

Mainly concerned with legislative advocacy, not concerned about the wine club, etc… ;)
 
dans2992 said:
Is there any other organization taking up the torch? EAA I guess, but I don’t fly an experimental.

Mainly concerned with legislative advocacy, not concerned about the wine club, etc… ;)
Click to expand...
Doesn't EAA do AirVenture? I know they have the word 'experimental' in the name, but they seem like they do way more GA stuff than the other group.

I don't know what they do for lobbying, but then again I don't know that the other group does anything, either.
 
Albany Tom said:
Doesn't EAA do AirVenture? I know they have the word 'experimental' in the name, but they seem like they do way more GA stuff than the other group.

I don't know what they do for lobbying, but then again I don't know that the other group does anything, either.
Click to expand...
They definitely do some. They were heavily involved in MOSAIC, and I just read Jack Pelton's editorial from late last year about the drone BVLOS NPRM that came out, and he said that they would be involved in that. They are listed along side AOPA on the EAGLE website. They also were responsible for VARMA (use of non-PMA parts on vintage [pre-1980] aircraft). Their advocacy tends to run more towards experimental/vintage, but nowadays vintage pretty much covers all the certified spam cans we fly.

I'm not sure if they have a lobbying presence in DC, which AOPA does, or at least did last I was aware. If you believe their version of the story, that person was heavily in reopening airspace to GA after 9/11. That lobbying mission is the reason they are in MD right outside DC. Don't know how effective they are at that now. I do remember every time there was a hearing about ATC privatization or something, Mark Baker would be up there testifying. They have to have membership to wield any power though, and that seems to be rapidly diminishing. I think Darren's idea was the the priority should be to reverse the membership trend so they would have a (big?) stick to swing in DC. I suspect the board wanted him to concentrate on wining and dining lawmakers and greasing the wheels of government like they always have. I don't know who's right, but they appear to be weaker than ever now, having failed both appropaches.

We're only a couple months in, and these things take time. Look how long Wayne LaPierre held on by his fingernails. They have really stepped in it again killing "save aopa". I hope they eventually emerge as an organization worth supporting; I think light GA needs a lobbying presence. It's going to take a year or two to shake out either way.

ETA.... yes, EAA does Airventure lol. In Wisconsin the normies just call the show "EAA". It originally was "the EAA annual convention and fly in", before they trademarked the name "Airventure". I believe that move was specifically to broaden the reach beyond Experimental and embrace GA as a whole. The rest of the world just calls it "Oshkosh".
 
Last edited:
Jim K said:
I think Darren's idea was the the priority should be to reverse the membership trend so they would have a (big?) stick to swing in DC. I suspect the board wanted him to concentrate on wining and dining lawmakers and greasing the wheels of government like they always have.
Click to expand...

If so (and I don't know), Darren might have considered the wine & dine activities to be Jim Coon's job. He's in charge of gov't affairs and advocacy.

In any case, the Board's solution sucks. Now we're without any president at all, and not many qualified people will want to step into such a toxic situation. What does that do for AOPA's stature in DC?

And then the AOPA doubles down, by using a legal threat to shut down Save AOPA. Their claim to be the voice of GA is laughable when they directly and deliberately muffle the membership.

I see no signs that they're going to pull their heads out of their rectums, and if that doesn't change very soon the AOPA will become an empty shell.


Jim K said:
We're only a couple months in, and these things take time. Look how long Wayne LaPierre held on by his fingernails.
Click to expand...

At least the NRA had elections for their Board, and that provided the leverage for members to make changes. That's not the case here. Plus LaPierre was a crook, and got dragged into court. At the moment, I don't see that happening with AOPA leadership.
 
Last edited:
Jack @ EAA is no spring chicken. Darren was on the EAA BOD before he took the AOPA job. I wonder if Darren might take over for Jack when he retires.
That still leaves us needing someone to run AOPA, hopefully under a new board.
 
MikeNY said:
www.aopa.org

AOPA chairman reports change of command

AOPA’s relentless commitment to advocating for general aviation will continue under new Board of Trustees Chairman Luke Wippler, outgoing Chairman Jim Hauslein announced March 20.
www.aopa.org
avbrief.com

AOPA Announces New Chairman - AvBrief.com

Current Chair Jim Hauslein and former Chair Bill Trimble are leaving the board in May.
avbrief.com avbrief.com

... adios
Click to expand...
:)

The devil's in the details, and we haven't seen those yet, but this:

...several bylaw updates, including changes to the trustee nominating process, proxy requirements, board size, and the establishment of trustee qualifications and term limits.​

sounds like the right path, and hits all the bullet points in the emails I've been sending to the AOPA. Maybe, just maybe, they're paying attention to us. Time will tell.
 
I believe Larry Buhl is also stepping down from the Board, so that makes three. We probably need a few more to go. We really need membership voting for Board members, and we need enought to step down so that member selections become the majority of the Board.
 
Half Fast said:
I believe Larry Buhl is also stepping down from the Board, so that makes three. We probably need a few more to go. We really need membership voting for Board members, and we need enought to step down so that member selections become the majority of the Board.
Click to expand...
There's a bit of a risk throwing all the bums out. One thing is losing institutional knowledge and potentially "fixing" something that's not broken. A second thing with open elections is the "crackpot" risk. A one-issue firebrand gets enough people riled up to get elected and then they take up all the oxygen in the room. I've seen both of these with volunteer boards for associations.

Having said all that, term limits and some form of open election is a positive step. One thing that works well in a private club I belong to is a 9 member Board, 3 year terms so three on three off each year, so you get a balance of not calcifying from the same people being there forever, and not constantly whipsawed by new directions each year.
 
Whippler? The guy from US Bank? Oh jeez, we're royally ****ed. Messed up the stadium deal in MN(Bank stadium, downtown Minneapolis), then he's about as far left as Atilla the Hun.

I will predict the future; Dues going up, services going down, overhead increasing, more spent on dinner and entertainment, less spent on buying senators and HR members.

Oh well, not my dues, not my problem.
 
Barrett50 said:
Whippler? The guy from US Bank? Oh jeez, we're royally ****ed. Messed up the stadium deal in MN(Bank stadium, downtown Minneapolis), then he's about as far left as Atilla the Hun.

I will predict the future; Dues going up, services going down, overhead increasing, more spent on dinner and entertainment, less spent on buying senators and HR members.

Oh well, not my dues, not my problem.
Click to expand...
Why are all these board people from big companies with even bigger egos? How about some small biz guys? (Sub $100mil).
 
Bob Noel said:
just a note. There are some states with organizations that can also help if you think the NRA isn't getting the job done for you. But, maybe no sucg organizations are in your state.
Click to expand...
We've got other state orgs to back, I was referring to the NRA sponsored shooting clubs as to why I"m still a member as you're required to be a member to belong to one.
 
Juan Browne reports on progress and provides information on proposed governance changes:

 
I especially loved this part of Jim Hauslein's announcement:

Your board began this review in 2024 and has recently received member feedback on AOPA governance. In response, we consulted experts in membership organizations, governance, and bylaw development.​

Yeah, nothing like a little good, honest feedback from us concerned members.

1774127401578.gif
 
All the proposed changes (maybe “helped” by the pr company?? But certainly influenced by vocal members) are steps in recovery. I haven’t dropped my membership yet, even though I’ve been thinking about it even before this new brouhaha, as I see value in the cause, just not action from the org. I did change to manual renewal, and will see where things stand after the annual meeting in May.
 
I can now confirm that the email addresses [email protected] and [email protected] both work.

I just received a reply to my original email dated 2/7/26. I won't post Jim Hauslein's reply without his permission, but it doesn't provide anything that isn't in this link: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2026/march/20/aopa-chairman-reports-change-of-command .

A moment ago, I sent the following response to Jim and the Board:

=============================================================
Dear Jim,​
​
Thank you for your reply. While your description of planned changes to the bylaws sounds encouraging, it's also rather vague for an effort that started in 2024. The failure to provide communication about this action, and the failure to seek member input, for the last two years disproves your claim that you "know that trust is built through transparency and action." The AOPA has been losing members for a long time now, and the buck stops with you and the Board of Trustees. You and the other Board members should have laid out a detailed plan long before now and solicited member feedback, rather than waiting for members to kick open the door. ​
​
Over the years, the AOPA has undergone an unfortunate transition, and today it is run as a de facto subscriber-based services company. It no longer operates as a true membership organization. If the AOPA is to grow, or even survive, that must change.​
​
In my opinion, there are some very specific items that must be addressed:​
​
1) Members must be able to vote online or by mail. If this is done by assigning proxies, then there must be an independent third-party proxy agent who will vote the proxies in accordance with member direction. No more assignment of proxies to the Board. This is a sine qua non requirement as far as I'm concerned, and it needs to be in place before the May 2026 meeting.​
2) Members must be able to select the Trustees. No more Board members selected by the Board itself, or nominees requiring approval of a Board committee. I realize it may take some time, but we need to reach the point where all Trustees have been elected by the AOPA membership, and we should set a date by which that will be achieved.​
3) Board members must have defined terms, at the end of which they must stand for reelection by the membership. Setting up a rotation, perhaps 3 years, so that only a portion of the Board turns over each year and continuity is maintained, might be a wise approach.​
4) Accessibility to the Trustees needs to be improved. I recommend that each Board member have an @aopa.org email address. When I asked AOPA staff for contact information for you and other Trustees, I was told they were not allowed to give that out. That is absolutely unacceptable.​
​
I sincerely hope you and the Board of Trustees will consider these things and implement them into the bylaws.​
​
Regards,​
=============================================================

Time will tell.
 
Half Fast said:
I can now confirm that the email addresses [email protected] and [email protected] both work.

I just received a reply to my original email dated 2/7/26. I won't post Jim Hauslein's reply without his permission, but it doesn't provide anything that isn't in this link: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2026/march/20/aopa-chairman-reports-change-of-command .

A moment ago, I sent the following response to Jim and the Board:

=============================================================
Dear Jim,​
​
Thank you for your reply. While your description of planned changes to the bylaws sounds encouraging, it's also rather vague for an effort that started in 2024. The failure to provide communication about this action, and the failure to seek member input, for the last two years disproves your claim that you "know that trust is built through transparency and action." The AOPA has been losing members for a long time now, and the buck stops with you and the Board of Trustees. You and the other Board members should have laid out a detailed plan long before now and solicited member feedback, rather than waiting for members to kick open the door. ​
​
Over the years, the AOPA has undergone an unfortunate transition, and today it is run as a de facto subscriber-based services company. It no longer operates as a true membership organization. If the AOPA is to grow, or even survive, that must change.​
​
In my opinion, there are some very specific items that must be addressed:​
​
1) Members must be able to vote online or by mail. If this is done by assigning proxies, then there must be an independent third-party proxy agent who will vote the proxies in accordance with member direction. No more assignment of proxies to the Board. This is a sine qua non requirement as far as I'm concerned, and it needs to be in place before the May 2026 meeting.​
2) Members must be able to select the Trustees. No more Board members selected by the Board itself, or nominees requiring approval of a Board committee. I realize it may take some time, but we need to reach the point where all Trustees have been elected by the AOPA membership, and we should set a date by which that will be achieved.​
3) Board members must have defined terms, at the end of which they must stand for reelection by the membership. Setting up a rotation, perhaps 3 years, so that only a portion of the Board turns over each year and continuity is maintained, might be a wise approach.​
4) Accessibility to the Trustees needs to be improved. I recommend that each Board member have an @aopa.org email address. When I asked AOPA staff for contact information for you and other Trustees, I was told they were not allowed to give that out. That is absolutely unacceptable.​
​
I sincerely hope you and the Board of Trustees will consider these things and implement them into the bylaws.​
​
Regards,​
=============================================================

Time will tell.
Click to expand...
I also received a message from Jim Hauslein, probably one of hundreds. Kudos on your detailed response to AOPA leadership.
 
Half Fast said:
FYI, this is the form letter I received:
Click to expand...
And as this is a form letter, it seems likely that your original letter and your current response were/will not be read in any detail. They’ll just get filed with all the others, and changes made will be based on an executive summary that doesn’t necessarily reflect reality.
 
MauleSkinner said:
And as this is a form letter, it seems likely that your original letter and your current response were/will not be read in any detail. They’ll just get filed with all the others, and changes made will be based on an executive summary that doesn’t necessarily reflect reality.
Click to expand...

Almost certainly true.
 
Not to minimize the work being done on the bylaw, and management front the reality is - there's not going to be meaningful change unless and until someone's ox gets gored. And, I mean a significant $$$$ reduction bloodletting. Recently, there are reductions in their income stream, and mgmt is sticking their finger in the dike to lessen the outflow. I doubt there's going to be any real development in transparency, or voter control of the board until the bloated salaries, and the financial income streams start to dry up.

Kudos to the folks for their effort. Hoping it has the desired effect, but money is money.
 
Barrett50 said:
Not to minimize the work being done on the bylaw, and management front the reality is - there's not going to be meaningful change unless and until someone's ox gets gored. And, I mean a significant $$$$ reduction bloodletting. Recently, there are reductions in their income stream, and mgmt is sticking their finger in the dike to lessen the outflow. I doubt there's going to be any real development in transparency, or voter control of the board until the bloated salaries, and the financial income streams start to dry up.

Kudos to the folks for their effort. Hoping it has the desired effect, but money is money.
Click to expand...

FYI - Board members are unpaid.
 
Half Fast said:
I can now confirm that the email addresses [email protected] and [email protected] both work.

I just received a reply to my original email dated 2/7/26. I won't post Jim Hauslein's reply without his permission, but it doesn't provide anything that isn't in this link: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2026/march/20/aopa-chairman-reports-change-of-command .

A moment ago, I sent the following response to Jim and the Board:

=============================================================
Dear Jim,​
​
Thank you for your reply. While your description of planned changes to the bylaws sounds encouraging, it's also rather vague for an effort that started in 2024. The failure to provide communication about this action, and the failure to seek member input, for the last two years disproves your claim that you "know that trust is built through transparency and action." The AOPA has been losing members for a long time now, and the buck stops with you and the Board of Trustees. You and the other Board members should have laid out a detailed plan long before now and solicited member feedback, rather than waiting for members to kick open the door. ​
​
Over the years, the AOPA has undergone an unfortunate transition, and today it is run as a de facto subscriber-based services company. It no longer operates as a true membership organization. If the AOPA is to grow, or even survive, that must change.​
​
In my opinion, there are some very specific items that must be addressed:​
​
1) Members must be able to vote online or by mail. If this is done by assigning proxies, then there must be an independent third-party proxy agent who will vote the proxies in accordance with member direction. No more assignment of proxies to the Board. This is a sine qua non requirement as far as I'm concerned, and it needs to be in place before the May 2026 meeting.​
2) Members must be able to select the Trustees. No more Board members selected by the Board itself, or nominees requiring approval of a Board committee. I realize it may take some time, but we need to reach the point where all Trustees have been elected by the AOPA membership, and we should set a date by which that will be achieved.​
3) Board members must have defined terms, at the end of which they must stand for reelection by the membership. Setting up a rotation, perhaps 3 years, so that only a portion of the Board turns over each year and continuity is maintained, might be a wise approach.​
4) Accessibility to the Trustees needs to be improved. I recommend that each Board member have an @aopa.org email address. When I asked AOPA staff for contact information for you and other Trustees, I was told they were not allowed to give that out. That is absolutely unacceptable.​
​
I sincerely hope you and the Board of Trustees will consider these things and implement them into the bylaws.​
​
Regards,​
=============================================================

Time will tell.
Click to expand...
That's a great note, and seems like a fair set of conditions to me.
 
dans2992 said:
Is there any other organization taking up the torch? EAA I guess, but I don’t fly an experimental.

Mainly concerned with legislative advocacy, not concerned about the wine club, etc… ;)
Click to expand...
I fly a [vintage] cherokee, dropped my AOPA membership before covid, been a lifetime EAA member for years.
 
Last edited:
Half Fast said:
I believe Larry Buhl is also stepping down from the Board, so that makes three. We probably need a few more to go. We really need membership voting for Board members, and we need enought to step down so that member selections become the majority of the Board.
Click to expand...
The membership elects the Board members.

The real question is whether everyone who's been dumping their memberships because of this will rejoin. If they were even members to begin with.
 
Albany Tom said:
That's a great note, and seems like a fair set of conditions to me.
Click to expand...
The only thing that I see that could be problematic is the change in the bylaws prior to the May 2026 meeting. I haven't read them to see how they are changed, but depending on how the bylaws are written it may not be practical to change them prior to that meeting. They should definitely be revised *at* that meeting at the latest, though...
 
Lindberg said:
The membership elects the Board members.

The real question is whether everyone who's been dumping their memberships because of this will rejoin. If they were even members to begin with.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for others but I'm done with AOPA ...
 
Lindberg said:
The real question is whether everyone who's been dumping their memberships because of this will rejoin. If they were even members to begin with.
Click to expand...
I obviously can't speak for everyone. But I have already re-activated after cancelling auto-renewal and letting it expire.
I am happy with the latest response and optimistic that they will follow through, at least to some point. If not, I can always cancel again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top