2016 IOMICA Motions
Posted: 21 Dec 2016, 18:47
Shortly your National organization should ask you to vote on these motions, and based on that majority, your country will vote Yes or No on the proposals. So it is important for you to vote when you receive your ballot.
There are two motions being presented at the 2016 IOMICA AGM. Here is a link to the agenda.
http://www.iomclass.org/wp-content/uplo ... 282016.pdf
But to find the details, you have to click on the links embedded in the agenda. The proposed change to the IOM class rule is significant so make sure that you look through it.
Here is a direct link to the proposed changes
http://www.iomclass.org/doc-files/Admin ... _AGM-1.pdf
This post concentrates on the proposed changes to the IOM Class rules. In my opinion, we should vote against the Rule change proposal as it represents a power grab by the IRSA to take more control over the IOM class that currently exists. While some parts of the proposed changes may be fine, other parts are not. But is appears to be an omnibus motion – take it or leave it in total.
What is bad about this motion? The intent seems to be to bring the IOM class rule closer to the new (and widely unpopular) rules promulgated by the IRSA for the other three International Classes which currently lack their own International Class Associations. While our rules share a common format to the other three classes, there is a big difference – the IOM class is a closed rule (everything is banned unless permitted), while the other three are open rules (everything is allowed unless banned).
So several changes should not be accepted,
A.79 CLASS RULES INTERPRETATIONS
A.79.1 GENERAL
Interpretation of class rules, except as provided by A.9.2, shall be made in accordance with the IOM ICA IRSA Regulations
This one is a power grab by the IRSA by adding the IRSA letters to the process. To date we have been well served by the interpretations of the IOMICA Technical Committee. Unfortunately the last technical ruling request about the plate/vang system was referred to the IRSA and the result was that we were given a dimension factor that made a number of existing commercial vang fittings non-compliant. As the ruling was generated by a committee including an owner of Sails Etc, one could see possible conflict of interest.
A.1012 VALIDITY OF CERTIFICATE
A.10.1 A valid certificate is issued using the IRSA approved certification documentation in accordance with the procedures in A.9 and A.12. Certificates from other documentation or sources are invalid.
Another power grab – today we use the IOMICA documentation and it has met our needs for many years. IRSA approved certification for the other classes is far more complex than required for IOMs.
A.10.12.12 A certificate becomes invalid upon:
(a) aA change of ownership,
(b) wWithdrawal by the certification authority.,
c) The issue of another certificate.
This is shown as a strike out change (I have underscored it here as there is no strikeout function) is proposed by IRSA to allow multiple certificates in the other classes (against the wish of many owners as it allows for multiple copnfigurations eg light or heavy wind venues, and increases the cost of competing by requiring more rigs). Now IRSA is trying to put it in the IOM class where it is a valid line item – ie only one valid certificate is allowed..
A.13 RETENTION OF CERTIFICATION DOCUMENTATION
A.13.1 The certification authority shall:
(a) retain the original documentation upon which the current certificate is based,
(b) upon request, transfer this documentation to the new certification authority if the hull is exported
This is overkill for IOMs. The current IOMICA regs meet our needs.
The proposal also seeks to change the way we archive prior year rule interpretations. Currently they are available on the IOMICA Class Rules page. I see this as a valuable resource as it easily answers questions that keep coming up form new skippers. The proposal is to take these interpretations and move them to a Q&A section on the IRSA web site. This is quite unnecessary as we are capable of looking after our own archives on our own web site.
John
There are two motions being presented at the 2016 IOMICA AGM. Here is a link to the agenda.
http://www.iomclass.org/wp-content/uplo ... 282016.pdf
But to find the details, you have to click on the links embedded in the agenda. The proposed change to the IOM class rule is significant so make sure that you look through it.
Here is a direct link to the proposed changes
http://www.iomclass.org/doc-files/Admin ... _AGM-1.pdf
This post concentrates on the proposed changes to the IOM Class rules. In my opinion, we should vote against the Rule change proposal as it represents a power grab by the IRSA to take more control over the IOM class that currently exists. While some parts of the proposed changes may be fine, other parts are not. But is appears to be an omnibus motion – take it or leave it in total.
What is bad about this motion? The intent seems to be to bring the IOM class rule closer to the new (and widely unpopular) rules promulgated by the IRSA for the other three International Classes which currently lack their own International Class Associations. While our rules share a common format to the other three classes, there is a big difference – the IOM class is a closed rule (everything is banned unless permitted), while the other three are open rules (everything is allowed unless banned).
So several changes should not be accepted,
A.79 CLASS RULES INTERPRETATIONS
A.79.1 GENERAL
Interpretation of class rules, except as provided by A.9.2, shall be made in accordance with the IOM ICA IRSA Regulations
This one is a power grab by the IRSA by adding the IRSA letters to the process. To date we have been well served by the interpretations of the IOMICA Technical Committee. Unfortunately the last technical ruling request about the plate/vang system was referred to the IRSA and the result was that we were given a dimension factor that made a number of existing commercial vang fittings non-compliant. As the ruling was generated by a committee including an owner of Sails Etc, one could see possible conflict of interest.
A.1012 VALIDITY OF CERTIFICATE
A.10.1 A valid certificate is issued using the IRSA approved certification documentation in accordance with the procedures in A.9 and A.12. Certificates from other documentation or sources are invalid.
Another power grab – today we use the IOMICA documentation and it has met our needs for many years. IRSA approved certification for the other classes is far more complex than required for IOMs.
A.10.12.12 A certificate becomes invalid upon:
(a) aA change of ownership,
(b) wWithdrawal by the certification authority.,
c) The issue of another certificate.
This is shown as a strike out change (I have underscored it here as there is no strikeout function) is proposed by IRSA to allow multiple certificates in the other classes (against the wish of many owners as it allows for multiple copnfigurations eg light or heavy wind venues, and increases the cost of competing by requiring more rigs). Now IRSA is trying to put it in the IOM class where it is a valid line item – ie only one valid certificate is allowed..
A.13 RETENTION OF CERTIFICATION DOCUMENTATION
A.13.1 The certification authority shall:
(a) retain the original documentation upon which the current certificate is based,
(b) upon request, transfer this documentation to the new certification authority if the hull is exported
This is overkill for IOMs. The current IOMICA regs meet our needs.
The proposal also seeks to change the way we archive prior year rule interpretations. Currently they are available on the IOMICA Class Rules page. I see this as a valuable resource as it easily answers questions that keep coming up form new skippers. The proposal is to take these interpretations and move them to a Q&A section on the IRSA web site. This is quite unnecessary as we are capable of looking after our own archives on our own web site.
John