Weiers memo

[bonuspointjohn]

I watched the commission meeting on the internet yesterday.

Mr Stinson spoke on behalf of AZSFWC at the commission meeting. He wanted them to keep the agreement

in place that the commission uses to give AZSFWC money under. So I guess some of the commissioners that his "commissioner appointment board" gave the

nod too now understand how they are supposed to vote.... How do you pick commissioners and then ask them for money for your club??

AZSFWC's current president did not seem to know that Suzzane Gilstrap was their "Executive Director"

So I guess "diversity" is alive and well!

Mansell, Freeman and 3 former commissioners all spoke about terminating the agreement.

Gilstrap stood up and thanked them for the "vote of confidence"

It was a weird meeting that I did not completely understand.

There has never been an instance where the Commission has give the AZSFW any money. Quite the opposite. The funding from the License Plate has benefited wildlife, habitat and youth programs which ultimately means the department benefits. There was a motion by Commissioner Husted to continue working with the AZSFWC, and that new commissioner Kirk Davis has been assigned to work with the AZSFWC as a intermediary, so that open and honest communication will not be misplaced. Former Commissioners have the same right as anyone else to comment. Former commissioners who commented included, Golightly, Woodhouse and McLean. Voting however is only by current Commissioners. The current Commission voted 5-0 to continue working with the AZSFWC.... but with a warning.

[ThomC]

Bogus points John: Did you heed the warning? I would suggest that the warning was stronger than you think.

[.270]

if sfwc doesn't have any money, will they go away and leave us alone? anyone donating to these jokers really needs to think seriously about what they are doing. Lark.

[elkaholic]

heres the original MUO-

 

i think thats what the topic they were discussing- page 7 atricle 9A

 

 

http://www.azgfd.gov/inside_azgfd/documents/20091204CommMtgMinutes.pdf

 

 

working together to fund projects period!!

 

not to steal our tags or rewrite articles for hunting limits or magizine capacities .

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

does anyone still not see the sfw / azsfw controlling influence on the commission reveiw board ?

[krp]

Nothing to see here... move along citizen... continue moving in an orderly fashion to your designated holding area... move along... nothing to see here...

 

Kent

[javihammer]

I was unable to catch the webcast of the last AZGFD meeting. I read the notes and the section about the “Memo of Understanding”, I didn’t see any discussion of AZSFW problems, platforms or warnings (the stuff BPJ alluded to). I got the gist from some of the Hernbrode, Martin, Voyles comments that they are keeping an eye on AZSFW . My concern is that the AZSFW issues may have been downplayed as “poorly executed communication” rather than the over the top tag heist attempt that it clearly was. Poor communication is forgiveable, what the AZSFW tried to do to the residents of Arizona is not.

 

I would also like to see the actual memo of understanding between AZGFD and AZSFW and the start and end dates of the agreement (and who wrote it, the meeting notes suggest it came from AZSFW since the attorney general was asked to review it) Not being an attorney or a politician, I Googled “memo of understanding” and this is what I found.

 

A memorandum of understanding (MOU) is a document describing a bilateral or multilateral agreement between parties. It expresses a convergence of will between the parties, indicating an intended common line of action. It is often used in cases where parties either do not imply a legal commitment or in situations where the parties cannot create a legally enforceable agreement. It is a more formal alternative to a gentlemen's agreement.

 

In some cases depending on the exact wording, MOUs can have the binding power of a contract; as a matter of law, contracts do not need to be labeled as such to be legally binding.[citation needed] Whether or not a document constitutes a binding contract depends only on the presence or absence of well-defined legal elements in the text proper of the document (the so-called "four corners"). This can include express disclaimers of legal effect, or failure of the MOU to fulfill the elements required for a valid contract (such as lack of consideration in common law jurisdictions).

 

It seems to me that it is in the best interests of AZGFD and the state to keep future MOU agreements as short as possible with AZSFW in order to ensure that regular reviews of the relationship are done. BPJ (President of the Arizona Deer Association) seems pleased that the latest MOU marriage was codified by a 5-0 vote by the commission. He clearly sees this as an endorsement of these jokers by AZGFD. I hope the Attorney General’s office suggests some changes to the current MOU that keep the marriage as short as possible (might I suggest 30 days).

 

People really need to write their legislators, the governor and take a hard look at the Directors of AZSFW and decide whether they want to continue to support their businesses. The sad truth is that Arizona residents support this group indirectly because AZSFW is given money by other wildlife organizations that derive money from the sale of the existing auction tags. The other wildlife organizations would be wise to follow the Yuma group and publicly disassociate themselves from AZSFW, there are some smart and politically astute Average Joes that will be following things very closely in the near future.

 

One more thing, I may be a newbie on this board but I am a committed hunter (belly crawled through a hundred yards of cactus and rocks yesterday trying to get within bow range of a little buck in unit 21 – too open, couldn’t get closer than 80 yards – it was still a blast). I love Arizona!

 

Ryan

[bonuspointjohn]

I was unable to catch the webcast of the last AZGFD meeting. I read the notes and the section about the “Memo of Understanding”, I didn’t see any discussion of AZSFW problems, platforms or warnings (the stuff BPJ alluded to). I got the gist from some of the Hernbrode, Martin, Voyles comments that they are keeping an eye on AZSFW . My concern is that the AZSFW issues may have been downplayed as “poorly executed communication” rather than the over the top tag heist attempt that it clearly was. Poor communication is forgiveable, what the AZSFW tried to do to the residents of Arizona is not.

 

I would also like to see the actual memo of understanding between AZGFD and AZSFW and the start and end dates of the agreement (and who wrote it, the meeting notes suggest it came from AZSFW since the attorney general was asked to review it) Not being an attorney or a politician, I Googled “memo of understanding” and this is what I found.

 

A memorandum of understanding (MOU) is a document describing a bilateral or multilateral agreement between parties. It expresses a convergence of will between the parties, indicating an intended common line of action. It is often used in cases where parties either do not imply a legal commitment or in situations where the parties cannot create a legally enforceable agreement. It is a more formal alternative to a gentlemen's agreement.

 

In some cases depending on the exact wording, MOUs can have the binding power of a contract; as a matter of law, contracts do not need to be labeled as such to be legally binding.[citation needed] Whether or not a document constitutes a binding contract depends only on the presence or absence of well-defined legal elements in the text proper of the document (the so-called "four corners"). This can include express disclaimers of legal effect, or failure of the MOU to fulfill the elements required for a valid contract (such as lack of consideration in common law jurisdictions).

 

It seems to me that it is in the best interests of AZGFD and the state to keep future MOU agreements as short as possible with AZSFW in order to ensure that regular reviews of the relationship are done. BPJ (President of the Arizona Deer Association) seems pleased that the latest MOU marriage was codified by a 5-0 vote by the commission. He clearly sees this as an endorsement of these jokers by AZGFD. I hope the Attorney General’s office suggests some changes to the current MOU that keep the marriage as short as possible (might I suggest 30 days).

 

People really need to write their legislators, the governor and take a hard look at the Directors of AZSFW and decide whether they want to continue to support their businesses. The sad truth is that Arizona residents support this group indirectly because AZSFW is given money by other wildlife organizations that derive money from the sale of the existing auction tags. The other wildlife organizations would be wise to follow the Yuma group and publicly disassociate themselves from AZSFW, there are some smart and politically astute Average Joes that will be following things very closely in the near future.

 

One more thing, I may be a newbie on this board but I am a committed hunter (belly crawled through a hundred yards of cactus and rocks yesterday trying to get within bow range of a little buck in unit 21 – too open, couldn’t get closer than 80 yards – it was still a blast). I love Arizona!

 

Ryan

Just an update Ryan, not a single penny of auction tags ever stays with the "critter" groups. By legislation, the complete monies for the sale of auction / raffle tags are given to the department.... including any interest that may accrue while the money sits in a bank account during long raffle tag time frames. So, any monies that have been paid to support legislative efforts in the past do not come from auction / raffle tags.

[.270]

just an update pbj, all the money Joe hunter forks out every year for permits and licenses all go to the azgfd also. every dime. and there isn't any smoke and mirrors or back doors involved. we all pay the cash right up front and take our chances with the draw. nobody tried some underhanded attempt to steal tags from each other. give it up. you have no credibility. you got caught and then lied about, are still lieing about it and will continue to lie about it. please leave. Lark.

[krp]

So the new commissioner, forwarded to the Governor for appointment by AZSFW/AZSFWC... is now the liaison between them and the AZG&F commission?

 

Of course, one more powerpoint of SFW is the state license plate that they sponsor, name sake and control funds from.

 

SFW obviously doesn't feel the need to explain their position or apologize publically to the general hunting community or the organizations, who all supported them these last few years. Though they have no problem going to the G&F commission to protect their political and funding interests with the state.

 

They obviously do 'not' consider themselves dieing or on the outs...

 

YVRGC and AES have pulled their support of SFW.

 

ADA is still in support.

 

The other orgs have not commented.

 

Looking at the member list of orgs and circle members, that is over 60,000 that have been paid in dues alone. Add all the other dues plus the PAC donations, license plate state monies... add someone that will spend 150,000 on a sheep tag willing to throw 50,000 in a super PAC fund to help legislate tags available, times that by how many donors SFW has supporting them from across the country.

 

Look at the time table of events to this point and this being an election year where all the PAC money will be brought into play.

 

The Nappy years culminated to a horrific situation that seemed unreversible. yet when Brewer stepped in, it was alleviated very quickly. This situation is much worse and there is no one step fix... we the public and even the Governor have been fenced out.

 

Who is going to go up against all the money and political power points... not John and ADA...

 

Kent

[ThomC]

I dont belong to the ADA but if I did I would be looking for new leadership.

[elkaholic]

"The AZSFW apologized for their actions and pointed out that the two groups are a distinct and separate entity."

 

well i see the top 3 people of azsfw alan-floyd-art-all on the board of azsfwc plus add susan gilstrap

 

how can you have distinct and seperate entity with these same people representing both groups -

 

And if in fact the president of azsfwc -states he doesn't know who represents his organization in legislative action/ consulting management -that is a joke in itself!!

[ThomC]

"The AZSFW apologized for their actions and pointed out that the two groups are a distinct and separate entity."

 

[/quote

 

I heard the apology but thought it was pretty lame. Because they also complained that the G&f were not communicating with them. And it was really lame to stand up there at the beginning of the discussion and say " I dont know what is the problem. After one of the commissioners said the problem then they offered their lame apology.

 

And I was not impressed with the new commissioner. He could be a ringer.

[bonuspointjohn]

just an update pbj, all the money Joe hunter forks out every year for permits and licenses all go to the azgfd also. every dime. and there isn't any smoke and mirrors or back doors involved. we all pay the cash right up front and take our chances with the draw. nobody tried some underhanded attempt to steal tags from each other. give it up. you have no credibility. you got caught and then lied about, are still lieing about it and will continue to lie about it. please leave. Lark.

Well Lark, that is the beauty of the site. You called me a liar. I would pose the question... When did I lie?...What did I lie about?... nothing. I have the ability to answer questions because I have been involved with a lot of groups. I participate in the monthly AZSFWC meetings as do a lot of other groups. They have chosen to stay away from this site because of the gross misunderstandings that a lot of folks have presented here. I appreciate the fact that you may not like some of the answers but they are the truth. AS long as individuals are attempting to garner information and ask questions I can choose to respond.

[archerycrazy]

I do not support a boycott of the WCC license plate due to this fiasco. The plate was first designed and offered by WCC long before they affiliated with AZSFWC. I have one of the earliest plates issued, #6 and proudly display it on my truck. The design has changed since the new affiliation.

Of course when the plate was first offered there was different leadership in WCC. As with any organization there were changes over the years. Sometimes changes improve an organiztation, other times the changes can lead to failure. A change of leadership whithin WCC could result in a change of course and possibly a termination of it's affiliation with AZSFWC. The change can only come from within.

[.270]

"because of the gross misunderstandings that a lot of folks have presented here." pbj, 1-27-12.

 

ok, there is another one of your lies. there is no misunderstanding that you and your lieing sob cronies tried to steal 350 of the best permits this state has from guys who's only chance at ever getting one is through the public draw. we all understand really well what went on. contrary to your lameassed attempts to paint us all that way, nobody here is stupid. everyone can add 2 and 2 and get 4. you and your lieingassed cronies can't understand that because you're too busy sitting around telling each other how stupid we are. there is no misunderstanding that you didn't even inform the azgfd about your intentions, and lied about it. there is no misunderstanding that you tried a clandestine end around under the cover of darkness to keep us from knowing about it and then lied that you did it to keep antihunters from knowing about it. there is no misunderstanding that you seem to feel that unless you "work" a party, you don't know anything about conservation. why don't you just give up and go someplace else? we don't you need you to tell us how stupid we are and about how grossly we misunderstand you and your sob buddies. liar. sincerely, Lark.