Board Membership

[Jan Hollan <jhollan@amper....muni.cz>]

>          In other news, you have been nominated to run for election to
> the IDA board of directors.  Do you accept this nomination?  Could you
> attend the IDA annual meetings in Arizona?  We hold them at least once
> per year.  I also notice that your were unable to attend the last two
> European Symposiums.

Hi Bob,

yes, I accept the nomination -- I wrote the corresponding sentences (as
given in Bylaws)  already, I assume  they were part of the nomination.

I can attend IDA annual meetings in Arizona to serve as a Board Member,
relying on the rule ``reasonable sum for expense of attendance'' (cheapest
available connection from Brno to Tuscon and back; I would pay a hostel in
Tuscon myself).

>         Also, if your were to serve on the board, could you agree to
> support board decisions, even if you voted against them?  For example, I
> serve as president of the Astronomical League, and I am sometimes caught
> voting against the majority of our Council.  Once the vote is done, I
> support the results wholeheartedly.

If I am not mistaken, there is nothing on that in Bylaws. I would respect
Board decisions, but I would not hide my dissenting opinion, if hiding it
would be harmful for my reputation as an expert on night environment
protection and for the goals of IDA, IMHO.

>         For example, we must all support the USA MLO.  Not all items
> suggested by all board members have been incorporated, but we believe it
> is moving in the right direction.  It is a dynamic document for the USA
> and we have high hopes that it will raise awareness of light pollution
> and help us control it.

I am happy to read that, but I cannot comment on it, as I don't know the
current draft version. Physics is common to US territory and the
surrounding world, and I'd stress the first word in the IDA's name. No
document approved by IDA should become a threat for spreading the best
legislation (as valid in parts of Italy) to another territories and
countries, or even to the existing best legislation within US.

>         Finally, we believe that some of your recommendations do not
> promote progress in the best way.  For example, you recommended a limit
> of 10 lux for most outdoor lighting.  The IDA thinks this is a bit on
> the low side.  We support limits, but not this low except in some
> specific cases.

This is no ad hoc recommendation, but a generous upper limit (with a
common alternative of 1 cd/m2) for all cases, where safety standards don't
say otherwise. It holds for a large part of Italy, from Alps to the end of
Adriatic coast, with 20+ million inhabitants. The rule has proven itself
to be OK, starting from 2000 in Lombardy through 2005 laws in another
provinces. By the way, Big Ben in London obeys the 1 cd/m2 limit (no
safety standards apply for architectural lighting of course). Once more,
let me stress the prefix ``Inter-'' in our name.

>       Thank you for answering these questions.  I will share them with the
> Nominating Committee.

Thank you too, please write a notice if anything more is needed in the
moment.

 Jenik