Davenport, so the rumor is........

[fillibuster]

Pete's points speak to more than a few of the conditions/limitations we all like to complain about. It's a volunteer club, and it's easier to volunteer one's criticism than to volunteer in the solution, that is, volunteer the work of the solution. And it's easier to volunteer somebody else's sweat and checkbook than one's own. It looks like the guy who volunteers for management in AMCA (lately) has to be retired and independently wealthy, because the pay, in dollars, makes the job a liability.
I think that we should consider limiting our national meets' BoD attendance to 3 meets. Pick 3 meets as major meets, the rest regional. Limit Senior and Winner's Circle opportunities to those 3 meets. Hold Pres meetings and BoD meetings 2 of those meets. Sanction multiple road runs, but don't feel obligated to mandate an officer's presence.
Lastly, we should depend, to a much greater extent, on the web site and this forum for communication and promotion. Those who are less than literate (me!) on the keyboard will just have to work through proxy avenues, or by phone. I don't know what Cornerstone is costing us, but I think we're "hooked".

2 cents

[4thcoast]

It is difficult to get suitable volunteers, let alone anyone who wishes to campaign for any of these jobs. When I say "suitable", I think anyone can understand the need for a secretary to be able to read and write intelligently,a treasurer to be able to add and subtract as well as understand accounting and so forth.

Pete,
We are not so bad at the whole volunteer thing here in the states. Just ask Steve Slocombe and his countrymen. In fact, our best people show up right about now. The current AMCA board is struggling to right the ship in the wake of some really questionable decisions made by former AMCA board members. As we all know, this is nothing new to membership organizations, look no further than the AMA recent mess that resulted in a forensic aduit and much more. Steve C. put it best... "Until there is fiscal oversight and ELECTED MEMBERS with a system of checks and balances, these incidents will continue to occur." If you look at the structure and format of how the board is put in place, it flies in the face of an 8th grade civics lesson. We will continue to have these crazy incidents like Davenport, Eustis etc... These are a deterrent for anyone thinking of joining. Hell, lately it ought to be called "Fight Club." The current president of the board, RF, Lonnie etc.. have a rotton Job ahead of them. If they are smart they will listen to and give representation to the volunteers, which, we know, are the Chapters. They have had it with the national running over them with no input to major financial decisions such as purchasing Torque Four and half the club's funds being transferred to the foundation. Was that really necessary to keep the non-profit status?
Respectfully,
4th Coast
Mark

[Bill]

A lack of transparency breeds suspicion and distrust. For there to be any healing of the sore we now have, it has to start there. If there is to be no financial disclosure or a more open door policy regarding business that affects us all, the future of the AMCA is likely to be a short one.

[fillibuster]

Mark, the torque 4 and the foundation are old issues to me now. Our greatest embarrassment should be that our young youth director had to step in between two seasoned adults to prevent a silly bar fight.

[exeric]

Mark, how are elections going to change anything? What's to stop an "elected" board from buying a Torque 4, or finding some other cause to dump money into. Personally, I think elections could be the same or bigger can of worms because you would still have a small electorate of partisan voter putting their own people in.

My personal feeling is; let time heal the AMCA and let us recover, and learn from past debacles. I think you can bet that this generation is not going to stand for another money squandering adventure. The AMCA we have now is working to the satisfaction of an overwhelming majority of members. If a small radical group of malcontents screw that up, they'll kill the best damn motorcycle club in America, and rob thousands of heretofore content members of one of the nicer things in life.

[darrylri]

but in reality there isn't that much interest by most members

I think you should start talking to more members. Everyone I have ever talked to want elections by the members UNLESS it was a board member. It does not matter if several do not vote that is their right.

Edd, they may want elections, but it's a matter of getting people to volunteer to run. Very few people have the time and inclination to run and serve in a position that takes up a lot of their personal time.

I am a beemer guy, I am involved with the BMW MOA (national club with 35,000 members) and am the webmaster and VP of the Vintage BMW Motorcycle Owners (VBMWMO, club with about 1200 members).

The MOA is the largest marque specific club in the world that isn't owned by the manufacturer itself. They continue to have problems getting people to run for their board. In the last three election cycles there have been no challenged seats for the board, and this last election, the treasurer advised members NOT TO VOTE because sending in the ballots cost the club the postage and there were no choices. In fact, the president will be appointing someone to a seat that had no candidates.

The VBMWMO reorganized itself about 7 years ago to have a membership-elected board. In two elections, the club was able to get one person who was not already on the board to run. In the end, the club had to reorganize again, more along the lines of the AMCA (with the board choosing its own members), in order to get anything done. Even so, we have an open seat on our board.

I am aware of similar problems in other clubs, big and small. It seems we are not a nation of volunteers any more. Sad, really.

[4thcoast]

Mark, how are elections going to change anything? What's to stop an "elected" board from buying a Torque 4, or finding some other cause to dump money into. Personally, I think elections could be the same or bigger can of worms because you would still have a small electorate of partisan voter putting their own people in.

My personal feeling is; let time heal the AMCA and let us recover, and learn from past debacles. I think you can bet that this generation is not going to stand for another money squandering adventure. The AMCA we have now is working to the satisfaction of an overwhelming majority of members. If a small radical group of malcontents screw that up, they'll kill the best damn motorcycle club in America, and rob thousands of heretofore content members of one of the nicer things in life.

Eric,

When you have the right to vote you get your crack at them and can send them packing It is a "American Thing". You are correct time heals wounds and this will shake out for the better.
Best,
Mark

[exeric]

Eric,

When you have the right to vote you get your crack at them and can send them packing It is a "American Thing". You are correct time heals wounds and this will shake out for the better.
Best,
Mark

I don't want a crack at them. I'm very content with the job currently being done. The bellwether events that led to all this yelling and screaming are the purchase of the Torque 4, the creation and procurement of funds for the Foundation, and the dismissal of Kevin and Robin. All of those event are in the past and cannot be changed. However, the club can learn, and adjust itself and that is true growth. Darryl's assesment of the election process in a small, special intrest club is both enlightening and somewhat chilling. I'll repeat, systemic problems with any organization will not go away with elections that draw candidates from a tiny pool of eligable candidates, elected by a very small electorate. I foresee huge, bureaucratic tangles, and inertia with a member elected admistration. A small club like this has to be streamlined and flexible for the volunteers that sacrifice their time. If it isn't, it will become increasingly hard to find anyone who wants the job and you will see the AMCA fragment and fail.

[pete reeves]

Rightly or wrongly buying the Torque four and giving half of the clubs funds to the foundation were controversial decisions. But they were made in the past by a previous BOD. Yet this current BOD is still being held to account. I would like to think that this current board is mindful of the storm of discontent that was generated at that time and will be more cautious in the future.
As others have said board members are hard working volunteers who are doing what they can for the benefit of the club.
Transparency appears to be a key issue with the current discontent and posting/publishing accurate and detailed accounts should go a long way towards satisfying this complaint.
Posting the minutes of meetings shortly after they take place on the clubs web site would also help keep the membership up to date and informed and should cut down on misinformed rumours.
I’m all for a democracy but I do not think each member having a vote to decide who is appointed to the board is workable. I agree with others that the vast majority of the membership has no interest in policy and would not vote anyway
Steve’s Ciccalones suggestion that the chapter Presidents should have the option to Veto board decisions that involve large expenditure and possibly other major decisions seems to me to be a good workable compromise for those who are arguing for more member control. I realise that the chapter presidents do not represent all of the membership. But with a little bit of thought to work out the detail this could easily be a workable way that a large proportion of the membership could have some influence on the direction this club is taking.
Just my thoughts
Pete Reeves 860

[bikerdds]

Pete, while I agree with some of what you said, there are things this board can do. The lack of transparency being the most important. They are having their feet held to the fire for things other boards have done only because they continue to behave in the same manner as previous boards. Want to end the foundation/torque four issue in a hurry? Publish the Internal Revenue letter sent to the club informing the club what and why things had to be done the way they were on such short notice. This should be available to all club members. Controversy over instantly.
I agree 100% about posting the minutes, but they should also be recorded. This is how things are done in the 21st century, and it isn't expensive. Recorders/cameras are cheap and reusable for years. We have the technology to do this now and a website to post on.
While the transaction regarding the foundation itself is a done deal, if the board had used it's head this perhaps could have been avoided.
I disagree with you, however, regarding the judging. The whole thing could have been remedied a long time ago. The head judge position is at the whim of the National president. He and the former president has chosen to let things be the way they are. The sum total of opinions and desires of the most experienced judges in the world meant nothing to either of them. This has nothing to do with brand, either. It is a control thing, period. The previous and present president have not been judges, or really have a clue about it or have cared about it. Let those who do know and understand it have at least an equal say in it. At this point, with only one person having a say so, the entire club is at the mercy of this individual and for sure personalities and agendas have played a part. The board only interacts with judging as it pertains to rules a for the most part. So, you see, that part could easily be changed or remedied.
Democracy is a wonderful thing. While any radical, instant change to how the board operates could be catostrophic, smaller changes would not. Concerned having the members vote is a problem? How can anyone say when it has never been done. That is why you have one or two at large positions determined by the members. Show it can work before trying to remake the whole thing. I belong to other national/international groups who have tried it and ballots included in the magazine are not a problem. Choose not to vote? Then it is the same thing we have in this country now. Don't bitch if you do not vote. Bitch mightily if not given the choice.
The club is having similar problems as our government in that we are severly split in our opinions. The truth always rests somewhere in the middle. We just haven't had a chance to even the playing field.

[Bill]

The bruhaha around judging is a very simple fix also, in my humble opinion. The position of Chief Judge should not be an appointed one, but one that is elected by the other judges. Only they who knows what and who they would feel comfortable serving under. The judging division should be a division that is somewhat separate and apart from the normal politics and should answer to the BOD on an "as needed" basis. There are many people in the club that are qualified to judge but dropped out years ago because of the politics. Remove the politics and favoritism and maybe there will be a considerably larger pool of folks willing to participate.
As far as the fear of civil liability arising from mistakes in the judging process that has rendered the entire process somewhat irrelevant where establishing authenticity in restoration and relative value is concerned, a more simple and direct disclaimer than the present one will restore the integrity of the process. It can be as simple as, " The most qualified judges available, using the most current information available, determine the authenticity of motorcycles submitted for AMCA judging. Despite the most dilligent attempt being made to assure the accuracy in judging, mistakes can be made and results are in no way intended to provide absolute proof that the results are incontrovertible."
That's my 2 cents, for what it's worth.

[bikerdds]

Bill, couldn't agree more. The entire process has been held up by a single individual. What the senior most judges in the club want or wanted meant absolutely nothing. It is all about who is in control. The worst part is, one person has the absolute authority where the head judge is concerned, and it has turned into an abuse of power. No single person on the board should have the individual control that has become the abuse of power that has destroyed the crown jewel of the club.
What is the difference between how the judging and the board should operate? They should operate in parallel. The board runs the day to day of the club. The judging should run the day to day in judging. The judges are not allowed to do so. The judging should be accountable to the board , but operate at arm's length, and have a say in who is the head judge and assistant head judge.
Your take on the process being irrevelant are spot on. All the credibility is gone. You have rules and regulations that were voted in in a hurry, and the competition class has been gutted. Let the ones who understand and know it handle it.
I get sick and tired of this move on crap. How can you move on when the process is broken? Just look at the federal government. That is what the judging process has become. No credibility.

[Knotthed]

Double Standard?

I could be confused because I have not followed this judging thing closely, but I thought one of the big nasty changes that kicked this whole judging fiasco off was that the AMCA judging was not to be used in any way to determine pricing or value on the the motorcycles that were judged.

Now RF says,

"AMCA Judging is still the most respected, and admired in the World, as proven by the HVA, FIVA, and Hagerty Insurance to use our services in their certification process soon."

It would seem to me that if Hagerty Insurance was planning to use the AMCA judging in their process, the AMCA would be conflicting its own stance on the judging????

I'm not trying to stir the pot with this, but simply pointing out what seems to be a contradiction of stance within the AMCA.

Perhaps, RF or someone on the BOD could comment some more on this?

Regards,

[redfred84]

Judging waiver

I could be confused because I have not followed this judging thing closely, but I thought one of the big nasty changes that kicked this whole judging fiasco off was that the AMCA judging was not to be used in any way to determine pricing or value on the the motorcycles that were judged.

Now RF says,

Hello Mr Knott,
Currently, the AMCA has a waiver for entrants to sign in an attempt to protect the club from any issues that may arise from the Judging process. I am not actually up on this, and perhaps an inquirary to it's author, Richard Spagnolli would clear it up.
As for the HVA, and Hagerty being interested in our system for their use; I believe they will want us to verify a machine is what it the owner states it to be. For example, if someone claims they have a '49 Pan head, we may be called to verify that it is indeed a '49 panhead. We may be called in for much more intricate duties, like verifying celebrety owned machines, or bikes with race history. We are still in the planning stages on this, and I am sure, some form of waiver will develope to accomadate this situation also.
I hope this clears things up somewhat?
Many Thanks, RF.
"AMCA Judging is still the most respected, and admired in the World, as proven by the HVA, FIVA, and Hagerty Insurance to use our services in their certification process soon."

It would seem to me that if Hagerty Insurance was planning to use the AMCA judging in their process, the AMCA would be conflicting its own stance on the judging????

I'm not trying to stir the pot with this, but simply pointing out what seems to be a contradiction of stance within the AMCA.

Perhaps, RF or someone on the BOD could comment some more on this?

Regards,

........................

[redfred84]

Sorry, my reply got mixed in with the quote I was trying to respond to on the previous post here.
RF.