WBCCI MOHO issue - 2010 to 2012

[Coloradobus]

Dwight, that list may have a skew to it. HQ lists us as owning a Globe Trotter.

[dwightdi]

The ECC has recommended buying a more effective database program for HQ usage and it has been approved by the IBT. I am not sure we intend to put the full demographics of the all the members into that database. Keeping it up to date could become a full time job. I am not sure how much money it would cost us or the positive value we would receive from the additional work. We currently are having difficulty making sure the members keep their "ever changing" Email addresses up to date. Airforums at least lists up to 5 trailers plus the Tow Vehicle. I am not sure whether that is searchable.

[Gene]

Nuvi, thanks for the clarification.

Gene

[dwightdi]

The Constitution says it takes a 2/3 vote of the members, represented by the delegates and voting at the at the delegates' meeting, to adopt an amendment. The question remains, is an abstention vote by an individual is counted as a "vote" or not. If Robert's is followed then an abstention is a "non-vote" but it would still require twice as many yes votes as no votes to pass the amendment. Abstentions would not be counted.

I think the no's will have it again and the SOB motorhome minority will try again in another couple years.

[Gene]

Abstentions always cause confusion. The issue is whether the voters (delegates I guess) who abstain are counted toward those in attendance (present and voting vs. present). If all those units present are counted, this makes it harder to pass anything. The abstention is not counted as a vote, but if it is counted toward those in attendance, then it acts like a "no" vote.

Once again, in any conflict between Robert's Rules and an organization's bylaws or other documents, Robert's Rules loses. When the organization's rules are not clear, then you have problems and arguments. Also, if Ohio statutes define this, since the club is incorporated there, that would trump all of this.

If the WBCCI's own rules do not define what abstaining means, then go to Robert's. Bob's definition, quoting his copy of Robert's Rules, says abstentions are not counted toward calculating what "2/3" means (post 942).

There are many editions of Robert's Rules. Robert's kept refining the original and after he died in 1923, others have modernized language and added things as practices have evolved, and so Robert's Rules various editions are not the same. Good bylaws will identify the edition to be used. It may have gone out of print years ago and it is possible no one will have the same edition. I have a different edition than Bob has and could not quickly find the same definition (a persistent cold may have affected my research). Various organizations have every possible version of voting rules you could imagine and then a lot more no one ever heard of. Sometimes they make no sense or were written so long ago the words have changed meaning.

The point of all this is you have to check all sources to make you have the right rules and interpretations. You also have to get through people misreading these things, either from misunderstanding, bias, conflicts of interest, or lack of research. Everyone should have a full time lawyer (my wife does, but I don't) and that means 310,000,000 lawyers in the US. Sounds great to me.

Gene

[xrvr]

If a unit does not have a delegate there is that an abstension? jim

[Gene]

I don't think it would make any difference. If abstentions don't count as votes or in calculating what 2/3 is, an abstention is the same as no one voting.

Gene

[LI Pets]

Originally Posted by zigzagguzzi

If a unit does not have a delegate there is that an abstension? jim

There is absolulty no reason for a unit not to be represented if not by a unit member delegate then find an associate member to act as your delegate.

Last year WDCU with about 90 members had no one appear!!!

There are several hundred at the rally, I'm sure someone would be happy to appear.

[LI Pets]

Originally Posted by CrawfordGene

There are many editions of Robert's Rules. Robert's kept refining the original and after he died in 1923, others have modernized language and added things as practices have evolved, and so Robert's Rules various editions are not the same. Good bylaws will identify the edition to be used. It may have gone out of print years ago and it is possible no one will have the same edition. I have a different edition than Bob has and could not quickly find the same definition

The current Constitution did not define it clearly. But they will follow the latest version just updated.

The Revision did include a clear definition.

The rules of the current edition

of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the proceedings of the WBCCI in all cases, International, Area and Unit, to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with the Constitution, Bylaws, Special Rules of Order, and any statutes applicable to the WBCCI that do not authorize the provisions of the WBCCI to take precedence.

[wheel interested]

You must pay to play (be in attendance.) How many units were not represented last year? Is there a correlation between the International Rally's location and units' region location that might be significant? The IBT attendance is probably higher than unit attendance of their respective percentiles. What factors do you think account for that? Is there a solution to any factors that may have proved problematic in the past? What is being done to address those issues?

[Frank's Trailer Works]

Originally Posted by LI Pets

Last year WDCU with about 90 members had no one appear!!!

I hope that is a false number. In 2009, when Rob Baker was President, there were 171 members in the WDCU. 11 of us appeared at Madison.

[munimula]

Originally Posted by 62overlander

I hope that is a false number. In 2009, when Rob Baker was President, there were 171 members in the WDCU. 11 of us appeared at Madison.

Maybe your siren call when you and Rob quit in tandem and publicly called for the WDCU Unit members to quit the WBCCI en masse had that effect.

[Frank's Trailer Works]

Originally Posted by munimula

Maybe your siren call when you and Rob quit in tandem and publicly called for the WDCU Unit members to quit the WBCCI en masse had that effect.

That would make a very good excuse. Feel free to use it.

[Sonia]

Stop making assumptions on the number of our members, when you are not a member of WDCU.

thanks!
Sonia

[Frank's Trailer Works]

No one has made any assumptions except why people have left, and that assumption was not mine, It was Mr. Morrison's.
I was utterly shocked by Lilpet number he stated. I guess he can ASSUME, BEING A MEMBER AND ALL.
And just to not assume, and to state fact about "when" I was a member it was 166. 166 was the actual number because THAT WAS WHAT WAS CAST.
Now you can all go back to being threatened by reality.

[RAG]

Can someone please explain, in simple terms: what is the "MotorHome Issue"? I'm a very recent owner and have been contacted by a Local Unit for membership, but have not as yet made a decision.

This information would be very helpful; thanks in advance.

[wheel interested]

Airstream stopped making Class A Airstream motorhomes and the owners of older motorhomes want to change the club rules to purchase and include any brand of Thor Class A motorhomes changing the Airstream only rule of the WBCCI. The current wording of the motion to be voted on at the International Rally in June/July is limited to extend this provision only to lifetime members.

[RAG]

Originally Posted by wheel interested

Airstream stopped making Class A Airstream motorhomes and the owners of older motorhomes want to change the club rules to include any brand of Thor Class A motorhomes changing the Airstream only rule of the WBCCI.

Is that the only issue? From some of the reads, it sounds like this is becoming political; sad.

[Nuvite-F]

Originally Posted by RAG

Is that the only issue? From some of the reads, it sounds like this is becoming political; sad.

Carol gave you the basic issue, but the history is a little more complicated. Back in 2004 WBCCI conducted a poll, one question of which addressed the question of opening the club up to other brands. Something like 80% of the respondents disapproved.

Then in 2007, after Airstream stopped making motor homes, admission of Thor motorhomes into the club was proposed as a constitutional amendment. A 2/3 majority is required to pass, but about 2/3 voted against it.

However a relatively small number of the International officers are not content with this decision and so another amendment to let owners of Thor motor homes into the club will be on the agenda for the 2012 Delegates Meeting.

I do want to emphasize that nobody that I know has any problem with Airstream motor homes--the issue is whether the club will cease to be the Airstream owners association.
.

[RAG]

Well stated and appreciated. I would have to agree with the current standard and not the proposed allowance of other brands.

IMHO, this sounds like a "no brainer"; am I missing something?