WBCCI MOHO Issue - 2013

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by munimula

Not the case. WBCCI Life Members can be active in the club without owning an Airstream. The caveat is that they cannot own any other RV.

I write technical specifications for a living, and one ironclad rule is, don't put in any requirements that you can't enforce. The WBCCI Constitution isn't technical specifications, but the same rule should apply.

Unless a WBCCI member sells his Airstream, and is caught owning an SOB by someone who can revoke his membership, he can effectively own whatever he likes, as long as he doesn't take it to a WBCCI event. WBCCI doesn't have RV police who check with the DMV to see if you've registered another RV.

And if you happen to own an Airstream and an SOB, they can't make you sell the SOB when you sell the Airstream.

So, the rule is there, and it makes perfect sense for an Airstream-only club, but the rule can't really be enforced; it's on the honor system.

[xrvr]

I thought even life members had to have at least part ownership in an AS to remain active. Obviously one of us is misinformed and it probably is me since I quit the club after last year. Jim

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by zigzagguzzi

I thought even life members had to have at least part ownership in an AS to remain active. Obviously one of us is misinformed and it probably is me since I quit the club after last year. Jim

WBCCI Constitution, Article VI, Section 2.C:

Regular Members, who were in good standing when they sold their recreational vehicle manufactured by Airstream, Inc., may, upon request, retain their membership as Regular Members, provided such members do not own another brand of recreational vehicle

WBCCI Bylaws, Article IV, Section 11:

In case of co-ownership of a recreational vehicle manufactured by Airstream, Inc. only those co-owners each paying International and Unit/MAL dues shall have all the rights and privileges of an International Club member. A co-owner is defined as one of two WBCCI members that own a single Airstream Recreational Vehicle.

Looks like a case of, you're both right.

[pmclemore]

While Protagonist is correct - that there are no police to enforce the rule. That is certainly true for a rank-and-file member; however if an officer showed up in a Prevost then that could not be allowed to pass unnoticed.

This is why it is the officers who want the rule changed.

Pat

[HowieE]

In case of co-ownership of a recreational vehicle manufactured by Airstream, Inc. only those co-owners each paying International and Unit/MAL dues shall have all the rights and privileges of an International Club member. A co-owner is defined as one of two WBCCI members that own a single Airstream Recreational Vehicle.

This is one they slipped in a few years ago thinking they could all buy one and leave it somewhere or take turns towing a Bambi to a rally and behind their SOB claiming ownership.

The interesting thing about that article is it does not distinguish the relationship between the co owners. Ones first assumption would be 2 different families. They also expandedmembership to include 2 individuals other than husband and wife.

Now that leaves a simple question. Are husband and wife co owners and what happens if one is no longer a member? Yes everyone says the survivor is a member, just assuming that condition is the result of death. What is the position of a member whose spouse has been kicked out of the Club? Have we gotten to the point of guilt by marriage.

Anyone recognize where I am coming from? And how this could have played out in Federal Court?

I am not attempting to resurrect an old issue I am just pointing out that "Quantity" of Constitutional changes presented seldom have the "Quality" of the Club in mind but rather the preservation of the "Free Ride" in a style that the leadership would like to be in.

[66Overlander]

Originally Posted by zigzagguzzi

Actually the WBCCI is a social club for carravanning and rally's. Ownership is required and use of these were encouraged. Now it seems ownership is required, but use is not necessary as seen by all the vintage units being restored and never get on the road and new units that are driveway jewelry. Kind of like most Harley owners. Maybe people who do not use their AS and Harley owners who do not ride can get together and form a driveway jewelry rv club. Jim

Jim,
I don't know what you are talking about. There may be some Airstream owners that bought or restored a vintage Airstream to serve as a pool cabana ("driveway jewelry" as you call it). I don't think those owners would have ANY interest in being WBCCI members. All of the WBCCI vintage Airstream owners that I know use their vintage Airstream for the intended purpose - traveling and camping. I suppose your experience may differ.

[Pahaska]

Our unit (Texas Highland Lakes) voted Saturday at the May rally. 2 "Yes", 2 Abstain, 17 "No". There is still a request out for mail-in ballots from folks who didn't attend the rally, but there are usually very few replies.

Two motorhome owners voted yes, these are about the only motorhomes in the unit.. Several abstained because they said they are sick and tired of this constantly coming up.

I'm proud of our folks. Our unit's 106 votes will be overwhelmingly "NO".

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by Pahaska

Our unit (Texas Highland Lakes) voted Saturday at the May rally. 2 "Yes", 2 Abstain, 17 "No". There is still a request out for mail-in ballots from folks who didn't attend the rally, but there are usually very few replies.

I'm proud of our folks. Our unit's 106 votes will be overwhelmingly "NO".

I'm actually dismayed. Out of 106 members in your unit, there were only 21 present for the vote, and there are few mail-in votes expected? Sounds more to me like, 17 opposed, 2 in favor, 2 abstain, and 85 don't care. It's a bad sign when the winner is "don't care."

[HowieE]

Originally Posted by Protagonist

I'm actually dismayed. Out of 106 members in your unit, there were only 21 present for the vote, and there are few mail-in votes expected? Sounds more to me like, 17 opposed, 2 in favor, 2 abstain, and 85 don't care. It's a bad sign when the winner is "don't care."

"2 abstain, and 85 don't care". This is what the "Leadership" is counting on. At this rate they will only have to bring this up 4 or 5 more time and the abstains and don't cares will be out voted by the MoHo owners.

[damonbeals]

This is typical, not everyone can attend the Rally or the event where the meeting takes place, our Unit is no different. Which is why it's important for member to mail in votes, or tell their Presidents how to vote for them. Most units just vote percentages when they don't get a real votes, but again that is up to the unit and how their bylaws are written.

Damon
#4827

Originally Posted by Protagonist

I'm actually dismayed. Out of 106 members in your unit, there were only 21 present for the vote, and there are few mail-in votes expected? Sounds more to me like, 17 opposed, 2 in favor, 2 abstain, and 85 don't care. It's a bad sign when the winner is "don't care."

[Pahaska]

Our unit votes percentages based on the number of votes actually cast and the resulting vote of our 106 regular members at the Intl. rally will be very much in favor of"NO" and probably almost exactly the ratio of the attending members.

This was our most far-flung rally of the year and a number of our regular attenders had conflicts and could not attend. As a result, it will almost surely be our smallest rally attendance of the year. Our usual rally is 30 or more rigs.

I don't know of any club that gets out a large number of mail-in or call-in voters and I have been in many clubs in my 80 years. Most folks simply depend on those who attend. In addition, we are probably the fastest growing conventional unit in the club and many new members tend to defer to older heads on what must be a confusing issue to them.

It was good to see several who supported the MH issue in the past back off and oppose it this time.

[Blue Pearl]

Hi to all my girls friends, I see we are checking in on the thread. Monah, silverpal,stspot.

[monah]

Originally Posted by Blue Pearl

Hi to all my girls friends, I see we are checking in on the thread. Monah, silverpal,stspot.

Hi right back at you Blue Pearl xo

[Howard E]

The results of 4CU voting on Amendment 1 are:
In Favor 19%
Opposed 81%

[Florida 55]

Carolinas Unit voted 100% against MoHo Amendment.

[monah]

Thanks for the updates Howard & Florida 55.... Glad to hear the topic has been discussed at the Unit level.

[AWCHIEF]

I am in the Mississippi unit and officialy no one has asked for my opinion. I do know that the local leadership appears to be for the Moho issue. I will be very disapointed if it passes. As far as I am concerned I joined an organization for Airstreams and Airstreams only.

[eubank]

Ah, Mississippi doesn't even seem to have a page on the web so that one can access any info about their plans. Argh.


Lynn

[HowieE]

Come on Mike.

Most governmental bodies have to read at a general meeting all correspondence addressed to them. Maybe one of those more familiar with the WBCCI Constitution and or Bylaws will chime in and advise if this is so. If so consider writing an open letter to be read at the International stating you position and the fact that is the result of no vote taken within your unit.

Historical yours is not the only unit that has been denied their right to vote when it might go against the grain.

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by HowieE

Historical yours is not the only unit that has been denied their right to vote when it might go against the grain.

Which begs the question, as far as that particular unit is concerned, which direction does the grain run?