Visit our Popular Forums

ITOWAIR · 02-11-2007, 11:10 AM

I am Andy Neumann , Past President of the Metro Detroit Unit of the WBCCI and this is only my opinion and I do not speak for the general membership of the unit, however,
I believe that the motion to change the constitution is invalid, and not in accordance with the Blue Book Article XVI Section 1. Per the Blue book an amendment must raise through
The ranks from a Unit, to the Region and then to Headquarters before it can be presented to the IBT.

Below is the motion as posted on the official WBCCI web site, note the use of the pronoun “I” , to me this indicates that Mr Emlinger made the motion on his own behalf and not that of a Unit of his Region. It is not the function of the IBT to amend the Constitution the function IBT to ratify proposed amendments made by the general membership.

“I move that the International Board of Trustees bring forth to the WBCCI delegates at the June, 2007, Delegates Meeting to amend the WBCCI International Constitution to include the words after “manufactured by Airstream, Inc.” as follows: “as well as the Class A motorhomes manufactured by the Four Winds International Division of Thor Industries, Inc. The Class A models of Four Winds motorhomes will be labeled “Airstream Edition” at their respective factory or by an authorized dealership in order to make their owners eligible to remain or become WBCCI members.”
The original motion, made by Region 12 President Jim Emlinger, limited eligibility for WBCCI membership to owner of Four Winds models Mandalay, Presidio, Valencia, Hurricane, Windsport and Magellan, which are both diesel and gas models and range in length from 30 feet to 40 feet.
The original motion was amended by Region One President Robert Thompson to eliminate the reference to Four Winds models and include all Class A motorhomes manufactured by Four Winds. Thompson said that in the future Four Winds could change model names and this would result in having to have another constitutional amendment. Thompson’s amendment also passed by a unanimous vote.

Below is the Article and Section of the Blue Book. It clearly states that Proposed Amendments follow a path that begins at the Unit level not the other way around.

ARTICLE XVI
AMENDMENTS

Sec. 1 Proposed amendments to this Constitution may be submitted to Headquarters in writing by any chartered Unit of the club. Any such amendment(s) shall bear a certification by the Unit President that it has been approved by a majority vote conducted in accordance with the Unit's Constitution and Bylaws. The proposed amendment(s) shall also bear a certification by the President of the Region of which the
originating Unit is a part, that the amendment has likewise been approved by a majority of the Units within that Region. Upon receipt of the proposed amendment(s) bearing the required certifications, Headquarters shall distribute copies to the Presidents of all other chartered units for ratification or rejection. When two-thirds of the club's chartered Units have ratified the proposed amendment(s) by majority votes according to their Constitution and Bylaws and the Unit Presidents have so certified to Headquarters, such amendment(s) shall be deemed to be adopted. If two-thirds of the Club's Units do not ratify the proposed amendment(s) within one year following the distribution to the Unit Presidents, the proposed amendment(s) shall be deemed to have been rejected and to be of no further effect. (6/30/93)

eubank · 02-11-2007, 02:54 PM

Wow, interesting point. So the IBT leadership really can't do a thing constitutionally unless the motion arises from the rank and file, so to speak? (And does this also suggest anything about last year's move to alter the WBCCI name?)

Lynn

**azflycaster** · 02-11-2007, 02:58 PM

Andy -
First of all, I am not a supporter of this amendment by any means.

The amendment IMO is covered by section 2 which allows for a member of the IBT (Region Presidents are IBT members) to fast track an amendment without going to any unit for appoval. This is the same method used last year that failed to change the name of the club.

Quote:

Sec. 2

Amendments to this Constitution may also be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the members represented by Delegates present and voting at the annual Delegates Meeting voting in accordance with Article XII of the Constitution. Such proposed amendment(s) may be submitted in writing by any chartered unit, by the Board of Trustees and by the International President. Any such amendment(s) submitted by a Unit shall bear a certification by the Unit President that it has been approved by a majority vote conducted in accordance with the Unit's Constitution and Bylaws. The proposed amendment(s) shall also bear a certification by the President of the Region of which the originating unit is a part, that the amendment has also been approved by a majority of the members of the Region Board of such region. Such proposed amendment(s) shall arrive at Headquarters by March 1. Headquarters shall distribute copies to the Presidents of all chartered Units by April 1 (90 days prior to the Delegates Meeting to which such proposed amendment(s) are to be presented, in order to give the units ample time to vote and instruct their Delegates. (6/30/93)

ITOWAIR · 02-11-2007, 06:40 PM

I belive section 1 covers how an Amendment can be proposed and section 2 covers how it can be addopted. Of course I have been wrong before I just am so strongly against it the way it is currently proposed that I am looking for any way possibe to make it go away without tearing the club apart.

wheel interested · 02-11-2007, 06:48 PM

Yes Andy I agree. How can this be a positive for the club? I think they broke the code of ethics. This is not promoting the club. And telling them we want the club to stay Airstreams is turned around upon those in favor as if they are making trouble. This did not originate from the members. The only people I know with motorhomes don't like the idea of SOB motorhomes let in either. How can our officers at the top supposed to be representing the whole of the club do this?

**azflycaster** · 02-11-2007, 07:18 PM

In the latest Arizona Unit newsletter a former Region 11 President was reporting the news from the mid-winter meeting. He made a statement about what would the club look like without and then he listed a group of names. He also stated that he would be interested in a MH someday and this would allow him to stay in the club. At the bottom of the article he then states that he is just the messinger. Interesting message.....
This whole ammendment started after a survey was sent out to current MH owners and they were asked for their opinions. Has anyone seen the survey or the results? I would be interested in how it was worded, how many responded and what were the results. This board has plenty of MH owners who are WBCCI members. Did you get a survey and what did it say?

wkerfoot · 02-11-2007, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azflycaster

In the latest Arizona Unit newsletter a former Region 11 President was reporting the news from the mid-winter meeting. He made a statement about what would the club look like without and then he listed a group of names. He also stated that he would be interested in a MH someday and this would allow him to stay in the club. At the bottom of the article he then states that he is just the messinger. Interesting message.....
This whole ammendment started after a survey was sent out to current MH owners and they were asked for their opinions. Has anyone seen the survey or the results? I would be interested in how it was worded, how many responded and what were the results. This board has plenty of MH owners who are WBCCI members. Did you get a survey and what did it say?

I was told that the "survey" consisted of calling the unit presidents and asking them how many motorhomes were in their unit.

Bill

myboyburt · 02-11-2007, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wkerfoot

I was told that the "survey" consisted of calling the unit presidents and asking them how many motorhomes were in their unit.

Bill

Yes, this was the extend of the "survey" requested by Headquarters to the NEU.

wheel interested · 02-11-2007, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azflycaster

In the latest Arizona Unit newsletter a former Region 11 President was reporting the news from the mid-winter meeting. He made a statement about what would the club look like without and then he listed a group of names. He also stated that he would be interested in a MH someday and this would allow him to stay in the club. At the bottom of the article he then states that he is just the messinger. Interesting message.....
This whole ammendment started after a survey was sent out to current MH owners and they were asked for their opinions. Has anyone seen the survey or the results? I would be interested in how it was worded, how many responded and what were the results. This board has plenty of MH owners who are WBCCI members. Did you get a survey and what did it say?

Richard if you don't mind maybe I can piggyback here on your post and in stead ask whoever here is a motorhome owner if they will tell us how they feel about letting other brand motorhomes into the club. Maybe we can do our own motorhome survey, complete with WBCCI number.

dwightdi · 02-11-2007, 09:23 PM

There is another point here (per the Constitution) on how a Constitutional ammendment is to be approved. It does not require a 2/3 vote of the membership. It requires a 2/3 majority of the units to approve the amendment per their bylaws and then submit a certified copy to Headquarters. There is no mention in the constitution of a vote taken at the Deligates' meeting. Therefore, the amendment should be voted on by the local units during the spring when Headquarters distributes it and then they can send their certified responses back to Jackson Center. The whole thing could be resolved before the Perry Rally occurs.

From Section 1
Upon receipt of the proposed amendment(s) bearing the required certifications, Headquarters shall distribute copies to the Presidents of all other chartered units for ratification or rejection. When two-thirds of the club's chartered Units have ratified the proposed amendment(s) by majority votes according to their Constitution and Bylaws and the Unit Presidents have so certified to Headquarters, such amendment(s) shall be deemed to be adopted. If two-thirds of the Club's Units do not ratify the proposed amendment(s) within one year following the distribution to the Unit Presidents, the proposed amendment(s) shall be deemed to have been rejected and to be of no further effect. (6/30/93)

Sounds like the SOB motorhomes proposal should not be an item that appears on the agenda of the Delegates' meeting. This could also prevent the adhoc changes and mixups occurring like they did with the name change at last year's meeting.

**azflycaster** · 02-11-2007, 09:37 PM

The issue is covered by section 2 not section 1. Under section 2 a motion needs to be voted upon by the members and the delegaates bring that vote to the meeting.

The issue I still can not understand is how the amendment for the name change was allowed to be modified at the last minute in Salem. The section is very clear about the time table for getting the motion out to the units for a vote. If a motion was to be changed (this one included), the motion would at that time need to go back to the units so that the deligates could get the votes of the members.

**azflycaster** · 02-11-2007, 10:18 PM

Since there are so many possible ways that this issue could be turned around at the deligate meeting, it would be impossible for a deligate to know how the unit felt on each issue. I would instruct my deligate to vote no on this issue and no on any modified ammendments. We are talking about the future of the club. It deserves more then a last minute change and a quick vote.

AZstreamin · 02-11-2007, 10:32 PM

I'm not real big on the political side of this WBCCI club that I some how became a member of...

I can see both sides of the argument...

so work with me here...
and enter the shoes of OLD JOE WBCCIer

1.. Your friends..some new....many though are long timers...you've all been members of the same club for years....you play cards, dice or cribbage once a week....one day you rise from your bed and realize.... towing is a lot of work, hooking up that trailer hurts my back....it’s time to trade in the silver bullet ma, and buy a motor home....being brand loyal... you buy an airstream.......the thought process..You can still hang with your chums in the same club that you've been playing pinochle with for the last X number of years....then comes time to upgrade.....now you’re stuck…. Airstream has eliminated your options....so as a senior member of the club, you change the rules of engagement to accommodate your personal needs, this way you may continue to hang with your chums and play cribbage…. Seems logical.

Another Perspective….

I'm a youngin’ by WBCCI standards so this will serve as an alternative view point…again work with me here… this is the viewpoint of a NEW WBCCIer...

2... Wally made the first Airstream with his bare hands... from some cheap plans from the back of a magazine. The trailer stood the test of time...Nothing on the road looks like it... that's the reason I bought one.. I'm unique like many of the other people that own an Airstream.. The club is made up of people of all different temperaments talents and convictions but they all share the love for the silver bullet. Some have motors.. Most don't…. In the end 99% are shaped like a bullet...not a box.. Most are silver.... some with paint.. But there is some kind of unexplainable nostalgia with owning an Airstream new or old and that seems to be the bond........
The idea of letting other brands into Wally’s club is ridiculous.

So there you go both sides....

So what to do? What to do....what to do?

The middle ground and perhaps a solution to this problem....

Grandfather the old timers....if they must replace their motor home... let it be... They make up a minute portion of the club..... But moving forward… If you want to join today, tomorrow or ten years from now... you must have an Airstream…..that’s the only way to preserve the integrity of the Wally club.

boblee5244 · 02-12-2007, 05:19 PM

I have a 2000 Land Yacht XC and I do support the addition of the Four Winds Motorhomes into the club. Most of the people that oppose this also oppose airstream motorhomes being in the club. Most motorhomes look alike and do not stand out like the traditional Airstream trailer does. With all of the negative comments on this issue, I do not see it passing. I believe that most Vintage and Classic members will say "good ridance" when motorhome owners leave the club because they cannot upgrade.

wkerfoot · 02-12-2007, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boblee5244

I have a 2000 Land Yacht XC and I do support the addition of the Four Winds Motorhomes into the club. Most of the people that oppose this also oppose airstream motorhomes being in the club. Most motorhomes look alike and do not stand out like the traditional Airstream trailer does. With all of the negative comments on this issue, I do not see it passing. I believe that most Vintage and Classic members will say "good ridance" when motorhome owners leave the club because they cannot upgrade.

Bob,

I respectfully disagree, the issue of whether or not motorhomes belong in WBCCI is "settled law". The issue is whether or not a single manufacturer RV club allows owners of RVs manufactured by another company as members.

Just my personal opinion.

Bill

wheel interested · 02-12-2007, 05:53 PM

Thanks Boblee for expressing your opinion. I hope more Airstream motorhome owners are heard from too.

And sorry not about your decision but about your feeling that the club does not fully embrace motorhome owners. I myself think it is just fine. That's the way it was when I joined and have never considered it less than desirable. I would love one myself. I think like Bill does that we are an Airstream club. My objections are not about motorhomes but about non-Airstreams. Don't want to pontificate over your opinion, glad you added it. I just feel badly that any WBCCI members would feel discriminated against, whether Argosy owners, motorhome owners, Squarestreams, fifthwheel, cstream, bvans, the Torpedo, BaseCamps or even MALs, vintage, classic or new. We all belong to our Airstream club together.

Nuvite-F · 02-12-2007, 06:15 PM

Bob,

Quote:

I have a 2000 Land Yacht XC and I do support the addition of the Four Winds Motorhomes into the club. Most of the people that oppose this also oppose airstream motorhomes being in the club.

Sorry if the actions of some have led you to believe this. I do not believe that is at all the case. Heck, we drag a vintage trailer, but some of our best WBCCI friends drive motor homes.

The problem is just as it's stated, no more and no less--WBCCI for RVs manufactured by Airstream. Opening up the club to other brand RVs is overkill. I appreciate the concerns of long-time members who want to buy a motor home in the future and have no problem with grandfathering existing WBCCI members to stay in the club with some other brand motor home.

Best regards,
Nuvi

till · 02-12-2007, 06:57 PM

The grandfather concept would make a good middle ground. I believe that this country was built on compromise??

The only question I have at this point is...
Has this kind of stuff been going on for the last 50 years, or has it just started since I joined?? If it has just started, I will quit so you can get back to a normal club.......

eubank · 02-12-2007, 07:51 PM

There might be another way to state the grandfathering idea: Folks who had an Airstream and joined under current rules can simply continue within WBCCI, regardless of their current ownership. This is, after all, more or less what's done with bunches of our elderly members, who have sold their rigs (=own no rig at all), but continue to attend functions, mainly luncheons and dinners.

What this would mean in turn is that we turn down the proposed amendment and leave well enough alone.

?
Lynn

boblee5244 · 02-13-2007, 09:50 AM

The bottom line is that Airstream is not going to make any more motorhomes. Those of us that have them will have to leave the club. If everyone is O.K. with this, then so be it. It has been said that there are many Airstream motorhomes on dealer's lots available for sale. The problem is that the ones available are over-priced and out-dated. The Mandalay is a better value and the quality is as good as the Airstream. As I said, I do not think the proposal will pass. If it did probaly no more than 10-15 would ever show up at a WBCCI function. My motorhome will last me as long as I will be around, but I hate to see good members leave because of this issue. We tried to get Thor to re-badge the Mandalay as an Airstream, but it would have upset their dealer network. I do not see the difference in that and and the "Airstream Edition". I'd bet that when Airstream opened the new factory in Ohio that people didn"t want them in either.