nea4wd.org

If you have anything that should be added please post it.

Please keep in mind there will be the usual reports from the Treasurer, A4A, and Land use updates.

Old Business:

Clubs seeking Full Member Status:
Vermont Expedition Society

Fall Crawl : Update with final plans.


New Business:

New Clubs seeking Provisional member status:
Western MA 4x4

Review assessment of work needed for each property

Spring Poker Run

Discuss potential amendment to quorum quota

Jay, think we could revisit the quorum requirements issue?
Our membership and quorum minimum is steadily increasing and maybe it's time to look at it again.

Can I submit my report via email and go clear trails at Carnage Hill all day instead? Honestly, I won't be any use at the meeting besides running my mouth anyways.

Pat C wrote:Jay, think we could revisit the quorum requirements issue?
Our membership and quorum minimum is steadily increasing and maybe it's time to look at it again.

Yes

Paul wrote:Can I submit my report via email and go clear trails at Carnage Hill all day instead? Honestly, I won't be any use at the meeting besides running my mouth anyways.

No

WM4x4 will be submitting our application to join NEA. See you all Saturday!

JayZR2 wrote:

Pat C wrote:Jay, think we could revisit the quorum requirements issue?
Our membership and quorum minimum is steadily increasing and maybe it's time to look at it again.

Yes

Ok well there goes the short meeting agenda.

We're going to have a 50/50 raffle at the meeting as well so bring your loot.

tammylynn wrote:

JayZR2 wrote:

Pat C wrote:Jay, think we could revisit the quorum requirements issue?
Our membership and quorum minimum is steadily increasing and maybe it's time to look at it again.

Yes

Ok well there goes the short meeting agenda.

So I was shaving this morning.


(my FACE you perv's)

..and I got an idea I'd like to toss against the wall.

For exec's, how many clubs are represented there?
Jay: NEZR2
Tammy: DWE
Pat: Baystate
Paul: NE4W

Now, I fully realize execs can't vote, and us there being in that club doesn't change the fact that we still need a delegate there to be counted. But, why don't we change this anyways?

I know for my club we may have a hard time getting another guy there, and this might be the case here and there for the other clubs listed there as well.

OUR GOAL here is to try to have a quorum as much as possible BUT at the same time we DO NOT want to drop the bar so low where just a few clubs will create a quorum. I think exempting the 4 clubs represented via the execs from the quorum count would help achieve this middle ground.
Lets still not let the execs vote....but we'd have 4 less clubs in our denominator for the quorum calculation.

Goal achieved: quorum calculation relaxed just enough to get us by.

Just and idea.

Bad idea,so my club will never have a chance to vote or express its opinion outside of the BOD?

No, you're misunderstanding.
You bring a delegate, he plays normal.
It's just that for purposes of calculating the quota, the denominator is reduced by the number of clubs represented within the 3-5 Executives that are there.

Ok,I "get it "now but its still unfair for all the clubs that do make the effort to go and be at these meetings.Playing with the quorum like these still isn't right though.Clubs want to be in the NEA need to make an effort or start losing trail rights or other sanctions.Two clubs still have perfect attendance and it'll be a slap in the face if others clubs can skate through this and have nothing happen to them.
Yes I know getting a quorum is tough but this is not the way to do it.Besides you will need a normal quorum just to vote on it and make revisions to the by-laws.

...........and here we go

I do not know the attendance record for BSJ so I may be shooting myself in the foot but why is it so hard for a club to get one member to the NEA meetings? I can understand if the club is NY based and the meeting is in Maine but from the sounds of it there is more then just a few clubs not making any single given meeting and it even sounds as though some are habitually absent from all of the meetings.

Paul wrote:...........and here we go

Like you didn'tknow it would go down this path...

schwalby wrote:I do not know the attendance record for BSJ so I may be shooting myself in the foot but why is it so hard for a club to get one member to the NEA meetings? I can understand if the club is NY based and the meeting is in Maine but from the sounds of it there is more then just a few clubs not making any single given meeting and it even sounds as though some are habitually absent from all of the meetings.

It's not really getting the club to show up, it's more like getting a person who is active, knows the situation, has some background on what the current topics are, etc, etc.

I mean hey, I can send you one of a dozen guys from my club, but you'll get the same from every one of them: "Heck if I know wtf everyones arguing about, I'll just raise my hand and go with the majority"

I dunno. I flip flop on the issue too (imagine that). Part of me says just make it whoever shows up and the other half says whack the knuckles of the clubs that don't show. This Assoc was NOT built by whacking knuckles however, we've let the clubs be VERY autonomous. Maybe this has to come to an end? Who knows.

In my heart of hearts I don't think meeting attendance should a gauge of participation at all. I busted ass for this Assoc for a 2-3 year stretch and never attended a meeting. People like Mikey, Dom, Carl Merrick and a host of others have too. Conversely, look at Roger, he attends every single meeting there every was yet he's never done a thing!!!

I have NOT been to every meeting.....

Paul wrote:It's not really getting the club to show up, it's more like getting a person who is active, knows the situation, has some background on what the current topics are, etc,

So it is basic politics. There is a large number of people involved, many complain about things but only a small few make the effort to vote and change anything.

I have a feeling no matter what is done it will always be that way. Maybe the way to look at it is to find a way so that those that are active and do make the effort to know the issues and vote are able to improve things without the inactive majority effecting that process.

We have had instances in the past where to make a quorum one of the exec officers stepped down from that position for the meeting, so they could act as delegate for their club.
I know the meetings aren't the most fun thing in the world, I would rather be out in the woods cleaning up the trails or making new ones then sit inside and hear most of the same arguments about most of the same topics however the bottom line is the meetings have to be held.
People need to follow through with their commitments IMO. The meeting schedule has been posted for at least 6 months. Maybe not the locations, but the dates. If your the delegate for your club, don't make any other plans for that day. Obviously there are exceptions, work, illness etc.
If you are the delegate for your club and know you frequently work Saturdays, maybe your not the best person for the job.
I think the answer here is not lowering the quorum quota. It's people recognizing they made a commitment to their club and the NEA and need to follow through on it.

JayZR2 wrote:I think the answer here is not lowering the quorum quota. It's people recognizing they made a commitment to their club and the NEA and need to follow through on it.

X2

pragmatist.

Paul wrote:pragmatist.

Grow a beard and we wouldn't need to be having this discussion.

FWIW only 3 full member club have gone 0-2 in 2009.
2 of those clubs have 1 excused absence each
7 are 1-2
13 are 2- 2
4 became full members in 09 and are 2- 2

mikesmaxx wrote:

Paul wrote:...........and here we go

Like you didn'tknow it would go down this path...

Seriously.

And FWIW I have had to step down at a meeting to represent my club but frankly I don't want to have to do it. I have enough on my plate during a meeting than to have to step down and act on behalf of my club too. So I pretty much told my club they either pony up a couple people to be delegates or they will either start losing access to stuff or they will be kicked out of the NEA for being absent too many times. We now have a couple dedicated people to act as delegates.

Paul wrote:Jay: NEZR2
Tammy: DWE
Pat: Baystate
Paul: NE4W

So whats the deal....I don't rate

my only issue with meetings is location. I just can't spend the gas to go to the coast every 2 months (Im in NY)

Luckily I have 2 officers in RI I send

I understand Rob. Thats why we let clubs host meetings. Try and spread it around. We usually send our delegate based on location and availability. It's worked for us. We are the other perfect attendance club with NEJeepz.
Since 06.

JayZR2 wrote:I know the meetings aren't the most fun thing in the world, I would rather be out in the woods cleaning up the trails or making new ones then sit inside and hear most of the same arguments about most of the same topics however the bottom line is the meetings have to be held.

This is an internal problem that is our own fault, IMO. Que the "streamlining meetings" topic now.....

schwalby wrote:

JayZR2 wrote:I think the answer here is not lowering the quorum quota. It's people recognizing they made a commitment to their club and the NEA and need to follow through on it.

X2

and X3

RTrac1 wrote:my only issue with meetings is location. I just can't spend the gas to go to the coast every 2 months (Im in NY)

That was why I said a NY club and Maine meeting place. I don't expect that every club can make every meeting. Like others said sometimes there maybe someone set to go and has a life emergency and cannot find an alternate at short notice. From what I have read on the issue it seemed that there was a lot of meetings that clubs are not attending on a regular bases.

Don't mean to talk out of place here, but i know SAM was going to implement a rule that clubs couldn't miss more than 2-3 meetings within a season and if they did they would lose their status SAM. I don't know if you guys have something like that already, but if not it's something to think about.

Rafikie wrote:Don't mean to talk out of place here, but i know SAM was going to implement a rule that clubs couldn't miss more than 2-3 meetings within a season and if they did they would lose their status SAM. I don't know if you guys have something like that already, but if not it's something to think about.

We do have a clause to that effect in the bylaws.

Paul wrote:
I dunno. I flip flop on the issue too (imagine that). Part of me says just make it whoever shows up and the other half says whack the knuckles of the clubs that don't show. This Assoc was NOT built by whacking knuckles however, we've let the clubs be VERY autonomous. Maybe this has to come to an end? Who knows.

In my heart of hearts I don't think meeting attendance should a gauge of participation at all. I busted ass for this Assoc for a 2-3 year stretch and never attended a meeting. People like Mikey, Dom, Carl Merrick and a host of others have too.

Sorry, Tammy.
This subject does promote stimulating discussion and I brought it up again because I think the quorum is going to keep being an issue. Like Paul, I flip flop .. I can see both sides.
I also see that when clubs sent whoever is available (which I am not complain about) we spend time explaining past discussions to get them up to date at meetings.
I believe we now need 17 delegates for a quorum, correct?

2/3 of 27 = 17.82. So 18 is the magic #

JayZR2 wrote:2/3 of 27 = 17.82. So 18 is the magic #

Um, 2/3 of 27 is 18. Just sayin...

See what I get for relying on technology too much.
.66% of 27 = 17.82.

For whatever it is worth, I would vote for WM4x4 seeking provisional status. I met a few so far, had them visit at my place and can't wait to have time to wheel with them. Rafikie is my neighbor of sorts, good people.

mrfreakinwhite wrote:For whatever it is worth, I would vote for WM4x4 seeking provisional status. I met a few so far, had them visit at my place and can't wait to have time to wheel with them. Rafikie is my neighbor of sorts, good people.

<tinfoil> Actually, I bet he's a spy sent to infiltrate us from those goodie S.A.M. snomobilers.