Buick PreWar Division Status Question

[John_S_in_Penna]

10 hours ago, NTX5467 said:

In short, the BOD formulates the By-Laws, but can also decide to vote to not follow the By-Laws in specific instances, if they do so by a majority vote (with "majority" having a variable definition, but being anything over a 50% amount).

 

Willis, it's great that you're trying to rectify some matters.

(By the way, I like the blue Wildcat in your avatar.)

 

By-laws, though, are very important, and the wording of

by-laws is crucial.  By-laws are meant to protect the rights

of all members, both the majority on a particular issue and

the minority.  They must be written with extreme care.

 

A board cannot vote not to follow the By-laws.

Doing so would give them absolute, unchecked power.

Just as a South American president is never above his

country's constitution, the board of an organization

is NEVER ABOVE the by-laws.  Instead, they are SUBJECT TO

the by-laws;  and by-laws can be changed only by the

membership, usually with a vote far above a simple majority.

This process helps to enforce humility in the governing body

and makes the board subject to the members.

[MrEarl]

11 hours ago, NTX5467 said:

The Membership elects a BOD President,

 

While the train is off the track, I’ll go out on a limb and say I at least like that idea

[MCHinson]

9 minutes ago, MrEarl said:

 

While the train is off the track, I’ll go out on a limb and say I at least like that idea

 

I can agree with you on that. It might be nice if the members of the board actually ran for a partcular office. In a perfect world, allowing the board to choose who is best suited to fill each office has some merit, but I don't know if it really works that well in the real world. How many people would run specifically for the offfices of Secretary or Treasurer? 

[MrEarl]

2 minutes ago, MCHinson said:

How many people would run specifically for the offfices of Secretary or Treasurer? 

 

Sorta why I cut the quote short to President

[Brian_Heil]

SECTION 5— Amendments of Charter. The Board of Directors may at any time or times in its

sole discretion amend, modify, or supplement the Constitution, Bylaws, and /or rule and

Regulations collectively known as Division Charters, provided notice to that effect shall have

been included in the notice of the meeting of the Board at which such action is to be taken, and

provided further that any such amendments, modifications or supplements initiated by the

Board of Directors apply in like manner to all Division Charters.

 

Alan O: Is there a second?

Rick S: I’ll second that. (Assigned motion # 2017-2018-45)

Alan O: We have a motion by Brian, seconded Rick, that we accept the petition by Jack to reorganize the Pre War Division

 

 

As a Regional Director of the PWD at the time Motion #2017-2018-45 was made and voted on, I am unaware of any such notice given to PWD Members per Section 5 of the BCA Bylaws concerning Divisions that a Reorganization of the PWD was to be discussed or voted on.  I ask anyone who can produce that notification to please post it here.

 

As such, Motion # 2017-2018-5 and the subsequent vote are Out of Order and Null and Void due to the BOD's failure to follow BCA Bylaw #5 and provide Notice.

Edited August 8, 2018 by Brian_Heil (see edit history)

[KongaMan]

Judging sure seems to cause a lot a problems.

[MrEarl]

Y’all, check the title of this thread

 

Buick PreWar Division Status Question

 

Let’s keep it between the lines here

 

 

 

[John_S_in_Penna]

2 hours ago, Brian_Heil said:

SECTION 5— Amendments of Charter. The Board of Directors may at any time or times in its

sole discretion amend, modify, or supplement the Constitution, Bylaws, and /or rule and

Regulations collectively known as Division Charters, provided notice to that effect shall have

been included in the notice of the meeting of the Board at which such action is to be taken, and

provided further that any such amendments, modifications or supplements initiated by the

Board of Directors apply in like manner to all Division Charters.

 

Reading the above, I think the BCA has given its directors too much power.

They may be nice people, but if they can change the

by-laws and constitution any time by their "sole discretion,"

the by-laws give them the ability, it appears, to take absolute

control, totally disregarding the members.  

 

It should be the members who vote to amend the by-laws.

[jscheib]

As another Area/Regional Coordinator, I can state that I had no prior knowledge of this action and agree with Brian Heil, that decision is voided.

 

John Scheib

[MCHinson]

While, I would agree that it was inappropriate for the BCA Board to do what they did about the Pre War Division, I don't think that their action was to

 

"amend, modify, or supplement the Constitution, Bylaws, and /or rule and Regulations collectively known as Division Charters"

 

Their actions do not meet that particular text in my opinion.  I don't think that there is any specific prohibition from the board doing what they did except that they should be acting in the best interest of the club, its divisions, and the members. I don't think their actions changed the charter provisions, but that does not make it right or fair. If they knew that the petition was going to be presented, and they... did since the majority of the then sitting board signed it, it was inappropriate for them to take the action without giving the involved parties advance notice and a fair chance to be heard on the issue prior to the vote.

 

Essentially the Divisions and Chapters are under the control of the BCA Board. I know that I am not the only member of the board of the 36-38 Club that is seriously considering asking our members if they want to vote to turn in our BCA Division Charter and simply become a stand alone club again.

 

[38Buick 80C]

7 minutes ago, MCHinson said:

 know that I am not the only member of the board of the 36-38 Club that is seriously considering asking our members if they want to vote to turn in our BCA Division Charter and simply become a stand alone club again.

 

but that's just it the 36-38 Club has a BOD and an editor and functions with bylaws and holds elections...

 

show us the last time an election was held in the pre-war division. I'm just sayin...

[MCHinson]

Just now, 38Buick 80C said:

but that's just it the 36-38 Club has a BOD and an editor and functions with bylaws and holds elections...

 

show us the last time an election was held in the pre-war division. I'm just sayin...

 

I don't disagree with your point. It might be totally appropriate for the BCA Board to want to make some changes in a Division that does not really function like a traditional Division. My problem is that nothing much changed about that Division. It has always been a little bit different. If the BCA Board legitimately wanted to make a change, they should have sent a notice to the guy that they all knew was operating as the Director and give him a chance to prepare to defend the issue rather than allowing someone from outside of the Division to pull the Surprise Attack that happened and then immediately take the vote that they did. 

[BUICK RACER]

24 minutes ago, MCHinson said:

Essentially the Divisions and Chapters are under the control of the BCA Board. I know that I am not the only member of the board of the 36-38 Club that is seriously considering asking our members if they want to vote to turn in our BCA Division Charter and simply become a stand alone club again.

 

This has been considered by others ie chapters and divisions, but the cost is somewhat prohibitive in most cases for smaller groups, insurance mostly the concern.just my .02 as history repeats itself, like it or not, unfortunately many don't learn from it.

[MrEarl]

5 minutes ago, BUICK RACER said:

This has been considered by others ie chapters and divisions, but the cost is somewhat prohibitive in most cases for smaller groups, insurance mostly the concern.just my .02 as history repeats itself, like it or not, unfortunately many don't learn from it.

 

Speakin of history, here’s some trivia...who was it that said somethin about “The central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy” ? 

[MrEarl]

Gotta wonder, what indeed would be the consequences, good and bad of any Division leaving the Club, for them and the Club

[1937-44]

 The 1937-1938 Club prospered independently for around 20 years before the issue that caused its demise. During that time both organizations survived. However I believe we are stronger with Unity Thru Diversity.

 

Carl

[Brian_Heil]

14 hours ago, 38Buick 80C said:

but that's just it the 36-38 Club has a BOD and an editor and functions with bylaws and holds elections...

 

show us the last time an election was held in the pre-war division. I'm just sayin...

 

The PWD is not a traditional Division. Never has been and was organized not to be. 

 

Treasurer?  We don’t collect dues. We have no funds nor do we require any.  Free. 

 

Secretary?  We don’t publish a news letter, we communicate as a whole via the PWD site and have fully communicated that when members did not support a newsletter with material with the final email news letter. 

 

We have Regional Directors and have had some excellent Divisional Dinners at National Meets when there was someone able and willing.  Same is true of some excellent After Tours.  We go ala carte and have never had someone stiff anyone. 

 

The only people complaining about the PWD are certain BCA BOD’rs who are not even Division members. And on a personal comment, the BOD has its own mess to clean up and is not a model I think any Division should currently follow right now. 

 

Complaint Department?  That’s the kicker. Where are the suggestions from actual PWD Members that they wish change?

 

I've formally filed my grievance with the BCA BOD that they did not follow the BCA Bylaws with the last vote on the PWD. 

 

And as someone said above. Let’s have an open and fair discussion on the topic with PWD Member input. Like professional adults running a first class national club. 

Edited August 9, 2018 by Brian_Heil (see edit history)

[JohnD1956]

9 hours ago, Brian_Heil said:

SECTION 5— Amendments of Charter. The Board of Directors may at any time or times in its

sole discretion amend, modify, or supplement the Constitution, Bylaws, and /or rule and

Regulations collectively known as Division Charters, provided notice to that effect shall have

been included in the notice of the meeting of the Board at which such action is to be taken, and

provided further that any such amendments, modifications or supplements initiated by the

Board of Directors apply in like manner to all Division Charters.

 

Alan O: Is there a second?

Rick S: I’ll second that. (Assigned motion # 2017-2018-45)

Alan O: We have a motion by Brian, seconded Rick, that we accept the petition by Jack to reorganize the Pre War Division

 

 

As a Regional Director of the PWD at the time Motion #2017-2018-45 was made and voted on, I am unaware of any such notice given to PWD Members per Section 5 of the BCA Bylaws concerning Divisions that a Reorganization of the PWD was to be discussed or voted on.  I ask anyone who can produce that notification to please post it here.

 

As such, Motion # 2017-2018-5 and the subsequent vote are Out of Order and Null and Void due to the BOD's failure to follow BCA Bylaw #5 and provide Notice.

 

That section refers to the BCA BOD amending the By-Laws regarding Chapters,  and as similar rule is in there for Divisions. It looks to me like it is intended to say if the rules are changed for one Division it must be changed for all Divisions, on notice to the membership.  It does not refer to the individual charters for the separate chapters or divisions.  And the argument here seems to say that this is a change to the PWD charter.  Where as, I once again say,  the prior BOD did not approve a motion to create something different, or new.  It voted to allow someone , who is a member of the group by the way,  to assume a leadership role to try and organize the group. 

 

Here's a thought.

 

Even though the Division was touted as being an internet group with out any organization, apparently there is some sort of organization.  Kind of makes me wonder if anyone in the group really knows what's going on.  But be that as it may, two people have indicated they hold some leadership role here.  If you are convinced that your group supports the Division as it existed, where is your petition to the BOD?   We were told that the membership list was out of date.  No one knew who was or wasn't a BCA member and there were some people on the list who were known to be deceased.   So, cull your list and then get up a petition to leave ya's alone.  Seems real simple to this ordinary member. 

4 hours ago, MCHinson said:

it was inappropriate for them to take the action without giving the involved parties advance notice and a fair chance to be heard on the issue prior to the vote.

 

Let me ask this.  Who was the leader?  Since Mark Shaw relinquished the role, there has not been a leader listed in the Division Directors listing.  So who is officially in charge.  How can anyone be officially in charge?   You have no by laws, you have no way to elect a leader.  You had no leader listed for three years.  So who do you expect someone to notify? 

 

And it seems to me that among the thoughts here, there is one that indicates a reorganization would change how people utilize this forum to communicate.  I don't know how that thought arises but I'm pretty certain no one can stop anyone from using this forum except the moderators.   

 

 

[MCHinson]

John,

 

When existing members of the board were and are active members of the Pre War Division and could easily answer the question of who was running the Division, it seems a bit unusual to me that the BCA Board would take this action without asking those board members who was the Director.

 

Mark Shaw was obviously communicating with officials of the club prior to the Denver Meet in the capacity of (official or not) Director of the Pre War Division, regarding parking in Denver.

 

The petition as included in the minutes indicates that Mr. Gerstkemper was communicating with the President on this issue in May and submitted the petition to the Board in June. It seems quite clear to me that those members of the Board who were also Pre War Division members were kept in the dark on this issue so that they could be caught unprepared to deal with this issue in Denver during the meeting. I don't care how anybody wants to spin that, it is the wrong way to do business. 

 

As for Mr Gerstkemper, the minutes also indicate that he identified himself as "Not Currently" a member of the Pre War Divsion.

[jscheib]

43 minutes ago, JohnD1956 said:

 

That section refers to the BCA BOD amending the By-Laws regarding Chapters,  and as similar rule is in there for Divisions. It looks to me like it is intended to say if the rules are changed for one Division it must be changed for all Divisions, on notice to the membership.  It does not refer to the individual charters for the separate chapters or divisions.  And the argument here seems to say that this is a change to the PWD charter.  Where as, I once again say,  the prior BOD did not approve a motion to create something different, or new.  It voted to allow someone , who is a member of the group by the way,  to assume a leadership role to try and organize the group. 

 

Here's a thought.

 

Even though the Division was touted as being an internet group with out any organization, apparently there is some sort of organization.  Kind of makes me wonder if anyone in the group really knows what's going on.  But be that as it may, two people have indicated they hold some leadership role here.  If you are convinced that your group supports the Division as it existed, where is your petition to the BOD?   We were told that the membership list was out of date.  No one knew who was or wasn't a BCA member and there were some people on the list who were known to be deceased.   So, cull your list and then get up a petition to leave ya's alone.  Seems real simple to this ordinary member. 

 

Let me ask this.  Who was the leader?  Since Mark Shaw relinquished the role, there has not been a leader listed in the Division Directors listing.  So who is officially in charge.  How can anyone be officially in charge?   You have no by laws, you have no way to elect a leader.  You had no leader listed for three years.  So who do you expect someone to notify?  

 

And it seems to me that among the thoughts here, there is one that indicates a reorganization would change how people utilize this forum to communicate.  I don't know how that thought arises but I'm pretty certain no one can stop anyone from using this forum except the moderators.   

 

43 minutes ago, JohnD1956 said:

 

John,

 

Tried to quote just the second to last paragraph, but got too much and did not know how to drop the other without messing everything up.  But just who is responsible for posting info on the chapter/division info? I thought it was the office.  Perhaps we had that Coordinator position filled this would be a non-issue, no?  An also one more comment, I can see at least three other divisions that had the same leadership for probably at least 4 years.  Do we have evidence of their elections?  Same for many chapters, you get elected by being the only person willing to take the job.  Elections are not really elections, are they? Yankee has voted the same slate by acclimation.  Thanks for your input as the PWD sorts through this.  Never to get a call to you as this stuff is now piling up.  Perhaps tomorrow.

[Larry Schramm]

5 hours ago, MrEarl said:

 

Speakin of history, here’s some trivia...who was it that said somethin about “The central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy” ? 

 

Abraham Lincoln in his first inaugural address on March 4, 1861.

[Mark Shaw]

1 hour ago, JohnD1956 said:

We were told that the membership list was out of date.  No one knew who was or wasn't a BCA member and there were some people on the list who were known to be deceased.   So, cull your list and then get up a petition to leave ya's alone.  Seems real simple to this ordinary member. 

JohnD,

    At the Denver meeting I was repeatedly badgered by a board member about the PWD membership numbers.  I answered that the latest roster I had available was from 2016.  I remind you that the BCA membership roster has gone as many as three years (2012-2015)before being updated.  I recently found three BCA deceased members in my own state of Washington that I knew personally who were deceased long before the current roster was published. (I wonder how many more there are that I did not know personally?) 

 Our membership chairman Dave Ebert Sr. recently told me that he has repeatedly requested the BCA office to verify the memberships before adding them to our roster or to verify current members he has been unable to contact, and has yet to receive any responses.  So, I suggest you cannot accuse the PWD for not knowing how many members it has when the BCA really doesn't know either.  

 

1 hour ago, JohnD1956 said:

Who was the leader?  Since Mark Shaw relinquished the role, there has not been a leader listed in the Division Directors listing.  So who is officially in charge.  How can anyone be officially in charge?   You have no by laws, you have no way to elect a leader.  You had no leader listed for three years.  So who do you expect someone to notify? 

JohnD,

     Please review your transcripts from the Denver meeting when I said that I was the founding director and confirmed that I did not renew my BCA membership for two years while caring for my aging parents ( you can also look up my profile when I ran for the BCA board to see that I was PWD director when nobody challenged it).  When I dropped out of the BCA, I asked for someone in the PWD to step up as director and nobody did.  When I returned to the BCA, the PWD regional directors asked me to assume the directorship again, so I did.  Two issues of The Bugle have been sent to me as Director of the PWD ever since, so please don't try to mislead anyone to believe that Pete Phillips and the BCA office were not aware of me as PWD director.  I specifically asked Pete Phillips to remove me from The Bugle listing when I was no longer a member.  I felt that since this forum is clearly listed as the contact place listed in The Bugle for the PWD, is was not necessary for my contact information to be listed.

Edited August 9, 2018 by Mark Shaw (see edit history)

[1937-44]

 The BOD is steamrolling ahead. I just copied this off of the Buick Club Website.

 

PRE-WAR DIVISION
Interim PWD Director
Jack Gerstkemper
360-256-xxxx
xxxxxxx@aol.com
 

[Mark Shaw]

59 minutes ago, 1937-44 said:

The BOD is steamrolling ahead. I just copied this off of the Buick Club Website.

 

Perhaps "RAILROADING" would be a better term to describe what is happening.

 

Railroad is Defined as:

press (someone) into doing something by rushing or coercing them.

synonyms: coerce · force · compel · pressure · pressurize · badger 

 

cause (a measure) to be passed or approved quickly by applying pressure.

"the Bill had been railroaded through the House"

 

[Den41Buick]

Does anyone else feel the wheels are falling off the club? Can't we figure out a way to get along for the betterment and preservation of our Buick's? Remember this club is getting smaller every year and these divisions are not helping. I am a mainstream member and I am getting tired of reading about all of the controversy. I do not see this same playing out in other clubs I belong to.

 

[Bill Stewart]

I am relatively new on this forum, and new to old Buick restoration. I have received solid information, thoughtful suggestions and polite reactions to my sometimes naive questions. This forum has been invaluable to me. I hope the present problems can be minimized rather than exaggerated and that those involved will not lose sight of the purpose and benefits of the club and forum. Right now egos seem to be more of a problem than objective issues.

[Mark Shaw]

2 hours ago, Den41Buick said:

Remember this club is getting smaller every year and these divisions are not helping.

Den41Buick,

     Actually, the PWD brought many new members and saved many members from leaving the BCA.  In fact, I won the award for adding the most members several years ago.  It is the previous voting majority and current self interested members of the BCA board who refuse to hear BCA members not involved in formal judging that are driving away long time members.   

     The voting majority of the BCA board (made up mostly of former BCA judges) created this controversy.  They pushed an agenda to keep members segregated into formal judging classes at BCA meets for many years.  Their attempt to prevent all-together parking for the Denver meet was thwarted by the PWD when we cited the BCA SOP that allows divisions to park their way at national meets.  I believe their underhanded and disrespectful actions to remove me as PWD director was just another attempt to prevent alternative parking arrangements for future meets.  Although they made it as difficult as they could, we were very successful in parking all the prewar cars all-together and chronologically on the show field for Saturday's judging at the Denver meet.

[Larry Schramm]

3 hours ago, Mark Shaw said:

Den41Buick,

     Actually, the PWD brought many new members and saved many members from leaving the BCA.  In fact, I won the award for adding the most members several years ago.  It is the previous voting majority and current self interested members of the BCA board who refuse to hear BCA members not involved in formal judging that are driving away long time members.   

     The voting majority of the BCA board (made up mostly of former BCA judges) created this controversy.  They pushed an agenda to keep members segregated into formal judging classes at BCA meets for many years.  Their attempt to prevent all-together parking for the Denver meet was thwarted by the PWD when we cited the BCA SOP that allows divisions to park their way at national meets.  I believe their underhanded and disrespectful actions to remove me as PWD director was just another attempt to prevent alternative parking arrangements for future meets.  Although they made it as difficult as they could, we were very successful in parking all the prewar cars all-together and chronologically on the show field for Saturday's judging at the Denver meet.

 

And I would add that the response was overwhelming positive. By having the cars parked together by year the owners were able to swap stories and help each other with questions and problems without walking all over a show field.  I think there were twelve 1929 all together and I heard lots of positive comments that individuals were able to compare the vehicles side by side.  One of the comments made numerous times was all of the different wheels that were on the cars.  Would not recognize that unless the cars were together.

[BUICK RACER]

You know this whole thing as I see it as past President of the BCA and Current VP and  over  a 30 yr member of the club,this embarrassing to say the least, childish, unbecoming of a great group of enthusiasts, immature, unprofessional and downright stupid. Please grow up. I will be with my great mentor as well as several others that could  claim that also, as he turns 85 tomorrow, "The Old Guy" should you want to wish him a Happy Birthday email buickjoet@ahc123.com or call him 810-655-8988, he may not remember you but it will make him and you happy to connect again! Lets be great again!

[Brad Conley]

14 minutes ago, BUICK RACER said:

You know this whole thing as I see it as past President of the BCA and Current VP and  over  a 30 yr member of the club,this embarrassing to say the least, childish, unbecoming of a great group of enthusiasts, immature, unprofessional and downright stupid. Please grow up. I will be with my great mentor as well as several others that could  claim that also, as he turns 85 tomorrow, "The Old Guy" should you want to wish him a Happy Birthday email buickjoet@ahc123.com or call him 810-655-8988, he may not remember you but it will make him and you happy to connect again! Lets be great again!

 

Can I get an AMEN!!??  Thank you Roberta.

[Jack Welch]

This thread is an embarrassment to any self respecting BCA member. I think that there are those that really have no interest in the Club returning to being fun. There still rants about parking and disrespect for those members who have volunteered their time to participate in the judging process. All of this has no purpose in this thread except to keep things stirred up. AS a BOD member, I have received several emails on both sides of the current issues facing the BOD. When these emails are rants, some with perceived issues going back over 25 years, I hit the delete button. If I receive a civil well written email, It gives me reason to consider the sender's position.

[John_S_in_Penna]

On 8/8/2018 at 6:36 PM, Brian_Heil said:

I've formally filed my grievance with the BCA BOD that they did not follow the BCA Bylaws with the last vote on the PWD. 

 

And stand for principle, Brian:  They cannot evaluate

a grievance against themselves.  A registered parliamentarian

could tell more--or the book I referred to in Posting #34--

but I believe an independent committee would evaluate

the grievance, not the board.

 

Actually, the board--and everyone--benefits from having

a fairly and smoothly operating club, so as you probably know,

it's not a matter of vindictiveness, it's simply a sincere attempt

to get things on track.

Edited August 10, 2018 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[NTX5467]

Back when the Pre-War Division was formed, I thought that was a good deal.  There was positive energy in the group, from what I could see in the postings in here, and I perceived that was good.  I also suspected that those involved might also, over time, discover it was "too much work" and things would wind down over time.  That was THEN.  So things progressed reasonably well, from what I could see in here.

 

Then, there was a question about the Pre-War Division.  Something like the activity in their specific forum had decreased, or something else made "outsiders" wonder about the group's activities.  Eventually, I believe that Mr. Shaw replied that he'd been absent due to health issues, if I recall correctly?  There were General Forum questions about membership, communications with members, and such.  Membership numbers were reported.  The lack of a regular newsletter, an important metric to some, was explained by what was mentioned a few responses back, that their particular forum was their unified "communication place", which can be a good deal, BUT also relies upon the particular individual to initiate coming to the Pre-War Forum, when THEY think about it, rather than when the Pre-War Division "thinks" about it for them.  

 

There used to be a free-standing car club in Dallas, TX.  They had ONE rule, there were no rules.  BUT, each of the members seemed to always have on their club jacket at weekend car cruises.  There had to have been some communications network, but who would keep it updated, with no rules?  How'd they'd know who was going where and when?  Even the most "unstructured" group has some sort of "unwritten" structure, which also means a "leader", official or not.

 

In other car club forums, under the "Activities" section, there usually are posts and questions of who's planning on going where and when.  Who might be going to a particular local show, regional show, or cruise.  Other members respond or ask questions.  Even with defined regions of the nation, too.  Many other clubs refer members to their website for activities listings, as this General Forum also has.

 

As for "parking", in so many shows I've ever attended where there were classes, it was "parking by class", period.  That's the way everybody did it, just as the BCA 400 Point System did.  Completely in-line with "normal" and accepted practices at the time.  There were NO limits of "mingling" or asking questions of other participants.  The only exception might be in the BCA judging where the car owner needs to be accessible to judges while their vehicle is being judged.  People MINGLED, even if it was across the parking lot, or next to them.  Information shared, friends made.

 

When I joined the BCA, one reason was that I had some knowledge and skills which I felt might be of use to the local chapter.  I didn't own a Buick, but have accumulated THREE, over time.  To claim that "a person" is not worthy of holding a position in a division, chapter, or on the BCA BOD as they don't currently own a particular year of Buick, might be a "power play" to keep things from progressing further?  Who's to say that that person might soon own a particular year of Buick, in the future?  To me, it has NOTHING to do with efficiently and successfully operating a Division of the BCA.  To me, what's more important is that "the person" has an interest in Buicks and desires to see to it that the particular Division maintains, grows, and prospers into the future, giving the particular cars in that Division "their due", THAT's what's important.  Of course, current BCA membership is required.

 

As for the BCA or its chapters, many people have expressed that they are leaving the club as they've "sold their Buick".  Yet where does it state that Buick ownership is required in order to be a BCA Member?  For them, the "Buick segment" of their life is over, for whatever reason.  At least that's how THEY see it.  Their orientation and their determination.

 

By the same token, some might feel they need to own a Buick, rather than just have a positive interest in Buicks, in order to join the BCA and a local chapter.  Be that as it may.  Others just want a place to sell their Buick or parts thereof.

 

Perhaps it's time, again, for The Office to request a current list of members in chapter, divisions, etc.?  As we've done before.  To ensure that all chapter members and such are current BCA members.

 

As Roberta mentioned, we've seen a good bit of this before.

 

Respectfully,

Willis Bell  20811

[NTX5467]

Now . . . to their credit, I DID hear many positive comments about how the Pre-War cars were arranged at the Denver meet.  Whom ever orchestrated or led that operation is to be commended.  I doubt it happened "out of nature".  Apparently, there were many "willing co-conspirators"?  Can we look forward to that happening at future meets?   What happens if somebody doesn't like where their assigned parking spot is?

 

Willis Bell  20811

[MCHinson]

Lately, I have read a lot of BCA Board of Directors Minutes, BCA Bylaws, SOPs, Rules and Regulations, and a lot of emails. I have had quite a few phone conversations with fellow BCA Members. I hope that we will all see a clear majority of the board working together more closely in the near future to resolve the multiple recent issues that have concerned quite a few members. It took a bit of time to get to this point and it will take some time to get it all under control, but I am a bit optimistic that in the near future it will get better.

 

It is important for everybody to be willing to communicate with each other in a civil manner, in spite of differences of opinion. There are some who see this discussion as a bad thing. I will only say that communication is necessary to keep an organization functioning. I look forward to being able to read Board Minutes with less drama in the future. The discussions regarding the operation of the club in this forum are simply a reflection of the operation of the club. The board can resolve the concerns and things will calm down here. Hopefully that will happen in the near future.

[Jack Welch]

12 hours ago, MCHinson said:

Lately, I have read a lot of BCA Board of Directors Minutes, BCA Bylaws, SOPs, Rules and Regulations, and a lot of emails. I have had quite a few phone conversations with fellow BCA Members. I hope that we will all see a clear majority of the board working together more closely in the near future to resolve the multiple recent issues that have concerned quite a few members. It took a bit of time to get to this point and it will take some time to get it all under control, but I am a bit optimistic that in the near future it will get better.

 

Matt: I would first like to mention that my comment about this thread earlier was not meant to be any reflection on you. I know that you and I sometimes disagree about issues, but I think we both have respect for one another. At the end of the day, that is a healthy thing. I do think that the BOD is on the road to resolving several Club issues at the ,moment. I am afraid. given the tenor of the emails,  that I receive as a BOD member, no matter how the Board votes on these issues, a great number of Club members are going to disagree with us. There is a lot of animosity going on at the moment. It is shame that we can not agree to disagree as a Club without all the rancor and name calling. The BOD is a little divided on issues at the moment also, but I think that as a group, we have a degree of respect for one another and that will eventually lead to solving the issues before us. I do see this as a BOD, that is capable of compromise .

One thing that is applicable to this thread is that the BOD has not have the issue of PWD restructure on its agenda at the moment. The overwhelming issues of expulsion of a member and the entire financial "situation" that we have been dealing with are among the first things we have to deal with immediately. I know tis is a disappointment to some, but I am afraid, the other issues take precedence over everything else right now.

Edited August 10, 2018 by Jack Welch (see edit history)

[MCHinson]

58 minutes ago, Jack Welch said:

Matt: I would first like to mention that my comment about this thread earlier was not meant to be any reflection on you. I know that you and I sometimes disagree about issues, but I think we both have respect for one another. At the end of the day, that is a healthy thing. I do think that the BOD is on the road to resolving several Club issues at the ,moment. I am afraid. given the tenor of the emails,  that I receive as a BOD member, no matter how the Board votes on these issues, a great number of Club members are going to disagree with us. There is a lot of animosity going on at the moment. It is shame that we can not agree to disagree as a Club without all the rancor and name calling. The BOD is a little divided on issues at the moment also, but I think that as a group, we have a degree of respect for one another and that will eventually lead to solving the issues before us. I do see this as a BOD, that is capable of compromise .

One thing that is applicable to this thread is that the BOD has not have the issue of PWD restructure on its agenda at the moment. The overwhelming issues of expulsion of a member and the entire financial "situation" that we have been dealing with are among the first things we have to deal with immediately. I know tis is a disappointment to some, but I am afraid, the other issues take precedence over everything else right now.

 

Thanks, Jack. Based on all that I have heard from other members, I too feel that the current board is going to be capable of some much needed compromise. I feel that it would have certainly been better for the club if a few things had not happened in Denver as they did. I understand that the Pre War Division issue is, at best, the third priority of the board of directors at the moment. I hope that those first two issues get resolved in the near future and then the board can quickly move on to that third issue, which I see as important but of a lower priority.

[Daves1940Buick56S]

15 hours ago, NTX5467 said:

When I joined the BCA, one reason was that I had some knowledge and skills which I felt might be of use to the local chapter.  I didn't own a Buick, but have accumulated THREE, over time.  To claim that "a person" is not worthy of holding a position in a division, chapter, or on the BCA BOD as they don't currently own a particular year of Buick, might be a "power play" to keep things from progressing further?  Who's to say that that person might soon own a particular year of Buick, in the future?  To me, it has NOTHING to do with efficiently and successfully operating a Division of the BCA.  To me, what's more important is that "the person" has an interest in Buicks and desires to see to it that the particular Division maintains, grows, and prospers into the future, giving the particular cars in that Division "their due", THAT's what's important.  Of course, current BCA membership is required.

In the main I don't disagree with what you said here. Sure, you can certainly join a group like a car group without owning one of the marque (unless specifically prohibited by the bylaws). If you are testing the waters, looking for info or leads on cars, it's a good way to go. Or maybe you socialize with other members and want to do your bit. But I would imagine such a member, although possibly well qualified in other ways, would have a difficult time being elected to an office or BOD of that group. Why? Simply that the other club members would like to have someone that's "in it" like themselves. Just having club membership alone isn't going to cut it for an elected office no matter how skilled in other areas they may be. So it's a bit of a deeper issue than just being qualified by membership.

 

In this case we have a member, Mr Gerstkemper, who, although possibly well skilled in those attributes necessary for leading a Division of the BCA, has no pre-war cars and thus, no skin in the game from the standpoint of us PWD-ers. Sure, he may get a pre-war car in the future. Or, he could totally resign out of the BCA. We don't know the future. We only know right now. And we have been handed what is, in effect, a coup d'etat by the BOD and it doesn't seem right. As an example, how would the Riviera Division feel if the BOD summarily declared that I, who own no Rivieras and never have, was suddenly appointed lead of the Division? I have plenty of leadership skills and I am sure I could see to it that the Riviera Division maintains, grows, and prospers into the future as you said. But I imagine the current Riv Division members would be less than thrilled, and rightly so.

 

The only way I see out of this is for the PWD members to come together formally and have an election. I think this should be sooner rather than later. Obviously, and sadly, our days of winging it in terms of formality are over. Mr Gerstkemper can make his case there and if he is elected that is fine.

 

Respectfully also,

 

Dave

[Larry Schramm]

13 minutes ago, groselle said:

      On ‎8‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 5:30 PM, 38Buick 80C said:

but that's just it the 36-38 Club has a BOD and an editor and functions with bylaws and holds elections...

 

show us the last time an election was held in the pre-war division. I'm just sayin...

 

A note went out to all of the pre-war members by Mark Shaw.  He asked if anyone wanted to succeed him as the division leader. No one raised their hand so he continued. Fact, not conjecture. Dave Ebert has been the "webmaster" handling some of the administrative activities.  If you were to ask anyone who is the prewar leader, Mark would be about the only name given.  He has been the banner carrier for as long as I can remember.  My position as owning four prewar (brass& nickel) cars and Mark owning about 1/2 dozen.

Edited August 10, 2018 by Larry Schramm (see edit history)

[KongaMan]

27 minutes ago, groselle said:

On 8/8/2018 at 2:30 PM, 38Buick 80C said:

but that's just it the 36-38 Club has a BOD and an editor and functions with bylaws and holds elections...

 

show us the last time an election was held in the pre-war division. I'm just sayin...

 

 

There till hasn't been one, has there?

 

Looks like the process ain't the problem... ?