AACA Museum & AACA, What is Going On

[Steve Moskowitz]

2 hours ago, Bhigdog said:

 

It appears that the catalyst for the Club/Museum split was the Clubs "need" for more space. Kind of lost in the fog of debate are a few questions:            

 

Does the Club "need" more space or would they merely "like" more space?  Needs, this issue was fully explained before and in my magazine column  two issues ago.  The space issue is mostly a library issue but we have no more office space and need it plus our other spaces are extremely inefficient to work out of..

Has the Clubs "need" been actually quantified? Yes

Has a cost/benefit study been run? No, that is a bit difficult to do but the fact is that we will have no room to accept major collections that are due to come here

Are there other ways to meet the Clubs "needs" other than building a new facility from scratch? Yes, and we are exploring that avenue and have toured a potential facility.

Will the new facility, if built, mimic the Taj Mahal type structure of the museum or a more work-a-day office like structure? Looking to have a aesthetically appealing building but no Taj Mahal

Would leasing existing space be both more practical and cost effective? In Hershey??  You find it and we would look at it!!!

Having all the AACA's facilities in one place sounds nice but is it really necessary in this age of instant connectedness?  It is still the most efficient way for us to work together.  The staff of both "departments" constantly are working to help each other

Does it REALLY matter if the Executive Directors office is in the same building as the library? Doesn't hurt as the ED oversees the library and I have heard he actually provides value although as never taken a dime in compensation from the library.

Is it worth it to the membership to expend millions of dollars to that end? We hope the members see the long range need and understand that expenditures are being made for the future of the organization

Does it make fiscal sense to expend millions of dollars to house a collection of literature, many pieces  of which will never be utilized to any large degree or even looked at?Our purpose is to save automotive history and to be the finest repository in the country and a free public library,  We believe so but as stated we have run out of room.  There are more large collections slated to come here in member's estates and ones that we have visited so we know there huge value to the automotive community.  Are you asking the Smithsonian whether it is worth their huge collection that most will never, ever see the display floor?

Can the libraries growing collection be culled to fit the existing facility while still serving the clubs "needs"? Culled?  We do not duplicate our holdings as evidenced by our sales online and sale at Hershey each year so we DO THAT! 

Etc.

Etc.

Etc.  Bob I can and will answer all your concerns but give me a call because I cannot stay on the forums all day.  I do have other issues to work on. 717-534-1910

 

 

Now before I'm branded as a heretic I'm merely asking these questions as a long time member. It seems to me this whole Club/library/Museum/new building are all part of the same issue. To wit: Do we really NEED this or would we only Like this?

Inquiring minds need to know.................Bob

 

 

[Guest jwsamuel]

Hello everyone,

 

This is my first post on this forum as I am just completing my first year as an AACA member and have recently renewed for 2017.

 

I have been interested in antique and collector cars for some time and used to own a 1949 Studebaker R5 pickup and a 1967 Mustang. I no longer own any collector car, unless you consider a 2009 Toyota Camry to be a classic, but remain interested in the hobby. At current, I am more interested in participating as an observer, reader, photographer and collector of memorabilia.

 

I decided to join AACA in December 2015 for the 2016 calendar year. A large part of my decision was to support the museum as I did not realize they were two different organizations and thought they were a single unit. There was nothing in any of the information I read leading me to believe otherwise. After all, it is called the "AACA Museum." I was aware that the museum had its own Board of Directors, but it is not unusual in non-profit organizations to have different boards directing different parts of the organization's mission. So there was nothing to lead me to believe that the two were separate.

 

A few days ago, just days after I renewed my membership for 2017, I received the "Urgent" letter informing my of the split between the two organizations. At first I was annoyed that the club had announced the split well into the time when most people renew memberships for the next year. My first thought was had I known before I renewed I might have not renewed with the AACA and waited to see if the museum offered its own memberships.

After reading the positions of both the AACA and the museum, I have started to change my mind and now think that I will not renew my AACA membership after 2017 and will not donate to the museum or purchase a museum membership if they offer one.

 

Why the change? The positions of both organizations have shown me that what is happening is something that commonly happens in non-profit organizations. That is that the egos of the directors of both organizations have taken precedence over the mission of the organizations. 

 

Over the years since the museum opened, the directors of neither organization saw fit to make it clear that they were separate entities. That indicates to me that they started off by seeing themselves with similar missions and serving the same members/patrons/customers. What happened since then to make each board believe differently?

 

I went and read message #224 on page 9 of this thread and after reading the museum board's statements and the AACA rebuttal, I get the feeling that the egos of board members on both sides were threatened by the proposed merger and that clouded their judgement. I have seen that happen in other non-profit organizations and believe it is dangerous to the organization when egos divert attention away from the mission.

 

Now I know that some of you will say that I am a newcomer to the AACA and have no business commenting. To an extent, I agree and that is why I have refrained from making any suggestion of what should happen in the future. I do not know enough to offer an opinion or suggest what should happen. Rather, I am just posting this to let people know what kind of impression this matter has made on a new member and why this new member may soon become a former member.

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, PA 

[R W Burgess]

5 minutes ago, Steve Moskowitz said:

"I have heard he actually provides value although as never taken a dime in compensation from the library."

 

I have heard the same thing, great value! Steve reminds me of the Blue Bloods TV person "Garrett". He keeps his emotions in check. I am sorry, sometimes mine get away from me. I deleted my post because Steve handles things correctly, without emotion. ....And the Board, plus every AACA member appreciates what he does for our Club.

 

Thanks Steve, had to say that!

 

Wayne

[John_S_in_Penna]

A new library and headquarters open up great possibilities,

whenever the money is raised to pay for them.

An existing building is an affordable alternative,

temporarily used or otherwise;

but imagine what a new building could be.

A new building could be a reproduction of a

historic automotive building from the past,

fascinating to visit and a boon to the hobby.

 

 

Edited December 22, 2016 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[John_S_in_Penna]

14 minutes ago, jwsamuel said:

...Now I know that some of you will say that I am a newcomer to the AACA and have no business commenting.... 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, PA 

 

ANY member's thoughtful comments are welcome!

And even though this issue is taking a lot of people's 

attention at the moment, don't think that argument is

what usually occupies people's thoughts.  The people in AACA

and at the  Museum are fine people.  You'll meet many

interesting and helpful car fans, with virtually no disagreement

other than friendly banter over tires and tools and techniques.

 

If you participate in AACA, JIm, you will find your enjoyment

of the hobby multiplied many times over.

 

[AJFord54]

I would like all of you to know that I have had correspondence with Wayne Burgess and Steve as well.  As most of you know, I was most adamant with my displeasure of this situation.  I have offered my opinions and suggestions.  In the process, it appears even my overly-generous merger ideas have been previously offered, with no success.

Honestly, I was of the opinion that something could be done to solve the problem.  I am now convinced that it cannot move forward.  Trust me, you are not hearing this from a "Board Member" or anyone who has ties to the administration.   I'm one of "you" - a member in good standing who has opinions and only wants the best for the Club.   We need to let it go.  We need to unite and be one.  Life has a way of taking care of all things.  The museum will operate without us, and we without them.  I am further convinced that in the future our board will remember this and bring us important information a bit sooner.

I cannot tell anyone where to invest their money or place their donations, but please be cognizant that the two groups are separate entities.  If you wish to support the National AACA, please do so.  If you wish to donate to the museum, that is your prerogative, but those donations will not favor the AACA National. 

This is a very emotional time for all of us.  Let us move on and enjoy the hobby.  Merry Christmas to all, and if it is more appropriate - Happy Holidays!

 

Footnote:  If the board decided to eliminate the "free admission" to the museum and use the extra few bucks towards a building program, I'm all in favor of it.

 

Andy Jochum

[R W Burgess]

Thanks Andy. It has been trying times for all of us.

 

[RPrice]

I just can't believe this whole scenario concerning the AACA and the AACA Museum.   I guess I'm just naive to believe all along that the museum was, in fact, part of AACA.   I guess I'm just wrong.   What really upsets me is all the member and club money that's gone into building and supporting the museum.   It seems incredible that our beloved club and the museum can't make accomodations to one another to merge into one unit.   Someone along the way is going to hurt big time and I don't believe it'll be AACA.   Museums are hard to run profitably.   I hope that the museum can find its way without the support of AACA.   I've been reading this whole story for the past few days on the Forum.   I just got my letter from AACA today, December 17th.

Rog

[RPrice]

To continue, after I got over the shock concerning AACA and the AACA Museum,  I realize that other auto museums are NOT part of the club that they're affiliated with.   As as example, the Studebaker Drivers Club and the Studebaker Museum in South Bend are not a unit.  Each is independent, but support each other's activities.   I also understand that the ACD Club is not in control of the ACD Museum.    I'm sure there are other examples, but I just wanted to name a couple.

Rog

[Steve Moskowitz]

I have been given permission to post a letter to us from Mr. Springer, former AACA board member, and the person who was the first in modern times (you can go way back in the club's history where a museum was discussed) to chair a committee looking into the formation of the museum.  Also a couple of articles from 1994 and 1995 form Antique Automobile which will show some original INTENT by the club.  It is just to answer a few questions concerning comments made by some others. It is not how things were worked out but will back up some of the board's feelings and many,many member's feelings.  Click on News 3.docx 

News 3.docx

[ChazA]

14 minutes ago, RPrice said:

To continue, after I got over the shock concerning AACA and the AACA Museum,  I realize that other auto museums are NOT part of the club that they're affiliated with.   As as example, the Studebaker Drivers Club and the Studebaker Museum in South Bend are not a unit.  Each is independent, but support each other's activities.   I also understand that the ACD Club is not in control of the ACD Museum.    I'm sure there are other examples, but I just wanted to name a couple.

Rog

That is true, but the big difference here is that from the get go, AACA was "all-in" supporting the kick off of the museum, with a lot invested in time and money.   I'm sure different decisions would have been made, like the example Studebaker Club you mention, regarding how many resources would be invested if they were separate identities from the start. The Studebaker Drivers Club, and other similar clubs with that relationship, possibly may not donate as much, or provide as many resources as if they were one org.  Big difference between donating 10K here or there, a spring meet once and a while at a museum, a few cars donated, etc..., vs millions invested (or higher % of revenue to a sister org).  Again, intent originally was not a separate org, as from readings this was supposed be temporary until 501.3c status granted. 

[MCHinson]

For the benefit of any who may not have the latest version of Microsoft Word and thus cannot open Steve's attachment above, Here is a pdf copy of that document, News 3.docx : Springer Letter.pdf

[trimacar]

I had an interesting discussion with a long-time member of the AACA regarding the original formation of the museum.  He was a lot more educated about some of the details of the beginning of the museum than I ever was, guess I just wasn't paying attention!

 

My understanding now is that when the Museum was founded, it was done so separately from the Club, both for tax reasons and the fact that some members of the AACA thought the Museum would fail, and in that case the Club should be insulated from any financial responsibility.  Stand alone museums, not privately nor corporately funded, do not have a good track record of staying in the black with operational costs.

 

With the support of AACA Club, and AACA members, the Museum has been reasonably successful and mostly able to grow and to pay the bills.

 

The Museum has made light of the $80K per year support from the Club, but that "little bit", which added up to over a million dollars over the years, might mean that the Museum would now be in debt $2.4 million instead of the $1.4 million stated in the documents.  There's a fine line between being in the red and being in the black for such an endeavor.  And, that $80K is separate and apart from all the other support from Club members, whom at the time probably thought anything given to the Museum helps the Club to further stated purpose.

 

I trust that the Club Board has done what they think is best for the existence of the Club.  The Museum Board has, apparently, drifted far from the course set when the Museum was first conceived, and it appears that there's no way now to get back to the original, intended,  destination (a merger).  As mentioned, life goes on, and one can support either or both of the organizations, but I'll be willing to bet that the Museum has lost some of the goodwill of the AACA Club members at this point, and it will be harder and harder to get donations, volunteers, and many other things a museum needs to function above the break-even line.

 

This is sad for the hobby, and both organizations will suffer in the long run.

[capngrog]

2 hours ago, AJFord54 said:

  I am further convinced that in the future our board will remember this and bring us important information a bit sooner.

I'm not convinced of this, because I don't recall reading in this lengthy thread any mention by an AACA Club official that the board was remiss in not notifying the membership of the ongoing negotiations with the Museum Board.  Other than this one point of personal concern (timely notification), I really don't care whether or not the Club and Museum are separate entities.

 

Merry Christmas,

Grog

[John_S_in_Penna]

1 hour ago, MCHinson said:

For the benefit of any who may not have the latest version of Microsoft Word and thus cannot open Steve's attachment above, Here is a pdf copy of that document, News 3.docx : Springer Letter.pdf

 

Thank you, all, for further documentation.

Ronald Stringer's letter (link thereto above) reminded me

that people were donating cars to the club in anticipation

of the museum.  Those cars were donated to the actual AACA

and, he says, later transferred to the museum.

 

Question:  In his 3 bullet points in his letter, to which

Board(s) of Directors is he referring?  The club, the museum,

the library--or different boards in different bullet points?

It's unclear.  He may want to revise his letter, as it is a

important documentation of club history.

 

And was the organization eventually arranged the way

he mentioned--with the already non-profit Library being the

umbrella--or did it come about another way?  I think he's 

saying that the arrangement was done differently.

Edited December 22, 2016 by John_S_in_Penna (see edit history)

[Steve Moskowitz]

Grog, the board certainly understands its need to keep members informed and we try to do this always as best as possible.  This was a very sensitive topic and there was little to be gained by either entity (take note that the museum has not discussed this on their website or in any publication either) talking about negotiations.  That would have been counterproductive to a good outcome.  If the negotiations had been successful all of this would be a moot point.

 

I have tried to tell everyone that this was an intricate set of circumstances that board decisions from 20 years ago and some more current put our current board in a no-win situation.  All any board can do is try their best to do what is right for their members. 

 

John, you have lost me as I think Mr. Springer's letter is self-explanatory but we are also in receipt of far more information from him and he is trying to find files that he was told to destroy but never did. All of that information is being saved along with some financial information that is still here in this office. 

 

Most importantly everyone, as we get close to the holidays, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukah, and any other holiday you observe.  I hope everyone has a Happy but more importantly healthy New Year and that peace and goodwill will somehow overrule the day!!!

 

If the board decided to eliminate the "free admission" to the museum and use the extra few bucks towards a building program, I'm all in favor of it...Andy, the museum has stated that 2017 they would honor free admittance.  I would make sure you bring your membership card.

[Restorer32]

Personally I hope there is always some insulation between the Museum and the Club. I can't envision club finances dragging the museum into bankruptcy but I can envision the museum dragging down the club. Hopefully both can exist in synergy with separate management and separate budgets.

[61-63]

I for one do not care a hoot if the museum and AACA part ways, although I too always thought the museum was part of AACA.  I live in SE Texas, have been to fall Hershey and the museum once, and really enjoyed both, but may never get back up there again.  I think Steve and AACA do a great job, and really enjoy the magazine and the few AACA shows I have been to in various locales, and the magazine and those shows to me are what AACA is about.   I've also been to many car museums in locations all over the country and enjoyed them all, but will probably not revisit any of them even if I go right by them.

 

Just my opinion.

[Bhigdog]

I've spoken to two officials of the AACA at length. There is no reason to go into our conversations chapter and verse but here is my take away.                

 

The AACA feels it has done it's best but admits things could have been handled better.

The Club and Museum rupture is a done deal.

We will be getting the Clubs position on this only from the clubs view point.

 

Here is my opinion on the subject:

On one hand the monies and efforts provided to the Museum is just plain gone. On the other hand it has produced a world class car museum.

Egos and personalities have played a noticeable role in the situation and continue to do so. (no surprise there)

Unless we were a fly on the wall we will never know the real and full story uncolored by bias and opinion. (except for our own)

We will be getting the Clubs version via magazine article. Believe it in whole or part as you wish.

In the whole scheme of things this is just another garden variety tempest in a tea pot.

It's time to  just say "the Hell with it" and move on.

My hope is that this whole debacle will serve as a learning lesson to the AACA that timely disclosure of AACA policy or changes  can only be the best policy.

Another member suggested the publication of a synopsis of future board meetings should be initiated, Sounds good to me................Bob Beck

 

 

 

Edited December 23, 2016 by Bhigdog (see edit history)

[Guest jwsamuel]

A question: Will the museum have to change its name or will it continue to use AACA in its name?

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, PA

[trimacar]

Any proposal, comment, difference of opinion, ego trip, power trip, ownership debate, monetary consideration, of either Board, that does not further the preservation of history and the cars that we all enjoy, nor the fellowship of the hobby that brings us together, is wasted effort.

 

And, sad. To a very large degree, but possibly not the nth....

 

The common goal seems to have been lost in all the dollars and sense....oh, cents... 

 

Seriously, it doesn't affect me, personally, one way or the other.  But, if the Museum fails, that reflects on the Club.  You can tell me all you want that they're "separate", but when the headline states "The AACA Museum is Closing",  you think it won't affect membership?

 

I love this hobby.  It's brought me experiences and friends that I never would have had without it.....and I really appreciate that.  But this is just so stupid....the son (Museum) telling the father (club) that this doesn't work, see ya later...that sucks...

[Doug Novak]

1 hour ago, Bhigdog said:

I've spoken to two officials of the AACA at length. There is no reason to go into our conversations chapter and verse but here is my take away.                

 

The AACA feels it has done it's best but admits things could have been handled better.

The Club and Museum rupture is a done deal.

We will be getting the Clubs position on this only from the clubs view point.

 

Here is my opinion on the subject:

On one hand the monies and efforts provided to the Museum is just plain gone. On the other hand it has produced a world class car museum.

Egos and personalities have played a noticeable role in the situation and continue to do so. (no surprise there)

Unless we were a fly on the wall we will never know the real and full story uncolored by bias and opinion. (except for our own)

We will be getting the Clubs version via magazine article. Believe it in whole or part as you wish.

In the whole scheme of things this is just another garden variety tempest in a tea pot.

It's time to  just say "the Hell with it" and move on.

My hope is that this whole debacle will serve as a learning lesson to the AACA that timely disclosure of AACA policy or changes  can only be the best policy.

Another member suggested the publication of a synopsis of the board meetings should be initiated, Sounds good to me................Bob Beck

 

 

 

I have to say I agree with Bob, it's time to move on.  I do find the whole string of posts, and string of events, to be interesting, but don't see it resolving things. Not much more to be said about it. Time to stop the Blame Game, what ever happens next won't really change the good things we all get out of being Members of the Club. The Museum isn't going to suffer much from it either, which is OK as far as I'm concerned, and the Club will get a New HQ, Library and Research Center bigger and better, no doubt about it. Everything else is water under the bridge. It's a new day.

Edited December 22, 2016 by Doug Novak (see edit history)

[MCHinson]

In earlier years when the museum was started, it probably did not seem that unusual for a lot of the details to simply be "understood" and essentially a gentleman's agreement among friends in the hobby. With hindsight we can see that some ironclad contracts, would have been a better idea.

 

As has been said, It is "water under the bridge". Unfortunate that it turned out this way and clearly it will be a while before the "family" will totally recover from the "family quarrel" but I have faith that the club will survive and thrive. Hopefully the museum will as well. Maybe down the road, the relationship will be mended but for now, folks are going to see a bit of a frosty relationship "around the table". I have been to a few family holiday dinners like that before and the family survived.

 

Maybe the timing is appropriate for us to think about the prospect of peace on earth and goodwill to all men.

[John_S_in_Penna]

1 hour ago, jwsamuel said:

A question: Will the museum have to change its name or will it continue to use AACA in its name?

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, PA

 

I don't know whether anyone knows that for sure, yet.

Back in Posting #169 (and a few following it), "Dynaflash8"

was pondering that point too.  He's a former national

President of the AACA.

 

It might boil down to what is trademarked, and how;

and how conciliatory the two parties are regarding the name.

Maybe someone can tell more.

[Doug Novak]

25 minutes ago, John_S_in_Penna said:

 

I don't know whether anyone knows that for sure, yet.

Back in Posting #169 (and a few following it), "Dynaflash8"

was pondering that point too.  He's a former national

President of the AACA.

 

It might boil down to what is trademarked, and how;

and how conciliatory the two parties are regarding the name.

Maybe someone can tell more.

 

Just opening another can of worms we don't need right now, nor would it accomplish anything other then broadening the distance between the Club and Museum. We all get that we a two separate entities regardless, but the General Public would not understand why we would demand a name change. The Museum exists because of the Club and should be thought of as our Museum regardless of who's running it. Leave our name on it.

Edited December 23, 2016 by Doug Novak (see edit history)

[Peter J.Heizmann]

12 minutes ago, Doug Novak said:

 

Just opening another can of worms we don't need right now, nor would it accomplish anything other then broadening the distance between the Club and Museum. We all get that we a two separate entities regardless, but the General Public would not understand why we would demand a name change. The Museum exists because of the Club and should be thought of as our Museum regardless of who's running it. Leave our name on it.

 

Excellent response, Doug.

 

Wish folks would just relax a bit, take a deep breath and see how things work out in the New Year.  To worry about name changing and such certainly serves no purpose.  Almost like leaving a wake then going through the deceased person's  possessions all in one day.  It is just not right at this time.

 

Personally I believe things will work out in the long haul.

 

Regards,

 

Peter J.

 

 

[Guest jwsamuel]

1 hour ago, Doug Novak said:

 

Just opening another can of worms we don't need right now, nor would it accomplish anything other then broadening the distance between the Club and Museum. We all get that we a two separate entities regardless, but the General Public would not understand why we would demand a name change. The Museum exists because of the Club and should be thought of as our Museum regardless of who's running it. Leave our name on it.

 

Sorry, but I disagree. As I mentioned in my first post, one of the reasons I joined AACA was because I thought that the club and museum were part of the same organization and the inclusion of AACA in the museum name was one of the reasons I thought that. Keeping the AACA name on the museum would continue to confuse people who are not familiar with the situation.

 

Secondly, if the AACA owns the trademark to AACA, allowing someone else to use the trademark could lead to the loss of the trademark.

 

But the trademark is a secondary concern to me. My real concern is that as a new member, I feel as if I was misled into thinking that the two organizations were one and the same. Continuing a name that would only mislead additional people does not make me feel any better about wither the club or the museum. In fact, it increases my negative feeling about both organizations.

 

So you may think that it is okay to leave the name on but to me it is an attempt to mislead people and a reason not to trust either group.

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, PA

[Frantz]

Someone mentioned earlier about the local radio host (RJ Harris right?) calling it the Antique Car Museum at Hershey. That's a fine name. Frankly I don't think the general public cares what it's called or even why, so it does go back to the purpose of the club (and museum) to cater to the preservation and activity with old cars. Legal considerations as a secondary, what's best? IMO I agree that forcing a name change would make a future reconciliation less likely and I'm not sure what it accomplishes. Perhaps the AACA should attempt a Smithsonian like partnership with many museums that meet it's standards. I think there are lots of positive future subthreads to come from this one long generally negative one, but I'm also quite glad it's been responsibly contained to this one point of conversation.

[Guest jwsamuel]

1 hour ago, Peter J.Heizmann said:

To worry about name changing and such certainly serves no purpose.

 

 

Sorry, but I believe it does serve a purpose. I am just finishing up my first year of membership in AACA and saw nothing to indicate that the museum was not part of the AACA. It was one of the reasons I joined.

 

I feel as if the two organizations deliberately misled people into thinking they were the same. As a result of finding out that I was misled, my level of trust in both organizations has diminished. If the two separate themselves even more, as has been indicated, yet they continue to share the name, I perceive that as a continued effort to mislead people and my level of trust in both organizations would go to zero.

 

I would have liked to have known about the situation before I renewed my membership two or three weeks ago. Had I known then, I would probably have still renewed but now, I am sorry I did renew my membership as I do not trust either group. My inclination now is to just go through 2017 and then let the membership lapse unless the organization does something to regain my trust.

 

 I want to know if they are going to continue to mislead people or if they will tell the truth. That is why raising the issue does serve a purpose. 

 

As I said earlier, I know that some of you will say that you are longtime members and I am a newcomer and should not raise these issues. If that's the case, I will happily go away and leave AACA. But to stay, I need a reason to trust the people running the club.

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, Pa.

[Guest jwsamuel]

7 minutes ago, Frantz said:

 IMO I agree that forcing a name change would make a future reconciliation less likely and I'm not sure what it accomplishes. 

 

It comes down to trust. Right now, I do not trust either organization and the more I read people defending the decision to mislead new members such as myself, the more sorry I am that I renewed my membership for 2017. 

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, Pa.

 

Edited December 23, 2016 by jwsamuel (see edit history)

[Bhigdog]

5 minutes ago, jwsamuel said:

As I said earlier, I know that some of you will say that you are longtime members and I am a newcomer and should not raise these issues. If that's the case, I will happily go away and leave AACA. But to stay, I need a reason to trust the people running the club.

 

 

I'm not sure how familiar you are with "clubs" of any sort JW but I can tell you from experience that in most any club, that involves humans, there is going to be clashes of egos, infighting, and shading of facts. The best way to approach membership in the AACA is to understand it has it's share of warts but they are not of the fatal sort. Membership does afford benefits and you have to ask if the benefits count more than your need for a more perfect organization.

I too have had, and have, disagreements with AACA management over the years but I also realize that it's a net benefit to be a member. Besides, by being a member of the club it gives you the right to bitch and moan about it and just maybe affect some change. ................Bob

[MCHinson]

15 minutes ago, jwsamuel said:

 

It comes down to trust. Right now, I do not trust either organization and the more I read people defending the decision to mislead new members such as myself, the more sorry I am that I renewed my membership for 2017. 

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, Pa.

 

Jim,

 

As a longtime AACA member, I will attempt to explain why I think most others feel differently. The primary reason that many people are upset about the fact that the merger attempt failed is that most members realize that the club (AACA) formally and informally raised most if not all of the money that got the museum started. It was set up as a separate organization but the two organizations have always worked together as partners. The museum has enjoyed many years of cooperative funraising with the club. The museum IS the AACA Museum. Many members never even paid attention to the fact that the club and museum were two separate organizations. The interests of the club and the interests of the museum have in the past appeared to be in total agreement. It is a shock to many that this appears to no longer be the case. Most AACA Members don't live close enough to enjoy the museum on a regular basis. Many of us visit once a year when we go to Hershey for the Fall Meet. Those members who live closer to the museum may have an opportunity to visit the museum more often. The average AACA member's experience of the club is receiving a magazine, many join a local region, and a smaller group of them participate in AACA Meets and/or Tours. The museum is not the primary reason that most members join the club.

 

I think that there is a real opportunity for the two organizations to work through the current situation and probably once again find a way to work together, although perhaps not quite as closely as before. In any case, after this, most AACA members will at least now notice that the museum and club are two separate organizations. They were parent and child. Maybe in the future they will become siblings. Perhaps a marriage (merger) may come up again in the future but for now the relationship is seriously strained. I don't think that any effort to force the museum to change its name would be counterproductive to the hope that the two organizations can move from this point back to the point that they are working cooperatively in the interest of the antique car hobby.  

[Guest jwsamuel]

Bob,

 

I am familiar with clubs and non-profit organizations and understand the role that egos can play in creating conflicts, particularly when people serve as volunteers.

 

That said, my primary issue with what is going on is one of trust.

 

When I joined AACA last year, and as recently as last month when I renewed, the club and club were portrayed as one and the same. They both shared the AACA name, reinforcing the belief that they were the same organization. Free admission to the museum was listed as a benefit of membership, again reinforcing the perception that they were the same organization.

 

Now, two weeks after my renewal check cleared the bank, I get a letter that informed me that the museum and club were not the same organization and that they would, in fact, be separating even more.

 

I do find it a bit hard to believe that no one on the AACA board knew what was likely to happen and that the board could not have informed us prior to membership renewals. It would not surprise me if the board did not intentionally delay the announcement so that it would not have a negative effect on renewals. 

 

So it is all trust. If I knew a month ago what I know now, I would not have renewed. As it is, I have renewed but I feel as if I was duped.

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, Pa.

 

[Guest jwsamuel]

9 minutes ago, MCHinson said:

Most AACA Members don't live close enough to enjoy the museum on a regular basis.

 

Thanks for the explanation. 

 

I can be at the museum within about two hours and that's why it was a prime reason for me to join AACA. To me, the cost of membership is the equivalent of three paid visits to the museum so that is why it was such a big factor in my decision to join AACA.

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, Pa.

[MCHinson]

And at least for now, the Museum says it will still honor the free admission for AACA Members, so you still get the benefit of that as an AACA Member.

 

I think that shows that the Museum does acknowledge that the suppport of AACA members has been important to the museum's success and hopes to see that support continue. I am hopeful that the relationship between the two organizations still has the potential to return to something like it has been in the past again in the future. There is no reason to burn the bridge to that possible future.

[ChazA]

18 minutes ago, jwsamuel said:

 

Thanks for the explanation. 

 

I can be at the museum within about two hours and that's why it was a prime reason for me to join AACA. To me, the cost of membership is the equivalent of three paid visits to the museum so that is why it was such a big factor in my decision to join AACA.

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, Pa.

Hi Jim,  it's buried in this long thread, but from the museum site"....the Museum will continue to honor our policy of providing complimentary admission for AACA Club members, regardless of this decision. "

Chuck

[Guest]

As a non member perhaps I should have no opinion but I will give one. Moderators you don't need it  but you have my permission to delete this post if you wish. First off I think you should ALL take two weeks vacation from this thread. Relax, make some new year resolutions and come back next year.  You are all just going around in circles right now.

I only belonged to the AACA for two years.  I am too far away to use the museum and the magazine was not what I was expecting.  However I knew that there were three (club, library and museum) separate entities before I sent in my first money.  I asked and my question was answered.  If anyone who was/is a member didn't/dosen't know this it is their own fault, not the fault of any of the boards or their executives.  I have been on boards of several library's, museums and international service clubs.  ALL of the difficulties that we had on ANY of these boards were caused by assumptions made either by outside parties or the board themselves. 

I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

[john2dameron]

What concerns me most at this point is why the Museum Board kicked Tom Cox off the board.  I feel sure that Tom tried to do his best for the museum just as he has done his best for the club and I don't see how responsible museum board members could take that action against him.  Perhaps Tom can explain why he was kicked off the museum board.  I suspect it was only because he was on the club board.  That seems a very sorry excuse for such action.

 

[Guest jwsamuel]

Thanks for the responses to my messages. 

 

Jim Samuel

Langhorne, Pa.

[Restorer32]

7 hours ago, Tinindian said:

As a non member perhaps I should have no opinion but I will give one. Moderators you don't need it  but you have my permission to delete this post if you wish. First off I think you should ALL take two weeks vacation from this thread. Relax, make some new year resolutions and come back next year.  You are all just going around in circles right now.

I only belonged to the AACA for two years.  I am too far away to use the museum and the magazine was not what I was expecting.  However I knew that there were three (club, library and museum) separate entities before I sent in my first money.  I asked and my question was answered.  If anyone who was/is a member didn't/dosen't know this it is their own fault, not the fault of any of the boards or their executives.  I have been on boards of several library's, museums and international service clubs.  ALL of the difficulties that we had on ANY of these boards were caused by assumptions made either by outside parties or the board themselves. 

I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

 

Just curious. You say the magazine was not what you expected. What did you expect?