Should FMCA Allow Towable RVs-- Vote NOW

[rpelatt]

Smithy, Can you comment on what Dons2346 said one page back:

 Another example of the executive board using bad judgement is the giving of $250,000 to the owner of rVillage, a facebook wanna be. The so called details of the gift is that FMCA will supposedly receive 5% interest on the money OR the owner has the option to issue FMCA stock in the company which is supposed to happen in 2019. This info was found out when I requested a copy of the current annual audit. It had to be covered there to justify the $250,000. You might think this is great in that we will get something however our investments are regulated by our Policy & Procedures. Those tell the organization what investments can be invested in. One that we cannot invest in is private stock. rVillage is not listed on any stock exchange. During the last GB meeting I questioned the then treasurer about the 5% interest and had we received it yet. The treasurer informed the entire GB that the "money is gone". Not one member of the GB stood up and raised any issue with it.

Did this indeed happen and how did it happen? Is there that little oversight that someone can authorize an expenditure of this size that is in total violation of the charter and no one caught it?

Bob

[dons2346]

Chris, the info I stated about the positive years was stated to me by two past AVPs that were in office at the time. Guess you can't trust any info received from those that were in charge. Did this happen following the change in the way active members are counted?

The idea for towables was never presented to the GB, there was nothing ever said about any "study". All that was put to us by Charlie during one of his "workshops" before the GB meeting was that we need to change our articles so that FMCA can explore other areas of the rv industry.

Out of the blue the following motion was brought to the floor with the following discussion:

Ken Carpenter, F312233, with the Diesel RV Club chapter, moved to authorize the Executive Board to initiate and supervise the amendment of the purpose statement in the Articles of Incorporation so that it is as broad as possible to avoid an overly restrictive constraint on FMCA’s mission (which may evolve over time) and activities in serving the needs and expectations of its members. The motion was seconded and discussion followed.

The current Articles of Incorporation were briefly reviewed. A question was raised regarding whether the Governing Board or Executive Board would be deciding whether to allow towable vehicles. It was answered that it would eventually be a Governing Board decision. A question was raised regarding whether the bottom line intent of the motion was to allow towables into FMCA. It was answered that that is not the ultimate question, but this motion opens the door. A question was raised regarding how much the cost would be to change the Articles of Incorporation. It was answered that it would be less than $10,000. Several members spoke in favor of the motion.

The answer as to who will make the ultimate decision on allowing towables is wrong, the final decision is in the hands of the total membership thus the ballot in the magazine.
 

The money to be given to rVillage started out at the amount of $500,000! and the owner said he could gain us 7,000 new members. That amount was later reduced to $250,000 thanks to a few AVPs. At the time of this happening (May,2016) rVillage had approximately 44,900 members. (Todays rVillage says they have 75,000). Not quite the 150% as you state. Unless something has happened, there is no way to tabulate the number of new members FMCA has received as a direct result of rVillage

[isaaac1]

Just for the record I joined FMCA in December of 2016, and had never heard of rVilage at the time

[aztec7fan]

30 minutes ago, dons2346 said:

Unless something has happened, there is no way to tabulate the number of new members FMCA has received as a direct result of rVillage

Actually, if the new member fills out the application form online, there is a box that asks "how did you hear about FMCA?".  One of the options us "RVIllage".  Why ask this question if we can't track the responses?

[smithy]

3 hours ago, rpelatt said:

Smithy, Can you comment on what Dons2346 said one page back:

 Another example of the executive board using bad judgement is the giving of $250,000 to the owner of rVillage, a facebook wanna be. The so called details of the gift is that FMCA will supposedly receive 5% interest on the money OR the owner has the option to issue FMCA stock in the company which is supposed to happen in 2019. This info was found out when I requested a copy of the current annual audit. It had to be covered there to justify the $250,000. You might think this is great in that we will get something however our investments are regulated by our Policy & Procedures. Those tell the organization what investments can be invested in. One that we cannot invest in is private stock. rVillage is not listed on any stock exchange. During the last GB meeting I questioned the then treasurer about the 5% interest and had we received it yet. The treasurer informed the entire GB that the "money is gone". Not one member of the GB stood up and raised any issue with it.

Did this indeed happen and how did it happen? Is there that little oversight that someone can authorize an expenditure of this size that is in total violation of the charter and no one caught it?

Bob

The agreement was done before I became Executive Director, so I was not privy to all the details. I can say the intent was never to invest in RVillage. It was booked as a marketing expense, and the auditors insisted it be classified as an investment. 

[smithy]

36 minutes ago, aztec7fan said:

Actually, if the new member fills out the application form online, there is a box that asks "how did you hear about FMCA?".  One of the options us "RVIllage".  Why ask this question if we can't track the responses?

It can absolutely be tracked by those who fill RVillage in that box. My guess is not everyone fills that in, so it would paint an incorrect figure. Keep in mind that was a one time expense, so we will never pay for advertising on RVillage again. At 60 per new member, we would need to obtain roughly 4,200 members to break even. That is not counting convention and RV Basics registrations that we receive as well. Very confident we will get our money back and more over the life of the agreement.

[smithy]

1 hour ago, dons2346 said:

Chris, the info I stated about the positive years was stated to me by two past AVPs that were in office at the time. Guess you can't trust any info received from those that were in charge. Did this happen following the change in the way active members are counted?

The idea for towables was never presented to the GB, there was nothing ever said about any "study". All that was put to us by Charlie during one of his "workshops" before the GB meeting was that we need to change our articles so that FMCA can explore other areas of the rv industry.

Out of the blue the following motion was brought to the floor with the following discussion:

Ken Carpenter, F312233, with the Diesel RV Club chapter, moved to authorize the Executive Board to initiate and supervise the amendment of the purpose statement in the Articles of Incorporation so that it is as broad as possible to avoid an overly restrictive constraint on FMCA’s mission (which may evolve over time) and activities in serving the needs and expectations of its members. The motion was seconded and discussion followed.

The current Articles of Incorporation were briefly reviewed. A question was raised regarding whether the Governing Board or Executive Board would be deciding whether to allow towable vehicles. It was answered that it would eventually be a Governing Board decision. A question was raised regarding whether the bottom line intent of the motion was to allow towables into FMCA. It was answered that that is not the ultimate question, but this motion opens the door. A question was raised regarding how much the cost would be to change the Articles of Incorporation. It was answered that it would be less than $10,000. Several members spoke in favor of the motion.

The answer as to who will make the ultimate decision on allowing towables is wrong, the final decision is in the hands of the total membership thus the ballot in the magazine.
 

The money to be given to rVillage started out at the amount of $500,000! and the owner said he could gain us 7,000 new members. That amount was later reduced to $250,000 thanks to a few AVPs. At the time of this happening (May,2016) rVillage had approximately 44,900 members. (Todays rVillage says they have 75,000). Not quite the 150% as you state. Unless something has happened, there is no way to tabulate the number of new members FMCA has received as a direct result of rVillage

The only change to the active member count occurred this year in January. We eliminated grace members, which dropped around 1,000 members from the active count.

When RVillage was introduced to me, their active count was around 31,000. It took quite a while to put ink to paper, so by the time the agreement was eventually signed, the active count could have been 44,900. Don't recall what it was when the deal was signed.

Let me find the historical member figures, and I can tell you loss/gain by year since 2004. Pretty staggering. Which also makes it much more amazing that we have had two positive years in a row. Still a lot of ground to make up to get back to 130,000 at the peak of membership.

 

[wolfe10]

I would like to see this thread continue.

BUT, I am concerned about the adversarial tone it is developing. This not what FMCA or the FMCA Forum is about.

Please, lets try to stick with the subject of this thread AND follow rules of common courtesy.

Thanks.

Moderator

 

[jeff753]

On September 30, 2017 at 10:15 PM, dons2346 said:

Well let me throw this out there. Policy & Procedure 1001 details the procedure for balloting on changes to the constitution of which you are balloting on for change. Please read under "Submission to the Membership" item number two ( 2) where it says that the ballot  shall be mailed to the CPA in an envelope on which the member has signed his or her name and FMCA number indicating that the envelope contains a ballot from a voting member.

I will bet you a dollar to a donut that there has not been one ballot submitted that that meets those requirements.

POLICY
To adopt any change in the Constitution, an affirmative vote of at least a majority of the votes
returned by the membership is required. Amendments adopted take effective immediately, and
are to be published in the FMCA publication.
PROCEDURE
Submitting Proposals
1. A proposal to amend the Constitution may be initiated by the Governing Board, the
Constitution and Bylaws Committee, the Executive Board, or by a petition signed by twenty
memberships.
2. Proposed amendments with rationale shall be clearly set forth in writing.
3. Proposals shall be sent to the Secretary and a duplicate to the President.
Preliminary Consideration
The text of any proposed amendment to the Constitution shall be referred to the Constitution and
Bylaws Committee for its review. The Committee shall present proposed Constitution
amendments to the Executive Board for its review, discussion and comment. The proposal,
along with any recommendations, shall then be forwarded to the Governing Board.
Submission to the Membership
1. If approved by the Governing Board, the text of a proposed amendment shall be submitted to
the membership of FMCA by publication of its text in the FMCA publication, along with an
appropriate ballot.
2. Ballots shall be mailed to FMCA’s certified public accountant in an envelope on which the
voting member has signed his or her name and FMCA membership number indicating that the
envelope contains a ballot from a voting member.
Action on Referenda
Ninety days from the magazine’s mailing date, the ballots returned shall be validated, counted,
and the results announced.
Special Actions
The Constitution and Bylaws Committee may make corrections to the Constitution for the sole
purpose of eliminating or correcting clerical or typographical errors without prior notice.
 

If that is true would someone please vote no and sign their envelope and annotate their F number.   One to nothing is better than nothing to one. 

 

[wolfe10]

Guys,

PLEASE, if you want to open a discussion on other issues, start a new thread.

This one is already 12 pages long.

And, yes, I just deleted an indepth post in RVillage (and only RVillage-- no mention of allowing/not allowing towables).

[dons2346]

Close the thread. It is obvious that you delete whatever you don't want to hear therefore making you a dictator and we don't need it.

Oh, by the way, I sent you a question as to why one of my posts was deleted. You haven't the courtesy of a reply. Could you explain that?

[smithy]

7 hours ago, dons2346 said:

Close the thread. It is obvious that you delete whatever you don't want to hear therefore making you a dictator and we don't need it.

Oh, by the way, I sent you a question as to why one of my posts was deleted. You haven't the courtesy of a reply. Could you explain that?

What Brett deletes and closes isn't a matter of opinion. There are forum rules that he enforces, which everyone agreed to when they signed up.

[wolfe10]

7 hours ago, dons2346 said:

Close the thread. It is obvious that you delete whatever you don't want to hear therefore making you a dictator and we don't need it.

Oh, by the way, I sent you a question as to why one of my posts was deleted. You haven't the courtesy of a reply. Could you explain that?

dons2346,

I would prefer NOT to close the thread.  But, will not tolerate personal attacks and particularly on LONG threads (this one already 12 pages) will try to keep focused on the original topic. 

If that makes me a "dictator", so be it.

And, yes sometimes I do question the many hours a day I dedicate to trying to make the FMCA Forum a great resource for both information and discussions.

[rfsod48]

Brett, I for one highly value your service and dedication to the forum.

I have felt for some time that this thread is becoming nonproductive and somewhat argumentative. Perhaps it might be better to terminate. 

[rpelatt]

Brett, I hope you do not close this out. I feel that although the discussion has appeared to wander it is for a good reason. We are being asked to vote on a major change to FMCA and the reasons given appear to be financial related.

So if the discussion evolves to members asking about significant expenses (as is the $250,000 investment in RVillage) that are questionable to say the least, then I think it is very important to address these publicly.

It seems we are being asked to vote on the issue at hand and expected to not question why and I think that is wrong. I for one, joined assuming FMCA was/is a well run association that caters specifically to self propelled RV's.

From reading this thread I have learned that the need to expand the association to include towable RV's is due to expenses out growing income. Is it not fair, but logical as well, to question just where and why the shortfall is occurring?

If I understand Smithy's  response to my post above the $250,000 was labeled an investment because the auditors could not ethically expense it to basically a "startup" venture. So it was then turned into an "investment" that may or may not pay 5% interest or gain shares of ownership (which then violated the charter). If this thread were started as an idea gathering post perhaps better ideas would have been put forth allowing the FMCA to remain profitable as well as remain true to the original charter.

[wolfe10]

23 minutes ago, rpelatt said:

Brett, I hope you do not close this out. I feel that although the discussion has appeared to wander it is for a good reason. We are being asked to vote on a major change to FMCA and the reasons given appear to be financial related.

So if the discussion evolves to members asking about significant expenses (as is the $250,000 investment in RVillage) that are questionable to say the least, then I think it is very important to address these publicly.

 

I agree, I really want to keep this discussion open.

And, discussion of other financial issues, both past and future are of equal merit.

My concern is that with 12 pages of posts on this one issue, that "changing topics"  will likely leave out many who DO have input on a new "financially related" topic.

That is why I would really suggest (again) that RVillage or other topics have their own thread. 

Nothing to do with censorship-- everything to do with making sure that anyone with a thought on a very different subject gets the opportunity to express it WITHOUT having to dig into miles of posts to find the "hidden start " for a new topic.

Does that make sense???

 

[jleamont]

9 minutes ago, wolfe10 said:

Does that make sense???

 

YUP! For the record you have a tough job that you do very well. 

Thank you for that!

[rolanddubree]

In the October 2017, Motor Home magazine on Page 82 is a ballot for members.  In the written material there is a statement that says; 

 

 "The term recreational vehicle, as used herein, is defined as a self-contained wheeled vehicle that includes  permanently installed cooking, sleeping, and sanitary facilities." 

 

Someone has defined the recreational vehicle but I can not find this paragraph included in any place in the Articles of Incorporation or the Constitution they want me to vote on. Seems the recreational vehicle definition should be going into the Articles of Incorporation or the Constitution so it is defined in writing.

 

WHY IS THIS NOT INCLUDED?  SEEMS WE ARE BEING ASKED TO VOTE ON SOMETHING INCOMPLETE? 

 

 

[wildebill308]

Personally I think any more discussion is not relevant. The management is so confident it will pass they are already inviting towables to the different Rallys and functions.  See page 91, 93, of the October issue. 

Bill

[smithy]

1 hour ago, WILDEBILL308 said:

Personally I think any more discussion is not relevant. The management is so confident it will pass they are already inviting towables to the different Rallys and functions.  See page 91, 93, of the October issue. 

Bill

Towables have been allowed to attend rallies for the four years I have been with FMCA.

To add to this, area rallies are not run by FMCA management. Each Area VP plans and executes their rallies. 

[aztec7fan]

"2. Ballots shall be mailed to FMCA’s certified public accountant in an envelope on which the
voting member has signed his or her name and FMCA membership number indicating that the
envelope contains a ballot from a voting member"

This is what is concerning me. Does this mean, any ballots that were sent in a plain envelope, without the FMCA # and an indication that it's a ballot from a voting member are just being thrown out?

Chris G.

f3508s

[hobart]

The comments about how the ballot is to be submitted are concerning. I went to the pages in the October magazine looking for reference to the procedure described and found nothing so indicated. While this may be in the current constitution most members are unaware and if this is required it should be somewhere in the article. while this may be an unintended error it could throw the ballot process into question no matter which way the results go.

[hayesfamily]

11 hours ago, WILDEBILL308 said:

Personally I think any more discussion is not relevant. The management is so confident it will pass they are already inviting towables to the different Rallys and functions.  See page 91, 93, of the October issue. 

Bill

Bill,

Being the new guy it's obvious that I can't comment on past rallies and past magazines and past stuff. But you said something very relevant which makes me believe that you're absolutely correct.

"Management is SO CONFIDENT" 

Being a corporate Refugee, one of the things that I have experienced in the world of corporate America or anything with the corporate structure, whatever corporate thinks is best, wants to do, or feels is necessary to do ... THEY WILL DO. They will lie to stockholders (ENRON) they will take risks against wise counsels advice and the advice of the general employee population to a point where it becomes dangerous and no way to return back to being profitable (MBNA) and they will do anything to protect upper level management pockets for years to come.

That being said I think that it is overly obvious that the majority of people in the forums are really not happy about towables, not necessarily the towable itself but the idea of towables being part of a motorhome Club. What really scares me is the vast amounts of people that are not in the forums that are members of various chapters. Those chapter officers who are willing to do whatever management says for whatever political gain there maybe can sway votes that we don't see. What scares me even more is the information that they have is probably skewed because they are not on the form hearing the pros and cons. So your corporate structure is going to lie about money and say we're going broke and uninformed people are going to do whatever they can to save the oval, we've already witnessed some risk-taking from FMCA that all of a sudden nobody wants to talk about to the tune of several hundreds of thousands of ddollar; the vast majority is okay because nobody's been prosecuted, and no matter how you look at it many people who have said it are absolutely correct, the fix is in, it was already decided several years ago. So nobody can say that it wasn't done with formality they mail out a ballot which let's be frank and honest, absolutely nobody trust but the people who want towables.

I think more people would have had faith in the board and in the system if an independent company actually tallied the voting and certified it correct. It would have been done electronic and we would have been able to see real-time results but they opted not to do that and I'm gas it was because of the "cost" ... which I'm not dumb by any means, if you can print an addition like a card in an envelope then it was affordable to do with an outside company.

At this point there are several things that can be done because hashing it out over and over is worse than beating a dead horse ... 

1. We can blame the Russians ... And we see where that is going. 

2. We can create chapters with the premise that it is motorhome only and hope we don't get sued for discrimination

3. We walk away from the benefits of FMCA and do like the rest of the population that I've seen in Parks, proudly display the oval but have no real affiliation anymore other than conversation on the forms with our friends.

4. If by chance by some miracle towable RVs get voted down we can all go back to enjoying FMCA for what it was until the next time they come up with a scheme for everybody to get cheesed off. 

[wildebill308]

Well stated!!!

Bill

[annmeris]

We had a fifth wheel (different ones of course) for 17 years.

We got our first Motor-Home this year. The first thing I did was to join FMCA. All those 17 years, I looked at FMCA as an organization I wanted be part of. If towable owners are allowed to join now, it would defeat my reason for joining.

I realize people want to travel with their families, but the whole family doesn’t have to attend rallies. There are many organization that don’t cater to Motorhomes exclusively.

I understand the management feels we’ll have more clout with greater numbers, I didn’t think that’s what this organization is all about.

In my opinion, just like there are Motorcoach only resorts, there is and should be a Motorcoach only organization.