Should FMCA Allow Towable RVs-- Vote NOW

[BillAdams]

Yep, I could be a member again in 2 minutes if this whole thing about 20 people was true. 

The real question is who is classified as a voting member when it comes to rule of law and not a poll of the membership to be used by those who can vote to cast their ballots.

[elkhartjim]

3 hours ago, elkhartjim said:

I would like to pass along a comment from some new motorhome and new members of FMCA.

"If we had read the forum on FMCA about letting towables become members we would have never joined."

I can't help but wonder if FMCA is not getting some new members because they are reading this forum.

 

 

2 hours ago, camarti1 said:

It appears to me, in a lot of cases, the best way to get some news is to read the forum. What I read in the statement above, these particular folks don't want towables admitted to the FMCA. I asked the question about FMCA on the Big Rig RV site on Facebook. Of all of the people on this site at any given time, I received two responses. One likes the magazine, and the other likes the FMCA assist.  Two answers in 30 minutes. That is not, in any way, a positive turn out.

The reason they joined was for the tire program, however, they found a dealer that beat the FMCA program price.

They voted yes to go along with management.  Their words not mine.

They will not renew their membership as they see no value. When I asked them about the assist program, they replied they never go more than a few hundred miles from home.

 

[camarti1]

39 minutes ago, elkhartjim said:

 

The reason they joined was for the tire program, however, they found a dealer that beat the FMCA program price.

They voted yes to go along with management.  Their words not mine.

They will not renew their membership as they see no value. When I asked them about the assist program, they replied they never go more than a few hundred miles from home.

 

too bad, these are the members we need to retain. Not only is there a need for bringing new members, but retaining the ones we got, especially if this towable thing goes through. 3

[camarti1]

1 hour ago, BillAdams said:

Yep, I could be a member again in 2 minutes if this whole thing about 20 people was true. 

The real question is who is classified as a voting member when it comes to rule of law and not a poll of the membership to be used by those who can vote to cast their ballots.

Bill, my understanding of a member in good standing does not come from the FMCA, but rather a larger corporation that was also non-profit. This would be dues are paid, there are not any grievances or pending litigation against you, and finally, you are active within the community, which would mean the FMCA community. The rule of law would support the definition as I gave it, as I worked with our corporate attorney at the time to write this rule. Active could mean staying on the boards and offering assistance when asked, up to going out and helping Habitat for Humanity slam in a few nails. Me, I went to homes of the elderly and help clean up the outside for them for a few hours in the morning about once a month. What a difference it makes in someone's life to have such a small kindness done. It really wasn't much to pull a few weeds and rake some rocks. 

I will let you know if I am going to throw out another motion for the 20 people, and when. I am still thinking on it, and need my head to brain to calm down so I can get some new ideas. Now I remember why I don't drink coffee in the morning anymore. Caffeine is not always a friend.

 

[BillAdams]

Keep in mind that there is FMC (the money folks and the corporation running this "club") and there if FMCA the non-profit that generates all the profits for FMC. 

OK, I am not sure how that all works but if no one was concerned about making money we would not be here.

[wolfe10]

Bill,

Having served on two Long Range and Development Committees, let me slightly restate that perceived goal: "To be fiscally responsible, we need to figure out how to get enough money "in" to cover what we perceive as "needed benefits" to attract new members and retain existing ones".

[camarti1]

Well Ollie, I did it again. I had written a great piece about what we could do next, and jumped back a page, and the entire written work is gone. Guess it means I need to rewrite my thoughts in a more salient manner. 

"Part of my problem with the whole thing is the one sided promotion of the deal" A quote from a member at the Six State Rally talking about how the speaker was hawking the vote but now allowing any discussion or rebuttal. This would indicate a breach of the Preamble:

Preamble

 The Family Motor Coach Association is the premiere organization that promotes motorhoming family, fun, and fellowship for motor coach owners. The Family Motor Coach Association shall strive to achieve its purpose by engaging in programs and activities that reflect the following core values: member focus; family, fun, and fellowship; integrity; the sharing of common interests; volunteerism; and motorhome safety and education.

This type of grandstanding  is contrary to: 

Governing Board

Responsibilities 1. Individual members of the Governing Board shall assume the responsibilities that their office imposes.

2. The following statements describe the principal obligations of each member of the Governing Board: A. Always think in terms of “FMCA first,” rather than “mine own self.” B. Remember to represent, at all times, the best interests of the entire FMCA membership. C. Understand that the basic function of the Governing Board is actually that of “oversight” and not “administrative,” and each should accept the responsibility of learning to intelligently discriminate between these two functions. D. Recognize that authority rests only in the Governing Board and is exercised within official meetings and embodied in the acts adopted therein. Individual members never have any legal right to obligate the Governing Board or FMCA except by voting in assembled meetings or by mail balloting, and/or endowing the National Officers with delegated authority. E. Take care to ensure that all actions of the Governing Board are in the best interests of the entire FMCA membership. F. Insist that transaction of Governing Board business be conducted in an open, ethical, and “above board” manner through adequate consideration of all questions.

I feel the Governing board should operate in an open, ethical way. For someone to prosthelytize their own feelings and beliefs and not allow additional discussion is against the written direction of the Governing Board, and hence, the need to redirect the issue of the vote. There was not open, ethical, or above board mannerisms considered.

I need to word a request to have the executive board be called to a meeting on this, as the executive board is the one body that meets all year, and is not segregated into only meeting during a national convention. Through my reading I have seen how a proper request is stated and written. I will still need the 20 votes with the member numbers to initiate the process to have the executive board at least rule on the request. If the request is turned down, then the motion from the floor will then take precedent. 

In other words, I have some writing to do, which will be quite a task for me. Can anyone else write this up  in a manner to attract the attention of the e-board as to call a special meeting, or am I alone on this? I can probably do it, it just will not be as fabulous as my prior writings used to be. 

This is my schtick for now. Gonna go and see what's for dinner, then come back and look at formatting this request. Pasta tonight always makes me feel comfortable.

[camarti1]

The other part I wrote, as I just remembered, was the way to grow the revenue is to grow the base. The suggestions just on this forum alone could generate dollars quickly. Just think if we had a place for all of the ideas to go and be validated as a way to grow our base and retain current and previous members? We have a wealth of knowledge out there, just no one has asked for it. Give the members a chance to upscale the numbers and see where it goes.

[spuds]

23 hours ago, camarti1 said:

You stayed with FMCA didn't you? So you have the best revenge, you have your integrity in place and your honor is intact.

Actually, we have been members since 2004 and are paid up for several years in the future, so I can't say that I "stayed" with FMCA after that unpleasant interaction.  It will, however, be considered along with the result of this vote as to whether we ever send another dime to FMCA.

 

Michelle

[manholt]

The frustration is not over the process...It's over the why?   No real explanation has been offered as of yet....kind of like, "You will have to pass it, in order to find out what's in it"!

[camarti1]

38 minutes ago, manholt said:

The frustration is not over the process...It's over the why?   No real explanation has been offered as of yet....kind of like, "You will have to pass it, in order to find out what's in it"!

I kind of got the gist of that, which is why I am considering the tract of how did we get here and why. Did anybody look at other alternatives? How has the membership been growing or losing for the last five years? Has a retention plan been formulated to keep existing members? Has a membership dues increase been considered? Why or why not? How much is the shortfall on a year to year basis? Why this, why now, why is the membership as a whole not aware of how this decision was arrived at? To say it came out of a committee is not going to sell, as the Preamble fosters open communication with the intent of making motorhoming the primary reason for the club. I just need to get my ducks to align properly to make a presentation that sounds compelling, profound, and asking for an immediate meeting to curtail this vote before it happens. Easy peasy, right?

[rossboyer]

No, it is not easy because the Governing Board is the highest authority in FMCA. The Governing Board directed that the issue be placed before the membership; therefore, the vote is in process and will be done. 

[rayin]

3 hours ago, camarti1 said:

The other part I wrote, as I just remembered, was the way to grow the revenue is to grow the base. The suggestions just on this forum alone could generate dollars quickly. Just think if we had a place for all of the ideas to go and be validated as a way to grow our base and retain current and previous members? We have a wealth of knowledge out there, just no one has asked for it. Give the members a chance to upscale the numbers and see where it goes.

You have a gift for writing and composing. To prevent future loss of what you have partially written, consider writing your article in notepad or word, then cut N paste to this forum.

Smithy said this vote is not the only option, just the one presented.  I wonder about the others, since we have never been privy to them.

[camarti1]

Has anyone asked Smithy what else he was talking about?

 

[jrwitt]

On 10/28/2017 at 5:09 PM, camarti1 said:

I need an explanation please. Why can't we all just vote "yes" to table the vote, and refer it back to committee? I read the rules on how to amend the constitution, and it clearly states it only needs 20 votes to initiate a change. We now have a second, so it would now be an active motion to vote on. The question is do you want to table this motion and refer it back to committee? If if can't be done as per the rules listed, then I really need a comprehensive explanation why, as I really do have a desire to know. I am not an expert on Robert's Rules of Order, so I am winging it here. According to the Constitution, it only needs 20 votes to amend.

I don't see your point. It says that 20 members can propose an amendment to the constitution. It doesn't say that 20 people can  stop the current amendment proposal. Until that amendment becomes part of the constitution, there is nothing in the constitution to propose removing. And also, in the last line you state that "it only needs 20 votes to amend. That is not true at all. It only takes 20 memberships to PROPOSE an amendment. Then the proposal would have to go through the various committees down the line and be voted on again by the same members that voted the change in in the first place.  Until it is part of the constitution, you cannot propose and amendment to remove it. 

 

[camarti1]

Amendment to Amend

Proposed Changes to the Articles of Incorporation & Constitution of FMCA

 

Proposers Rationale:

The amendment to the Articles of Incorporation & Constitution of FMCA need clarity, allowing members to know the reasoning behind such changes  in order to effectively cast a vote. The Preamble of the Family Motor Coach Association states as follows:

Preamble

 The Family Motor Coach Association is the premiere organization that promotes motorhoming family, fun, and fellowship for motor coach owners. The Family Motor Coach Association shall strive to achieve its purpose by engaging in programs and activities that reflect the following core values: member focus; family, fun, and fellowship; integrity; the sharing of common interests; volunteerism; and motorhome safety and education.

Following:

Mission and Purpose: A. The Mission of FMCA is to bring together motor coach owners who share similar interests in congenial traveling, recreational, and social activities in order to preserve and perpetuate the traditional ideals and spirit of friendly and wholesome family fellowship as manifested by the founders of FMCA.

Following: Policy and Procedure Amendments

2. A proposal to amend these policies and procedures, either by making changes or creating new ones, may be initiated by the Governing Board, the Executive Board, any FMCA committee, the Executive Director, or a petition signed by twenty memberships.

Following: Whereas the proposed amendment, while striking and adding language and definitions, does not offer the general membership an understanding as to why this change needs to occur at this time.

Following: Whereas a significant number of the FMCA membership do not belong to a chapter, as most chapters do not meet the needs of many of the members at large. Therefore, a large segment of the FMCA population is without representation at the national level.  

Following: Whereas a segment of the general membership feels more options shall be explored to increase membership as well as retain current membership. Suggestions have been made to this forum which deserve a chance to be researched prior to adding a different demographic group to the Corporation. There are other options available to the FMCA to increase/retain membership with motor coach owners versus adding towables.

Summation

Therefore, it is with great urgency this proposal be reviewed and submitted expeditiously to cancel the current member vote of the “Proposed changes to the Articles of Incorporation & Constitution of FMCA”. The membership at large needs an understanding as to why this vote needs to happen at this time prior to reviewing other methodology of membership increase and/or retention. The membership at large desires to understand the outcome of such a vote, as the amendments alone do not advise current motor coach owners how this will affect their standing within the corporation. This member humbly submits this proposal for consideration and desires the consideration be accelerated, causing this to be complete, prior to the 30^th of November, 2017.

Respectfully submitted by the following members:

[camarti1]

This is a very, very rough draft, it is not ready for submission. As JRWITT stated, it will take 20 member numbers to affect an amendment. The governing board has the ultimate power to establish, amend, or delete. I am asking for the impossible, which is also highly improbable, but at least we can say we tried.

 

[manholt]

Unfortunately, the GB can only vote on such amendment at the Summer National Convention, we meet opening day.  You don't have to be on the GB or EB to come in and listen!  Your one of the owners of FMCA!

Next meeting is in Gillette, WY. 

[five]

It appears that this thread has gone for so long and covered so many different topics, the real reason for bringing in other types RVs has been long forgotten.  The ONLY reason for increasing membership is to pay for FMCA Assist....period.  There are not enough current members to pay for the number of times it is forecast that the FMCA Assist program will be used.  The answer is really very easy, we have three options:

 

1.  Stop using FMCA Assist...money problems solved, don't need the "other" members.

2.  Allow "other" members...FMCA Assist will be financially solvent.

3.  Offer an FMCA Assist type insurance program on an individual basis...with that person(s) paying the premium.

 

As one of my favorite talk show hosts says, "follow the money."

[BillAdams]

End FMCA Assist sounds like the most logical solution.  Unless, the plan is to continue to court the 71 year old average member as we (you) have today.

[rayin]

4 hours ago, FIVE said:

It appears that this thread has gone for so long and covered so many different topics, the real reason for bringing in other types RVs has been long forgotten.  The ONLY reason for increasing membership is to pay for FMCA Assist....period.  There are not enough current members to pay for the number of times it is forecast that the FMCA Assist program will be used.  The answer is really very easy, we have three options:

 

1.  Stop using FMCA Assist...money problems solved, don't need the "other" members.

2.  Allow "other" members...FMCA Assist will be financially solvent.

3.  Offer an FMCA Assist type insurance program on an individual basis...with that person(s) paying the premium.

 

As one of my favorite talk show hosts says, "follow the money."

You might add: 4. Raise dues to support the Assist program, FMCA Assist is the ONLY such program charging less than $100/yr.

[manholt]

FIVE.  Your right.  However #2, may not solve the situation.  50/50 chance that all we get is more 71 year olds!

I'll go along with #4....Linda Just renewed, 5 years, cheap.  She feels that another $10-$15 a year, would still be a great deal.  But, according to Chris, nobody will go along with that...guess Ross and he took a survey on that also!  Spend $100,000 + on a coach and camp out at Wall Mart...

[rossboyer]

Chris who? And why was my name included in your statement? 

[manholt]

Ross.  Because you were the chairman of the committee that did the study and came up with the average age off 71. 

Now, does that mean that you had a part and or recommendation that we open up for towables? 

Only you can answer that one.

[smithy]

2 hours ago, manholt said:

Ross.  Because you were the chairman of the committee that did the study and came up with the average age off 71. 

Now, does that mean that you had a part and or recommendation that we open up for towables? 

Only you can answer that one.

The study I referred to was done years ago. It was a readership survey of our members.  Not a survey Ross and I administered for the purposes of the towable vote.