From: | Hodge | e-mail: | myemail |
Subject: | Another View | Date: | Tue Jan 17 10:47:00 2012 |
All, The email below was sent to all Chapter Presidents over the weekend regarding another view of the issues between Scott Lange (Chief Blackhawk Chapter) and Richard Spagnoli (current AMCA National President). Hodge Greetings from Kentucky, In 2009 I founded, chartered, and was elected President of the Bluegrass Chapter. The purpose and mission of the chapter was and is in line with the national organization's purpose and philosophy. Under Rocky Halter's AMCA, we had the needed support to earn our charter. And under the current AMCA, we have enjoyed the support and benefits to host our first national road run, which by most measures was a success. So it somewhat comes as a surprise that another chapter sends me the message below, emploring me to support their coup. My members are small in number. I may have the youngest member base among all clubs. They are growing the club and having fun doing so by attending various meets and coordinating local runs. Most are not retired, and their full-time jobs support this hobby (or addiction) that is supposed to bring some joy and pleasure outside of the normal day-to-day. The club can't function without comittment and efforts from individuals like myself that hold everything together and keep the ball rolling. So it is with great concern that I continue seeing evidence of unrest between a single chapter and the BOD. My attention is focused on the needs of my chapter, and promoting the club's purpose and philosophy. We will not take sides. We do not support this coup. My wishes are that the individuals driving these proposals can act with civility and professionalism, and not divide the club as they will most certainly do if these messages continue to be presented to the members that are not in leadership roles. Respectfully, Brian Groff AMCA#5365 From: bteellash@gmail.com To: amcajudge@yahoo.com; indianrobn@aol.com; oleyfleamarket@comcast.net; bob.aton777@gmail.com; louiemcman@aol.com; taylorprimo@aol.com; rvset70073@aol.com; vlheaven@aol.com; dw67@optonline.net; toomanymotors@yahoo.com; brian_groff@msn.com; bbutchr@gwtc.net; asc3@bellsouth.net; jnixon@texas.net; yourfriendken@comcast.net; scott.english@us.army.mil; bob.kenney@raymondjames.com; safari100usa@yahoo.com; tomdeem49@gmail.com; kthomsonmk@yahoo.com; spraynet@softcom.net; turquoiselady@sbcglobal.net; dande@svtv.com; hodge@engineeredmaintenance.com; scooterman7@bellsouth.net; hvcdanhenke@yahoo.com; wecamps3@yahoo.com; info@motociclette-americane.com; johnrummel@bresnan.net; guidokaiser64@yahoo.com; hdgarden@telus.net; oregon.trail@amcaotc.org; m.skopec@att.net; glidepath1@cox.net; jeff_alleman@nrel.gov; oleyfleamarket@comcast.net; cullenbill@hotmail.com; solomon13@embarqmail.com; jje100co@gmail.com; tgraber@pacbell.net; ridgeruner50@aol.com; wolverineamca@yahoo.com; jwellemeyer@cox.net; gimpelbird@gmail.com; craig@missouriamca.com; danmargolien@yahoo.com; lauren95@htc.net; economy5@aol.com; wcstevens@lfsinc.com; wildwest@telus.net; dcrad@comcast.net; redrideridestherange@netzero.net Subject: Fw: Respect Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 17:36:00 -0600 From: Scott K. Lange [mailto:sklange@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 1:09 PM To: 'rspagnoli@aol.com' Subject: Respect Importance: High Dear Mr. Spagnolli, I read with interest the first President’s newsletter. Now I can see why so many people have to say what they do about you. You don’t seem to tolerate critical comments very well, even when those comments are intended to be constructive. I will concede that I can be a bit intense, but my message is usually spot on. Hopefully by now, you’ve learned that shooting the messenger rarely solves the problem. And there is a problem. All of this has been building up to a proposal. I had wanted to take you up on your offer to call and talk, but you have already established that you don’t care to have a dialogue. So instead, I will put it in writing. I will share this message only if you a) try to preempt me on the plan for change I am going to present, and/or b) if you break the deal I am going to propose. I am a man of my word and my integrity is well established. If you had the same credentials, I’d be discussing this with you via phone or in person. There are three other individuals who know about what I am going to propose, and they have all agreed to keep it confidential – forever. AMCA is a member driven organization. The bulk of club revenue comes from member dues and Chapter sponsored events. The rubber meets the road at the Chapter level. I believe in a strong board. An organization can’t function if the board does not have sufficient power to conduct its affairs on behalf of the organization. I believe the AMCA requires a strong board. That said, I also believe as a member driven organization, the board needs to be accountable to its members. That accountability is lacking in our club. I have heard from many members who are distressed that their voices can’t be heard. Many are frustrated that all decisions are made at the board level without input from the Chapters and members. The proposal I am about to make will resolve that conflict and allow members greater input into the affairs of the club. Whether you agree or not, I am establishing a working group of respected members of our club. The individuals I ask to serve on this group have impeccable integrity and credentials. Before they are asked to join the group, they will be fully vetted. This group will contain a mix of Chapter level leaders, as well as individuals who served in a National capacity. No one will be asked to serve on this working group unless they agree in advance to several conditions. Respect for every opinion is paramount. No bad mouthing of anyone, no personal vendettas, no past disappointments, no chapter rivalries - one purpose and one alone – redesign this club, with a positive attitude, so it works. I will ask this group to come up with new by laws that will establish the goal stated above to allow greater member involvement in club affairs. They will be asked to find a workable balance between the anarchy that would ensue if the members made all decisions and the current situation where all power resides in ten people at the top. While I do not intend to dictate a solution to this group, I do intend to support them behind the scenes by making suggestions on possible approaches to representative governance. I will also support them by drafting language that captures the essence of their decisions, including the wording of revised by-laws. Input to this working group can be made by anyone, with one condition. All suggestions and recommendations shall be presented to the group in writing. The group will be completely independent in its work and not subject to direction by the National BOD or its members. That said, I do have ideas that I believe will greatly reduce the scope of the task. Specifically, I envision a governance structure that makes chapter leadership accountable to chapter members, and makes National leadership accountable to an oversight body comprised of Chapter presidents. The Chapter, or its President, may determine that a new chapter level leadership position be created to sit on the oversight board. At the chapter level, one member, one vote. At the oversight level, one chapter, one vote. To alleviate administration associated with voting, I would suggest a proxy system. In those chapters where the members are comfortable with their leadership, they may elect to tender their proxies to the chapter board. If chapters are in good step with their members, members will feel comfortable entrusting their proxy to the leadership. Where less cohesion exists, and where the chapter board does not obtain a majority of proxies, member voting on certain matters should be the rule. The same proxy structure can be maintained for the oversight body. If chapters feel comfortable with the National leadership, they can tender their proxies to a designated member of the board, entrusting that member to vote on that chapter’s behalf. A well respected management team will obtain enough proxies to allow all decisions to be made at the board level. If the board can’t obtain sufficient proxies to make all decisions at the board level, certain types of decisions will require approval by the oversight body. Establishing this system does not require excessive administration. There are tools available today to allow members to visit a website to cast their votes on issues, and the integrity of the results can be established. While I do not believe it would be necessary, those concerned about the disparate numbers of members in each chapter, weighted voting could be considered. Each chapter could have votes at the oversight level that is proportionate to the total population of club members. This adds additional administration, but would respond to chapters who believe their chapter should have greater input to the process because of their relative size. This is a decision for the working group to make. The working group will assess appropriate voting margins to apply to certain types of decisions. I would envision that major issues would require a larger majority, but in such cases, would allow the chapters to provide direction to the board. To preserve the ability of the board to function, less significant matters can be advisory only. This is the avenue for assuring there is balance between the input of the members and chapters and the necessity of most decision authority vested in the board. This is a conceptual overview. It is straightforward enough that members will understand it, it is fair, and it allows those who just want to ride their machines to tender their proxies to their chapter leadership. This system would assure accountability and provide comfort to members that their voices can be heard on matters THEY believe are important. This is my proposal. You have two choices. One, you can reject this proposal, and it will occur anyway. I will take the chance that the members will be sufficiently pleased with the re-designed governance structure, and that they will respect the group that came up with the plan. Notwithstanding your absolute authority, you will be hard pressed to resist this recommendation as you will have open rebellion if you reject it. Your capacity as a leader will be shattered. Two, you can buy into this proposal and, and provided you and the BOD agree, in writing with the full authority of the BOD, that the final recommendations made by the working group will be accepted by the board and implemented within six months. If you accept these terms, you can take full credit for the solution proposed, and I give you my word, and the word of the other individuals I have advised of this plan, that no one will ever know the idea came from anyone but you. That will allow you an opportunity to re-establish your credibility as a leader of this organization that is willing to give more than just lip service to “respecting” the input of all members of the AMCA. The board’s acceptance of this arrangement will assure that those currently “in the board’s camp” will support the process, and will also assure that those skeptical of the current structure will also buy in. If you reject the deal, you are going to put your position and reputation on the line. If you decide instead to reject the deal, this message will be distributed widely across the club. You will have to explain why you rejected it, and I can assure you, people are not going to allow you to ignore it. With all of the rhetoric about respect, and being open to constructive ideas that will move our club forward, the rejection of this proposal will reveal your true underlying motivations. With all due respect, you won’t have the credibility to govern, assuming there is still a membership to govern. It is clear from your refusal to respond to my earlier messages that you assume me to be a troublemaker with a negative agenda. You have misjudged me, Mr. Spagnolli. If we are going to have a war and make the members decide who is more deserving of respect, I don’t mind the hand I hold. There is strength in keeping to the high road. Let’s see if your actions can match your words. Please note that I haven’t dropped my objection to the wrongful expulsion of Charles Finney. My advice to you on that, is to admit the board acted without a defined procedure, and that as a result, you have decided to reverse the decision that was made. You seem to have an absolute fear of admitting you have made a mistake, but if you do, you will find that in doing so the perception of your leadership will be enhanced. If you don’t, your hubris will pave the road to your demise. I will be leaving for Las Vegas tomorrow morning for the auctions, and when I arrive, I anticipate being mobbed by club members attending that event. I’ll be arriving Thursday afternoon, and if I haven’t heard from you by then, I don’t see any reason to not share this message with others. You have through the evening tonight to send an email response to this communication, or you can contact me directly by phone at 425-210-8531 starting tomorrow morning through Thursday afternoon. I apologize for leaving you such limited time, however, based on what I know of you, giving you longer would likely result in you creating your own tribunal to do the same thing I have just suggested. The reason I have shared this with a limited number of people, is to be able to prove you are a liar if you try to pursue this course on your own. I will close with one final point. Some of your friends have noted that the problems at the National level are the result of prior leaders. They suggest that you are just doing your best to clean up the mess. Unfortunately, such assertions only drive home the wisdom of my proposal. Had reasonable governance provisions been in place, those past problems wouldn’t have occurred. People in this club wouldn’t have to act like children pointing accusatory fingers at others in explanation for what is wrong. The root of the problem is the governance structure, and instead of talking about it, I’m taking the necessary steps to change it. I doubt many people will find my goals to be disrespectful. I have nothing to gain, and nothing to lose in pushing for change – I have already gained much respect among members for my efforts and that is way more than I was looking for by speaking up. Respect is earned, not an entitlement that comes with your position as you believe. If your pride is so great that you refuse to acknowledge this as anything other than a constructive, respectful proposal, please do not try to convince our members that you have only the best interests of the club at heart. Your brazen thirst for control and power will have been fully exposed, and I doubt you will ever earn the respect you so covet. I look forward to your prompt reply to this message. Hopefully, you realize by now that when I say I am going to do something, it happens. RESPECTFULLY, Scott Lange #6954 |