| LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/ |
|
| Lost Rockies, Chapters, Sub-chapters, etc… http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=4393 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Skyjump136 [ Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Lost Rockies, Chapters, Sub-chapters, etc… |
Ted said to start a new thread so here it is. Keep the ideas coming. How should we organize this thing? I am specifically interested in seeing a discussion on sub-chapters, the need (or not) of an umbrella organization, voting rights, etc. Let's discuss local issues vs regional issues and how those will be handled. |
|
| Author: | USAFCOP [ Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, I do not think we really need to be associated with anyone except LOST, or Blue Ribbon Coalition or UFWDA But those are things we can have membership drives for. As for the By-laws, if we do them right, all states should be able to use them, especially if we remove all mention of the colorado association. We could all be called LOST Rockies and use the same By-laws. Each State could make there own amendments for local issues, but Still be LOST Rockies. If it needs to be distinguished, we could just refer to LOST Rockies- CO/NM/UT, no need to call them Chapters unless one group wants to join a larger local association or we have a huge difference in the needs of each state's members. |
|
| Author: | Redneck Ron [ Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | My 2 cents worth |
If CO/NM/UT can agree on bylaws for all and then have specific bylaws for themselves--I agree. We do need to stay all LOST Rockies and if it is individual chapter that is fine with me--As long as we are together-even!! CO/NM/UT want to join state specific clubs under the LOST Rockies. That is fine and nothing wrong with that. That is along as we are and stay LOST Rockies together. Individual state runs 1 or more annual runs Bylaws will be formed from all states not only just one. State representatives? President? Vice president? Treasure? Online meetings for everyone? This is some good discussions and it is Colorado folks is fault--Which is a good thing and I am not complaining one bit!!! This is great!! You Colorado folks have come together and led the way. Now, we are all joining you on forming the LOST ROCKIES LET US GET'R DONE |
|
| Author: | Kugellager [ Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think we can manage to avoid the sub-chapter challenges if we have regional vice-presidents elected only from/by people in their state. There could be one overall LOST Rockies president and three vice presidents...How does that sound? That way each region of LOST rockies would have a local 'leader' elected by their own constituents and who would run their region. Kind of like how a large company has regional sales rep or vice presidents who still report to the main office. In addition, it would make it easier in the future if we decide to add Wyoming to LOST Rockies. John ];') |
|
| Author: | KW AV8R [ Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm all for the overall president and regional vice-presidents. I think there may be need for an (for lack of a better term) senior vice-president to handle Rockies business in case the president is unavailable. Pres, senior VP, treasurer, secretary, and public affairs officer (PAO) should be voted on by the membership as a whole. The PAO's (aka: web guru's) duties would include web-design, flyer design, and such. I also agree that our meetings should be online since the geographical area we cover is so vast. Trying to get everyone in one locale is going to be nearly impossible. There should also be an annual meeting to coincide with the annual run. Officers should be STRONGLY encouraged to attend the annual run at a minimum but we all need to understand that life happens. While on the topic of the annual run, have we set the dates yet? I noticed that btolle had to pick dates since we hadn't set any yet. Are we going with his dates? (does anyone see the irony of someone outside the Rockies setting the dates for our annual run?) Do you think there would be a need for more regional positions, such as treasurers and secretaries? I bring this up because if we stick to any expenditure must be done by check and the check must be signed by both the treasurer and the president, this is going to raise some logistical difficulties. If the president resides in southern New Mexico and the treasurer resides in northern Utah, how are we going to accomplish this? Could the treasurer delegate the authority to sign checks to the regional treasurers and the president delegate his authority to regional VPs? If we are going to have regional meetings, who is expected to take the minutes? Okay, that's all I could think of for now. I'm just trying to troubleshoot right now, I'd hate for us to get everything set on paper then realize something is practical. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|