I think that it's about time we quit wasting our time wanting to drag this thing not only through the mud, but also airing our dirty laundry in plain site of everyone to see.

I would suggest that the concerned parties plan and attend a meeting consisting of those against and those for. I would be glad to volunteer as moderator since I have no vested interest in anything other than resolving the differences between some kayakers in the club who should all be friends, not enemies. Why push it ad-naseum on this forum ? Let's meet face-to-face and get this ugly display put to bed. I know there are a few folks in this recreational / social club who are definitely "A" type personalities, and maybe even "A+" personalities. That is natural in a whitewater club where the very nature of defying the dangers is part and parcel of the sport. We recognize and accept this a part of the magic of whitewater paddling. But there is also the silent majority, that doesn't mind other folks taking the lead. These folks are getting pretty sick and tired of having to see this stuff repeatedly polluting our forum site. There are better things to do with the time. Time is precious, we don't have an infinite amount of that set aside for our lives. I don't want to spend my time dealing with this. While I understand what is driving both sides ( I think ), it is nigh time to put and end to this drivel and get on with using the forum for what it was designed for, such as communicating river levels, ideas, meeting times for trips, etc.

I invite all warring parties to come to steering committee meeting and lets get it done. Maybe I don't have the authority to do this, but at this point I'm ready to stick my neck out for the good of the BWA and the paddling community.

Mike M

During all my thought on this subject, especially about simplicity I think that I have come to some new conclusions.

1. There are no real problems with the management of Elkhorn acres.
2. This situation has been overplayed for years.
3. I really don’t know what is to be benefited by disbanding the EAMG.
4. The EAMG biggest problem has been that people who don’t like it treat it like a bitch.
5. There is nothing to be gained by more people having a say in the management of a BOATING TAKOUT!!!


I find it so easy to get caught up in all this drama that I have lost sight of the real issue. THERE IS NO PROBLEM WITH MANAGEMENT. The problem happens when people feel like getting something done quickly and when it can’t happen in what they believe is a timely fashion they just do it anyway. I am now under the impression that the EAMG is the simplest way to manage the EA. If from what I have heard people say is the truth then for the EAMG to be disbanded one of two things must happen. Either they must relinquish control internally or control must be taken away from them by the AW. If the latter happens we have a much bigger problem.

What it gets down to is that people were told that this would be a takeout for boating and if they donated $500 they would be given a share in the management of this takeout for boating.


Correct me if I’m wrong but I thought that EA was purchased as a takeout for boating.
What it is now is a takeout for boating.

Are you getting the theme yet, please chant with me “takeout for boating” hold 2 3 4 “takeout for boating” and release.


Jim Dinger stated that he thought the property did not look that great right now. That issue was addressed and money has already been allotted. This summer I am positive that these improvements will happen. So what’s Wrong again? And also what more needs to be done besides maintenance? Do we need every paddling club in the state to vote for the property to be mowed or is this really just about camping and having festivals at the takeout? If it is just about camping, isn’t there a campground at the putin already? If we had taken the money that was used for the porta pottie and spent it at the putin campground instead we would have been taking better care of our NPFF guests anyway. So I guess that arguments out the window anyway.

JBob

P.S. Hey Molnar, I have done everything I can to stick to the issue and not get personal and I believe I have. While I do appreciate your comment I think that getting this out in the open before the meeting will be more constructive than destructive.

Hey JBob,

I totally agree with the substance of your post. IT IS A TAKEOUT !

Why are we stretching this thing to the limit ? You're right, it does not make any sense whatsoever. I'm with you all the way !

As far as making it personal, I have tried not to do that too, as reflected by the diplomatic tone taken in ALL my posts. If I have gotten personal at any time, it was not intentional and a review of the posts confirm that. Please do not get personal towards me, I don't deserve it That includes snide remark made at the film festival Saturday night

But back to the point, please clarify as to what you think the best meeting time / place would be. Before the SC meeting ? Before the montly meeting ? Other ? I'm all for it man.

Dudes, I'm off to the Elkhorn.

Bye for now,
Mikey

Question: The debate about the configuration of such a proxy managing body seems oriented around the idea that each group would have a single representative. (1 for BWA, 1 for VCC, 1 for Elkhorn Paddlers, 1 for unaffiliated donors, 1 for Bardstown boaters...). This may, in fact, be the best way to do things. However, I want to point out that my original suggestion was not to have representatives from separate groups, but rather to have trustworthy individuals elected to represent the best interests of the property.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I think that there is enough overlap among these groups, enough familiarity between persons involved and enough similar intent and interest, that a small group of persons could be selected in a manner independent of their group affiliation. The idea isn't to leave anyone out, I would suggest that a popular vote among all the stakeholders might be used to determine the makeup of such a group. However, the idea is to simplify things. After all, are the interests of these various groups so diverse that they each need a representative pulling for their particular set of interests? From my (admittedly limited) perspective, most of the controversy seems to be swirling around who will manage EA rather than what will be done to manage EA.

I know there has been a controversy recently about camping. Other than that, is there major disagreement about what needs to be done to manage EA? If so, then let that be presented. Such a discussion will be much more productive than the current one. Let's see if we can hammer out some guidelines and figure out what the areas of general agreement and of controversy really are.

Hanley

Good points Hanley; I think also that JBob had an excellent post about not trying to fix something thats not really broke.

So, I guess tonite would be as good a time as any to try and get this resolved with a plan. This would give most of the weight to the preferences of the EAMG and the active share-holders.

Food for thought.

As I sit here trying to figure out the best plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
mike

Whoops I mean Tuesday night at Don's...........

I've been contacted by each side today and I guess I'll just wait 'til I'm needed to vote. . . . . .

I don't think that the BWA has the right to go over the heads of the original donors unless a MAJORITY of them ( if they can be reached and they could always vote "don't care" and be deleted ).

I think that there is merit to at least two of the approaches, but again. Have we already tried to ask the EAMG and / or the original donors to defer to a new approach ? Have they told AW that they were backing out of their original established responsibilities ?

I think there has probably been a large deal of personality confllicts driving this thing. Probably too much so that it gets in the way of the simple task at hand, which is using the location as a take-out and making sure it remains in a state much like it is now as to be non-threatining to the local constabulary and the neighbors ( and non-inviting to local non-boaters to use as a party site etc.), and the rest of the non-paddling population.

If I'm wrong, call me out
Mike Molnar

Hanley:

Your suggestions are spot on and I agree. The property was bought with money from 34 individuals who gave more than $500. A number of others that gave less than $500. And money from three clubs (BWA $1300, VCC $1000, EP $1000). Some of the donors set up the group EAMG. Some were opposed and others didn't care either way. The original donors is different than the "shareholders" today. It would probably be difficult to gauge what all the donors wanted at the time of the purchase in terms of management responsibility and who should have it. Many probably assumed the BWA would do so or play a major role. But you are right, the controversy is over the makeup of the group that interfaces with AW over the property. I think a solution that is simple that protects all interested persons is in sight and appears to be supported by AW. You are also right, there is not that much that needs to be managed. Cut the grass, put some gravel down every so often and plant some cool plants. In the 8 plus years since we purchased it, that is basically what has been needed. (With the exception of the changing room, itself an issue of some controversy). It is a very workable site that does not need much to satisfy most in the boating community that paddle the Elkhorn and take out there. I sure am glad we bought it. Wish we could all come together with a plan that best addresses everyone's needs regarding the managment of it for AW. Let's try everyone.
Brent

If the control of EA was given to the BWA alone, would the other clubs that have donated money to the EMAG keep donating? It seems that if the BWA took over control, less money may be donated by other groups leaving more responsibility to the BWA. If all five groups were equally represented, would it be expected that each group would donate money to EA? Should there be a required or suggested minimum donation per year from each group to help maintain and provide modest/needed improvements to OUR takeout?

Dustin

acreekfreak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>>
> By request, I posted last years meeting minutes on
> the Viking forum.
> [www.vikingcanoeclub.org]
> iewtopic.php?t=3290
>

Incidentally, my vague recollection is that Zina raised a legal (?) issue regarding parking on the riverbank side of the lot. The minutes of that meeting make reference to erosion concerns, and twice mention the idea of a rail to prevent parking on that side. I noticed that there there were several cars parked there on Sunday. Also apparent is that there was insufficient room on the far side if parking on the river side were to be avoided. Actually, I don't know if there was insufficient room there, because I don't know the boundaries of the lot. Basically, what I am contributing to this discussion, is the state of confusion of one interested party and desire that things be "marked" a bit more clearly at AW.

Chris Schardl

Chris: I think what Zina was alluding to is an effort to identify a distance that we (AW) would restrict parking from the edge of the creek. There are such railing at the proposed limit now, but not enough to keep vehicles behind. I noticed that too. We probably need more railing along that edge to give a clear boundary. We should be able to increase the parking space and address issues with the $1900 worth of gravel that has been earmarked for the property. We ought to have a work weekend out there when that occurs with all interested paddlers from the various clubs and in the area. Wonder if we could borrow Clay Warren's bobcat if everyone was into it? Be nice to fix that hole. I bet the Vikings would be in to such an effort. Could be fun. BTW, we have 4.8 something acres and there have been efforts to plant along the boundary areas. See Zina about that. Be a great opportunity for everyone that has been talking about Elkhorn issues the past few weeks to come together on something that benefits all. This could be the year of the Elkhorn with all this passion out there for it. We still got the major cleanup on river right before the takeout to look into. The Vikings have a clean up in May I believe. BWA folks that can should join them too.
Brent