To the folks in the BWA who are sick and tired of being made to witness the wrangling over the management of the Elkhorn takeout I offer my apologies for making yet another post in the BWA forum on that subject.

However, for those who remain concerned about this issue, want to be involved and express an opinion then I ask you to take a moment and check out the new guidelines and suggested proposals by AW for a new representative group called the Elkhorn Leadership Council. To read about the ELC I have attached AW's open letter to the EAMG to this message. To download and read this file you will need to visit the BWA Forum (click the thread link at the bottom of the email) and then download the PDF.

I and many others fully support the new Elkhorn Leadership Council as proposed by AW. Some reasons for supporting the new ELC are also posted here in the Elkhorn Forum: [www.americanwhitewater.org]

I again encourage all of you who are still interested in this discussion to please post your opinions in the Elkhorn Forum and save those who are not interested from having to receive messages on this topic. Public Posting is allowed in the Elkhorn Forum - so anyone - BWA member or not may post there.
barryg

Brent;

your most recent post is purely inappropriate for this forum, it addresses issue you have with EAMG and should remain there until resolved.

The post does accomplish two thing on your behalf:
1) it clouds the real issue with personal termoil, unsubstainiated accusations, and and aire of the "listen to me and I'll take care of everything for you attitude"
2) it assists your agenda of drawing in percieved BWA support without actually getting a vote authorizing your intended actions.

Take your complaints to the meeting tonight, air them and accept what ever comes of it.

I, a dues paying, voting member of the BWA and the AW am tired of this issue that has arisen only during your tenure and never prior in the BWA.

You are failing miserably at representing the wishes of the club members. When ever has there been a vote to authorize this attempt at a hostile takeover of Elkhorn Acres management? NEVER thats when!!!!!

It is not your role as president to dictate this issue, lobby for a specific resolve or inflame the membership of the club. You are in the position of servitude not dictatorship.

I call for Brent's resignation of the position of club president, allowing Hanley to serve until the annual elections in June.

Gmead

Sorry, George, but, you are a noisy gong. Your ignorant attacks on me are unfounded. I will not respond to your garbage or lack of knowledge. I don't serve you. I serve the BWA as I best can according to my long standing in the paddling community and according to my conscience. Never wanted or intended nor am I a dictator. Maybe that was other Presidents. You are silly. Why don't you come meet me sometime. I don't even know who you are. You are the one with no standing to voice anything about the EAMG. You are a divider, my friend, not a consensus builder. Are you anti AW too? Peace out dude!
Brent

All: (BWA, Vikings, Elkhorn Paddlers, Bardstown Boaters, and EMAG)

Read the AW letter!

It appears perfectly clear in the letter from American Whitewater (the taxpaying OWNERS of the property) that they wish to see a resolution drawn with all five groups to manage Elkhorn Acres. Please, lets all work TOGETHER and form the comittee the OWNERS are proposing to manage the land that all private boaters are privilaged to use. The original stakeholders donated this land to AW, so lets follow that decision by helping AW manage the land acording to their reasonable management guidelines.

George, please understand this is not a BWA takeover with Brent's interest in mind, nor does it require a BWA vote for the owners of the property to ask the BWA to be a part of it's management. We should feel privilaged to be asked to join this group and appoint an officer and an alternate to address their intent and by voicing the BWA's opinion via vote, when neccessary.

Above all, it's the only public takeout! Wouldn't it suck if the owners sold it?

Dustin

What I heard from the meeting last night was a consensus of 3 or 4 primary goals for the property from the EAMG donors.

1) Privately owned creek access for all boaters with some limitations as described by current AW guidelines (which have only recently been made available)

2) General concern about property maintenance, and the future of property management for generations to come.

3) Development of a more balanced and equitable share of management voting privileges via equal representation of regional boating clubs (BWA, ElkhornPaddlers, BB, Vikings...) and the donors.

Over all there seemed to be a couple sticky points that most everyone was prepared to overlook for the long term benefit of the whole. No voting occurred last night and I am under the impression that voting will occur either at or around the time of the second scheduled meeting on 4/23, which is open to the general public (just an impression not fact).

I believe there were 10 donor members, 3 proxy reps., a Vikings rep., a Elkhorn Paddlers rep., and of course a BWA rep., at last nights meeting for a total of 15 voting privilidges (plus those who represented more than one voting privilidge). The general consensus at the meeting did lean toward discussion of a regional management consortium, which is fine provided we continue to pursue the consortium from the basis of an EAMG voting majority.

The meeting represented just short of 50% of the donor voters to the best of my knowledge. I hope that on 4/23 the donor representation will be much higher and provide an undisputable consensus for or against a new regional consortium

My biggest conflict within this process has been failure to afford the donor group a voice in the process. I believe today that the opportunity was at hand last night and will be afforded again in the next meeting. Should those donors not seize the opportunity to be involved they must conceed their right to second quess the outcome of the 4/23 meeting.

I have said this before and I will say it now, I am not against a move toward future management only against trampling those who made this property available, and provided us the luxury of this problem.

Gmead