Sorry dude. It's going to be a long year. Those who know Brent, know that he thrives on controversy.

I suspect that the EAMG issue is the main reason behind Brent and another "new" officer running hard for BWA offices with a pocket full of absentee votes and a push to recruit out of town, mostly disinterested, members, that will likely vote for their buddies agenda. Brent was asked specifically about the EAMG issue at the election meeting, prior to the election. What was his response? Anybody remember?

I would like to point out that the BWA does have a stake in this property & this is BWA business. Brent is assumed to be the BWA representative to the EAMG. Sharing information about Elkhorn Acres with the club is a good thing and input is appreciated, despite his presentation and agenda.

This stuff will pass and the BWA will continue to be the amusing circus that we've all come to love and adore. will be the amusing circus that we've all come to love and adore.

I am sorry Dale, but I am missing your points. But it probably doesn't matter because you are obviously upset with me. If you wanna talk about it in private, I would love too.
Peace out,

Brent

Brent... this is not about me being "upset" with you... please don't try to turn it into something lame and pathetic like that. It is all about the issues we've been discussing.

Sorry Brent but I agree with Dale on this issue. Why does the BWA need or have an issue with the EAMG? The lawns are mowed and the area is fairly well maintained. And we are working on larger scale plans. p.s. The trees on the property were planted and paid for by the original donors and are eco friendly as per Zina (Sorry Z if you weren't wanting to be involved in this thread). The monies are raised through the largess of volunteers, clubs, etc... (no AW money is required). What is your and others problem with this? If you show up at meetings you'll never hear anyone request if you 'donated' money to the EAMG purchase to hear and consider your opinion. We respect and accept any input into the 'management' of this property. What is the problem. I do not get it.
Peace out.
BIll

Bill my issue with the EAGM is that there are some (you? Dale?) who still assume it's a closed system. The attitude that only the original "shareholders" or those who are given a share can have a say or vote is just not a sustainable plan for the future.

All BWA, Vikings and Elkhorn padders must be considered shareholders too and allowed a say AND a vote. These organizations are decades old, proven, stable, groups that have open, evolving memberships that will attract the new energy needed to ensure the continued success of AW's takeout on the Elkhorn. It is from these groups that 99.9% of the original donors came from. I and many other so called shareholders welcome them and invite them to attend meetings, share their thoughts and then vote on what is to be done.

I don't get what's wrong with that?
barryg

Why is the existing system not sustainable? Shares are getting passed on. There is new blood. I don’t know of anybody that wants to be involved that has been refused.

I have a hard time thinking of the EAMG as a closed system, being as I am a relative newcomer to the group. Dustin & Ledgeman both expressed an interest in assisting with the management of Elkhorn Acres and before long, they too were part of the group. They are not the only ones that have migrated into the group. It’s not exactly the closed system you would have people to believe.

Barry, if there are people that are interested in helping with Elkhorn Acres and you want them to have a vote, by all means, pass along one or more of your shares or maybe Brent can pass along a vote or 2.

One of the problems with opening the voting to everyone/anyone, is… it opens the doors for shady voting practices. You know… like… somebody could get their non-interested, out of touch, out of town buddies to vote their way. It seems kinda far fetched… but… well… you know…

AW Acres Rapid (a.k.a. BWA-ha-ha) on the Elkhorn Creek, Frankfort Kentucky
Class V+
This rapid paradoxically emerged in the dry summer of 2007, thought to be due to the well-known but poorly understood phenomenon of paddler boredom, exacerbated by election fatigue. At what used to be an easy takeout of the Elkhorn Forks section, several treacherous rocks and holes have suddenly emerged. As you approach the takeout, paddle hard to the left to avoid Dale’s Dale, but then angle the boat right to avoid Brent’s Debate. This will send you directly to the class 5.3 boof in the center, known as the B6 Straddle Paddle. A Z-maneuver is immediately required to preserve the environment. Finally, the river narrows to a series of holes that, though seemingly easy, are actually very sticky: Dallas, Joey 1 and 2, Dave 1, 2 and 3, and Chris 1, 2, 3 and 4. Assuming that you will be swimming at the end of this rapid, work your way behind the dead sycamore tree to the takeout, where lots of BWA members will briefly cease their bickering and adroitly rescue you from the raging torrent.

Chris Schardl

F'n hilarious Chris. I like it! ;- )

In Anticipation of Precipitation
WaVeY

Hey Chis,
Don't y'all bees fogittin bout dat fued a brewin. I hears da shiners and da growers is a sqarin off da land rights on dat piece down by da ol sycamore tree. Dey mights be fixin ta shoot it out o sumpin ya know. Wy anyone paddlein dat part o the big section of ekorn crick might git sum stray fire or plum be a target o hosility. I'd suggess us free lovin boaters aviod dem parts or risk bein a casualty of war. Hanlin dem big water rapids ain't wort dyin hear! Why I'm tempid ta call Barney and mebee even Festus to git on down nar an fire up sum woopass!

I'm shur it's all over da tax man an the county levey agin na homestedders heh?

That is absolutely hilarious Chris. Perfect.

Now, let's get back to the debate (word) that is really at hand: do we need to spend buckets of money on AW's property? I am assuming that the management group is open to all interested persons and I am asking the BWA for their input and ideas on how we manage and spend money on AW's property, so we can give them our best recommendations. My opinions about the BWA and it's potential to manage the property is just my personal opinion. I stated that opinion the night of the election when I was asked by an interested party how I stand on that issue. I was candid then and I am now on that. I hope everyone recalls my response that night because I sure do. However, everyone will note that I have not started or implemented any procedural or parliamentary maneuver via steering committees or otherwise to directly address, affect or take over management of AW's property. There will be no secret parliamentary moves regarding same. I don't believe in those. I am simply asking for input from my club on this topic.

The management group, is not an official group, has never been formally accepted by all donors and has not really had to do much so far. It has no written agreement with AW. AW simply trusts it's friends in the BWA who it sees as involved on this property that they own. The gravel that is there and the changing room were done by volunteers without regard to any formal management group. There has been lot's of volunteerism outside of the original donors and the property is not broke and does not need to fixed. Why create a large budget and spend lots of money on AW's property? Why recommend that to AW? Anyone want to discuss the issue of budget and what to recommend to AW? I would like to hear some ideas other than how much money we can spend on the property. Let's focus on the needs of the property and boaters.
Brent