			<div   class='message  msg_warn'>
									
				You are currently not logged in or haven't verified your email in a while. Please login or complete the verifictation process to post.
				</div>
			<div style='clear:both'></div>
		<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>BWA-Speak</title>
    <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/list/send/9/</link>
    <description><![CDATA[General BWA Message and Milling Area]]></description>
    <language>EN</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:24:18 -0400</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:24:18 -0400</lastBuildDate>
    <category>BWA-Speak</category>
    <generator>Phorum 5.1.23</generator>
    <ttl>600</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5333/#msg-5333</link>
      <author>ezgpaddler</author>
      <description><![CDATA[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.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5333/#msg-5333</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:24:18 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5292/#msg-5292</link>
      <author>wirednut14er</author>
      <description><![CDATA[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]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5292/#msg-5292</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:11:37 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5290/#msg-5290</link>
      <author>brentaustin</author>
      <description><![CDATA[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]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5290/#msg-5290</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:43:09 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5288/#msg-5288</link>
      <author>ezgpaddler</author>
      <description><![CDATA[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 &quot;listen to me and I'll take care of everything for you attitude&quot;
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.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5288/#msg-5288</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:07:58 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5285/#msg-5285</link>
      <author>barry</author>
      <description><![CDATA[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 [b]Elkhorn Leadership Council[/b]. 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:  http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Forum/read/send/42,4950,5283/#msg-5283

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]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5285/#msg-5285</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 12:18:18 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5282/#msg-5282</link>
      <author>paddlezrm</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Let me reiterate:
There will be no votes taken tonight. This is to gather information from people.
All points will be written down and recorded, including such things as
   I never recognized the EAMG as an entity in the first place
       or
   All the people to whom proxies have been given (short or long term) are active members of the paddling community and most are active AW volunteers.

Once a point has been made, we will not reiterate it ad nauseum.

We can be consumed by negativity and blame or we can appreciate all that has gone right about this access. People have selective memories about how we got to this point -- we do nothing but damage the reputation of boaters in general and AW in particular by attacking each other.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5282/#msg-5282</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 11:30:55 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5279/#msg-5279</link>
      <author>dmargava</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Zinz, are you in touch with reality? Your inviting these preceived Proxy people to a EAMG meeting to join in? How can you expect to get anything accomplished under these abstract conditions? These imaginary proxy people have no vote and nothing to say until this proxy process is approved.  The meeting is for the orginal doners (period). If they want to come and listen, fine.  Maybe after the EAMG has it's discussions, elects its reps for AW then those interested can speak?  Lets see how many original doners show up, see what they say and then go from there.  First things first.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5279/#msg-5279</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 10:54:15 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5274/#msg-5274</link>
      <author>brentaustin</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Zina:

As an original donor involved with the early mechanics of making the purchase happen, I have repeatedly expressed concerns with the organization as set up, years after the purchase and without full involvement or consent of all donors.  The EAMG never had full consent.  It was not a democracy that took a vote and agreed to majority rule.  It just formed by some of the donors long after the purchase.  It formed due to the desires of some of the donors and despite the silence and objections of others.  It does not represent all paddlers or AW Affiliates and is weighted in favor of donors, many of whom no longer paddle or do so rarely.  In ten years, these folks will be gone and the EAMG will not effectively represent interested paddlers.  This is an Elite club that has tried to muscle control over the takeout despite other, stronger interests in the access in the long haul.  The AW Affiliates have little voice, 1 vote out of (40 or so?).  Proxy voting is rampant in EAMG, clearly disfavored by many in the boating world.  We have not had a meeting since the Election well over a year ago.  Are there any officers at all?  There certainly has not been a meeting and the last few meetings really resolved nor did anything despite all of us agreeing on things to be done without regard to the organizational defects.   

This organization purports to have Bylaws which have not been adopted by proper process.  The supposed Bylaws in place are complex and tedious and was never in the radar of us donors in 1999.  Many years after we bought the property, Bylaws were attempted to be enacted by some of the donors in order to better control (legally?) what happened with the property.  I was unaware of this attempt until after the fact despite being a donor very involved in the purchase and donation to AW.  I was not the only one.  Secret back door deals? - this is one of the biggest ones by BWA select members in years.  Further, AW was not involved in the set up of the organization and was unaware of the creation (out of thin air) for shares, subscribed and unsubscribed shares, the unregulated transfer of shares and the lack of cohesive founding organizational members.  There has never been a formal written agreement with AW despite past debates leading to that suggestion years ago.  Still nothing except AW's recent clear statement that EAMG is not the management structure they have in mind, after hearing everyone's personal comments on all sides of the fence.  Everyone has had a voice with AW and they are aware of everyone's position.  Now AW wants the Council of interest paddlers over EAMG - that is clear.  

There are suggestions that non-donors have shares.  How did that be allowed and why are there not share transfer restraints by the organization?  There was no warning, just a statement of &quot;shares&quot; being transferred.  Some donors (myself included) do not recognize the validity of those transferred shares for different and additional reasons than not recognizing any shares.   How are we going to deal with that?  Does whether it matters that there was no process to allow that depend upon who someone likes personally and decides to side with?  That is not process, that is nothing but a popularity contest.

Many donors simply sat back and did not care what others did.  The rest of us fought over what was being shoved down the donor's throats as an organizational fait accompli.  Now the fight seems to be with those that were never involved, who somehow assume the organization to be a legitimate one (depends on where they are in the popularity contest), and seem to want to fight with donors of the EAMG simply because they have a personality conflict or other disagreement with that donor.  As long as the EAMG exists, these organizational defects and shortcomings will not go away and there will be division.  In addition to your comments about what we will discuss tonight, I want to raise again the very fundamental issue of the failure of EAMG to comply with appropriate organizational process in its last 5 year quest to become an entity.  I will move to dissolve the EAMG as redundant and a hinderance to resolving the management of AW's property.   I am sure that is nothing new to many of you.  See you tonight - I look forward to the meeting.

Brent]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5274/#msg-5274</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 09:25:34 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5271/#msg-5271</link>
      <author>jcalder</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I agree Z.  as a concerened non-vote owning member of the BWA and paddler of the Korn I would like to hear what goes on tomorrow.  I will unfortunately not be there in person due to prior conflicts with school.  Thanks, J

I Also hope that the EAMG can adapt as a group within themselves to be what AW wants without having to be forced aside by a potential new group.  I think the framework already exists to be what is needed if they want.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5271/#msg-5271</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 22:45:43 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5270/#msg-5270</link>
      <author>ezgpaddler</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I stand corrected, thank you Zina. I was confused about the dates and should have reread your original post.

I would like to read the minutes of the meeting from tomorrow along with Jbob if possible. Thanks.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5270/#msg-5270</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 21:04:51 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5265/#msg-5265</link>
      <author>jboater</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Zina:
   I know that this is alot to ask but do you think that you could get someone to post the minutes of the meeting on this  forum?]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5265/#msg-5265</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:35:44 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5229/#msg-5229</link>
      <author>paddlezrm</author>
      <description><![CDATA[There is a broader regional meeting of anyone interested in the Elkhorn property which will happen on the 23rd.  The April 2nd meeting is to gather the thoughts of the original donors to the property and anyone to whom those donors have given their proxies. 
If you attend, please be respectful of the purpose of this meeting, to gather and record the thoughts of this group. There will be an opportunity for open discussion at the meeting on the 23rd.

thank you,]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5229/#msg-5229</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:49:33 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5228/#msg-5228</link>
      <author>ezgpaddler</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I encourage everyone and anyone who may utilize or have an interest in the Elkhorn Acres property to attend the meeting scheduled for 4/2/2008 at 6:30pm in Frankfort. I've attatched the link providing information and the location of the meeting.

http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Forum/read/send/42,4950/]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,5228/#msg-5228</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 09:59:22 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4969/#msg-4969</link>
      <author>ezgpaddler</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I realize I have recently been a pain in the ass for a few on this thread lately. I'll not apologize for that! 

I have but one hope, and that is to see the BWA positively influence the future of boaters and boating through democratic service the honorable conduct.

Personally I don't care who manages the property so long as boaters are allowed access. But I do believe we as boaters share a responsibility to respect our peers actions and rights (fellow BWA and AW members or not). We have an established system of operation, as does the AW and the EAMG. Unless I am mistaken that system is the democratic process in which officers at each organization and at each level represent the wishes of their constituents (above personal interests) in order to insure the welfare of the ultimate resources, the boater, the river, and the environment.

I believe it is the responsibility of each individual entrusted with a position of office to serve the individuals within the organization they represent in a selfless manor placing the interests of the majority as their primary duty. 

I am a member of other organizations (both millions strong) that actively practice this principle of operation and rarely if ever experiences deep divisions as have occurred over the Elkhorn Acres property. Yet, both of these organizations yield deep strength and influence over federal, state, local and social policy.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4969/#msg-4969</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:35:45 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4930/#msg-4930</link>
      <author>jboater</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Don't worry Ledgeman this will all be over soon and all the little forest animals will come out and dance in a circle.  I do have to say that I don't like the crack you made about warm and fuzzy,  but if you come to the RR cleanup this year you may get to feel something cold empty and fuzzy, MY FREEKIN HEAD!!!!

JBob
calculated risk taker]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4930/#msg-4930</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:28:57 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4929/#msg-4929</link>
      <author>frankloudermilk</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Dear Ledgeman,
   Sounds like you could use a hug .
   Here it is .. God bless everyone .
    Beautiful sunny day on Boone Creek today..  frank]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4929/#msg-4929</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:19:39 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4926/#msg-4926</link>
      <author>tmiller</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Elkhorn Acres, I just want to park there. I agree with Leachmann. tim]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4926/#msg-4926</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:36:54 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4925/#msg-4925</link>
      <author>leachman</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Here’s my theme / motto:  “I just want to park my car there” please don’t mess that up.

Mackenzie and I bought a canoe together and started boating the Elkhorn in the Spring and Summer of 2001.  We parked our car and the Elkhorn Acres (EA) takeout.  We paid the campground folks to park at the put in.  We paddled a dozen or so times a season and we specifically paddled the Elkhorn for 3 to 4 years parking in the EA gravel parking lot the whole time.  We weren’t BWAers’ at the time.  I assumed canoe Kentucky owned the land or something and let the public use it.  We didn’t know who owned EA and we were just glad to use it for an access point for Elkhorn Creek.

This is a thanks to those folks who bought the land for me and you to park there!!! 

And Thanks to the folks who have put the infrastructure there for access to the creek even though it was done under the radar.

Now I’m a BWA member of about 4 years or so.  I learned much about the piece of property and how it was purchased through a front man at an auction who did not appear to be a boater.  Thank YOU sir.  I’m also a BWA officer and have been for two years and this is my third.  I’m a design professional and have looked at the development of the property.  I’ve talked to folks about pavilions and river walk access to the creek and other development improvements to the property.  I have heard many opinions for and against the development of the property. 

After all these years I have come to the conclusion that I am just glad I can park my car there to take off of Elkhorn creek.  Yeah the road and parking could use a little improvement.  Maybe a paved trail with gravel dust with a steel boarder (like what they have at the gardens at UK’s arboretum).  Yeah maybe a turn around would be nice for a truck and trailer.  Yes I pull the BWA canoe trailer in there once a year for the annual Ledgeman canoe trip.  But ultimately I just want to park my car there.  And I don’t want anything to mess that up like camping or to much naked partying down there.  I just want to park my car there. 

So let me get this straight.  We are thinking of creating a group to manage the property.  I thought that’s why EMAG was created?  Why recreate something that already exists?  What needs to be decided upon that is so important that a small group of individuals have gone out of there way to make EMAG fail.  Mowing?  Picking up trash?  Gravel maintenance?  Maybe a porta potty in peak season that floats up during floods (ask Larrimore about his houseboat).  If you all want to create a new management group . . . whatever?   All I ask is that you don’t do anything to screw up us being able to park there.  I still don’t understand what’s so pressing or important that we need to recreate something that already exists.

There are things that could jeopardize this luxury of parking at EA.   Camping could piss off the neighbors.  Putting up a pavilion could attract local vandalism.  Less is more.  Put up a pavilion and bring in the locals and their thrash and broken bottles on our path from the take out, ouch!  AW pays the taxes, so what are the big issues that this group needs to decide upon.  EMAG was scheduled to lay gravel down this winter, right?  

Elkhorn Acres, I just want to park there.  Please don’t mess that up!

Lastly, I don’t feel the love so much anymore in the BWA.  I’ve been turned off by the forum lately.  I have been feeling pretty negative about the club ever since the summer BWA presidential election which included the controversial membership buying issue.  I’ve got my boating buddies now so why stay in the BWA?  For my BWA handbook parking pass for the Elkhorn put in?  That is just thinking negatively, right?  Can’t we all just get along?  Can’t we have fun in our club again?  I want to feel warm and fuzzy after leaving meetings.  I don’t want to feel the need to step away and pay my dues just so I can get my parking pass for the Elkhorn put in.   I want to raise above all this crap that has been going on lately and have a great clinic this spring and feel better about my boating family.  How about some positive vibes return to the BWA!

Elkhorn Acres, I just want to park there.

Dave Leachman]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4925/#msg-4925</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:30:23 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4865/#msg-4865</link>
      <author>JenCoates</author>
      <description><![CDATA[What I don't understand still is how EA needs to be a BWA issue. If the BWA wanted the property to be managed by them in the first place, why didn't the BWA solicit donors and have them donate money to the BWA, specifically earmarked for buying the property, and have the BWA then go and buy it and donate it to AW? I repeat, we should NOT be alienating ANYONE willing to put up money towards conserving river access. Not a good idea, IMO.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4865/#msg-4865</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:46:51 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4863/#msg-4863</link>
      <author>ezgpaddler</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Here´s some interesting reading on the subject of elkhorn acres I think every BWA member should be familiar with prior to taking a position on this thread:

http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Forum/read/send/9,4225/
http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Forum/read/send/9,808/
http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Forum/read/send/9,4302/
http://www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Forum/read/send/9,4597/

I think you'll find certain things to be true:

The EAMG was agreed upon by all property investors and only became a contention in Barry's article. I've heard no complaint by any other investor beyond Barry and Brent, That doesn't mean there aren't complaints I've just never seen, read or heard them.

There was an attempt to make an issue out of what was presented as the new budget for 2008. the issue was clarified by the EAMG to have only been a proposed budget to be discussed and ammended. Still no complaints other than Barry and Brent.

Mark Singleton (AW) specified that the rift over management be dealt with at the local level. Our two previous presidents (4 years of service) both expressed that there was never dissatifaction with EAMG management prior to the Spring of Brents election into office.

Brent claims that although an agreement was reached to form the EAMG originally not all parties were satisfied (Good news, Bad news here Brent. That's called a democracy, majority rules). 
P.S. it's important to note here that a democracy is the model used for the BWA, majority rules. That's how Brent became president, not because some minority group within the club thought he should be.

The EAMG President posted a letter to Property share holders noting that Mark Singleton wished this issue to be resolved locally, a conference call was scheduled and a notice of a meeting to be scheduled in late March to early April was proposed.

The conference call was conducted without representation of the BWA and then followed up later in a private conversation.

The BWA members have never been allowed to vote a club positon on this issue

BWA and AW members who have spoken out against the plan engineered by Barry and Brent have been attacked, criticized, threatened with sensorship, and the original BWA forum which held valuable information about the subject was abandoned and deleted for the formation of the new forum within the AW Site.

A special forum was created and is now administrated by Barry regarding the issue in which he has taken the lead to unveil the change to a new management group. Yet, still no BWA democratic process, or complaints by property investors other than Barry and Brent. 

It is becoming painfully obvious that this entire call for change has been well planned over a long time with a complete lack of openess and involvement of the BWA members or the property share holders participation. 

I'm willing to bet money that if this fails to pass prior to the end of Brents term as President and Barry's term as Program director this entire issue will fade away the EAMG will continue to manage the property according to the AW guidelines and we'll all have a place to park and paddle. 

We, the memebers of the BWA have not been allowed to voice our opinions about the property management and BWA involvement not once in this process, and if we allow ourselves to be railroaded into this new management proposal we will be accomplices in a hostile misjustice to all of the original investors who may not have an issue with current management. That alone will cast a much greater negative image of the BWA than all of the discussions that are now happening.

I for one will not be a part of stripping the rights of the investors from managing the property without a fight (note that I have no investment in teh property, nor EAMG voting privilidges). This nation was founded upon the principle of equal representation for all citizens, much the same as our club is governed on the principle of equal representation of all members.

Prior to any decision I call for a vote among members of the BWA to decide whether or not we approve of and are willing to authorize the formation of a new management structure before we allow it to be forced though much like the taxation thrust upon the founders of our nation.

Ok that's my speech go back to whatever you were doing, but remember this is true for each of us, good or bad &quot;If it's to be it's up to me&quot;.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4863/#msg-4863</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 13:18:22 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4849/#msg-4849</link>
      <author>acreekfreak</author>
      <description><![CDATA[The Vikings have 2 proxies. I have been a Viking rep in the past. As soon as someone emerged as interested in being the Viking rep, I stepped aside.

Does Barry Sipple have a right to allow someone to use his proxy, should he not want to attend a meeting? He chose me for at least one meeting. I don't see a problem, if he doesn't.

Do Gary Hoagland or Valerie Askren have a right to choose someone to represent their interests in the property? They appear to think so. If they think otherwise, or if the group chooses to disallow this type of representation, I'll happily step aside.

I've never had 4 votes at one time, nor have I ever claimed to. 

To the best of my knowledge, there have been no close votes within the EAMG. I'm attempting to work within the existing management group. Others have chosen over and over to do otherwise. The camping vote at the February meeting is an example of this.

To the best of my knowledge, no request to the EAMG by any of the individual clubs has ever been denied. 

No club has voted on and expressed a dissatisfaction with the way the property is managed. As far as I know, there has been little or no discussion within the Steering Committee or at regular monthly meetings from any of the clubs about dissatisfaction with the way the property is managed within any of the clubs, until now and I'm still not seeing anything resembling a consensus.

Let's vote on it and move on from there.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4849/#msg-4849</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:38:27 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4845/#msg-4845</link>
      <author>brentaustin</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Meryl:  You are getting personal, not levying mere criticism.  Dale did say he had a share given to him by Valerie, that he had Gary Hoaglan's share, that he often exercised Barry Sipple's proxy and that he has represented the Vikings.  That is four votes he has wielded.  It is about power over the Elkhorn, but not mine.  What other donors wanted the EAMG out of the 34?  Who are the donor's intent you speak of?  I was a donor.  You nor Dale were, yet you are the most outspoken of the folks, with close seconds by other non-donors.  Why is the EAMG such a mantra for you folks with no stake in it at all.  What about the real donors and folks like B6 who more than anyone made this happen?  I think everyone can get a good flavor of who is being personally attacked.  I have been by you and Dale and any cohort you can spend a day on river with bending their ear.  I am used to being attacked by you guys.  But, I get four times the accolades for my efforts with the BWA and AW than any posted to the contrary.  I will do the best I can for these organizations which is what I have been doing.  Sorry you are unhappy.  Again, you or Dale can boat or camp with me anytime you like.
Brent]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4845/#msg-4845</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:04:52 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4844/#msg-4844</link>
      <author>acreekfreak</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I have never had, nor ever claimed to have 4 proxies. That was your partners unfounded claim.

I have never asked anybody for their proxy. If I was going to ask anybody for there proxy, it wouldn't be Burgess. I have a pretty good idea of his thoughts on the subject and I know he wouldn't give me proxies. There are several people out there with proxies that I could approach, yet I have not. 

That's not what I'm interested in.

If I were truly seeking proxies, as claimed, there is a mechanism in the bylaws of the EAMG by which I could petition for a proxy for work done to the property. I've not, nor will I ask for a proxy in this manner, though I think I would easily be given one, if I asked. 

Claiming I started this mess ignores years of history. 

The 34 individual donors had their chance to vote and most did. The EAMG is the result. 

Your attempt at making this personal is an attempt at distracting folks from the real issues here. A cheap trick, for sure.

I don't believe you to be representing the BWA in this. There has been very little real discussion within the BWA of whether we, as a club, are happy with the EAMG. There has been no vote within the Steering Committee or at any monthly club meetings.

What I ask is, for this issue to be discussed within the individual groups and voted on.

What I'm seeing is, an attempt at railroading this &quot;compromise&quot; without a vote.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4844/#msg-4844</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:44:00 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4843/#msg-4843</link>
      <author>meryldouglas</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Brent,

Your answer at the election meeting was that you were unhappy with EAMG but were not planning to address the issue during your presidency. I was satisfied with that answer, not realizing that it was a lie. Here are some more bald-faced lies just from your one post:

1. Dale did not ever say he had 4 votes, nor has he ever had them.
2. Dale has never forced anyone to take sides.
3. Dale has not been sitting on the sidelines, he has certainly done more work at Elkhorn Acres than you will ever do.

And the assertion that &quot;I did not want to have a fight over EAMG and was content to let it sit sideways to be dealt with internally&quot; is probably literally true, you wanted it done secretly behind the scenes without your vaunted &quot;democracy&quot;, but it is certainly an attempt at deception.

Dale has never posted anything as hate filled as this message of yours. Do you expect people to just sit there and take it while you attack and lie? Is it divisive to not want to have to camp and boat with people who do this to you?]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4843/#msg-4843</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:32:45 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4840/#msg-4840</link>
      <author>brentaustin</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Dale:
I don't recall you being at the election meeting.  Did you give Meryl your proxy to vote for your candidate of choice at the election?  You are really good a misquoting folks at meetings that you did not attend.  Meryl asked about my position at the election.  I responded.  She had no follow up questions about it.  I note that if she is not satisfied, she follows up with questions.  I did not want to have a fight over EAMG and was content to let it sit sideways to be dealt with internally.  But, I will not run from a fight on it because I believe and have always believed that the organization is politically unfair, was railroaded down the throats of many of the mostly silent or complacent 34 individual donors and did not give real voice to the BWA.  Between us, if anyone is, I am a real shareholder and donor and you are not.  You strike me as the voice of greed over your Dalekorn Creek.  Please note that you started this mess with your vitriolic attacks on the VCC forum about camping and mysterious conspiracies and how you had four votes (proxies) on the EAMG and this was about my attempt to gain power over the Elkhorn takeout.  Guess what?  Wrong again.  Never have I wanted power.  I have absolutely never wanted to see power over the Elkhorn congregated in the hands of an individual like you.  That is a perfect example of what is wrong with the EAMG.  With the council, the voice you have will depend on whether you are the representative of a group like the BWA or the Vikings.  Your voice will otherwise be limited.  You are a better critic anyway.  Isn't that what you do, sit mostly on the sidelines tossing hate filled criticism of those that don't do things your way?  And God help anyone that ever gets on your bad side.  Dale, you are a force of division.  This has to stop.  Stop making folks take sides.  No one will ever hear me or Barry ask someone to choose.  We will not ask others not to boat or camp with us.  I challenge you to build community within the boating village and the BWA, not tear it apart.  I challenge you to support the BWA efforts to help support AW.  We are more than a social club, we are also activists and we have political voice.  Let us use this voice and our political capital wisely and we will accomplish really cool stuff for generations of paddlers.
Brent]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4840/#msg-4840</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 08:04:07 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4838/#msg-4838</link>
      <author>ezgpaddler</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I was just threatened with sensorship on this forum for my posts regarding this issue. I particular the post regarding the nine points I addressed. I personally resent the hell out of that idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4838/#msg-4838</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:43:12 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4837/#msg-4837</link>
      <author>acreekfreak</author>
      <description><![CDATA[A simple starting point would be...

Money was solicited for the property with the idea that the property would be managed by an entity made up of the major donors. $500.00 would get you one vote within the management group with 4 votes maximum.

Then... once the property was purchased, a handful were not happy with that arrangement and have been fighting to dissolve the management group every since.

In various emails the last couple of years, Brent has said the Elkhorn Acres Management Group is:
a “fantasy”
a “sordid group”
an “illegal group“
an “imaginary group”
an “unwieldy and self important” group
a “pretend organization” 
and that the “EAMG needs to go.  If it does not, I will continue to be a bumblebee in the bonnet.” 

Do you remember him saying anything like that at the election meeting? He was asked specifically about this issue at the election meeting. Was he upfront and honest about it?

There has been a concerted effort to dissolve the EAMG and it's well on it's way to fruition. 

The people who made this property a reality are our friends and mentors.

This effort to dissolve EAMG seems a bit like kicking Santa in the nuts.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4837/#msg-4837</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 06:52:59 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4836/#msg-4836</link>
      <author>cschardl</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Can I just say that I am totally confused? Someone needs to publish a score card: Names on the left column, followed by apparent agenda, then hidden agenda. So, is it B6 and Brent have &quot;apparent agenda&quot; to increase representation for EA management, but the &quot;hidden agenda&quot; is to make it a subsidiary of &quot;their&quot; BWA? Call me dense, but I really don't follow this at all. 

So, as a &quot;bear of little brain&quot;, here are the only solid facts that I can discern:

1. EA is owned by AW. It was donated to AW, so they own it.
2. AW has clear policy for AW property.
3. AW wants to establish a workable management organization to fulfill that policy re EA.
4. EA is a takeout.

That's about all my brain can handle. So, this is my noncontribution.
Chris S]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4836/#msg-4836</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:34:03 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4833/#msg-4833</link>
      <author>JenCoates</author>
      <description><![CDATA[I agree with the above. Plus, how are we going to present this to future potential donors? Here, please hand over some of your hard earned cash, we'll promise you that you can be a part of the managing group, and then we'll probably just yank it out from under you under the guise of a club having a problem with the &quot;unfair system&quot;. The only reason AW is taking such a hard look at this in my understanding is that individuals made a huge fuss about EAMG without a previous club vote on the issue.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4833/#msg-4833</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:13:00 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: BWA &amp; Elkhorn Acres management</title>
      <link>http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4814/#msg-4814</link>
      <author>ezgpaddler</author>
      <description><![CDATA[Post by Barry Quoted from the AW forum Elkhorn Arces Thread 3/18/2008

&quot;Re: American Whitewater’s River Access Area Management Guidelines 
Posted by: barry (IP Logged)
Date: March 18, 2008 02:08PM


George, 
Thanks for bringing your Elkhorn comments to this forum - which, BTW is completely open to the public to read and post in. 

The Elkhorn council is still in the formation stages. Nothing has been decided except that AW wants a new management entity for it's property. 

The BWA has yet to determine anything including who might be it's representative(s). Things are still very much taking shape and there's (hopefully) going to be folks from the Vikings, the EP, the BB and the BWA all participating. That's a lot of folks potentially involved so it's going to take some time for everyone to reach a consensus and agree on how to go forward. Everyone involved is a volunteer (except for AW staff) and getting all these folks to agree will be a time consuming, imperfect and sometimes inefficient process. 

I hope you will take time to understand the issues and then give things a chance to work before slamming the process so hard. FYI, under the existing management rules, unless you pay $500, are given or inherit one, you currently have no vote in any of the decisions for takeout that might be forwarded to AW for approval. This new council that AW is asking for intends to give you (and many others) a vote. Would you agree that this idea is a goal worth taking the time necessary to work towards? 
barryg&quot;

Response:
Barry,

1) The Elkhorn Council is only a proposal by AW not an entity.

2) in your post you mentioned the Elkhorn Paddlers, Vikings, BWA, and BB. Yet you failed to mention the EAMG, the group that represents those who provided the majority of the cash to purchase the property in the first place. Further, even Mark Singleton included that group in his march 10th discussion about the port a potty. 

3) To the best of my knowledge and from reading his post that's the most of what was discussed. The formation of a new managment group or a name has yet to be determined. The meeting which the BWA fail to have representation at, and only held a conversation in private which was not approved by the Club.

4) The deligation of voting priviliges for the property management was divided among the people who put up the money to buy it, and what those individuals chose to do with their voting priviliges is their business. It is NOT the privilige of BWA officers to trample those individuals to acquire the management responsiblity without a damn good reason.

5) I've yet to heard a valid reason for changing the management of the property to better meet the guidelines set forth fy the AW. The property is and alsways has met the guideline provided with the exception of Unauthorized BWA club meetings on the property (a violation of AW Guidelines) and allowing the pets of BWA club members to run free on the said property prior to and during those meetings ( also a violation of AW guidelines) 

6) Even the changes Mark is asking for are very similar to the existing property management plan. The only real change is having the interests of all parties represented by elected officers of each club.

7) The BWA, nor the Vikings, nor the EP, nor the BB, nor the EAMG have voted as bodies to support this idea. None of these bodies have authoriized any of their officers to even proceed with such a discusiion that was held on March 10.

8) it is becoming very apparent that the current officers involved in this manipulation of property management have failed to represent the wishes of the members of the BWA, or even ask fo ra vote on the issue. These officers have taken all efforts to do as they chose without the consent of the individuals they represent.

9) Based on the previous actions of the BWA and the current activities of the officers involved, I for one fial to see how any involvement by the BWA in the governance of the property can be beneficial for the improvement of following th guidelines of the AW on property management.]]></description>
      <category>BWA-Speak</category>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.americanwhitewater.org//content/Forum/read/send/9,4697,4814/#msg-4814</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 19:12:09 -0400</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
