Elkhorn meeting 4/23/08

Disclaimer: these are my notes – I’m sure I didn’t catch everything. I welcome additions/corrections from the other attendees.

Attendees:
Brian Sandmann – Vikings and BWA
Dave and Amy Stawicki – Elkhorn Paddlers, EAMG rep for EP, BWA
Hannah Helm – Elkhorn Paddlers
Nancy Moore – Elkhorn Paddlers
Jay Thomas – Bardstown Boaters
David and Kyra Quarles – EAMG, BWA and neighbors
Anne Chaney – BWA and neighbor
Brent Austin – EAMG, BWA
Mike Molnar – EAMG, BWA
Paul Singleton – paddler and local resident
David Margavage – EAMG, BWA
Zina Merkin – EAMG, BWA
Robert Milgate – BWA

Overall format / summary:
-Brief overview of history of property
-Overview of new management guidelines
-Overview of AW proposal for regional management group consisting of representatives of area paddling clubs and EAMG
-Some confusion over the purpose of the meeting – one attendee thought it was for EAMG to decide about whether to support AW’s proposal, and was frustrated to find out it was not.
- Open discussion about questions and concerns regarding the AW proposal, and any management issues the participants felt needed to be addressed. This was particularly fruitful because of the neighbors being there, as well as a few other Franklin County residents. Several suggestions were made (see list of comments below).
- Meeting ended with a proposal from Paul Singleton that individuals go back to their groups with a summary of the meeting and ask the groups to vote on whether they support in principle the formation of a regional council, and if so, to appoint/elect a couple of people as members of an interim regional committee to draft out a more detailed proposal / by-laws of the Elkhorn Management Council. The proposed time-line was to have clubs vote on this in May, and if there is support for the idea, have this committee meet for the first time in late May/ early June, with a goal for getting a new group operational by July or so.

Comments from the discussion

 neighbor was concerned about aggressive words on the listserv and hoped it would not translate into aggressive behavior at the takeout
 comment that as far as the property being maintained, the current arrangement seemed to be working ok for now.
 comment that interest within the EAMG has been flagging
 comment that more signage is needed at the site in regard to rules
 neighbor commented that when property was purchased she was worried it wouldn’t be maintained, but feels that it has been well maintained.
 suggestion made that new council have 2 reps plus a back-up from the bigger clubs, as opposed to current suggestion of one rep and one back-up from each group.
 Bardstown Boaters representative (Vice President Jay Thomas) said there was interest in the club to participate. They want the property kept up, and will help.
 comment that there should be no more building on the site
 comment that Vikings just want the place maintained, instead of bickering about it
 concern voiced that under the management guidelines, the part about “unless arrangements are made with AW” created a loophole in the rules about camping, etc.
 neighbors voiced strong opinion against having a pavilion on the property.
 neighbor noted that there have been problems before with dogs left at the property.
 one of the boaters (Sandmann?) suggested that the neighbors should each have a vote on the council, since they are directly affected by what happens at the property and have knowledge of what’s going on there.
 neighbor talked of having to run off wade fishermen many times and said we had to be diligent about policing the property.
 suggested we update the letter in the sheriff’s office describing activities allowed and not allowed and giving Dave and Kyra Quarles, and Anne Chaney authority to ask for vehicles to be towed or people run off.
 suggestion for a sign stating property to be vacated after dark?
 suggestion for a simple chain to be put across the entry, not locked, but a slight deterrent to folks coming on to the property just on impulse or whim.
 suggestion that all the folks go back to their clubs and suggest that
1) the clubs vote on the general principle of the new council and if they want to be involved
2) if they support the general idea, the clubs each nominate a couple people as interim representatives to flesh out a more specific organizational structure for the regional council.
Those people would be asked to meet in late May or early June, with a goal of the new council being operational by July.
 some discussion of whether Canoe KY or Nathan should be invited/involved, and no conclusion was drawn.
 via email, a comment that however the new council is set up, provisions should be made for how to handle a club’s dissolution, or failure to provide representation, or the formation of a new area club, in terms of how that would affect decision procedures in the council (quorum, majority vote, etc.), so that the council isn’t ever stalled out.

respectfully submitted,

Zina

Excellent job on the notes, Zina. I wasn't sure you were taking those as well. I was hoping someone was - as many excellent points were raised.

Good job, you deserve some credit here,

Mike

Zina,
Thank you so much for recording and posting the notes from the meeting. I greatly appreciate the effort involved and the information being available.

Gmead