VCCA Home Forums GENERAL DISCUSSION General Discussions VCCA Chat Chapter (members only)

We need to face up to what the BOD intended when they allowed Billy Barker to set up the Chatter.
It would be a place to help get ideas about restoreing and preserving old Chevrolets....Not a place where anyone should discuss matters about politics, makeup of the BOD nor anything else, dealing with the internal workings of the VCCA. I guess that is really what they are telling us. So be it....

That is what I think!

So what have you been doing to your old Chevrolet whilst we are off the air?
I have been getting parts bought and cataloged so that I will be ready, when I get really ready!

Yep...and from now on all your sandwiches will be on white bread only!

I'm dissapointed and I'm not going to comment at this time except to say.....RGwiz has done an exemplary job of putting this whole thing together for us and deserves a resounding round of applause...can you hear mine?.....Perhaps another time?

Some BOD members dislike Chatter so much that they would shut it down?? WOW....have we struck that much fear in the hearts of some?

8000+ VCCA members
5000+ members of CHAT and growing.....hmmmm


I'm quitting before the chat cops arrive

Hey now...

...give your self the applause! You guys are the alive bunch that wants to see this club move into the 21 century and beyond!

...and never say quit!
...quit'n for sissys.

According to RG's post above, the vote was:

" The Board vote was 8 YES, and 5 NO. 1 abstention, 4 didn't vote. "

I suppose the abstention was a "conflict of interest" situation.

But 4 (FOUR) simply didn't vote!?!?! How can that be?? Out of the country?? Personal situation, funeral, in re-hab, etc??

I wonder if the four that didn't vote usually don't vote on issues brought before the board?? I just don't understand why four board members wouldn't vote.

Does anybody know why four bored members didn't vote???

Bill.

Hey 42,

As you know the site has been down for a few days, so I didn't see your question.

I'm sorta in agreement with Mr. Macks thought that a "did not vote" is usually a "no" vote.

...it's like, if ya don't want to say something good, don't say anything at all...

"...it's like, if ya don't want to say something good, don't say anything at all... "

Sounds like a one liner to me!!!

What a

"I wonder if the four that didn't vote usually don't vote on issues brought before the board?? I just don't understand why four board members wouldn't vote."

42bill, that is a very good question. However, more importantly, you might want to ask yourself if the four board members that didn't vote were included in the tally of the voting process so that their votes would be included as a no vote.

Example: Assuming that a quorum (2/3rds) of the board is needed to hold a vote and with 14 board members out of 18 voting there apparently was a quorum. With 8 yes votes, 5 no votes and 1 abstention, it appears that the vote did pass, but the motion was still defeated. Think about it.

I agree with ken48 that RGwiz along with several others did a fine job setting up the Chatter Chapter. I though it was and still is a good idea to go ahead with the formation of Chatter Chapter. Next to the G&D the new chapter is the best part of the VCCA. I thought like any other orginization, the BOD is elected to represent the membership in decisions affecting the orginization. How could a BOD member vote against or not vote for an item that was so popular with the members they are supposed to represent. In reading the annual BOD meeting minutes it appears that some members do not vote with their consitutants in mind. Also it has been mentioned a few times that some BOD members dislike the Chatter. What could anyone have against something that is so popular?
I think the Chatter Chapter should be discussed at the next board meeting. If it is voted down again we should consider how we vote in the next election. RGwiz - Stay with us on this. Don't give up.
If any BOD members read this I hope you will give this matter some serious consideration. Use a little "horse sense". Don't be so technical. There are a lot of VCCA members that want this Chapter to fly. JAR41

JYD,

As you acknowledge, you're making some assumptions there. If your assumptions are correct, it obviously should have passed.

Unfortunately, I don't think your assumptions are correct. It's my understanding, regardless of how many actually vote, for a motion to pass there must be 10 'yes' votes. In other words, even if only 12 or 14 or whatever number vote, there must to 10 'yes' votes to pass.

I think I'm correct about needing 10 'yes' votes regardless of how many of the 18 actually vote; but I'd sure like to hear about this from somebody who REALLY knows.

Bill.

"It's my understanding, regardless of how many actually vote, for a motion to pass there must be 10 'yes' votes. In other words, even if only 12 or 14 or whatever number vote, there must to 10 'yes' votes to pass."

That sounds correct. I think also that (1) the board would probably need to have a quorum (2/3rds) in attendance to vote, and (2) the voting procedure would be dictated in the VCCA by-laws which would include the minimum number of "yes" votes required for a motion to pass.

As usual Polyticks is way over my head.
I'm disgusted with the vote.

The way I see it we are all VCCA members but do we need the VCCA to set up a "Chat Chapter"? Which is only virtual on the web anyway? So do we need the blessing of a boring short sighted board?
Ok! No VCCA goodies at our virtual car shows. No write up in the G&D of our virtual tours....So What?

This is my own honest opinion!

Like everyone else I am saddened by the vote but I take heart and hope with the actual vote numbers.
At this stage I say keep pushing and also even if only for the sake of curiosity find out why 4 of the BOD didnt vote and the other 4 voted no. We may be able to convert some of them to a yes. I would think at least 1 of the yes voters would list the opposing voters.
We did hurry into this, (which I agreed with) strike while the iron is hot but with hindsight maybe we should have left it in the fire a while longer.
I certaily wont be jumping ship over the first setback.
Tony

It is like anything that more than 2 or 3 humans participate in, there will be differences of opinions. Democracy is the poor mans way of evening out the situation, kick out the king, elect fair minded reps. We just gotta be sure the reps. we elect are fair minded. The key is for everyone to vote your choice, after you get input as to what the candidates stand for, our club has been pathetically lax on that point. Maybe several radicals and firebrands can revive the majority, with the help of the majority of our general members, whether they have computers or not, we still have many means of communicating the good news!
Lord willing, I will continue to be in the pot stirring, stirring, right along with the Chatters here!

Happy Thanksgiving Chatters! Turkey , pumpkin pie and football, That's the American way, you guys across the pond bare with us, and have a good day yourselves........

maybe we can have our Chatter bunch club anyway "Informally joined in a common cause?" without a charter.
Make up a email address list (a group)of those that were on the list and we can keep in touch!

Actually, it is our understanding that there were 9 "yes" votes and one of the "yes" votes changed to a "no" vote at the end. Also, two of the four "no" votes felt that Non-Geographic Regions are for specific vehicles and that the VCCA by-laws need to be changed to accept our type of region.

On the other two "no" votes, "rumor" has it that they feel Chevy Chatter should be discontinued.

There is no word, however, as to why the other four board members didn't vote.

Concerning the 10 "yes" votes required for a motion to pass, the word that we received is that the 10 "yes" votes needed are based on the total number of board members, which is 18. In that case, depending upon how you look at it, the four members that didn't vote could be considered "no" votes. However, we don't know if 10 "yes" votes are still required even if only two-thirds (which would constitute a quorum) of the board members actually voted and the rest did not.
:( :( :(

Mr. Mack, or Joe or someone else with a copy of the by-laws of the VCCA;

Could one or more of you do a little research? How many Board Members represent a quorum and must be "present" to hold an official meeting? Is that reserved for just meetings where people are physically in the same place or can that also be by remote means? Once a quorum is "present" then how many votes are required to pass a motion? Is it a simple majority of those "present" or of the entire Board?

Are there special requirements to hold a meeting by telephone or other electronic means? (I know that telephone conference calls have been held in the past that (is)are considered (a) "legal" meeting(s).) One just last June. Are there "rules" to hold an electonic vote? Do they specifically address the number of votes (positive, negative, abstain) necessary to constitute a legal or valid vote?

I may have missed a question or two in the sequence but, hopefully you will understand where I am coming from (or going to). The basic question is what constitutes a valid vote? Is it a simple majority of those voting as long as there is a quorum voting? To assume that those not voting would vote in the negative (or abstain) is not justified. They are simply not "present" during the vote! If that is the case then the motion to approve would pass with 8 affirmative votes out of the 13 cast, clearly a majority of those "present" and voting.

I see where you are headed Chipper,but I think that only works in a democracy.

Hard to say without having a set of by-laws in front of us.

Let me do a little football, catch a nap and put away some more stuffung and I will do some reading, and get back to you , if there is a chat online then.....Bye!

Chipper, please check your new email box. I didn't want to cause any more problems than usual here on Thanksgiving Day!
But, I do have that certain itch! You know , the one you feel out in the boonies when the hair on the back of your neck starts to stick straight out?

There is a move to amend the non-geographic motion wording to include all of the stuff Mike Jones talked about in his Oct G&D message.

Thanks guys for the encouragement. I'm not going anywhere until this thing is settled one way or another.

For now of course, we are still here, and still thinking. Some of the comments are good ones and should be followed up on.

I'm not sure but I think the vote was taken by email and phone calls. One might think that a quorum was never reached at one time. So...maybe ONLY the votes cast can be counted! ...mmmmm...
...RayG

According to the number of votes shown on the postings (8) yes, (5) no, (1) abstaining and (4) not voteing. There should have been enough to constitute a quorum:

VCCA By-Laws: A majority of the authorized number of Directors constitutes a Quorum for the transaction of business except as hereinafter stated. The authorized number of Directors could either be 18 or 17 , which makes the number required for a quorum since there must be a "majority" ...a majority for 17 is 9 and a majority of 18 is 10. There were 13 casting votes that would count toward the passing of the item up for vote. according to the way I read RONR the votes counting toward a majority would not include the 4 "not voting" nor the 1 Abstention. which would only require a majority of the 13 votes cast yes or no and to pass would require 7 votes.
RONR(10th ed.), p.387, l 5-25.

This is just my personal opinion since the only information about the discussion and resulting vote is what I read here on the Chat. and in the printed By-Laws of VCCA , and Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, 10th Edition

Thanks for the info. on the By-Laws Macky Wacky.

Here is the response that was officially received after the board voted:

Mike Jones emailed the final results at 3:06 p.m. today. (November 16, 2006)
YES = 8
No = 5
Abstain = 1
Failed to Vote = 4

Also, in another email received, Mike Jones, the VCCA President indicated that 10 "yes" votes were needed for the motion to pass.

However, according to what the By-Laws state in the above posting, it appears that the vote passed since the board did have a quorum on the voting and the majority of the 13 votes cast were "yes" votes!

:eek: :confused: :cry:

JYD, it would appear that way. However there may have been an instant where the BOD voted in a resolution mandateing that a majority must be a majority of those attending the meeting, if so then it should be written somewhere in the minutes of previous meetings.
The BOD, did take the time and energy to discuss the motion for a Chatter NG Region.
I wonder why there were all of those 4 "not voteing" Who were they trying to please? Does that mean that they neither care one way or the other about our efforts? The one abstintion vote also is strange when one understands why an abstintion vote is allowed.
I hope that our Regions don't parrot the voteing pattern of this instance, maybe they will just consider the incident "A bad example" of a Board of Directors event, and go from there.

By the way, If there had not been a quorum for the meeting the motion should never have come up for a vote!

Actually, the "not voting" on the part of various board members is nothing new. Check out your June 2006 edition of the G&D. Regarding the National Board minutes (17 board members were present) you will notice that motion 05-07 had 5 board members that didn't vote and two abstentions. On motion 05-15 there were seven board members that didn't vote and one abstention. And, on the next motion, 05-16, there were six board members that didn't vote and two abstentions.

:confused: :confused: :confused:

"By the way, If there had not been a quorum for the meeting the motion should never have come up for a vote!"

That is correct, and I think that possibly the confusion on the part of the board is that they figured that 10 "yes" votes were needed for the motion to pass when in fact 10 board members needed to be present to make a quorum so that the motion could be voted on. Two different things here.