Insurance fiasco

[com3]

I usually just show you finger when you ask me that, why bother wasting words

 

[reedcrr]

thanks everyone who took all their own personal time to get all of this sorted out. i'm happy with the outcome of it all.

thanks, berto, for taking the time to answer everyone's questions too. you must spend all day on this forum.

Dude... what are you talking about? Didn't you read what Berto just posted?

Good point charles. I heard "no Salas".

 

[Matt714]

Additionally, I have talked with many vendors doing biz with track day providers and so far none have noted that they are required to post any insurance with any of the tracks at any track day events.

Regards,[/QUOTE]


Trackdays aren't considered racedays(competitive). A person is at a trackday to improve their understanding and capabilities on said vehicle. Which can be considered a training event rather than a competive one. Thus when an individual wads their ride in a trackday event, they can claim the incident(I have heard of this ocurring may times).

 

[Georgie]

Trackdays aren't considered racedays(competitive). A person is at a trackday to improve their understanding and capabilities on said vehicle. Which can be considered a training event rather than a competive one. Thus when an individual wads their ride in a trackday event, they can claim the incident(I have heard of this ocurring may times).

NASA auto racing does not require their official vendors (photographers & tire/parts vendors) to post insurance and they hold their west coast races at BW, Infineon, T-Hill, Laguna Seca, Fontana and Miller, heck they race at just about every track in the USA this way

 

[Matt714]

NASA auto racing does not require their official vendors (photographers & tire/parts vendors) to post insurance and they hold their west coast races at BW, Infineon, T-Hill, Laguna Seca, Fontana and Miller, heck they race at just about every track in the USA this way

Ok Georgie,

This is why I have not posted during this elongated thread of whining. It has nothing to do personally with you it is just that one person sees it one way and another a different way. What happens is just what we have here, 21+ pages of sorry to say it, "bitching back and forth".

What has occured is just that, "it has happened". As any compentant business individual would evaluate the situation and make his/her decision accordingly in which to continue or to fold. This is the same decision that all of us racers make in the time of finacial decisions.

Yes, I do know the person which was called apon to help us in the new insurance requirements. I can tell everyone this, I have never meet anyone who is more dedicated to the improvement and promotion of OUR sport, while continually taking a loss to his personal time and finances.

Regards
Brooksy

 

[Georgie]

I am not trying to argue Brooksy, just wanted to point out that there are many orgs still doing things differently. That may change, but for the moment the AFM is in the lead all by themselves in this direction

I am satisfied at this point that the AFM is doing the best they can and working with their vendors proactively now.

 

[com3]

I am satisfied at this point that the AFM is doing the best they can and working with their vendors proactively now.

+1

 

[TWF]

Zoran...that is your belief that things by board members shouldn't be said in certain ways

you are 100% correct, that is my opinion.

 

[CTS488]

you are 100% correct, that is my opinion.

and i agree!!!

 

[TWF]

and i agree!!!

you would like to change it tho

 

[Gary J]

......i agree with you Zoran that while on the board you should act a certain way ...this is all berto has been doing is defending himself. .....

Relevant to the topic of these most recent postings in this thread, is a significant event that showed up this morning on the AFM discussion. As that this significant event may have impact on the direction of these current discussions, and has yet to be referenced by anyone here, bringing note of that event here seems appropriate:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Event:

Berto publicly posted a formal offer (directed to Alex), that he would voluntarily "resign" from the AFM Board, IF Alex agrees to:

• - Also "resign" from the AFM Board
  - Drop any/all current legal actions (if they exist) against the AFM
  - Commit to not enact any subsequent legal actions in the future, against the AFM. on the current issue(s)

It is pretty disappointing that the previously mentioned "Option #1" doesn't seem to have a glimmer of hope at this point.

That option being a path where all BOD members would soften up a bit from their current stance, and having a willingness to revisit an approach for some level of shared-responsibility on past events. An approach seeking a "win-win" solution, and learning/growing process, where all members could continue to remain in position on the BORD.

Is it too late now? Doesn't look good ...... but it doesn't have to be over, until the final gavel falls. Collectively (if 100% can agree) the BORD members still have the power to redirect that energy in a positive direction.

 

[Fast Turtle]

Relevant to the topic of these most recent postings in this thread, is a significant event that showed up this morning on the AFM discussion. As that this significant event may have impact on the direction of these current discussions, and has yet to be referenced by anyone here, bringing note of that event here seems appropriate:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Event:

Berto publicly posted a formal offer (directed to Alex), that he would voluntarily "resign" from the AFM Board, IF Alex agrees to:

• - Also "resign" from the AFM Board
  - Drop any/all current legal actions (if they exist) against the AFM
  - Commit to not enact any subsequent legal actions in the future, against the AFM. on the current issue(s)

It is pretty disappointing that the previously mentioned "Option #1" doesn't seem to have a glimmer of hope at this point.

That option being a path where all BOD members would soften up a bit from their current stance, and having a willingness to revisit an approach for some level of shared-responsibility on past events. An approach seeking a "win-win" solution, and learning/growing process, where all members could continue to remain in position on the BORD.

Is it too late now? Doesn't look good ...... but it doesn't have to be over, until the final gavel falls. Collectively (if 100% can agree) the BORD members still have the power to redirect that energy in a positive direction.

Unfortunately Gary I think option 1 disappeared when the recall ballot went out. That left only three options.
1. Alex voluntarily resigns.
2. Alex "wins" recall.
3. Alex "loses" recall.

No matter how this shakes out I believe the AFM will be/already is the worse for it. I know most of the current BOD and applaud them for stepping up and volunteering, but I can't see how any "good" can come from this whole situation. I also believe it is long past time the club hired a competent Executive Director to take care of the vast majority of the club's day to day business and do the research necessary for the Board to make informed decisions on issues facing the club. Market the club and grow sponsorship and revenues. I have been on both sides of the non-profit BOD fence and I can say unequivocally that having a "competent" ED makes the organization and the Board function exponentially better.

 

[Gary J]

You have some good insights on the whole non-profit organization structure Patrick.

Unfortunately Gary I think option 1 disappeared when the recall ballot went out. That left only three options.

Actually the question of whether the current "Recall" action is absolutely (legally as per the AFM "By-Laws") unrescindable, once it has been started (i.e ballots sent out), was one that I brought to the table in the official AFM forum. The purpose was to see if there was still any light at the end of the tunnel on a possibility of a less damaging outcome to this current situation, if the AFM BORD had a mindset to do so.

I posed the question directly to Shawn (in the section specifically created for formal "questions"), asking for him (or anyone) to specify the actual verbiage in the official By-Laws that specificially stated it was NOT allowed (legal) to rescind a recall process once started. (i.e. "no going back")

A posting reply followed by David W. (AFM VP) that was good enough to share the exact text of the entire section in the By-Laws that covered the guidelines for recalls. Reading it end-to-end, nowhere in that wording did I see any exact wording that "forbids" (i.e. says you "can't") rescinding a recall process, and instead making a decision to take an alternate path.

The follow-up question to Shawn, was to let us know the word(s) in the By-Laws (that had been posted at that point) that (he perceived at least) removed the power of the BORD to rescind a recall process once started ... even if they decided they wished to take that action.

Despite a number of days passing since that formal question was asked in this dedicated section on the official AFM forum, that was created for direct Q&A of the main BORD member(s) ...... no response has ever come from Shawn (or any other BORD member). Longterm silence ..... following the posing of a question (in such situations), is in itself often an answer.

The BORD certainly has the power to take whatever path they wish, and if they truly want to take this recall to the final driving of the stake .... that's their privilege. I'm just not OK with it going to that final "win-lose" level at this point, based upon the criteria that "we couldn't stop the process", because of the By-Law wording.

I don't believe it's too late .... until the final trigger is pulled ...... and in this recall situation, I don't believe the ballots going out is that pull. The bullet is still in the gun, and could be removed ...... if the BORD could all come together and make some individual consolations, for the good of the rest of the club members.

 

[675 Trip]

rescind recall

Gary,

If the by-laws don't allow for it, it can't be done. Recall is a process that once started must be moot (alex resigns) or completed (recalled or not).