I recommend that we all vote No; I will.--On Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 10:43 PM Serge Issakov <serge....@gmail.com> wrote:Hi everyone!--I've been representing SDBC and the whole cycling community as best as I can on the board of the San Diego County Bicycle Coalition for almost 20 years now. My priorities, along with most of the other club reps on the board, have always been to protect our rights to ride in the road, to make the roads safer, to ensure bike infrastructure is high quality, and to make cycling in San Diego even more inviting for all.Others have different priorities, and this sometimes leads to uncomfortable contention. As a result, those who prioritize building physical separation between cars and bikes at the top have proposed a change to the Coalition bylaws that would eliminate club reps like myself from the board.Obviously, I think that's a very bad idea, hope you agree, and ask that you'll please take a few minutes now to register to vote on Zoom on 7/27, and then attend the Zoom voting session at 6:30pm on Wednesday 7/27 to VOTE NO on this bylaws amendment.If you have any questions, hopefully you'll find the answer here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10kQyjwWg0NGWLSWuE5_9fSkSUYh_0YyiTIwzXjX17LU/edit?usp=sharingHow to vote:
- If you’re not already a Coalition member, join (for free) TODAY, here:
- Register on Zoom by 7/25 to VOTE NO on 7/2.
- Attend a short 7/27 Zoom meeting to VOTE NO at 6:30PM
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.Thanks,
Serge
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BikeWalkEncinitas" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to EncinitasBikeAndPedestr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/EncinitasBikeAndPedestrianCommittee/CAEy9bH7HocughQRA%3DEHworvPpwZ1yVw_PoaznH_%3D2df0AJfsxg%40mail.gmail.com.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BikeWalkEncinitas" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to EncinitasBikeAndPedestr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/EncinitasBikeAndPedestrianCommittee/CAG28zXco5BTnAgaBNZANaeNpTEs9F7wGVoQhUm9mE0rc%3D_4MNA%40mail.gmail.com.
I'd like to correct a few misconceptions or misunderstandings about the upcoming vote by Bike Coalition members on the proposed bylaw amendments. First the amendment will not prevent any member of a bike club from being on the Board of Directors. They would only need to run for the position just like all the other Board members. That's what is meant by making the Board selection process more democratic. In fact, there currently are two elected members who clearly identify themselves as members of a bike club, and there have been more. Input from club riders is still sought, and the Coalition established the Council of Clubs expressly to provide for that whether or not the club has a member on the Board..
Second, the process for being nominated to be a Board member hasn't changed except that the Coalition will no longer take nomination from the Board at the time of the meeting where the vote takes place. There is a good reason for this. The current bylaws require a slate of candidates to be sent to the Board 30 days prior to the vote. This is so the Governance Committee can gather information about the candidates that the membership can see in advance of the vote. We want to know who we are voting on. The nomination process through the Governance Committee won't change if the amendments pass. Every Board member, and even every Coalition member is welcome to participate in the nomination process. Decisions are made by those who show up and do the work. If the outcome is important to you, then show up.
Yes there have been some significant differences on some policy issues at the Coalition Board, but I honestly believe the Board has made some significant strides in reducing the differences in opinion by basing our policy decisions on what we see working for other areas around the country and other bike advocacy groups. The proposed bylaw amendments will make our organizational structure consistent with every other professionally run bike advocacy group around the state and the country that I am aware of. The smaller size of the Board will ensure each member has the space to contribute, and the term limits (3 2-year terms or six years) provide time for people to make a difference, but also create room for new voices over time. It's the current structure that includes unelected Board members with no term limits from however many clubs want seats on the Board that is at odds with good practice.
Please join us in making the San Diego County Bicycle Coalition a better organization for all of us by becoming a member if you aren't (it's FREE!), registering for the meeting by July 25, and voting yes on July 27. Thanks for your thoughtful consideration of this important decision.
Stephan Vance
Chair, San Diego County Bicycle Coalition Board of Directors
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "San Diego Bicyclist Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to San-Diego-Bicyclis...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/San-Diego-Bicyclist-Forum/CAA58Sze67q29CED_61RC_beX1bWF%2BSwXa6jSzoYJnddFTqx5XA%40mail.gmail.com.
How to vote:
- If you’re not already a Coalition member, join (for free) TODAY or very soon, here:
- Register on Zoom by 7/25 to VOTE NO on 7/2.
- Attend a short 7/27 Zoom meeting to VOTE NO online at approximately 6:30PM
Sender notified by Mailtrack | 07/20/22, 07:43:34 PM |
1) If you’re not already a Coalition member, join (for free) TODAY!2) Register on Zoom by 7/25 to VOTE NO on 7/27https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_5_lr3QtGSaK2IKe1A2lhIA (Some time after you register you'll get a link via email to use to attend the 7/27 Zoom meeting.)3) Attend a short 7/27 Zoom meeting to VOTE NO at 6:30PM
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/San-Diego-Bicyclist-Forum/67651244.2127215.1658360662959%40myemail.cox.net.
<<Hello BikeSD friends —
I am writing to you all with what I know is a huge ask — I would really, really appreciate it if you could sign up as a member of the Bicycle Coalition and vote YES on these bylaw changes on July 27th.
For those unaware, the Bicycle Coalition has been held hostage for years by a group of cyclists who are against building the safe, protected bicycle infrastructure San Diego County needs to get more people riding bikes. These cyclists — mostly older, white men — have held our organization hostage, bullying anyone who disagrees with them and causing massive internal issues in our advocacy work. In fact, BikeSD was formed in part due to these cyclists pushing young, progressive cyclists out of the Coalition.
As part of the leadership team at the Bicycle Coalition, I view this period of our organization’s history as incredibly shameful. I believe that our advocacy is better when we pedal together — and as such, SDCBC leadership has been working over the past few years to rebuild our relationship with your organization. We hope to continue to work together in the future to protect vulnerable road users — but we need your help to make this happen.
So how can you help? The Coalition’s Leadership has proposed significant changes to the way our organization operates, and we need as many YES votes as possible when our organization votes on them later this month. Here’s what you’ll need to do:
1) Become a member of the Bicycle Coalition before July 25th. You can sign up for free by clicking here.
2) Register for the bylaws voting session. Sign up using this link.
3) Show up at the virtual vote on July 27th @ 6:30 PM and vote YES! The vote should occur early in the meeting, so it won’t take too much of your time. You’re welcome to stay for the rest of the meeting as well.
Please let me know if you are able to make it, or if you have any questions.
In solidarity,
Jacob Mandel
Advocacy Committee Chair
San Diego County Bicycle Coalition>>
reducing our board from 30+ to 15
Introducing term limits
On Jul 22, 2022, at 12:53 PM, Richard Opper <ric...@richardopper.com> wrote:Richard G. Opper3136 Dumas St.San Diego, CA 92106Cell: 619.417-6899“I was not yet 16 when I understood a great deal, from having ridden bicycles for so long, about style, speed, grace, purpose, value, form, integrity, health, humor, music, breathing, and finally and perhaps best, of the relationship between the beginning and the end.” William Saroyan
From: sdcbc...@googlegroups.com [mailto:sdcbc...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Serge Issakov
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2022 10:54 PM
To: stephanvance stephanvance <stepha...@cox.net>
Cc: San Diego Bike Forum <San-Diego-Bi...@googlegroups.com>; encinitasbikeandp...@googlegroups.com; encinita...@gmail.com <encinita...@gmail.com>; sdcbc_council_of_bicycle_clubs <sdcbc_council_o...@googlegroups.com>; sdcbc-board <sdcbc...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [SDCBC-Board] Re: [San-Diego-Bicyclist-Forum] Re: [EncinitasBikeandPedCommittee] Please VOTE NO on proposal Coalition bylaws amendment
Hi Stephan and all,I too would like to "correct a few misconceptions or misunderstandings about the upcoming vote by Bike Coalition members on the proposed bylaw amendments".
- Club representatives like myself are elected by Coalition members just like at-large board members are, it's just a subset of the full membership that are members of each representative's respective club that elects the club reps. How exactly the coalition, the community, or anyone would benefit from having all board members elected by the full Coalition membership remains unaddressed, much less answered to any reasonable satisfaction. In cities like Encinitas and San Diego representatives are elected by district. Would the system be more fair or "more democratic" if everyone voted on every council member instead of doing it by district?
- Non-profit organizations like the Coalition have a wide degree of latitude in determining how their board members are selected. On one extreme, organizations that have a very specific mission may have a self-selected board, where the board itself selects its own members. In contrast, the mission of the Coalition is relatively broad. From encouraging more people to cycle more to protecting and expanding the rights of cyclists, evaluating and weighing in on bike infrastructure projects, providing education, etc. Naturally, there are differing opinions on how best to achieve these goals, and how to prioritize among them when there are conflicts. Having a diversity of opinions about the best directions to take can be cumbersome at times, but in the end that's what makes our organization a coalition, and gives it extraordinary power and strength.The founders of the Coalition had the wisdom to realize they could achieve such a diversity of opinion and broad representation from the cycling community by including club representatives selected by local bike clubs on their board. That's just as true today as it was 35 years ago.
- Trivializing the importance of removing the right of board members to nominate candidates at the annual meeting is very misleading. It may have been presented to you as an insignificant change, but you must by now understand that it shifts the entire power of selecting and presenting the slate of candidates at the annual meeting to one person: The Chair of the Governance committee, who, coincidentally, is the primary author of this proposal to change the bylaws. Under the current and proposed bylaws, if you, for example, wisely wanted to nominate Kristine Schindler to the board, you can let the Governance Committee know, they would decide whether they agree, and ultimately the Chair is charged with deciding whether to include her on the slate presented at the time of the election. However, should the Committee or Chair decide to not include her for any reason whatsoever, under the current bylaws you (or any other board member) could still nominate her at the annual meeting. The importance of retaining that power is subtle: it's precisely because you have the ability to nominate her anyway at the Annual Meeting that it behooves the Committee and Chair to not dismiss your suggestion in the first place. Removing that ability amounts to an enormous power grab in terms of how board candidates are selected: from every individual board member to just the Governance Committee and ultimately only its Chair. This seemingly subtle change but actual enormous power grab alone warrants rejection of the proposal.
- Stephan, if you "honestly believe the Board has made some significant strides in reducing the differences in opinion", you might want to let the rest of your Executive Committee know. Your colleagues, the main proponents of this proposal, have recently made it quite clear that that is not their opinion at all. To the contrary. The primary author of the proposal, and Chair of the Governance Committee, Katie Crist, has revealed that this proposal is the culmination of "years of struggle to ... eliminate the hold the cycle club / VCs have on this organization." Yes, "eliminate" is her word. In the meantime, Jacob Mandel, our Advocacy Committee Chair, has exposed sexism, ageism and racism in expressing why this proposal is important to him: "These cyclists — mostly older, white men — have held our organization hostage, bullying anyone who disagrees with them and causing massive internal issues in our advocacy work." These are not the words of people seeking ways to work effectively with their fellow board members.
- How exactly this alleged "holding hostage" and "bullying" has manifested itself is not stated, because it's false. The staff and leadership and majority of the board is dominated by board members who are not club representatives or are even club members. Staff and board leadership is constantly taking actions and making decisions over which clubs have no say whatsoever, much less the ability to influence it. For example, we didn't have the ability to change the decision to stop supporting CABO for a few years, we couldn't stop the elimination of the rule that required 50% of the board to be club reps, we couldn't persuade Coalition leadership to oppose the Cardiff 101 cycle track project (which has caused 29 crashes so far, including one this week), and we couldn't stop these bylaws changes from being proposed. The notion that we have any control over what the Coalition does, much less are holding anyone hostage or are bullying anyone, is absurd, unless civil refutation of weak arguments is now considered "bullying".
Reminder: if you have not yet registered to vote on 7/27:
1) If you’re not already a Coalition member, join (for free) TODAY!2) Register on Zoom by 7/25 to VOTE NO on 7/27https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_5_lr3QtGSaK2IKe1A2lhIA (Some time after you register you'll get a link via email to use to attend the 7/27 Zoom meeting.)3) Attend a short 7/27 Zoom meeting to VOTE NO at 6:30PMRegards,SergeSDBC representative, San Diego County Coalition Board of Directors
On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 4:44 PM stephanvance stephanvance <stepha...@cox.net> wrote:
I'd like to correct a few misconceptions or misunderstandings about the upcoming vote by Bike Coalition members on the proposed bylaw amendments. First the amendment will not prevent any member of a bike club from being on the Board of Directors. They would only need to run for the position just like all the other Board members. That's what is meant by making the Board selection process more democratic. In fact, there currently are two elected members who clearly identify themselves as members of a bike club, and there have been more. Input from club riders is still sought, and the Coalition established the Council of Clubs expressly to provide for that whether or not the club has a member on the Board..Second, the process for being nominated to be a Board member hasn't changed except that the Coalition will no longer take nomination from the Board at the time of the meeting where the vote takes place. There is a good reason for this. The current bylaws require a slate of candidates to be sent to the Board 30 days prior to the vote. This is so the Governance Committee can gather information about the candidates that the membership can see in advance of the vote. We want to know who we are voting on. The nomination process through the Governance Committee won't change if the amendments pass. Every Board member, and even every Coalition member is welcome to participate in the nomination process. Decisions are made by those who show up and do the work. If the outcome is important to you, then show up.
Yes there have been some significant differences on some policy issues at the Coalition Board, but I honestly believe the Board has made some significant strides in reducing the differences in opinion by basing our policy decisions on what we see working for other areas around the country and other bike advocacy groups. The proposed bylaw amendments will make our organizational structure consistent with every other professionally run bike advocacy group around the state and the country that I am aware of. The smaller size of the Board will ensure each member has the space to contribute, and the term limits (3 2-year terms or six years) provide time for people to make a difference, but also create room for new voices over time. It's the current structure that includes unelected Board members with no term limits from however many clubs want seats on the Board that is at odds with good practice.
Please join us in making the San Diego County Bicycle Coalition a better organization for all of us by becoming a member if you aren't (it's FREE!), registering for the meeting by July 25, and voting yes on July 27. Thanks for your thoughtful consideration of this important decision.Stephan Vance
Chair, San Diego County Bicycle Coalition Board of Directors
On July 20, 2022 at 3:20 PM "Frank J. Lehnerz" <flehne...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Folks,These proposals seek to change the fundamental structure of the Coalition Board in particular WHO gets on and HOW.Here is a Google Slides presentation that attempts to visually explain what exactly these proposed by-law changes intend to do. At least this is how I undertstood things after spending a few hours trying to comb through the details while reaching out to others for some "fact checking."
Screenshots of the slides are also below/attached and reitterates the section in the document Serge attached, entitled "PROPOSED METHOD IS LESS DEMOCRATIC FOR NOMINATING BOARD CANDITATES"
<image002.png><image003.png><image004.png>
On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 at 08:38, Jim Baross <jimb...@cox.net> wrote:
I recommend that we all vote No; I will.
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022, 10:43 PM Serge Issakov <serge....@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi everyone!I've been representing SDBC and the whole cycling community as best as I can on the board of the San Diego County Bicycle Coalition for almost 20 years now. My priorities, along with most of the other club reps on the board, have always been to protect our rights to ride in the road, to make the roads safer, to ensure bike infrastructure is high quality, and to make cycling in San Diego even more inviting for all.Others have different priorities, and this sometimes leads to uncomfortable contention. As a result, those who prioritize building physical separation between cars and bikes at the top have proposed a change to the Coalition bylaws that would eliminate club reps like myself from the board.Obviously, I think that's a very bad idea, hope you agree, and ask that you'll please take a few minutes now to register to vote on Zoom on 7/27, and then attend the Zoom voting session at 6:30pm on Wednesday 7/27 to VOTE NO on this bylaws amendment.If you have any questions, hopefully you'll find the answer here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10kQyjwWg0NGWLSWuE5_9fSkSUYh_0YyiTIwzXjX17LU/edit?usp=sharing
How to vote:1. If you’re not already a Coalition member, join (for free) TODAY, here:2. Register on Zoom by 7/25 to VOTE NO on 7/2.3. Attend a short 7/27 Zoom meeting to VOTE NO at 6:30PM
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.Thanks,
Serge
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BikeWalkEncinitas" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email toEncinitasBikeAndPedestr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/EncinitasBikeAndPedestrianCommittee/CAEy9bH7HocughQRA%3DEHworvPpwZ1yVw_PoaznH_%3D2df0AJfsxg%40mail.gmail.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BikeWalkEncinitas" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email toEncinitasBikeAndPedestr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/EncinitasBikeAndPedestrianCommittee/CAG28zXco5BTnAgaBNZANaeNpTEs9F7wGVoQhUm9mE0rc%3D_4MNA%40mail.gmail.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "San Diego Bicyclist Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to San-Diego-Bicyclis...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/San-Diego-Bicyclist-Forum/CAA58Sze67q29CED_61RC_beX1bWF%2BSwXa6jSzoYJnddFTqx5XA%40mail.gmail.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "San Diego Bicyclist Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to San-Diego-Bicyclis...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/San-Diego-Bicyclist-Forum/67651244.2127215.1658360662959%40myemail.cox.net.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sdcbc-board" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdcbc-board...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sdcbc-board/CAEy9bH7jDigWkEJgRoZQveN-sv_4vLrun2RqU%2BMwhn1KvuRqAQ%40mail.gmail.com.--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sdcbc-board" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdcbc-board...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sdcbc-board/BY5PR20MB3169D183CD11E5FB9789E64FCD909%40BY5PR20MB3169.namprd20.prod.outlook.com.
Thank you Richard for helping everyone to think clearly and fairly about this. No one is exploring options to ensure access to nominations yet, but I have stated more than once in these discussions about the bylaws that the Governance Committee will be asked, at least by me, to draft formal, written procedures for taking and processing nominations to the Board.
I think her language was inartful - but it doesn’t justify the extraordinary response it engendered. Unfortunately, the sense of peril that was drummed up is counter productive. There are numerous solutions to the issue of insuring equal access to nominations. No one is exploring any of them so the baby gets tossed with the bath water.
I hope you also know that there are people like me who have been involved for more than 10 years trying to get us to this historic vote. It has been years of struggle to get our board to a place where we could put this before the membership and finally have a chance to eliminate the hold the cycling club / VCs have on this organization.
For those unaware, the Bicycle Coalition has been held hostage for years by a group of cyclists who are against building the safe, protected bicycle infrastructure San Diego County needs to get more people riding bikes. These cyclists — mostly older, white men — have held our organization hostage, bullying anyone who disagrees with them and causing massive internal issues in our advocacy work.
Thank you Richard for helping everyone to think clearly and fairly about this. No one is exploring options to ensure access to nominations yet, but I have stated more than once in these discussions about the bylaws that the Governance Committee will be asked, at least by me, to draft formal, written procedures for taking and processing nominations to the Board.On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 2:51 PM Richard Opper <ric...@richardopper.com> wrote:I think her language was inartful - but it doesn’t justify the extraordinary response it engendered. Unfortunately, the sense of peril that was drummed up is counter productive. There are numerous solutions to the issue of insuring equal access to nominations. No one is exploring any of them so the baby gets tossed with the bath water.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 22, 2022, at 1:13 PM, Myles <mpom...@san.rr.com> wrote:
Richard and Stephan,
----Stephan
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SDCBC_Council_of_Bicycle_Clubs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdcbc_council_of_bicy...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sdcbc_council_of_bicycle_clubs/CAHQQwD_aSa7aLnP6YJUNk6P7ARr2-7h-Nv3524TD58_qG17--g%40mail.gmail.com.
We have had a nomination process Frank that we have used for the last two elections of Directors, but apparently you weren't paying attention. All we are proposing to do now is codify the process in a written statement, and make sure everyone is in agreement.
--Stephan
This is correct, on both sides of the issue, but follow the money. Currently, grants and funding are leaning towards Class IV bikeways. The question is, are all of them safe? And if not, how do we make them safe. Also, if not deemed safe by those who wish to travel at a speed higher than that of a family with children, why aren't there automatic sharrows requested beside these facilities as well? After all, my understanding of Class IV Bikeways is that they do not fall under the jurisdiction of the roadway. Therefore, requesting "Complete Streets" would seem obvious. Also, e-bikes are rarely mentioned. Five years ago, they were rarely seen. Now, even on uphill sections 20mph is attainable by novices who do not understand what the terms "Right Hook" or "Left Cross" are, not to mention the "Door Zone".
On Jul 22, 2022, at 18:54, David Nichols <purples...@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Only volunteers trying their best to keep the organization responsive to the dynamic change our society is going through, and that lies ahead." This is correct, on both sides of the issue, but follow the money. Currently, grants and funding are leaning towards Class IV bikeways. The question is, are all of them safe? And if not, how do we make them safe. Also, if not deemed safe by those who wish to travel at a speed higher than that of a family with children, why aren't there automatic sharrows requested beside these facilities as well? After all, my understanding of Class IV Bikeways is that they do not fall under the jurisdiction of the roadway. Therefore, requesting "Complete Streets" would seem obvious. Also, e-bikes are rarely mentioned. Five years ago, they were rarely seen. Now, even on uphill sections 20mph is attainable by novices who do not understand what the terms "Right Hook" or "Left Cross" are, not to mention the "Door Zone".
Myles, Serge, Frank et al.,Does this email from July 14th, 2022 explain your distrust and vehement opposition to amending the bylaws 5 years ago when first proposed?
This email explains your opposition at every meeting we’ve had over the past several years to try to diversify our board and increase representation for people who ride bikes for reasons outside of sport?
This email explains your vote on April 27th as one of 5 lone votes of opposition?
This email explains why NOT ONE of you has ever participated with the election process or the Governance Committee or contributed a single nominee, despite being asked every year?
Or is this unfortunately public email, born out of years of frustration from being the recipient of your unwavering conspiratorial and aggressive opposition to common sense progress in the organization, really just a convenient pretext for the latest installment of your panicked campaign to keep yourselves in power at all costs.
Is it really just an opportune way for you to desperately cling to a seat on the board, knowing it’s the only thing lending legitimacy to your disproven views on bike advocacy.
Is it really just a chance for you to play victim and not have to answer the question on why you feel your voices are so much more valuable than anyone else’s that you should remain on the Board since the inception of the Coalition.I’m sure this email explains your deep distrust of any other potential person who might represent your clubs on the board, such that you’ve not even considered developing any new leaders or bringing new voices to the table over your 30 years of your service.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sdcbc_council_of_bicycle_clubs/CAA58SzckZ8exVXndjQO4z98mOhgkJuSe23it6Pfz7mA81-3x2w%40mail.gmail.com.
Does this email from July 14th, 2022 explain your distrust and vehement opposition to amending the bylaws 5 years ago when first proposed?
This email explains your opposition at every meeting we’ve had over the past several years to try to diversify our board and increase representation for people who ride bikes for reasons outside of sport?
This email explains your vote on April 27th as one of 5 lone votes of opposition?
This email explains why NOT ONE of you has ever participated with the election process or the Governance Committee or contributed a single nominee, despite being asked every year?
Or is this unfortunately public email, born out of years of frustration from being the recipient of your unwavering conspiratorial and aggressive opposition to common sense progress in the organization, really just a convenient pretext for the latest installment of your panicked campaign to keep yourselves in power at all costs.
Is it really just an opportune way for you to desperately cling to a seat on the board, knowing it’s the only thing lending legitimacy to your disproven views on bike advocacy.
Is it really just a chance for you to play victim and not have to answer the question on why you feel your voices are so much more valuable than anyone else’s that you should remain on the Board since the inception of the Coalition.
I’m sure this email explains your deep distrust of any other potential person who might represent your clubs on the board, such that you’ve not even considered developing any new leaders or bringing new voices to the table over your 30 years of your service.
Myles, Serge, Frank et al.,
Does this email from July 14th, 2022 explain your distrust and vehement opposition to amending the bylaws 5 years ago when first proposed?This email explains your opposition at every meeting we’ve had over the past several years to try to diversify our board and increase representation for people who ride bikes for reasons outside of sport?
This email explains your vote on April 27th as one of 5 lone votes of opposition?
This email explains why NOT ONE of you has ever participated with the election process or the Governance Committee or contributed a single nominee, despite being asked every year?
Or is this unfortunately public email, born out of years of frustration from being the recipient of your unwavering conspiratorial and aggressive opposition to common sense progress in the organization, really just a convenient pretext for the latest installment of your panicked campaign to keep yourselves in power at all costs.Is it really just an opportune way for you to desperately cling to a seat on the board, knowing it’s the only thing lending legitimacy to your disproven views on bike advocacy.Is it really just a chance for you to play victim and not have to answer the question on why you feel your voices are so much more valuable than anyone else’s that you should remain on the Board since the inception of the Coalition.I’m sure this email explains your deep distrust of any other potential person who might represent your clubs on the board, such that you’ve not even considered developing any new leaders or bringing new voices to the table over your 30 years of your service.
KatieOn Jul 22, 2022, at 9:39 PM, Frank J. Lehnerz <flehne...@gmail.com> wrote:
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sdcbc_council_of_bicycle_clubs/CAA58SzckZ8exVXndjQO4z98mOhgkJuSe23it6Pfz7mA81-3x2w%40mail.gmail.com.
On Jul 22, 2022, at 7:36 PM, Katie Crist <katie...@gmail.com> wrote:
Myles, Serge, Frank et al.,
Does this email from July 14th, 2022 explain your distrust and vehement opposition to amending the bylaws 5 years ago when first proposed?This email explains your opposition at every meeting we’ve had over the past several years to try to diversify our board and increase representation for people who ride bikes for reasons outside of sport?This email explains your vote on April 27th as one of 5 lone votes of opposition?This email explains why NOT ONE of you has ever participated with the election process or the Governance Committee or contributed a single nominee, despite being asked every year?Or is this unfortunately public email, born out of years of frustration from being the recipient of your unwavering conspiratorial and aggressive opposition to common sense progress in the organization, really just a convenient pretext for the latest installment of your panicked campaign to keep yourselves in power at all costs.Is it really just an opportune way for you to desperately cling to a seat on the board, knowing it’s the only thing lending legitimacy to your disproven views on bike advocacy.Is it really just a chance for you to play victim and not have to answer the question on why you feel your voices are so much more valuable than anyone else’s that you should remain on the Board since the inception of the Coalition.I’m sure this email explains your deep distrust of any other potential person who might represent your clubs on the board, such that you’ve not even considered developing any new leaders or bringing new voices to the table over your 30 years of your service.
KatieOn Jul 22, 2022, at 9:39 PM, Frank J. Lehnerz <flehne...@gmail.com> wrote:
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sdcbc_council_of_bicycle_clubs/CAA58SzckZ8exVXndjQO4z98mOhgkJuSe23it6Pfz7mA81-3x2w%40mail.gmail.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SDCBC_Council_of_Bicycle_Clubs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sdcbc_council_of_bicy...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sdcbc_council_of_bicycle_clubs/295D36E2-70DD-4232-8830-CAFBC6891298%40gmail.com.