Open Letter from the Board to Membership
This letter was co-authored by three members of the currently seated 4 member Airheads Beemer Club Board of Directors. Tim Roberts through actions and statements has already provided his perspective on many of these topics. The board members who contributed to this letter felt it was important to provide this factual information to the general membership to guard against rumors and falsehoods propagated on various social media and email platforms.
We respectfully request that each of the Airmarshals disseminate this information without edits, comment or embellishments to your membership via email or whatever means you would typically convey club information to their local membership.
Q - What does it mean if I “vote” in favor of "The DUO"?
A -
-
Acknowledging the existence of “the DUO” means that you have decided that the board of directors and the function it serves is no longer valid. However, that body and those roles are part of our bylaws and linked to our articles of incorporation for the club. If the board is dissolved, the club no longer exists.
-
Providing feedback to the board using the reference to “the DUO” can be useful feedback for the board to take into consideration for future decisions, however, it cannot and will not change past decisions carried by the board in due course of its legitimate operation.
Q - Can a member at-large vote to impact the function and operations of the Airheads Beemer Club?
A- Yes, when an Airmarshal position is open in your state, and there is competition for that seat as the state leader for the club, you will be asked to vote for your preferred candidate to represent your state. You may also make your feelings and preferences known to the club in general by renewing or not renewing your annual membership.
Q - Was there a vote by the board to eliminate Oaks materials from the Airmail?
A - No, While there was a vote to suspend the use of Oak’s material while additional permissions were sought, the vote in front of the board was whether or not the Digital and Print Airmail magazines should be identical and provide the same content to members who chose digital over print.
*Fact - due to an agreement between the club and the now deceased Oak Okleshen, the club is restricted from publishing content provided by Oak as online content. The Board fully intends to honor that agreement.
Q - Is there now, or was there ever a proposal to eliminate the paper version of the Airmail magazine?
A - NO - All discussions of producing a digital edition of the Airmail were focussed on providing that and an additional option to members.
Q - Does the club currently have more reserve funds than it ever has in its 30+ years of existence?
A - No, that high water mark was met in 2020. Due to a drop in sales on the AirStore driven most likely by the lack of events such as the National Rally’s and by a multi-year drop in membership, our cash position has dropped by ~20% in the past 18 months.
Q - Did the board overstep its authority in the action of dismissing B. Jan Hoffman as editor of the club?
A - No, according to a contract between the club and Mr. Hoffman dated 2019, the contract can be terminated by either party with 30 days notice. In addition, Bylaw #4 states that the board may dismiss any member from a role or position held aside from member “with or out without cause”
Q - Does the board feel there was cause for dismissal of the editor?
A - Yes - According to the contract with Mr. Hoffman for the paid position of editor, and based on behavior and numerous complaints from membership relating to his misuse of the Airmail magazine for self promotion and controversial materials published in the Airmail, it was our duty to address it. Following multiple attempts to address this with Mr. Hoffman directly, and on his part to fail to communicate with the entire board, we felt that he left us with no other course of action.
Q - What will happen to Oak’s material?
A - The club leadership is still in talks with Mrs Oakleshen about acquiring the rights to use his materials including in digital formats and for online use. We are hopeful that she will engage on this topic again soon.
Q - Why should the club seek to attract younger members? Do we really think Millennials are interested in these old bikes?
A- We are not trying to attract Millennials especially though it would be great to get people that young interested. The “younger” age group we would like to attract are the 40+ folks that are starting to have more disposable income and leisure time. People whose interest in classic bikes may be limited by the cost of a vintage Harley, etc.
Q - Is the Board going to “handpick” the Region 1 Director Position successor?
A - No. The Board has the ability to appoint someone to finish out Dave’s term but that person will come from the Airmarshals in that region. They have all been notified and asked to submit a bio if interested.
Thank you Tim Hille for your post summarizing the issues presented to the ABC board. I was at the MOA rally in Springfield and attended the open meeting held by the ABC board. Some of the issues you mentioned were also brought up at this open meeting. As such I feel that issues being addressed by the board have been done with full awareness of any interested ABC member.
Today I was majorly disappointed when I pulled my copy of Airmail from my post box and opened to blacked out sections. Instead of the usual desire to read it right away I felt like maybe not reading it at all. I cannot imagine what the advertisers feel. It is certainly not a publication that I would encourage others to subscribe to. These feelings I can lay at the feet of the editor. I have been a member since 2017 and have noted a serious decline in the quality and content of the publication and this is an all time low. I have also contributed several articles to Airmail over my time in the club. After submitting a couple of articles that were not published and gotten no feedback from the editor, my desire to contribute waned significantly. As such I am in favor of getting a new editor. I believe that the editor is the only paid member of the club.
I really like the premise of this club and hope that these issues can be worked thru by the volunteer board.
Thank you for your time in serving the ABC.
Celia Williams, Florida Airhead
I strive to not let weighty matters weigh me down. There always is a bit of irony or humor that can be found.
The letter requests that “this information be disseminated without edits, comments, or embellishments” … yet, information from some other folks was entirely redacted … lol! Even airheads are not immune to such shenanigans.
In attempt to reply to the points presented by the BoD’. In a timely fashion…..on a couple of points presented….
A-
-
Acknowledging the existence of “the DUO” means that you have decided that the board of directors and the function it serves is no longer valid. However, that body and those roles are part of our bylaws and linked to our articles of incorporation for the club. If the board is dissolved, the club no longer exists.
Ok - wellll, My viewpoint, and many others, is NOT that the BoD’s positions are no longer valid. You, collectively, again misrepresent what the membership is saying to you, OR twisting the meaning out of context.
The flood of comments you are getting with support for the ‘DUO’ is because the BoD’s is not communicating in a timely fashion to the members. You are not doing our collective (majority) bidding. We are exasperated at being told what is best for us without our input nor with sufficient time to examine the issues and give our input. That lack of representation and our responses to it are not to invalidate the/any positions on the board, and therefore devaluate and shut down the club (pretty extreme supposition, no?). Our replies and responses is to pass along our displeasure with the way issues are being handled and the way you collectively see US. Right now it appears you see us as minions, or subjects in your realm of domain. Not fellow members.
Knowing this-Why would you allow it to continue?
To me that isn’t the way to represent a group. Therefore the complaint isn't the job title, it’s how the position is being utilized by the person installed in the position.
“Q.Can a member at-large vote to impact the function and operations of the Airheads Beemer Club?
“A- Yes, when an Airmarshal position is open in your state, and there is competition for that seat as the state leader for the club, you will be asked to vote for your preferred candidate to represent your state. You may also make your feelings and preferences known to the club in general by renewing or not renewing your annual membership.”
* So you-(the BoD’s) -are telling us the ONLY way we, ( the members at large
who pay for the club) can effect the function, operations, direction and management of the club is when you ASK us to vote for a particular Airmarshal-
Airmarshal candidates- that only you the board approve to run??
( Huh, And I thought I had a right to vote and didn’t need to be asked or given permission)
OR.
I/We can show our preferences for the clubs function by “elect to not renew “ my membership???!!!
So you are telling the membership-all
of us- the entire membership at large to either accept things as you deem appropriate or stop paying? And quit the club?
There is no other option to influence our club’s function? How does this fit within the club canons??
There are a couple other options….
Probably the most easy and effective option to get some of the members back on your side would be to open up communications between you and the membership - in some kind of (cough, online/webpage) easy, fluid, timely manner and use the majority input in your representation decisions.
The issues with Oak’s intellectual property and it’s future use is a noble goal. I for one would like to see his advise in a searchable online database and would pay extra for it.
Again, had there been timely public updates on what is going on, things would not have swelled negatively.
As for the editor firing and hiring fiasco, I have issues with the editorials not being handled by a trusted member. (trusted by everyone) NOT a professional company who knows nothing about us or our bikes
I have more but this is already ridiculously long. And I’m wasting too much time with watching the clubs shenanigans while the bike needs prep for a NYE trip.
Edward Adams
AirheadEd
16830
@4949 "You may also make your feelings and preferences known to the club in general by renewing or not renewing your annual membership."
What Hille means is if you don't agree with The Three Amigos hijacking the club you can hit the road.
@bret I think you are correct. The only members that get emailed replies from the board are those that agree with them and blindly support them. I am getting really pissed that they refuse to publicly address the concerns of the members and NOW they arbitrarily change the canons description without any notice, survey, discussions, public notice... nothing. i truly cannot decide whether they are intentionally destroying the club or are just self serving pompous asses. they sure had me fooled when I went to the meeting in Springfield at the MOA Rally. I am so pissed at them for the mistreatment that I may am intending to joining the Airmarshal ranks. Well if I get accepted. I have been told privately that they ( the current bod) will not allow nor accept anyone with dissenting viewpoints.
I don't see how this club stays a club with the current board.
@rtpilot - Where do you see the board changing the canons? No canons have been revised by the board.
In February Airmail, who decided to remove "friendship over friction" from Canon #3?
@895 I will have to check, it must be an editorial error.
Indeed that was a transition error, and it was not caught by the editor or reviewers. Thank you for pointing it out. I have notified the editor and it will be corrected in March.
In the future, please don't hesitate to point out errors via a letter to the editor - editor@airheads.org
Thank you.
Looks like we got shorted on the editor swap.
@14325 Thanks Tim. Yes, the error was in copying from a PDF (the only source to pull from at the time) and missing a third line in the text after a return. It has been corrected in the March issue. - Chris
Advertisement
