-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [AERC-Members-Digest]
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 04:18:16 -0700
From: AERCMembersForum-owner@... (List Server)

===================================================

Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 08:21:04 -0500
From: Michael Maul <mmaul@...>
Subject: [AERC-Members] Online AERC Point Standings updated

New point standings have been posted at
http://www.doublejoy.com/erol/Points/default.asp

Rides prior to May 1 that are not included are:

Mar 14, 2004 Sand Hills Stampede II
Patsy Gowen (8371) phone:803-329-0077
email:FireFoxRun@...

Mar 20, 2004 Bar H Boogie I & II
Lynne Glazer (14580) phone:909-947-0775
email:anyone@...

Apr 17, 2004 Grizzly Mountain
Linda L. Tribby (6305) phone:541-475-6199
email:ltribby@...

Apr 17, 2004 Shine and Shine Only IV
Becky Grand Hart (1917) phone:408-997-0814
email:randomrio@...

Apr 24, 2004 AHDRA I/Region 11 Endurance Championship
Joyce Mocilan (11018) phone:309-829-5125
email:endurance@...

Apr 24, 2004 Antelope Island
MJ Jackson (2892) phone:801-254-4347
email:sundownr@...

Apr 24, 2004 Sonora Classic
Anne Neary (M21118) phone:250-497-6026 email:nearyta@...

Apr 25, 2004 Aprilfest
Fred R. Buchanan (M22729) phone:519-323-3146
email:fredbuchanan@...



===================================================

Subject: RE: [AERC-Members] Could not find AERC Forum
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 08:36:19 -0500
From: "Mike Jaffe" <mjaffe@...>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C447DD.6C06E9B9
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Tom,
=20
I don't think I have it listed in the public directory side
of Yahoo
yet. You can find the site at
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/AERCMembersForum/.
=20
Mike J.

_____ =20

From: AERCMembersForum-owner@...
[mailto:AERCMembersForum-owner@...] On Behalf Of
Tom Dean
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 9:35 AM
To: AERCMembersForum@...
Subject: [AERC-Members] Could not find AERC Forum


I did a search of Yahoo Groups and they do not show an "AERC
MEMBERS
FORUM"????
=20
Thanks,
=20
Tom Dean
=20
The more I learn, the less I know.
=20


===================================================

From: "Christopher Scott Sansom" <sansom@...>
Subject: Re: [AERC-Members] Conflict
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 22:02:04 -0700
Hello all,
I normally just lurk, reading a few posts after it gets to
dark to ride.
But I think it is time I put my two cents in.
I believe it is good the list discusses all the issues it
does. However, I
read a lot of personal attacks in the posts over the last
couple of weeks.
This I disagree with. As I see it ( my opinion) Roger,
Randy, and all the
other people involved on the Fort Stanton project are out
doing something to
promote our sport/good reputation. Not many of us stop
riding, or typing,
and actually go volunteer to do "work" to promote our sport.
So post your
opinion but please remember if you beat up the volunteers
they won't be back
for the next event. And then YOU will need to become the
volunteer.

So go ride your horses more and your keyboards less.

Scott Sansom
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Teeter" <johnt@...>
To: <KimFue@...>
Cc: "aerc List" <AERCMembersForum@...>
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: [AERC-Members] Conflict


> Kim,
>
> It was pointed out to me that the RM of the ride which uses the project
site cast a vote with respect to the project. In my opinion,
a conflict of
interest was involved. It seemed important enough that a
discussion occur
amongst the members to establish the proper precedence.
>
> When I asked the original question on the members list, I didn't
specifically say who was in conflict (only referencing the
sw directors) and
that anyone in conflict should have not have voted on the
issue. I also
think there has been a long term effort behind the scenes to
make that
particular ride site the permanent home of the AERC
championship event and I
mentioned that as well.
>
> I didn't specifically say who was in conflict on the vote. He is a sw
director and the manager of the ride. The other sw director
sanctions the
rides held at that site and has used that site in the past
for his rides as
well. From my perspective, it is difficult to tell the
difference between
these two individuals. They have passed rides back and forth
between them
quite frequently over the past years. They tend to act as
one in matters
concerning AERC. Nothing particularly wrong with that except
that it becomes
a bit difficult to pin down the details at times. It becomes
difficult to
tell one from the other at a distance.
>
> But in this case, only the RM is in conflict. He should not have voted
either for or against this issue. AERC should encourage
clarity in this area
and discourage the establishment of president which
justifies conflicted
actions.
>
> Finally, I suggested that ride venues which support higher participation
levels might be worthy of AERC trails infrastructure grants
as well. It was
mentioned later in the discussion that the two example
rides, Biltmore and
Tevis, have not requested grant funds from AERC. To that
issue, I suggest
that AERC should become more proactive in the grants
solicitation process.
Identify those venues which it wishes to fund and work with
the interested
parties to establish the projects which are suitable.
>
> It is too bad that the non-RM was called into question, but reputations
have a way of inducing bias.
>
> ride well:)
>
> jt.
>
> note: as to the conflict statements on file with the AERC. These are to be
updated annually I think? In the case of the one shown on
this list, the
activity of Ride Management was mentioned as an area of
conflict.
>
> ==== original post ====
>
>
> It was pointed out to me that there is a conflict of interest within the
southwest region directors concerning the recent vote to
allocate additional
AERC funds to the improvements of the Fort Stanton ride site.
>
> At the very least, the ride manager of the Fort Stanton event should have
abstained from this vote to avoid the conflict. Possibly the
ride vet(s)
should also have abstained? Is it a conflict of interest for
the Ride
Manager to have voted to allocate these funds?
>
> More broadly, the total allocated funds from AERC for this one ride site
seems very high as compared to the number of riders (@60
last year) who
attend the ride.
>
> This is phase 4 of the project(s), what funds did AERC provide for phases
1-3??), are future phases anticipated?
>
> Is AERC really building the future permanent home of the AERC (US+CA)
National Championship Event?
>
> MikeJ, do you know the total $s AERC has provided for Fort Stanton
improvement? Do you feel these to be in line with the level
of AERC usage of
the venue? (just to contrast, Biltmore just hosted 200+ AERC
members w/o any
support from AERC for trails maintenance). Tevis will host
200+ w/o any AERC
grants support. etc.
>
> johnt
>

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-
-= Discussion List Archives:
http://www.goldhill.com/members/index.html
=-
-= Subscribe/Unsubscribe: mailto:
AERCMembersForum-moderator@...
=-
-= Rules of Usage: http://www.goldhill.com/members/rules.html
=-
-= Disclaimer of liability:
http://www.goldhill.com/members/liability.html
=-
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-