LACBC Elections. Fun! Sex! Beer!
Thread started by
PC at 03.20.08 - 3:29 pm
Wouldn't it be fun if things were so good for cyclists in LA that you didn't have to worry about what your local advocacy orgs were doing with your money? Then you could spend 100% of your free time having sex and drinking beer!
Instead of 99%, or whatever.
But they're not so good, of course. And your local advocacy org, the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, is having its elections right now, and they will determine in a big way how they spend your money (if you're a member...or even if not).
If you're a member of the LACBC, you were recently emailed a voter's guide and a ballot. You might want to read that voter's guide carefully, because there's an eye-opening proposition on the ballot in addition to the regular election for Board of Directors. If passed (and it needs a 2/3 vote to pass), this proposition would change the bylaws in such a way that, essentially, this would be the last time you ever get to vote for the Board of Directors.
Specifically, it would change the bylaws so that the Board of Directors, instead of being elected by the membership, would be elected by...the Board of Directors! Well, ain't that convenient?
I couldn't believe anybody would have the nerve to make such a naked power grab, so on another forum I asked Board candidate Alex Amerri (you know, the Ride-ARC guy), who seems to support the proposal, what the justification for it was.
His answer (I'm paraphrasing, of course): Up untl now, voters have been in the dark about who they're voting for, because candidates are only given 150 words in the voter's guide to introduce themselves and say what they stand for and what their qualifications are. As a result, the membership has kept reelecting Board members who are weekend warriors or don't even ride bikes, and who in any case don't care enough to put in the time to do advocacy work or even show up to meetings.
I suggested that if the problem is voters not knowing enough about the candidates, the solution is probably to
give the candidates more than 150 words so that the voters can make an informed decision. I also pointed out that in the 21st century, it would be no problem to give candidates space on the LACBC website to explain their backgrounds, qualifications, and views, and to take questions from members or other candidates about all those thing. It seems to me that this is a much better solution than simply throwing democracy out the window.
Alex hasn't responded to my alternate suggestion yet, but in the meantime I thought I would throw this out to all of you. What do you think? For those of you who are members, which way will you vote on the proposed bylaw change? Or are you so disenchanted with the LACBC that you don't even care?
And if you've read this far, let me once again reiterate: Sex! Fun! Beer!
reply
BTW, as I pointed out in the other forum, I like Alex A. personally and I'm not trying to start drama with the guy. The reason I'm having the debate with him is that (so far) he is the only supporter of this proposal who has had the nutzz to defend it publicly.
PC03.20.08 - 3:33 pm
reply
Vote yes for the proposal that way we can start completely ignoring them all together.
PC I have your gloves!
franz03.20.08 - 3:44 pm
reply
YOU HAVE MY GLOVES?
PC03.20.08 - 3:46 pm
reply
(SORRY, LET ME TURN OFF THIS MEGAPHONE)
You have my gloves?
PC03.20.08 - 3:46 pm
reply
Give em to me Franz or you won't get you glasses back.
Joe Borfo03.20.08 - 3:51 pm
reply
MY GLASSES YOU HAVE THEM!
oh borfo you make me happier than a little debutante at a private charity nude firefighter wrestling match!
franz03.20.08 - 3:59 pm
reply
Do you really have my gloves? My gloves that look like this?
PC03.20.08 - 4:03 pm
reply
Fuck the LACBC, I want my gloves back.
PC03.20.08 - 4:21 pm
reply
Back on topic.
I asked multiple volunteers at LACBC valentines day event what they were doing. The only one who didn't say "I don't know you should ask someone else" was Alex A. He said "Trying to stay alive".
franz03.20.08 - 4:23 pm
reply
Alright! Alright. Franz, give them to him please, before he tries to run for the board.
Joe Borfo03.20.08 - 4:26 pm
reply
Just vote against the stupid proposition, is all I'm saying, people. And quit stealing my gloves.
PC03.20.08 - 4:28 pm
reply
BORFO = Beats Off, Releases Frustration Online
PC03.21.08 - 3:58 am
reply
After not getting elected last year, and then having the dude who narrowly beat me for a spot on the board leave town after a few months, I was pretty bummed about the LACBC for a few months.
I spent a lot of time working on a sort of long term plan for the LACBC that would free it from being so beholden to the MTA. Sigh. That feels like such a waste of time now.
Fortunately, the ladies running the place now are working hard to build up the organization. I hope they're able to get even more nimble, and start throwing parties and rides, and "selling" merch, to generate cash to fund a real presence for bicyclists.
We need a staffer or two attending every public hearing in L.A. to write about it, take pix, and post videos. There are a heckuva lot of unpaid blogger who do that now - but our efforts really need a professional touch to get the general public engaged in bike issues.
Sorry to carry on.
ubrayj0203.21.08 - 10:49 am
reply
Whats a staffer?
I want to help in some way.
Joe Borfo03.21.08 - 11:16 am
reply
I donated quite a bit of money to them... for selfish reasons of course... who can resist the GOGA Ladies but I digress, their website needs help and they need to be vigilante at telling us their agenda and getting us involved should they decide they want to stay relevant.
Roadblock03.21.08 - 11:43 am
reply
and they ned to separate themselves from the MTA if that's really true. the MTA are a bunch of money interest slobbin t. knobbins
Roadblock03.21.08 - 11:48 am
reply
i don't trust the LACBC. they neglected to mention the $8 cover charge for their valentine's dance on their flyers, blog/website, AND on MR. it's a bit sneaky and inconsiderate for those who rode all the way out there and had to find out the hard way that there was a cover charge that was never advertised.
BOO on LACBC.
meandmybluebike03.21.08 - 12:07 pm
reply
yeah that was pretty shady. I didnt know about it and even though I was on of the ones being auctioned off got the pressure to pay to get in. I didnt pay but still.
Roadblock03.21.08 - 12:10 pm
reply
i heard some folks got in for free (which is cool), but it's quite unfair for the others. the problem could have been a easily avoided.
BOO on LACBC.
meandmybluebike03.21.08 - 12:18 pm
reply
All the more reason not to let them elect themselves.
PC03.21.08 - 12:48 pm
reply
Oh, hell no. The LACBC is the Bermuda Triangle of bike activism. Once you get an official position with them, nobody ever hears from you in any meaningful way again.
PC03.21.08 - 1:07 pm
reply
lol. well who the fuck what fuckin agency is working for bicyclists in this town then?
Roadblock03.21.08 - 1:18 pm
reply
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
