Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 66
  1. #1
    Probably drunk right now
    Reputation: Ken in KC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,767

    IMBA's Regional Leadership Council Program

    http://www.imba.com/resources/rlc/index.html

    Any thoughts or opinions?

    I don't really understand the need for this type of program across the board. I do see the need for this in some areas.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    806
    They are replacing the IMBA rep program with this leadership council program.

    Basically the concept is:

    Give a man a trail and he rides it for a day and then will want you to do more for him...teach a man how to create sustainable mtbr clubs and trail systems and he rides and preserves trails for a lifetime without bothering you anymore.
    Michael Vitti
    CLIMB President
    www.CLIMBonline.org
    www.IMBA.com
    NY State Trails Council Member

  3. #3
    Probably drunk right now
    Reputation: Ken in KC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,767

    Okay...

    Quote Originally Posted by sick4surf
    They are replacing the IMBA rep program with this leadership council program.

    Basically the concept is:

    Give a man a trail and he rides it for a day and then will want you to do more for him...teach a man how to create sustainable mtbr clubs and trail systems and he rides and preserves trails for a lifetime without bothering you anymore.

    So IMBA is going to teach SORBA, NEMBA, MMBA and all the other established mountain biking advocacy organizations how to create sustainable clubs and trails? That seems unlikely.

    It seems to me that introducing another layer of "regional" mountain biking representation in regions that already have an established organization that works with LM's will muddy the water and potentially result in a conflicit of interest between IMBA and regional organizations.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    806
    The person already doing the IMBA rep work in those areas will most likely help create new chapters for those larger organizations. The rest of the country is wide open for access issues and potential new IMBA clubs and affiliations.

    Maybe someone from IMBA can chime in?
    Last edited by sick4surf; 12-22-2008 at 12:39 PM.
    Michael Vitti
    CLIMB President
    www.CLIMBonline.org
    www.IMBA.com
    NY State Trails Council Member

  5. #5
    Probably drunk right now
    Reputation: Ken in KC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,767

    Yeah but...

    Quote Originally Posted by sick4surf
    No, the person already doing the IMBA rep work in those areas will most likely help create new chapters for those larger organizations. The rest of the country is wide open for access issues and potential new IMBA clubs and affiliations.

    Maybe someone from IMBA can chime in?

    Someone from IMBA needs to chime in.

    After reading the FAQs and more about the program, it seems to me that this adds another layer of complexity in those areas with established organizations. Using CLIMB as an example and with the understanding that this is purely hypothetical:

    Currently
    CLIMB has strong relationships with Land Managers. Those Land Manager know and respect CLIMB based on the work done locally by CLIMB representatives. CLIMB from time to time asks IMBA for support in some capacity for their projects and because the NY IMBA State Rep is heavily involved with CLIMB.

    There are (hypothetical) times when the local LM's identify grant monies that are available that CLIMB can apply for and manage as those grant monies result in more trails that CLIMB helps bring to the public.

    New RLC
    There's now a regional branch of IMBA that would represent mountain bikers in the same region as CLIMB. CLIMB may or may not be represented on this regional IMBA branch based on whether or not a CLIMB member is selected by IMBA to join the regional IMBA RLC.

    One of the goals of the RLC's is to raise funds, manage grants and ultimately provide paid positions as part of the plan. This seems to put them in conflict with CLIMB, to me. And because IMBA has Trail Building division, do they expect to compete for regional trail building grants or paid trail building opportunities? It seems to me that the new RLC ensure that.

    So those organizations that have spent litterally decades establishing relationships with LM's are now not the go to voice for mountain biking advocacy in the region?

    Again, it would be nice if IMBA corporate would jump in here.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    806
    Yea, I see your points. I think Ryan Schutz at IMBA can answer your questions. I'm not sure if they have implemented the program yet.
    Last edited by sick4surf; 12-22-2008 at 12:40 PM.
    Michael Vitti
    CLIMB President
    www.CLIMBonline.org
    www.IMBA.com
    NY State Trails Council Member

  7. #7
    JmZ
    JmZ is online now
    Reformed Lurker
    Reputation: JmZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,017
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken in KC
    So IMBA is going to teach SORBA, NEMBA, MMBA and all the other established mountain biking advocacy organizations how to create sustainable clubs and trails? That seems unlikely.

    It seems to me that introducing another layer of "regional" mountain biking representation in regions that already have an established organization that works with LM's will muddy the water and potentially result in a conflicit of interest between IMBA and regional organizations.
    No, but they can help groups like OMBA work to pull together. Or HMBA. They're working to be like MMBA, MORE, SORBA, but it will take time. This MIGHT help out.

    The regional rep system does work, but does have it's limitations too. Even in states like MI with a great organization - covering the entire state has difficulties. It can create hot spots or rather cold spots for advocacy because they don't have representation - this can work to shake that up.

    There can be conflicts between IMBA and local groups, but there can be conflicts even between local groups too. HMBA and NIMBA may have slightly different goals when it comes to which state park we should be trying to open.

    My guess is IMBA was realizing the limitations of the single regional rep system, and was looking for ways to improve on it. The efforts of the regional reps were uneven due to many factors - different states/government entites, how close (physically and otherwise) to the positions of power in the state, different support organizations they worked with, heck even different personalites make a difference.

    JmZ
    JmZ

    From one flat land to another.

    Advocate as if your ride depends on it...

  8. #8
    Probably drunk right now
    Reputation: Ken in KC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,767

    My experience....

    Quote Originally Posted by JmZ
    No, but they can help groups like OMBA work to pull together. Or HMBA. They're working to be like MMBA, MORE, SORBA, but it will take time. This MIGHT help out.

    The regional rep system does work, but does have it's limitations too. Even in states like MI with a great organization - covering the entire state has difficulties. It can create hot spots or rather cold spots for advocacy because they don't have representation - this can work to shake that up.

    There can be conflicts between IMBA and local groups, but there can be conflicts even between local groups too. HMBA and NIMBA may have slightly different goals when it comes to which state park we should be trying to open.

    My guess is IMBA was realizing the limitations of the single regional rep system, and was looking for ways to improve on it. The efforts of the regional reps were uneven due to many factors - different states/government entites, how close (physically and otherwise) to the positions of power in the state, different support organizations they worked with, heck even different personalites make a difference.

    JmZ
    The problem with turning cold spots within regions in to hot spots has less to do with organizational representation and leadership and more to do with locals willing to act as the organizations official representative, Trail Steward or Trail Manager and accept ownership of an opportunity.

    Without local support, regional oversight/management or direction will never result in a success in a "cold" spot.

    We can see this play out in nationally recognized successes. IMBA was a part of Mike's success in New York but IMBA would and could not have been successful without Mike and CLIMB's direction and leadership.

    In the KC area, we have more requests for new trails than we can take on right now. Not because we need more "leadership" but because we don't have enough middle management willing to take ownership of the request or opportunity. We will not take on any new trail projects unless a qualified Trail Steward is identified and has volunteered to be responsible for that specific trail.

    There are limitations with a state rep program and I'm not suggesting that it doesn't need to be revamped. I have concerns with this approach because it really defocuses succesful organizations from what they're doing, runs the risk of confusing our clients (Land Managers and mountain bikers) and seems to put IMBA and those local groups in a competition for limited funds, perhaps resulting in IMBA obtaining funds that would have otherwise gone to the organization.

  9. #9
    Recovering
    Reputation: jbogner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,483
    I think the RLC is a way to bring more club leaders into the fold and to create more capacity and access among them to the top levels of regional government. It makes sense around here- you've got CLIMB, NYCMTB, JORBA, WMBA, Fats in the Cats, the newly-founded Hudson Highlanders- all in a fairly tight area. We all ride each others trails, and we all have some valuable experience that we can share with the leaders of the other groups (and can work together to incubate new groups where we need them). With a single IMBA rep, it's just more difficult to maintain continuity in the region if, say, that single rep relocates, gets disillusioned, or moves on. And it's much harder to ask that single rep to cover, on a volunteer basis, a wider geographic area in an even-handed manner. If nothing else, I think it's a great idea just to get top-level trail advocates in various regions together and bouncing ideas off each other.

    The RLC's only make sense if they're made up of the leadership of the current IMBA clubs. I don't think IMBA is going to go out on a limb and appoint random people who haven't been in the fray to the RLC's- they don't want to lose support of the clubs.
    Former New Yorker, now in Fort Collins
    http://www.nycmtb.com

  10. #10
    IMBA Guy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    173
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken in KC
    Someone from IMBA needs to chime in.
    The challenge that Kansas City mtb advocates face is becoming somewhat common - capacity does not match opportunity. This growing challenge is largely what has spurred IMBA to take a new direction with our advocacy support programs.

    The RLCs are not advocacy organizations, or a new level of bureaucracy. The RLCs are facilitated networks of passionate mountain bikers assembled to share best practices, identify opportunities, cultivate leadership, build relationships, and develop strategies to benefit the mountain bike community. Each RLC's direction and character will be determined by the members of the RLC.

    Mike, Jamie, and Jmz are pretty accurate in their estimations of the RLC program. RLCs will exist to support clubs, develop more leadership within the mtb community (this includes "middle managers" that could eventually become board members or presidents), and develop strategies to cultivate and marshal more resources (human & economic). Paid staff in a region would serve to support affiliate clubs, not compete with them. IMBA is not interested in co-opting, usurping, controlling, or hijacking any club. IMBA understands that access advocacy starts and ends with the local club, that's why we seek to do what we've always done: Provide education and support.

    When you want answers from IMBA in the future, just give us a call or an email. You know our number and you have my email

    Ryan Schutz - IMBA
    Powered by Krispy Kreme!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JamR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken in KC
    Someone from IMBA needs to chime in.

    After reading the FAQs and more about the program, it seems to me that this adds another layer of complexity in those areas with established organizations. Using CLIMB as an example and with the understanding that this is purely hypothetical:

    Currently
    CLIMB has strong relationships with Land Managers. Those Land Manager know and respect CLIMB based on the work done locally by CLIMB representatives. CLIMB from time to time asks IMBA for support in some capacity for their projects and because the NY IMBA State Rep is heavily involved with CLIMB.

    There are (hypothetical) times when the local LM's identify grant monies that are available that CLIMB can apply for and manage as those grant monies result in more trails that CLIMB helps bring to the public.

    New RLC
    There's now a regional branch of IMBA that would represent mountain bikers in the same region as CLIMB. CLIMB may or may not be represented on this regional IMBA branch based on whether or not a CLIMB member is selected by IMBA to join the regional IMBA RLC.

    One of the goals of the RLC's is to raise funds, manage grants and ultimately provide paid positions as part of the plan. This seems to put them in conflict with CLIMB, to me. And because IMBA has Trail Building division, do they expect to compete for regional trail building grants or paid trail building opportunities? It seems to me that the new RLC ensure that.

    So those organizations that have spent litterally decades establishing relationships with LM's are now not the go to voice for mountain biking advocacy in the region?

    Again, it would be nice if IMBA corporate would jump in here.
    I think you hit on some really good points here. Many local clubs of various types already work with local land managers with trail maintenance, trail patrol programs, materials and equipment support....etc, and on trail recommendations, design and construction.

    Some of them have been very successful for years. IMBA is definitely seen as more of the broader advocacy group with large membership drives, but not intimate with many local scenes.

    I know in my local area, several mountain bike clubs do the lions share of support for the local parks....State, County, and Federal areas, and IMBA really does not have much of a presence with the exception of a couple of NMBP club affiliates, but even these have created successful patrol groups on their own.

    I know for my personal part as a land manager....IMBA has not replied to more than a half dozen e-mail requests in the past two years, so we simply work through our own resources and the mountain biking community members.

    The concept sounds good, but I believe that most areas will always be served better by local groups that use their areas on a daily basis and have a close relationship with their local land managers.

    Good stuff though

    Thanks

  12. #12
    Tre1nt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    315
    JamR ... sorry to hear that your messages to IMBA went unanswered. Messages to "info@imba.com" come to me (I'm the communications director) and I try to answer all requests with 48 hours of receiving them. You can also write to me via markeller@imba.com I promise you will receive a reply.

    -- Mark

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    336
    I think that having a paid position for IMBA is a very good idea. It gives a level of accoutnability and direction. I have been the IMBA Rep for North Carolina for the last two years. I did not get any direction from IMBA except for when I asked for advice. I personally felt like it was a little too hands off in some instances. But I always felt served, completely. I always get a response when I call on IMBA, usually the same day. Even though I have never felt more productive as a trail advocate, I do not think I have done every thing I could, mostly due to family responsibilities. After all, I am a volunteer and this is a big state. I dare say that the eastern part of NC has no voice in mtb'ing. This was one of my goals for next year, but I may not get to it since I will probably not be the Rep. next year. I am hopeful that the new person will be in place soon and they are on board with the good things that are going on in NC already. If IMBA can put the right person in place and have them guide and be responsible for their area, this could be very good. If IMBA does not guide this person and the person is not very responsible, it could be terrible. I hope this is a good move by IMBA, for all of our sakes. Until then, I am the Rep. for NC, if you have any concerns, let me know.

    Brian Williford
    NC IMBA Rep.

  14. #14
    Who turned out the lights
    Reputation: Francis Buxton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,115
    Here's where I'm confused. There will be 6-8 RLCs, so let's just say that's likely to be a bunch of 6-state groupings. The "Midwest RLC" could be Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Iowa, Oklahoma and Arkansas +/-. I know Kansas has at two State Reps, and so does Missouri. Let's assume each state has at least two, so you're talking 12-15 "Representatives" currently, with that number being closer to 20 if you have 8-state RLCs.

    The RLC will be 6-8 people, and they will be all volunteer to start, and from my reading of the documents, it sounds like these groups will be highly "encouraged" to actively seek out funding opportunities. That sounds like MORE work than the current system, not less.

    The 'election' process seems a little odd, in that you may have some very successful organizations in a region that will end up NOT having a representative on the RLC. My thought was that every IMBA-affiliate club/org should have one elected person on the RLC, even if they are on a lower-level board (like an Advisory Board), and they Executive Board members are elected from there, and they are the directional leaders. Every org/club has achieved their successes in a different way, so if you want truly collaborative learning/leadership, it seems odd to leave out a potentially large number of orgs.

    I think I read the words "funding" and "paid" about 50 times on two pages. It may have given me the wrong impression of the intended direction.

    And I think that Ken posting this here vs. having a 'private' conversation with IMBA is actually a good avenue. It's a way to find out what other clubs/orgs across the country are thinking and to figure out if he's just off base or if others have having the same concerns.

  15. #15
    JmZ
    JmZ is online now
    Reformed Lurker
    Reputation: JmZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,017
    Took a while to stew on the response.

    First - I agree. Without local support, building and maintaining a local trail are very difficult, at best. And more likely than not to fail.

    Second - getting local people involved can be part of a regional operation. The group is there to help the local club building efforts, to be the ones to talk to local shops, etc. Sometimes it's just getting the word out to the locals that they CAN do something... sometimes.

    And Mike's success has been duplicated on many different levels. Getting NIMBA a trail in one of the state parks was pretty close to the same model. Work with the park, work with the state club guys, and work with IMBA to bring it all together. The planning stages took longer than the building stage for the first loop.

    Developing a regional group of leaders is a good idea, but I do hold some of the same worries that you have Ken. If they are not inclusive at some level - they're just going to hurt some group of locals. I've seen it at the local level and at the state level. If people don't feel like they're represented... and then it's hard to work towards the same goals.

    JmZ


    Quote Originally Posted by Ken in KC
    The problem with turning cold spots within regions in to hot spots has less to do with organizational representation and leadership and more to do with locals willing to act as the organizations official representative, Trail Steward or Trail Manager and accept ownership of an opportunity.

    Without local support, regional oversight/management or direction will never result in a success in a "cold" spot.

    We can see this play out in nationally recognized successes. IMBA was a part of Mike's success in New York but IMBA would and could not have been successful without Mike and CLIMB's direction and leadership.

    In the KC area, we have more requests for new trails than we can take on right now. Not because we need more "leadership" but because we don't have enough middle management willing to take ownership of the request or opportunity. We will not take on any new trail projects unless a qualified Trail Steward is identified and has volunteered to be responsible for that specific trail.

    There are limitations with a state rep program and I'm not suggesting that it doesn't need to be revamped. I have concerns with this approach because it really defocuses succesful organizations from what they're doing, runs the risk of confusing our clients (Land Managers and mountain bikers) and seems to put IMBA and those local groups in a competition for limited funds, perhaps resulting in IMBA obtaining funds that would have otherwise gone to the organization.
    JmZ

    From one flat land to another.

    Advocate as if your ride depends on it...

  16. #16
    pronounced may-duh
    Reputation: Maida7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    4,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken in KC
    So IMBA is going to teach SORBA, NEMBA, MMBA and all the other established mountain biking advocacy organizations how to create sustainable clubs and trails? That seems unlikely.

    It seems to me that introducing another layer of "regional" mountain biking representation in regions that already have an established organization that works with LM's will muddy the water and potentially result in a conflicit of interest between IMBA and regional organizations.
    Not sure if this was already mentioned but SORBA has merged with IMBA. We are now called SORBA-IMBA. I refer to it as SIMBA. Following the merge all SORBA members became IMBA members and all IMBA members in the south east became SORBA members.

    I think IMBA is shifting slightly from teaching the world how to build trails to club building. They have written the book on traiol building techniques. Now they are moving into supporting local clubs. SORBA has done a good job on building local clubs. What we know about trail building we got from IMBA.

  17. #17
    Probably drunk right now
    Reputation: Ken in KC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,767

    Sweet...

    Quote Originally Posted by willie b
    I think that having a paid position for IMBA is a very good idea. It gives a level of accoutnability and direction. I have been the IMBA Rep for North Carolina for the last two years. I did not get any direction from IMBA except for when I asked for advice. I personally felt like it was a little too hands off in some instances. But I always felt served, completely. I always get a response when I call on IMBA, usually the same day. Even though I have never felt more productive as a trail advocate, I do not think I have done every thing I could, mostly due to family responsibilities. After all, I am a volunteer and this is a big state. I dare say that the eastern part of NC has no voice in mtb'ing. This was one of my goals for next year, but I may not get to it since I will probably not be the Rep. next year. I am hopeful that the new person will be in place soon and they are on board with the good things that are going on in NC already. If IMBA can put the right person in place and have them guide and be responsible for their area, this could be very good. If IMBA does not guide this person and the person is not very responsible, it could be terrible. I hope this is a good move by IMBA, for all of our sakes. Until then, I am the Rep. for NC, if you have any concerns, let me know.

    Brian Williford
    NC IMBA Rep.

    You bring up a point that needs to be considered in the RLC approach that I don't see addressed: Does the RLC represent IMBA at the state level?

    I head to the Topeka (KS state capitol) 1-2 times a year as IMBA's representative to testify before the state house, senate or a sub-committee regarding legislation that impacts mountain biking, mountain biking access and or volunteering. I also testify before county and city boards or councils. In addition to driving and the actual testimony, this involves hours of preparation, meeting with lawyers and practice. I've been doing this for years. IMBA doesn't need to provide me with direction or provide any sort of reimbursement for this. I just do it as part of the job.

    I assume that the RLC will take this over for me? That would be awesome! I don't like the time commitment this takes. I don't like the lack of appreciation from a-holes who biatch about me not doing enough for them with my really expensive, free time.

    I think it's fantastic that the RLC will replace the state reps. It works a lot better for me, personally. I just don't see this addressed in the FAQ's.

    I don't get the sense that the RLC's will be entities that would look to IMBA for direction and leadership as you're suggesting. If they are in fact doing so, then I suggest this approach is heading in the wrong direction. Direction (goal setting, strategic planning, etc.) needs to work in both directions: The RLC needs to be aware of IMBA's goals but primarily, they need to support organizations in their region and obtain their direction from those organizations, not from IMBA.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    336

    I may assume too much...

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken in KC
    You bring up a point that needs to be considered in the RLC approach that I don't see addressed: Does the RLC represent IMBA at the state level?

    I head to the Topeka (KS state capitol) 1-2 times a year as IMBA's representative to testify before the state house, senate or a sub-committee regarding legislation that impacts mountain biking, mountain biking access and or volunteering. I also testify before county and city boards or councils. In addition to driving and the actual testimony, this involves hours of preparation, meeting with lawyers and practice. I've been doing this for years. IMBA doesn't need to provide me with direction or provide any sort of reimbursement for this. I just do it as part of the job.

    I assume that the RLC will take this over for me? That would be awesome! I don't like the time commitment this takes. I don't like the lack of appreciation from a-holes who biatch about me not doing enough for them with my really expensive, free time.

    I think it's fantastic that the RLC will replace the state reps. It works a lot better for me, personally. I just don't see this addressed in the FAQ's.

    I don't get the sense that the RLC's will be entities that would look to IMBA for direction and leadership as you're suggesting. If they are in fact doing so, then I suggest this approach is heading in the wrong direction. Direction (goal setting, strategic planning, etc.) needs to work in both directions: The RLC needs to be aware of IMBA's goals but primarily, they need to support organizations in their region and obtain their direction from those organizations, not from IMBA.
    I got the news about the RLC from a local chapter TORC-SORBA Rep. when he got back from the Summit in Utah. I could not go, I had a very pregnant wife at the time. Imagine my surprise when he told me I would likely not be the State Rep. next year. I took the job because the guy before me decided to spend more time with his family. Something I plan to do this year. I had heard nothing from IMBA prior. Once I spoke to a couple of folks at IMBA (Ryan for one) and other State Reps.(several), I figured out that IMBA had NOT decided what the RLC program was actually going to do at that time. I do not think the FAQ's cover everything. I think they are still figuring things out as they go. Probably not a good idea, but here we are, let's make the best of it. This is what I know for sure from the FAQ page:
    What about the IMBA State Rep program?
    The IMBA State Rep program is being replaced by RLCs.

    If IMBA does not lead the RLC's it won't be any different than the current State Rep. program. If they are running around without some guidance in foreign territory, they will be lost. Hopefully they will pick folks familiar with their area.? Maybe that guidance will come from us, the Reps.? Who knows? For now, I have not been contacted to serve as an RLC or been told who will be my new RLC will be.

    I do much like yourself, I travel to meetings/events all over the state representing and lobbying for IMBA and local clubs for mtb access. And just like you, on my own dime and precious time. This is why I said I probably have not done everything I could have due to family responsibilities. I know I don't do this for the jerks out there and I am sure you are not doing this for the "a-hoes who biatch about me not doing enough for them with my really expensive, free time". You are volunteering because YOU think it is the right thing to do and it is. You are the kind of people IMBA cannot do without. So, do not give up on them just yet. IMBA needs to be sure they do not disenfranchise some of their best volunteers, the State Reps. Because some of them may already feel this way...

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Buxton
    "And I think that Ken posting this here vs. having a 'private' conversation with IMBA is actually a good avenue. It's a way to find out what other clubs/orgs across the country are thinking and to figure out if he's just off base or if others have having the same concerns."
    HEAR! HEAR!
    Thanks Ken.

  20. #20
    JmZ
    JmZ is online now
    Reformed Lurker
    Reputation: JmZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,017
    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Buxton
    "And I think that Ken posting this here vs. having a 'private' conversation with IMBA is actually a good avenue. It's a way to find out what other clubs/orgs across the country are thinking and to figure out if he's just off base or if others have having the same concerns."
    Quote Originally Posted by Shelbak73
    HEAR! HEAR!
    Thanks Ken.
    Gotta agree too. This also helps IMBA know that their members and their volunteers have several questions. I tentatively am supportive of it, but I too have many of the same questions.

    Adding a level of middle management might be needed, or might be just another level of bureaucracy. It's a tough call, and depending on how well the groups are funded, how well they pull from the many volunteers working, and how well they can represent a multi-state area will determine if they were a good idea.

    Unfortunately that means I don't know how well it works, until it does, or doesn't.

    Getting rid of the State Reps is a risk, since many have been very successful in their efforts, but IF it means having a full time paid staff in a geographic region - it could more than make up for this 'loss' with this change.

    JmZ
    Last edited by JmZ; 01-03-2009 at 11:41 AM.
    JmZ

    From one flat land to another.

    Advocate as if your ride depends on it...

  21. #21
    featherweight clydesdale
    Reputation: Fattirewilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by JmZ

    Getting rid of the State Reps is a risk, since many have been very successful in their efforts, but IF it means having a full time paid staff in a geographic region - it could more than make up for this 'loss' with this change.en very successful in their efforts, but IF it means having a full time paid staff in a geographic region - it could more than make up for this 'loss' with this change.

    JmZ
    IMO, the most qualified people for this paid position are the state reps that have been largely successful. Up to now, they've done it on their own cost/time. If they were paid, they could put three or four times the effort into it....assuming being paid IMBA staff doesn't require a major pay cut. They already love the job or they would be doing it for free.

    The problem is that there isn't a one size fits all here. The rep that's an engineer isn't going to give up the day job for a paid position. However, putting that rep on a regional council may infact lighten the workload he was doing by making others more active. Sorta like making the board of your local club, 9 members instead of 5. You're likely to get more new blood doing more stuff that way.

    I don't think a regional council or area rep should mess with the affairs (negotiate/deal with local land managers) of a successful local club without being asked. That's where new bureaucracy gets made. There are plenty of areas without representation and state wide matters, grants to chase etc. that the paid position would do. It would be important for each local club to have a voice on the regional council.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    48
    Depending on what the RLCs eventually develop into and depending on what your local existing(or nonexistent) organizations are currently doing, they could be a good thing or maybe less so. The concern I have is what happens during the time they are being formed and becoming relevant.It seems to me that fewer toes would have been stepped on and the transition would have been smoother if the state reps had been left in place while this is organized with the option for them to eventually be integrated in to the RLC. In our case in NC we have had great service from Brian Williford and I see no way that a multi state RLC will be able to give us the local support that he does. I understand that other states have less active reps and in some cases they are even detrimental but I would have rather seen them dealt with individually and kept the reps working while the RLCs are formed. As far as I can see the local grassroots club efforts are where the rubber meets the dirt in the MTB world and while I understand and support big picture initiatives like the ride centers we can't focus too much on them at the expense of local efforts. RLCs look too much to me like we are moving the resources and decision making another step away from the local level. I also fully believe we should continue to find ways to fund everything from advocacy work to trail building but the transition from all volunteer to having some paid positions is a tricky thing to pull off. If the RLCs eventually help establish a funding pipeline that is equitably distributed across the board and includes the local level that will be great but that will be a challenge on several fronts.
    I hope the RLCs are a big success but I think the change could have been handled better. I know the reps are still technically in place but they were given their pink slips last July. The RLCs may be a long way from even getting started - I have yet to hear about anyone from central NC being contacted to help with the search committee or serve on the council.

    Stewart Bryan
    TORC
    SORBA/IMBA

  23. #23
    saddlemeat
    Reputation: bsieb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,572
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark E
    JamR ... sorry to hear that your messages to IMBA went unanswered. Messages to "info@imba.com" come to me (I'm the communications director) and I try to answer all requests with 48 hours of receiving them. You can also write to me via markeller@imba.com I promise you will receive a reply.

    -- Mark
    yeah right (can you say "black hole?)

    So to be a part of regional leadership one will have to be prepared to fund raise for yet another level of bureaucracy?

    ssweet
    Making the smack track baby.


  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Howley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    626

    Volunteer turns Pro

    Many of the comments voiced here are right on and our hope is IMBA is listening with the understanding that veting this through an open forum should be embraced as a modern way to communicate.

    The way I read it "I have yet to hear about anyone ... being contacted to help with the search committee or serve on the council."

    Application and nominations are being taken by IMBA.


    After 20 years volunteering it would be great to "turn pro" but how would I (anyone) get paid?

    Seems of those who apply they would need to be connected to funds they can bring to the table that establish a budget for a "professional advocate".


    I made an assumption that IMBA wants to be involved in this discussion on this mtbr forum.
    OR
    As IMBA has stated-send a private email and we will do our best to answer.

    We seem to all have similar FAQ.

    Does IMBA want to use this forum?

  25. #25
    Probably drunk right now
    Reputation: Ken in KC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,767

    No offense..

    Quote Originally Posted by willie b
    I got the news about the RLC from a local chapter TORC-SORBA Rep. when he got back from the Summit in Utah. I could not go, I had a very pregnant wife at the time. Imagine my surprise when he told me I would likely not be the State Rep. next year. I took the job because the guy before me decided to spend more time with his family. Something I plan to do this year. I had heard nothing from IMBA prior. Once I spoke to a couple of folks at IMBA (Ryan for one) and other State Reps.(several), I figured out that IMBA had NOT decided what the RLC program was actually going to do at that time. I do not think the FAQ's cover everything. I think they are still figuring things out as they go. Probably not a good idea, but here we are, let's make the best of it. This is what I know for sure from the FAQ page:
    What about the IMBA State Rep program?
    The IMBA State Rep program is being replaced by RLCs.

    If IMBA does not lead the RLC's it won't be any different than the current State Rep. program. If they are running around without some guidance in foreign territory, they will be lost. Hopefully they will pick folks familiar with their area.? Maybe that guidance will come from us, the Reps.? Who knows? For now, I have not been contacted to serve as an RLC or been told who will be my new RLC will be.

    I do much like yourself, I travel to meetings/events all over the state representing and lobbying for IMBA and local clubs for mtb access. And just like you, on my own dime and precious time. This is why I said I probably have not done everything I could have due to family responsibilities. I know I don't do this for the jerks out there and I am sure you are not doing this for the "a-hoes who biatch about me not doing enough for them with my really expensive, free time". You are volunteering because YOU think it is the right thing to do and it is. You are the kind of people IMBA cannot do without. So, do not give up on them just yet. IMBA needs to be sure they do not disenfranchise some of their best volunteers, the State Reps. Because some of them may already feel this way...
    I've been a state rep for over 10 years. I don't really need an IMBA pep talk. I've seen multiple complete employee turn overs within IMBA and this RLC approach is likely a result of the most recent leadership change and the new leaders bringing their perspective to IMBA. The RLC is probably an initiative presented for setting and trying to meet new strategic goals for IMBA. I think we all understand that at some level.


    My frustration is that IMBA made the public announcement with very little feedback from very many people. They took an idea that works great for one region and applied it to the entire world.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •