Wildbill Posted September 18, 2016 Share Posted September 18, 2016 Was there live entertainment? no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doogirl69 Posted September 18, 2016 Share Posted September 18, 2016 The beef was indeed yummy However the $8.25 beers were tough to swallow!! LOL WOW, for that much there should have been strippers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAM Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 And a 4oz glass of wine as $10.50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Techdenis007 Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 Holey crap glad I don't get invited there ... I'd have to mooch booze off the likes of y'all ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 and the dummies had 3 bars set up and only one guy selling booze tickets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearcat_w Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 Was there live entertainment? Actually there was some kind of contorionist acrobat. Twisted herself into some real interesting positions. No stripper pole tho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faceman Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 We need to go back to Collingwood next year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volunteer2 Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 So now that MOTS is passed what are all the Associations going to do? Not needed any more are they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 So now that MOTS is passed what are all the Associations going to do? Not needed any more are they. That's a rather bold assumption. Not withstanding the proposed consolidation of D7 & D10 the only real change for D7 grooming would be that the grooming association would now include the two D7 clubs that were not part of the grooming association in the past. I suspect it would be similar for the others where grooming associations have already been in place. MOTS just reaffirms grooming association principals and brings all clubs into those relationships Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 So now that MOTS is passed what are all the Associations going to do? Not needed any more are they. That's a rather bold assumption. Not withstanding the proposed consolidation of D7 & D10 the only real change for D7 grooming would be that the grooming association would now include the two D7 clubs that were not part of the grooming association in the past. I suspect it would be similar for the others where grooming associations have already been in place. MOTS just reaffirms grooming association principals and brings all clubs into those relationships Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volunteer2 Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 That's a rather bold assumption. Not withstanding the proposed consolidation of D7 & D10 the only real change for D7 grooming would be that the grooming association would now include the two D7 clubs that were not part of the grooming association in the past. I suspect it would be similar for the others where grooming associations have already been in place. MOTS just reaffirms grooming association principals and brings all clubs into those relationships With MOTS there is no need for any more grooming associations, the district is the grooming association. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sledjunk Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 With MOTS there is no need for any more grooming associations, the district is the grooming association. That is my understanding as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 With MOTS there is no need for any more grooming associations, the district is the grooming association. Which for all intention remains the same. I anticipate the same people with the same club representation. The only difference being it encapsulates all clubs in the district and the naming of MSR goes away for D7. The cooperation that has seen the blurring of grooming boundaries with clubs cooperatively grooming other club trails where when it makes sense continues with that principal now entrenched province wide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volunteer2 Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 Which for all intention remains the same. I anticipate the same people with the same club representation. The only difference being it encapsulates all clubs in the district and the naming of MSR goes away for D7. The cooperation that has seen the blurring of grooming boundaries with clubs cooperatively grooming other club trails where when it makes sense continues with that principal now entrenched province wide Yes that is correct. I think I asked the question incorrectly. I should have asked : What are the clubs that were part of a grooming association now going to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dweese Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 Glad to hear productive things came out of the AGM. Transparency is a good thing... thanks to those of you who have the time to volunteer and make the system better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faceman Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 Yes that is correct. I think I asked the question incorrectly. I should have asked : What are the clubs that were part of a grooming association now going to do? There is a motion on the table at our association to disband. No need. Although the district is "taking over" grooming it will still be the club grooming coordinator as part of the district groomers coordinators that will control and monitor grooming activity and frequency. The association becomes redundant as there are only two levels of accountability, club ( as the trail building organization and district. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volunteer2 Posted September 19, 2016 Share Posted September 19, 2016 Our Association has always worked real good, working with and for the clubs. There really wasn't a need for the clubs to be involved with the District with a lot of stuff. We are now seeing many of our clubs attending and participating at the District level. This is a good thing for sure. There are options open to all the clubs within the OFSC, if they were a member of an Association or not, to continue to carry on for the future, which is also a good thing. One question FM Was/Is your Association a corporation and did they have a vote at the OFSC AGM ? Pls Thx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faceman Posted September 20, 2016 Share Posted September 20, 2016 Yea and Yes V2. We have 13 directors at present at our board table. And this was their biggest bitch at the district level was one vote at the district table as every club (10) and the three associations (16 clubs) all had a board member. Now 26 clubs will be represent individually at the board table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadianlad Posted September 20, 2016 Share Posted September 20, 2016 In districts that had associations the associations for all intent really ran the district. In D12 for example we had all 10 clubs in the association and each had the same rep on the district board. Really one of the boards was a waste of time and volunteers. In the association the clubs have a say in grooming but it is overseen by the association. All operators work under a coordinator for each groomer which might and mostly does groom in several club boundaries. The operators and coordinators work for the association. All groomers are taken care of by the association and each club is a part owner of every groomer. We also have a grooming meeting twice a month with the coordinators and the clubs send a liaison to represent the club where grooming issues are discussed. This was only one of the many aspects of what a good association did for the clubs. Even without MOTS our association and district board were in the process of amalgamating and were asked to hold off until MOTS passed or was defeated. So the short answer is No associations will not be required however some districts may continue to have them (thinking of areas with 20-25 clubs or more and divide up into 2-4 associations with one rep at the district board from each association.-- these associations would have no vote at the OFSC AGM however My fear is that with MOTS the actual area is so big (can take up to 6 hours to go from one end to the other on a good day by car) that the 3 new clubs will choose not to attend meetings etc and be represented equally and also that some of our safety procedures will not work for the operators due to the distances. In northern Ontario we do not have the cell and radio coverage the southern areas have, but we do have more lakes and swamps and hazards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreezerBurnt Posted September 20, 2016 Share Posted September 20, 2016 In districts that had associations the associations for all intent really ran the district. In D12 for example we had all 10 clubs in the association and each had the same rep on the district board. Really one of the boards was a waste of time and volunteers. In the association the clubs have a say in grooming but it is overseen by the association. All operators work under a coordinator for each groomer which might and mostly does groom in several club boundaries. The operators and coordinators work for the association. All groomers are taken care of by the association and each club is a part owner of every groomer. We also have a grooming meeting twice a month with the coordinators and the clubs send a liaison to represent the club where grooming issues are discussed. This was only one of the many aspects of what a good association did for the clubs. Even without MOTS our association and district board were in the process of amalgamating and were asked to hold off until MOTS passed or was defeated. So the short answer is No associations will not be required however some districts may continue to have them (thinking of areas with 20-25 clubs or more and divide up into 2-4 associations with one rep at the district board from each association.-- these associations would have no vote at the OFSC AGM however My fear is that with MOTS the actual area is so big (can take up to 6 hours to go from one end to the other on a good day by car) that the 3 new clubs will choose not to attend meetings etc and be represented equally and also that some of our safety procedures will not work for the operators due to the distances. In northern Ontario we do not have the cell and radio coverage the southern areas have, but we do have more lakes and swamps and hazards. what worked for the STP is all clubs were within 30-45minutes or less apart , which having multiple meetings and interaction easy, and I would say 90+% of the members of the clubs are all living within that catchment area compared to other areas of the province Also seems with MOTS, it is moving away from ground volounteers who make up the clubs to a more corporate model less personnable, not saying it is not the way to go What happens with D 17 now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutter Posted September 20, 2016 Share Posted September 20, 2016 what worked for the STP is all clubs were within 30-45minutes or less apart , which having multiple meetings and interaction easy, and I would say 90+% of the members of the clubs are all living within that catchment area compared to other areas of the province Also seems with MOTS, it is moving away from ground volounteers who make up the clubs to a more corporate model less personnable, not saying it is not the way to go What happens with D 17 now? I don't get why so many are thinking this ? Clubs will still be working with their landowners, still maintaining, signing, bridging and grooming their trails, still having their events and social interaction. The only thing really changing is the bills will be paid by the district/region and groomer coordination will be overseen by a district grooming committee made up of the groomer coordinator of each club and the aid of the regional support manager to make it more efficient. Districts can also do what ever else the clubs that make up the district/region decide to make a dist task if they wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperG Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I don't get why so many are thinking this ? Clubs will still be working with their landowners, still maintaining, signing, bridging and grooming their trails, still having their events and social interaction. The only thing really changing is the bills will be paid by the district/region and groomer coordination will be overseen by a district grooming committee made up of the groomer coordinator of each club and the aid of the regional support manager to make it more efficient. Districts can also do what ever else the clubs that make up the district/region decide to make a dist task if they wish. Yes I agree the most things in the mots model are good for our sport, BUT the re alignment of the districts was completely unnecessary! forcing districts to merge together after most districts worked hard to come together and work as one (manageable) district for the proposed mots model. Now are having some boundaries changed and an expanded (unmanageable) sized super district, in name sake of apparently saving a few administration $. Oh and hiring these super administrators to oversee EVERYTHING! Good luck! I dont see the savings in it at all! if anything your spending more! Also they haven't even budgeted anything for it yet to see! Thats where they lost our vote! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livin' on the b103 Posted September 22, 2016 Share Posted September 22, 2016 What Blake G said!! Sorry I'm man of few words when it comes to the politics of sleddin'. Just too busy actually getting stuff done. Livin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperG Posted September 22, 2016 Share Posted September 22, 2016 YES LIVIN, WE ARE TOO BUSY FOR THE BS POLITICS OF THIS ALL! INSTEAD OF LEAVING DISTRICTS ALONE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH TO DO, NOW WE HAVE TO GET MORE STUFF WORKED OUT FOR MERGING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livin' on the b103 Posted September 22, 2016 Share Posted September 22, 2016 I rest my case.. Livin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.