Nutter Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 Nothing wrong with permit $$$ going that way IMO But a club with actual active true members that raise funds for their club that money should stay within that club's account It will cause there is no way or want to physically extract it, however depending on how or if a district board wants to deal with it the club with extra money in the bank might receive less funding from the district then a club with less ability to fundraise as much. If we don't do something the strong clubs will just get stronger and the weak clubs will just get weaker till they are absorbed by the stronger clubs, then the stronger clubs get burnt out because they can't handle the extra workload and then a larger area of trails will suffer ....... We've seen this happen in many cases already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 It will cause there is no way or want to physically extract it, however depending on how or if a district board wants to deal with it the club with extra money in the bank might receive less funding from the district then a club with less ability to fundraise as much. If we don't do something the strong clubs will just get stronger and the weak clubs will just get weaker till they are absorbed by the stronger clubs, then the stronger clubs get burnt out because they can't handle the extra workload and then a larger area of trails will suffer ....... We've seen this happen in many cases already. that is communism . It does not work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildman Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 I agree with most of what you have written but truly believe that many of the strong clubs are good fundraising clubs and if you alienate the fundraisers by getting the district involved in the funds they worked hard to build, the strong fundraising clubs will become less strong quickly IMHO. Those strong clubs probably won't un incorporate. There has to be a component for clubs that just want to be a chapter.......I have yet to see anything that is forcing un incorporation, just components facilitating the option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildman Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 The problem is that many here feel thats what MOTS is when it certainly isn't. Just because a club doesn't have capitol investments in it's name and gets the district to cut the checks for expenses, and works together with each other within the district that they govern and run doesn't mean they will no longer be what they were before and what they are today.Just to add further to this......STP from what I understand, has been operating like this for years, a grooming association really is no different then the district.........the district just encompasses more clubs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutter Posted July 30, 2016 Share Posted July 30, 2016 Just to add further to this......STP from what I understand, has been operating like this for years, a grooming association really is no different then the district.........the district just encompasses more clubs Exactly, the difference is that now the districts will have to work together as one, rather than some independant clubs and an association within a district creating a voting imbalance at the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCC Posted July 30, 2016 Share Posted July 30, 2016 Seem like the proposed new district structures is 6 committees, district board and executive committee structure is the same as the OFSC execon & BOG. Plus it looks like the executive committee structures is president, v-president, secretary, treasurer and they are the decision makers, not the district board. Today in our district's structure the board is comprised as club reps from each club, they have a vote, but not in MOTS. This concerna me because are we not suppose to work together and each club should feel that they are making decisions to better the district. We need to ensure that we don't upset to many volunteers and loss them. BECAUSE THEY ARE OUR BIGGEST ASSET! Volunteers have been the backbone of OFSC & clubs for years! I know we need change, but let's not loss sight that volunteers are why we have snowmobiling in Ontario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soupkids Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 Just to add further to this......STP from what I understand, has been operating like this for years, a grooming association really is no different then the district.........the district just encompasses more clubs Yes STP does operate like this and has since its inception. Its not a perfect system but it works pretty dam good. I have scoured the OFSC clubhouse for info in MOTS and pretty much found nothing. The concept and thinking behind MOTS is sound for the most part but the time frame needs to be extended. From what I hear and read the plan is to push way to fast with not enough information put out to digest. This is a sure fire way to push volunteers out of an already strained system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sledjunk Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 Yes STP does operate like this and has since its inception. Its not a perfect system but it works pretty dam good. I have scoured the OFSC clubhouse for info in MOTS and pretty much found nothing. The concept and thinking behind MOTS is sound for the most part but the time frame needs to be extended. From what I hear and read the plan is to push way to fast with not enough information put out to digest. This is a sure fire way to push volunteers out of an already strained system. After you log in to the clubhouse, look for the line halfway down the page that says Access The More on the Snow Member Package Here!Click on that line to get to the package. I understand that there are a number of grooming associations, but as I understand it, the clubs still get a portion of their permit sales to cover incidental expenses as they see fit, within the guidelines, of course. As I understand the new proposal, under the premise of accountability, no money will be transferred to the clubs, so all decisions will have to be approved by the district. This includes signage requests, landowner appreciation dinners, work crew BBQ expenses, etc. BTW, how is it expected that the clubs will be able to attend future AGM's if they do not have any revenue? Are we just to give our proxies to either the district or to clubs rich enough to attend from their fundraising or rely on volunteers paying their own way. My club is not part of a grooming association but this is my understanding of how most work. Please correct me if I am wrong and also how they will function going forward under the new rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viperules700 Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 So if the clubs no longer get any revenue (currently clubs in an association got around 12 dollars per permit sold), no one will care about permit sales, patrolling trails (let the district worry about that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panther340 Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 Just thinking outside the box for some examples of structures where local and district and provincial oversight all occur and where assets and volunteerism occurs at the local level primarily. I could not help but think of the church organizations. Where a local board is voted in and takes care of the building asset and various fund raising to keep the "church" going, but that church is then part of a bigger regional group of churches and oversight from even provincial or Canada wide . I know that is how it occurs in some Associated Gospel Churches and I imagine in Baptist and Catholic and United Churches. Maybe there is some lessons to be learned from them type of organizations on how they divvy out responsibility and still maintain their asset and volunteerism ..maybe a useless thought of mine, but there is a similarity I could not help but notice.........but I am no expert in churches or OFSC....although from the looks of things the OFSC could use some prayers !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 So if the clubs no longer get any revenue (currently clubs in an association got around 12 dollars per permit sold), no one will care about permit sales, patrolling trails (let the district worry about that). I really think this is a big risk from a number of perspectives. If all Club funds are going to have to be transferred to the District then the real crap show will start and it will not be a pleasant outcome. We are going too far, too fast without much information to work on. Even losing 20% of our key Volunteers as a consequence will be fatal to many Clubs. Rather than spending a pile of money that we don't have on Super Regional Managers, I recommend increasing the Trail Permit fees by $20 a year, then $10 each year after that. In 5 years we bring in $6,000,000 I can't get on to the last MOTS report on Clubhouse but hope to next week. I have heard that there may be no more industrial groomers bought due to cost and farm tractors will be the power units. This will not work in many northern areas with steeper terrain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greggie Posted August 3, 2016 Author Share Posted August 3, 2016 It's already five minutes before twelf o'clock. The OFSC has already started with the implementation of MOTS on August 1. The clubs need to make a budget how much money the need for opening trails, trail work and so on. This budget need to get approved by the district and if approved, it can do the tasks they need to do. Don't think thT the district will give thousands of dollars for land owner préciation. Last year at the Agm, it's delayed with one year, that will not happen again. All assets of the clubs will go to the districts, groomers, atvs, clubhouses, shops and tools, chainsaws, bank accounts and so on. Then some assets will given back to clubs as chain saws, most likely. The district is responsible for groomer maintenance and a groomer schedule. It's possible that a unknown groomer operator will groom your club trails with the old groomer from your neighbor's club, while your old groomer is grooming 200 km away. Grooming and maintenance isn't anymore a club responsibility. How this will go, not sure.... If the district have he ducks in a row and grooming is going well, it will go well. If not, it can become a mess..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreezerBurnt Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 Yes STP does operate like this and has since its inception. Its not a perfect system but it works pretty dam good. As per centralized grooming yes But don't the clubs themselves get $$$$$ as per permit sold?? Each club has it's own accounts Also the clubs themselves do fundraising also and many purchase their own trail maintenance equipment ie saws, club snowmobile, argo atv, signage etc if needed unless this has all changed recently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doogirl69 Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 Why don't they look at the Quebec model? Seems to work for them with a higher permit price and plenty on sweeeet groomers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PISTON LAKE CRUISER Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 So if the clubs no longer get any revenue (currently clubs in an association got around 12 dollars per permit sold), no one will care about permit sales, patrolling trails (let the district worry about that). What clubs in what association got $12.00 per permit sold currently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nutter Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 My thoughts are that with a La Nina season coming that pretty much guarantees a good to above average winter, after the worst ever season for Ontario sledders, that followed 2 less than stellar seasons, now is not the time for these huge drastic changes. We need to must put ALL our efforts into opening and grooming trails and winning the loyalty and faith of the permit buyers back ...... rather than try and reinvent the wheel. If we see good snow and consistent cold and are too busy piss anting around with MOTS and district realignment to make sure trails are groomed and in good shape, MOTS and district realignment will do nothing the help us out of the hole that will be dug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildman Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 After you log in to the clubhouse, look for the line halfway down the page that says Access The More on the Snow Member Package Here! Click on that line to get to the package. I understand that there are a number of grooming associations, but as I understand it, the clubs still get a portion of their permit sales to cover incidental expenses as they see fit, within the guidelines, of course. As I understand the new proposal, under the premise of accountability, no money will be transferred to the clubs, so all decisions will have to be approved by the district. This includes signage requests, landowner appreciation dinners, work crew BBQ expenses, etc . BTW, how is it expected that the clubs will be able to attend future AGM's if they do not have any revenue? Are we just to give our proxies to either the district or to clubs rich enough to attend from their fundraising or rely on volunteers paying their own way. My club is not part of a grooming association but this is my understanding of how most work. Please correct me if I am wrong and also how they will function going forward under the new rules. I can only speak from the stand point from my experience with my club and district, which I do sit on the district trail committee. The district takes requests, we have said no to one thing, fixing a junk groomer that had no business having money spent on it, the club had 1 groomer that worked fine, and really they don't need it either, because 3 other clubs could pick up a bit and cover their trails. We haven't always given exactly what was asked for.....because it was unreasonable.....it is a committee making these decisions, and when there is aconflict with a club member, they leave the room. If it is run above board, and properly, it is a great system and trims waste. We do things like cap storage expenses, stuff like that, keep things fair and reasonable, stop abuse. If the district cap isn't enough, you need to fund raise, but anything we have capped is more then reasonable. As for agm, we want to send 2 people from each club, and encourage it, we need a strong voice as a district, just like every district should want, thats what makes the system work. The same goes for our trail committee, there is encouragement to have a member of each club on the committee. Again, this works for us, because we all want to work together to make our district as strong and efficient as possible and for every club to survive......forward thinking is key. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 I can only speak from the stand point from my experience with my club and district, which I do sit on the district trail committee. The district takes requests, we have said no to one thing, fixing a junk groomer that had no business having money spent on it, the club had 1 groomer that worked fine, and really they don't need it either, because 3 other clubs could pick up a bit and cover their trails. We haven't always given exactly what was asked for.....because it was unreasonable.....it is a committee making these decisions, and when there is aconflict with a club member, they leave the room. If it is run above board, and properly, it is a great system and trims waste. We do things like cap storage expenses, stuff like that, keep things fair and reasonable, stop abuse. If the district cap isn't enough, you need to fund raise, but anything we have capped is more then reasonable. As for agm, we want to send 2 people from each club, and encourage it, we need a strong voice as a district, just like every district should want, thats what makes the system work. The same goes for our trail committee, there is encouragement to have a member of each club on the committee. Again, this works for us, because we all want to work together to make our district as strong and efficient as possible and for every club to survive......forward thinking is key. And it seems that this was done successfully by your District without MOTS so why the need to force feed it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mczed38 Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Why don't they look at the Quebec model? Seems to work for them with a higher permit price and plenty on sweeeet groomers. Copy and paste from Fb page of Les Ours Blancs, a club near Mt Laurier. The snow is not necessarily whiter. Translation is a by Google I believe so it's rough, But you get the gist. Club de motoneige les Ours Blancs 7 March · Mise au point : Revenus vs dépenses pour le Club les Ours Blancs : 520 membres à 158$ = 82,160$ Subvention sentiers MTQ = 110,000$ Revenu total pour l’entretien des sentiers = 192,160$ Dépenses Entretien des sentiers moyenne de 2,500 heures à 75$/hre = 187,500$ Solde = 4,660$ Avec ce solde de 4,660$ le club doit payer le mécanicien, les frais d’opérations du garage, les paiements mensuels de remboursement de la machinerie, la mise à niveau des sentiers (ponts, ponceaux, signalisation, etc) et l'administration générale. Si vous avez des préoccupations quant à la saine gestion de votre club, n'hésitez pas à communiquer avec le président, Sylvain Marchand au 819-441-1444 ou president@oursblancs.com Bonne fin de saison. Development:Income vs expenditure for the club the polar bears: 520 members to $ 158 = $ 82,160 Grant trails mtq = $ 110,000 Total Income for the maintenance of trails = $ 192,160 Expenditure Maintenance of trails average of 2,500 hours at $ 75 / HR = $ 187,500 Balance = $ 4,660 With this balance of $ 4,660 the club has to pay the mechanic, the costs of operations of the garage, the monthly payments of reimbursement of the machinery, the upgrade paths (Bridges, culverts, signage, etc) and the general administration . If you have any concerns regarding the sound management of your club, please do not hesitate to communicate with the president, Sylvain Marchand at 819-441-1444 or president@oursblancs.com Good end of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 My thoughts are that with a La Nina season coming that pretty much guarantees a good to above average winter, after the worst ever season for Ontario sledders, that followed 2 less than stellar seasons, now is not the time for these huge drastic changes. We need to must put ALL our efforts into opening and grooming trails and winning the loyalty and faith of the permit buyers back ...... rather than try and reinvent the wheel. If we see good snow and consistent cold and are too busy piss anting around with MOTS and district realignment to make sure trails are groomed and in good shape, MOTS and district realignment will do nothing the help us out of the hole that will be dug. Wow, with such an experienced and knowledgeable person as 'Nutter' seemingly agreeing to slow this MOTS process down for another year it convinces me that this shouldn't be rubber stamped at the AGM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 My thoughts are that with a La Nina season coming that pretty much guarantees a good to above average winter, after the worst ever season for Ontario sledders, that followed 2 less than stellar seasons, now is not the time for these huge drastic changes. We need to must put ALL our efforts into opening and grooming trails and winning the loyalty and faith of the permit buyers back ...... rather than try and reinvent the wheel. If we see good snow and consistent cold and are too busy piss anting around with MOTS and district realignment to make sure trails are groomed and in good shape, MOTS and district realignment will do nothing the help us out of the hole that will be dug. Crap I agree with Nutter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soupkids Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 I think the whole club fundraising and revenue is being confused between MOTS and the upcoming gov't legislation regarding not for profit organizations. I am thinking the MOTS talk has crossed the line between the two by giving examples of scenarios under the coming legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbakernbay Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 With respect, I really don't think the so-called pending non-profit legislation has any real bearing on why MOTS is being proposed. There is a minor element letting Clubs choose to be unincorporated but I don't think this is one of the primary Club concerns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sledjunk Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 I can only speak from the stand point from my experience with my club and district, which I do sit on the district trail committee. The district takes requests, we have said no to one thing, fixing a junk groomer that had no business having money spent on it, the club had 1 groomer that worked fine, and really they don't need it either, because 3 other clubs could pick up a bit and cover their trails. We haven't always given exactly what was asked for.....because it was unreasonable.....it is a committee making these decisions, and when there is aconflict with a club member, they leave the room. If it is run above board, and properly, it is a great system and trims waste. We do things like cap storage expenses, stuff like that, keep things fair and reasonable, stop abuse. If the district cap isn't enough, you need to fund raise, but anything we have capped is more then reasonable. As for agm, we want to send 2 people from each club, and encourage it, we need a strong voice as a district, just like every district should want, thats what makes the system work. The same goes for our trail committee, there is encouragement to have a member of each club on the committee. Again, this works for us, because we all want to work together to make our district as strong and efficient as possible and for every club to survive......forward thinking is key. We have spoken about this and I understand that it works for you and your district. However, what I am not clear about is if that is truly the system that is being proposed, err forced, in MOTS. In this latest version, our club is being moved to a different district that will be composed of what is currently, two grooming associations and three or four standalone clubs. Under this new district, we are expected to implement MOTS with only three months till the trails open. Too much, too fast, and too many unknowns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sledjunk Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Crap I agree with Nutter X2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.