Re: RC: 5 Reasons Why I Can't Go To Reno

[jlong@mti.net (Joe Long)]

>BMcCrary27@aol.com wrote:

>> We considered numerous alternatives in years past.  Denver seemed like a good
>> idea but the airport is so high in elevation that we decided that flights
>> would be too unpredictable.  

????  Front range weather almost never closes the airport.  Did anyone
actually check the number of cancelled flights due to weather in
Denver in Feb-March compared to other airports -- including Reno?  Not
that I favor Denver (despite living nearby), there are other reasons
that it would not be a good site IMO.  Mainly, that when it moves from
Reno it should be further east and closer to more members -- and Front
Range folks can *drive* to Reno!

>>Once again, I'll state that it is exceedingly
>> costly for AERC to move all the necessary supplies across the country.  The
>> convention WAS held back east two different years and I don't remember the
>> attendance was any greater for having done so.  It does seem unfair, but we
>> have to be realistic about costs.

Yes.  Again, the Almighty Dollar.

The AERC must decide what is the real purpose of the Convention.  If
it is to serve the members, then it should be made as accessible as
possible.  If it is to raise money, then it should be held where it
raises the most money every year.

I believe the Convention, and the AERC, should put members first.  So
even if it doesn't raise as much money when it's held outside of the
West it should move around the country some years.  The formula
arrived at some time ago was one that I felt didn't move it enough,
but it was better than nothing.

This relates back to a fundamental problem I've seen with the AERC
management in recent years -- that the bottom line in making decisions
isn't what's best for the members, or the riders, or the sport, but
what best fills the coffers of the AERC.  I believe it is essential
that those priorities change and that the AERC return to putting
members first.

-- 
Joe Long
jlong@mti.net
www.rnbw.com