IMBA: Possible new direction for the MMBA

[johnnyg]

I think the idea of moving administrative duties to the IMBA is a great idea. I also think that the MMBA can maintain its local status and integrity on the important things mentioned in this thread, such as:

chapter

Local advocacy

Trailbuilding

Trail maintenance

Events

Event and trailbuilding insurance

MMBA

State level advocacy

Lobbyist

Advocacy director

Advocacy team

Website

Annual meeting

Advocacy insurance

Then, I think the State Board must decide what to do with some of the local programs. The ones that I find most important are:

Mountain Bike Patrol

Michigan Interscholastic Cycling Association (perhaps integrated with Mountain Kids)

From an advocacy perspective, I can tell you that the MMBA needs to survive in order to maintain its clout. The affiliation with IMBA will be just that-- an affiliation. The organization of the new Michigan IMBA chapters will be the ties that bind us to local issues and keep our influence and respect with the DNRE, legislators, Congress, the governor's office, local park managers, etc.

A question: can we push the undo button if this affiliation proves disappointing? If the answer to that is yes, then it seems like this could really lift a burden off the MMBA at little risk.

[dirt]

A question: can we push the undo button if this affiliation proves disappointing? If the answer to that is yes, then it seems like this could really lift a burden off the MMBA at little risk.

Unknown if it would be possible to push the undo button, but we have no plans on the MMBA getting ride of it's 501(c)3 status, so our legal identity would be maintained, so it would be possible from that standpoint. There are no plans on 'shutting down' the MMBA if the change were to take place.

[gf101]

I've read all the posts to this thread and I still don't have a good solid answer to the question, "What's in it for me?" (me is the MMBA membership). If the MMBA has become to big for a "volunteer" Board to operate then I'd rather pay another $5 or $7 per year in additional dues and hire either a full or part time Director who will have the proper administrative/managerial background and be able to put the kind of time and effort into managing the MMBA that's required. Let the rest of the board focus on the "problems" of the organization and chapters .

[thejode]

I don't think it's as simple as hiring a Director. That person cannot possibly do all the things that the board and local chapter leaders need to do. And it is always the same people who do the work while the rest of the membership reaps the benefits for their small membership fee. It's always been just a hand full of people doing the mailings, the phone calls, the event organization and the burnout is inevitable. Eventually those people step away because they just can't continue at that pace forever. I think what they are saying is that it's getting harder to find people who are willing to put in the time and effort needed for the business efforts required. Not to mention the sometimes harrowing verbal abuse dished out by some members to volunteers (which I have witnessed first hand). Yeah that's a good way to keep volunteers. So I get this part.

What I'm wondering (changing gears here) is how does the fund raising work? Where does the money go? Do the local chapters still maintain a bank account? Do they still have control of their own funds? Just wondering. (I know, probably answered above but I didn't see it in my scan)

[Geff]

Initially I liked reading the idea/concept of morphing with IMBA and becoming a larger more powerful advocacy voice and having the full weight of the IMBA behind us. But there are lots of things I like about our MMBA having a "Home Grown" feel to it, for it...and keeping it local. I just wouldn't want to lose that model, especially when MMBA deals with the local land managers and members in Lansing. When our advocates go into meetings and discussions now, I sense there is a good working relationship. My worry when bringing in IMBA is that it gives the impression of "Whoa...they're bringing in the big guns and heavy hitters now."

The IMBA model would put a new meaning to "your tax dollars at work." But in this case, membership dollars. I would like to believe that this would be a really good thing for us state wide.

Just some random thoughts.

[2WheeledWarrior]

I would caution using SORBA's model. SORBA has 25 local chapters in seven states. The MMBA has 9 chapters in one state. Because we are all in one state, MMBA needs to have a more prominent status than IMBA to the local chapters.
For instance, the Equestrian Bill affects all chapters in the MMBA where in SORBA it would affect 2 or 3 chapters maybe.
I don't have a problem with a closer affiliation with IMBA, but we have worked too hard and long to have the effects and history of the MMBA be minimized.
Nate, I like your outline. However, a comparison of outlines between what is now and what is being proposed would really help.

[johnnyg]

Initially I liked reading the idea/concept of morphing with IMBA and becoming a larger more powerful advocacy voice and having the full weight of the IMBA behind us. But there are lots of things I like about our MMBA having a "Home Grown" feel to it, for it...and keeping it local. I just wouldn't want to lose that model, especially when MMBA deals with the local land managers and members in Lansing. When our advocates go into meetings and discussions now, I sense there is a good working relationship. My worry when bringing in IMBA is that it gives the impression of "Whoa...they're bringing in the big guns and heavy hitters now."

The IMBA model would put a new meaning to "your tax dollars at work." But in this case, membership dollars. I would like to believe that this would be a really good thing for us state wide.

Just some random thoughts.

Good thoughts. I think the plan for IMBA is to only do what we ask them to do-- which for the most important part, at least for now, is administer the tedium of running the "backroom". I think advocacy and all "front office" operations would still be within the prerogative of us natives. Really, when one thinks about it, it is how many great organizations are run-- how many businesses do you know that are vertically integrated? Instead of doing everything we keep doing what we want to do (advocacy and trail building and getting new people involved in the sport) and subcontract out the rest.

Rhetorical questions to make a point: do you want mtbers to slave over corporate governance, insurance coverage, mmba store product fulfillment, membership admin, website services, etc.? For some it works out because they have some training in these fields and also happen to be mtbers-- hooray! For many of these tasks we are working (read: volunteering) many more hours on admin and losing the chance to be visionaries for the MMBA. No offense to anyone, but I don't want Nate Phelps pouring over insurance policies-- I want him dreaming up his encore to the Grand Rapids Bike Park and gladhanding the people with influence over that project; I don't want Mike Moss slaving over membership fulfillment-- I want him to be walking the woods with Pete figuring out where the next trail at Stony Creek is going to be. The list goes on and on.

The point: getting the visionaries out of the red tape and back into dreaming what new trails and parks can be opened to mtbing is a return to the original vision of the MMBA-- i.e. let's find the dirt for the next new trail that we are going to build.

[dirt]

Addressing a couple of points:
- Sure, at some point, we could increase dues enough to hire full time employees to do everything for us, but do we really want to increase dues just to cover the business cost, with none of the increase going to trails, projects and programs? IMBA provides us those business services at LESS cost then currently. Under our current model, 25% of the membership dollar goes to the chapters. Under IMBA, it would be 40%. The 'overhead', from a chapters perspective, would decrease.

- Money that goes to the chapters remains the chapters. Their own bank accounts. Donations to or funds raise by the chapters remains the chapters. Chapter property is chapter property. From a chapters perspective, it remains very much like it is now.

- What IMBA would really be taking over is the business aspects of the MMBA. Taxes, 501(c)3 status, insurance, membership fulfillment, renewal notices, etc. For that, they keep 60% of the membership money, that's it. Currently, the MMBA State Board is a group of representatives form the chapters (and at large member). Post-IMBA, the MMBA would probably remain a group of representatives from the chapters. And other representatives. The local advocacy, state issues, state programs? That's what we, the state board, HOPE that we can return to concentrating on, when we no longer have to worry about the business aspects.

Personally, as a state board member and a MMBA member, I fear losing those very same things you fear losing. But, I feel like we're losing them now. The business has starting taking up so much of our bandwidth, that the other stuff has fallen off our plates. We want to get back to advocacy, and trails, and land access.

[froggyrider]

I also think getting us out of the business of "wedding planning," as we call it in our chapter, would be great. We need to have a presence at events, but the amount of time and energy that goes into planning some events wipes us out for doing what we need to be doing- trail building and advocacy. That is where we get our ROI, plus revenue from races. As far as events "promoting" the chapter, I think membership needs help too (we have the nuts and bolts down with the great work Mike Moss does- I am talking about the bigger picture here)- just being able to have more outreach as a united group and doing some promotion and advertising will get us and keep us on the radar. There is a branding issue in that every chapter has such different logos. We do not look united. There is an issue getting or maintaining information to shops and at kiosks. We could use more media coverage like press releases. I think getting the lobbyists is a good first step to getting noticed, but carrying this through to a common look and an actual marketing plan will help membership. The member logo on the forum posts is genius, by the way! I guess what I am saying is there is a combination of state level functions that need to be addressed as well as chapter functions. I am not sure if the IMBA would help with chapter functions, but maybe if enough was taken care of at the IMBA level, we'd have more energy or distribution of volunteer duties at the chapter level to keep us interested in volunteering.

[bikesatori]

hmmmm, quite interesting reads...

+/-

[Nelg]

My only major worry is our representation in Lansing which IMBA will not be able to fulfill in person like our current advocacy director and lobbyist. Are there any plans to keep some state level functionality and to create a legal and representation fund? I love the idea of offloading the daily operations to IMBA, but I need to know that if another right to ride type bill comes up that we have boots on the ground in the capital, not some one making phone calls from Colorado.

[Loren]

Under our current model, 25% of the membership dollar goes to the chapters. Under IMBA, it would be 40%.

State wide activities (advocacy, lobbyists, annual meeting, travel, ...) all cost money, and that money has to come from somewhere. Probably out of the chapter's cut, right?

[Di_bear]

Under our current model, 25% of the membership dollar goes to the chapters. Under IMBA, it would be 40%.

State wide activities (advocacy, lobbyists, annual meeting, travel, ...) all cost money, and that money has to come from somewhere. Probably out of the chapter's cut, right?

Yes. What I'm trying to figure out is how do the individual Michigan IMBA Chapters contribute money to the MMBA and how are they held accountable for that money?

If we were to hire people (if we actually had the funds to sustain this), I would expect that we would need the following, at the very least:

• Business administrator
• Fundraiser, including merchandise
• Promo person/communications
• Paid treasurer

The thing is, what the MMBA needs is to grow a business, and that isn't what the volunteer board knows how to do. We know how to build trails, and some of the board knows how to put together excellent events, but we aren't business people. In order to employ good people for the necessary tasks, and actually keep those people, we have to pay competitively, and we just can't do that on our current funds.

[choppe]

Under our current model, 25% of the membership dollar goes to the chapters. Under IMBA, it would be 40%.

State wide activities (advocacy, lobbyists, annual meeting, travel, ...) all cost money, and that money has to come from somewhere. Probably out of the chapter's cut, right?

Yes. What I'm trying to figure out is how do the individual Michigan IMBA Chapters contribute money to the MMBA and how are they held accountable for that money?

If we were to hire people (if we actually had the funds to sustain this), I would expect that we would need the following, at the very least:

• Business administrator
• Fundraiser, including merchandise
• Promo person/communications
• Paid treasurer

The thing is, what the MMBA needs is to grow a business, and that isn't what the volunteer board knows how to do. We know how to build trails, and some of the board knows how to put together excellent events, but we aren't business people. In order to employ good people for the necessary tasks, and actually keep those people, we have to pay competitively, and we just can't do that on our current funds.

So if the MMBA layer costs the chapters more than 15% of dues the IMBA/MMBA would actually cost the chapters more money than the current 75% the MMBA gets. It sounds like in the end that the chapters getting more money isn't really going to be a reality.
What is going to keep the chapters supporting the MMBA after they are part of the IMBA?
Can the MMBA become 1 big chapter of IMBA? I would think this would be less confusing.

[nate.phelps]

Quick answers to questions I saw throughout the thread.

The executive director position is a part time salary position.
There is an undo button on this.
The only money going to IMBA is a cut of the membership dollars.
And if you took IMBA out my outline a few posts ago, most of that burden falls under the MMBA.

It sounds well and fine to hire a staff and bring in a full time executive director. This was an organizational goal. It became quickly apparent there wasn't enough money to fund that plan, so plan B developed and a volunteer staff was assembled. This like anything that is volunteered based, has bright spots and just spots.
Often it creates more work to admin that is actually being output. Roughly 5-6 years ago we were around 1800 members which dropped to around 1000 about two years ago and built back up to 1200 in the last year. So roughly over the last 5 years there has been little change in membership. We added $5 onto a membership and I absolutely thought I was going to be tarred and feathered. To increase membership again to fund a staff and ED as realistically the job is bigger than one person can perform, given our current financial burdens, I'm not sure that a $5-$7 increase is enough. I don't know what it would actually take, but I think a start would be a $10 increase.

The reason SORBA is used as an example is they were similarly structured to the MMBA. Since moving to IMBA club, the mother organization has not lost political clout, relationships, etc. The point being made in the example is there is still a SORBA and it is still vital. Simply said we can do the same.

A huge part of the reason the MMBA and SORBA for that matter are successful is the chapters. To be sure there is currently great work happening at the state level,
we are focused under the advocacy leadership of John Gonway and crew. We are about singletrack (and bike parks). We aren't straying onto other issues. There is a plan to create destinations and access. When this plan comes to fruition, whom will build it? Chapters will. And fund it. There isn't money in the state MMBA coffers to do this. Look around at events, whom pays for these and staffs them and so on? The chapters. So what would change in the IMBA model? Not much.

The biggest question that is unanswered is what does the state level MMBA look like after this? The thought is a lean and efficient singletrack advocacy based
organization.