Yowza All,
I implore all who have an opinion on this issue to send their comments Pro and Con to the Jaguar Journal but hurry as the issue gets "put to bed" in several days. I doubt the Pro side will have much to say as they seem to be keeping a VERY low profile, more on that later.
The "powers with the name that must not be spoken" have stated we must wait a year before anything is done. This is an intellectually dishonest statement, actually more of a "bereft of honesty" statement as intellect clearly is not involved. Mensa has none of these clowns responsible for this aberration on Speed-Dial.
The issue that annoys me the most is the fact that this issue was not posted in the Journal on the Website or even on the Agenda for the AGM.
WHY WAS THE MEMBERSHIP NOT GIVEN THE ABILTY TO VIE THIS AND OFER ANY SUGESSTIONS OR COMMENTS?
I made calls to the Prsident Steve Kennedy and Counsel Steve Weinstein, six days later I've yet to hear ANYTHING from them. Mr. Weinstein was sent a certified letter this past Tuesday maybe that will work.
Mr. Kennedy, you were "supposedly" elected to uphold the rules of the Club. Clearly you have been grossly negligent by allowing this situation to reach this level. Mr. Kennedy I ask that you tender your resignation immediately. Using the Proxies you did is also very questionable but more of a personal character issue. The Proxies that you brandished with arrogance, did the Clubs feel the same way as you did? Sort of doubtful seeing the issue wasn't posted so they had no prior knowledge. The Membership involved with those Proxies should also make their feelings known to the Journal ASAP, by e-mail if needed.
I also made calls to ALL of the Regional Directors and talked to about 2/3 of them. One of the numbers had no way to leave a message and the rest apparently feel no obligation to be accountable to the Membership. Great bunch of guys we elected, wouldn't you agree? Remember that for next year.
One interesting thing about my calls. Some, not all were surprised that this passed as they knew it would inflame passions of some of the Membership. The ones who were against the measure were up-front and honest about their displeasure. The ones that were for the new measure didn't say a word. Their opinion were only revealed as different Officer expressed their surprise and stated otherwise. For those who chose to be less than transparent, id est, lied, do you understand you weren't in a vacuum that day and other people witnessed you vote, Dennis Eynon.
Maybe the whole procedure should be taped for later viewing and the AGM should retain a Parlimentary Procedure Coach to help keep the meetings on the up and up. It would seem that a Counsel doesn't serve a useful purpose in this case.
Good Health to All, Bob Lovell- Jaguar Club of Southern New England

Submitted by NE08-35179J-J on Wed, 04/23/2008 - 17:45

Yowza All,
Just to let you know.......No response has been received from Mr. Weinstein at this time. The "certified" letter was sent out last Tuesday but so far no receipt of signature. He should have received it Friday as the trip from Conn to his state is minimal. Meanwhile I've noticed he has had time to "clarify" a question a member had regarding the President also holding a Regional Directors Office, but not the simple Parlimentary Ruling that makes up the basis of my complaint on the legitimacy of the Driven Division's Trailering Rule.
Luckily Steve has his complaints properly prioritized, still waiting and waiting and he still has my phone number, fingers must be broken, can't use the phone, I'm sure.
Later, Bob Lovell

Submitted by wljenkins@usa.net on Tue, 04/22/2008 - 00:23

Louis, I too fail to understand the connection between trailering a car to a concours and the autotrain or a ferry.

I also don't like the 30 year old minimum and 400 mile minimum. Why not 25 years old which is what most states require in order to get "Antique" or "Early American" license plates. Here in Connecticut, a car only has to be 20 years old to get Antique license plates so how about 20 years old? An '86 XJ6 is just as likely to overheat on a long trip on a very hot day as a '48 XK120 since the engines are basically the same.

Come to think of it, I support the rule change the way it ended up more than I would support setting cutoffs for age of car or minimum miles from the event.

As I pointed out in another thread, it's almost impossible to prevent anyone from trailering their car and dropping it off of the trailer around the corner out of everyone's view and just driving it to the field. It's always been an almost impossible rule to enforce so the more I think about it, the more I think it's a good rule change.

I'm also not really sure how much of an effect this is going to have on concours around North America this year. My guess is it will be negligible so I personally don't think it's worth getting all excited about.

However, I do believe the originator of this thread (Mr. Lovell) does have some very valid points and concerns regarding the highly questionable way this rule change came about (the possible Roberts Rules and JCNA bylaws violations).

Submitted by SE98-32482CJ on Sat, 04/19/2008 - 14:21

Louis not being familiar with Martha's Vinyard (other than it is an island) I do not see how this is a problem either way---do you not drive onto the ferry? Do thy make you put a car on the ferry on a trailer? If a person lives on Hawaii and wants to go to a show in California and drives to the dock (or airport) and drives from it that has never been a problem. As far as the snowbirds are concerned the typical Southern (native- and yes big S as it is a proper noun) use of that term is someone who comes down for the winter. They have a second residence so they move. How they get their car to their second home is not the issue if they drive from that home to the event. Now if they have the car shipped to Fla. from NY just for the show that is to the point. Louis about the pay are you serious? And all this time I have just thought accounts payable were backed up----kidding of course.

Submitted by kairys@cfl.rr.com on Sat, 04/19/2008 - 13:37

First of all, let me point out that Steve was not the president of JCNA at the time, he was only a director and was so until the end of the AGM Banquet. Secondly, the original proposal (which I though was acceptable) was for cars at least thirty years old and a distance of at least 400 miles. Part of the problem that I pointed out is if we have a member that lives on Martha's Vineyard (or any other island), then the rules would prohibit that person showing their car in Driven. To carry it further. We have a number of JANE members who are snowbirds. Some of them take the Autotrain down. Do we disallow them because the did then rather than drive all the way? As said I voted against the final proposal, but we lost. Such is living in a representative society. Also, please remember all of us are volunteers, no one is paying us to any of the work as delegates through the BOD, and the Executive Board (I am only a delegate and now committee chair). We pay our own way to all of this. Please feel free to join us in our endeavors and become active on a national level.