Boundary Reorganization

[Joe Weinbeck]

If this reorganization go through the way it is being shown I will be interested in finding out how many members from the far reaches of a region will be leaving the PPFA - maybe none because there are benefits from just being a member w/o ever going to a meeting but it will still be interesting to see what happens. I can pretty much guess now that the reason for members to continue is because of the benefit of the WCAF and by being a member the discounts you get. I know the leadership is not going to be what Robin wants - very very few people who have to drive the 8, 10, 12 hours to get to a meeting are not going to volunteer for a leadership role - heck, it is hard to get a volunteer from people who are within 15 minutes of a meeting. I just don't see any benefit what-so-ever with the boundary reorganization and nobody has given a good reason to do it. There has been a lot of people saying we hope this will happen or we hope that will happen but there has not been a definitive reason to make the changes, especially where the real estate of a region will be so large. Sorry but that is just my thoughts...Joe

 

[Ellen Collins MCPF]

To be blunt, I suspect that the chapter meetings are NOT the main reason frame shops belong to PPFA.

If it were, wouldn't more of them show up to our chapter meetings? We put meetings all over our area- Baltimore, DC, Fredericksburg, once even in Roanoke

And some of the meetings have NAMES: Linda Wassell, Jim Miller, Rob Markoff, Hugh Phibbs. Each of these brought about 12-18 people- no thundering herds.

All meetings have a program which would benefit any framer: mat decoration, using media to bring in more business, fabric wrapped mats.

And who showed up? The same 8-15 people and one or two from the local area. but not what a logical person would expect if the chapter meetings are as important as we are saying here.

For what it's worth...

 

[Gregory K. Norris CPF]

In most cases those members in the "far reaches" have not been being served at all except through the mailbox chapter.

 

[Randy Parrish CPF]

In most cases those members in the "far reaches" have not been being served at all except through the mailbox chapter.

Yes and that is potential chapter funding that was going nowhere. Minnesota which has around 35 members would go up to about 60. Wisconsin with about 25 members would go to about 58. Now if Texas Gulf Coast Chapter would consider bringing in Louisiana, their chapter would go from about 16 to 28. Almost and sometimes more than doubling the budget they get, $25 per member. Remember some of these non active chapter may be sitting on their funding and doing nothing with it, is that fair to their members?

 

[Joe Weinbeck]

Then how do those "rural" members benefit by staying with the PPFA? That is my point, if we make it harder for them to associate and attend the more unlikely it is that they will stick around. We make the boundaries larger they may even loose more of those benefits - I know for sure they aren't benefitting by getting a window sticker annually because that is just about non-existent.

 

[Randy Parrish CPF]

Then how do those "rural" members benefit by staying with the PPFA? That is my point, if we make it harder for them to associate and attend the more unlikely it is that they will stick around. We make the boundaries larger they may even loose more of those benefits -I know for sure they aren't benefitting by getting a window sticker annually because that is just about non-existent.

They are now going to have contact from a chapter, if anything we are making it easier for them to associate and they like EVERYONE they can attend ANY meeting they desire too. What would keep them sticking around now, what are they possibly loosing by being included in a chapter?

A year ago we thought the door sticker was taken care of, it was not. Then again at a recent Board of Directors meeting, myself an others personally made sure door sticker are once again being issued, this should be happening right now! Gone are the days when we were supposed to request a sticker.

 

[Gregory K. Norris CPF]

I can't see how it gets harder to associate with chapters when they are currently not even assigned to a chapter???

Ellen made a good point this morning for many folks not already active in chapters, something else is motivating them to be members.

And Randy, we only get 2 new members, but during our discussion the fact that we would get more money never even came up, we were just grateful to have some new members. But it is a good point. It will bring money to some chapters which will help compensate for some of the extra work around competitions.

 

[Cliff Wilson MCPF]

Then how do those "rural" members benefit by staying with the PPFA? That is my point, if we make it harder for them to associate and attend the more unlikely it is that they will stick around. We make the boundaries larger they may even loose more of those benefits -I know for sure they aren't benefitting by getting a window sticker annually because that is just about non-existent.

This pdf explains SOME of why many of our members stick around for reasons other than great chapter meetings:
http://www.pmai.org/uploadedFiles/PPFA_Today_April2014.pdf

We have dysfunctional chapters and are trying to increase the likelihood that more chapters will reach a critical mass of members to aide in generating leadership, so we have more well functioning chapters.

This was a reaction to some members (who still feel this way) wanting to eliminate chapters completely.

Will this cure all ills. No.
But, we have to try something and I for one don't want to "throw the baby out with the bath water" by eliminating chapters.

 

[Ellen Collins MCPF]

Then how do those "rural" members benefit by staying with the PPFA? That is my point, if we make it harder for them to associate and attend the more unlikely it is that they will stick around. We make the boundaries larger they may even loose more of those benefits -I know for sure they aren't benefitting by getting a window sticker annually because that is just about non-existent.

(to reiterate my point) our chapter is East Coast, and therefore small, and yet we STILL can't get most members (approx 100ish) to attend true QUALITY offerings. The other side of your argument is that geographically smaller chapters would encourage more participation in chapter events. This doesn't hold water, at least for National Capital Chapter.

And yet we have said 100ish members. Why? There is plainly something else that keeps them in the association. We need to figure out why they want to belong, and yet not participate.

 

[Randy Parrish CPF]

And Randy, we only get 2 new members, but during our discussion the fact that we would get more money never even came up, we were just grateful to have some new members. But it is a good point. It will bring money to some chapters which will help compensate for some of the extra work around competitions.

Tri-State takes on Northeastern Ohio and Western new York, you will take on 25 to 27 new members.

 

[Jim Miller MCPF GCF]

This conversation is beginning to sound familiar. Getting framers to join PPFA and to attend chapter events have always been tough tasks.

"I don't have time." Many of us spend countless hours of much less value consorting on the internet.

"The meeting is too far away." Many framers wouldn't walk across the street to attend a PPFA event, because they see no reason to go.

These are convenient evasions of real negatives, usually unspoken in efforts to be courteous. Competitive animosity may be near the top of that list, as many framers disdain being in the same room with their competitors, but many simply do not believe PPFA benefits and educational opportunities are worth the necessary investment of time or money.

When PPFA succeeds in building a strong perceived value in the minds of its members and potential members, the framers will come. Otherwise, the association is only chasing its tail.

 

[James R Cook GCF]

When this discussion is over is there going to be a chapter vote on this redistricting?

 

[Randy Parrish CPF]

When this discussion is over is there going to be a chapter vote on this redistricting?

No but the chapter itself could vote for which neighboring chapter you would like to aligned with, I assume the Chapter Relations Committee and the Board of Directors would consider that. Chapters were supposed to send a representative to the Chapter Leaders Meeting last January to Vegas, where many new changes to plan were already discussed and worked on.

 

[James R Cook GCF]

So this has already been decided. This is not a real discussion about the boundary reorganization .

 

[Gregory K. Norris CPF]

Randy, you are right. We will have more to work with. The 2 members we picked up were mailbox members.

 

[Gregory K. Norris CPF]

If it was already decided, the board would have already voted on it. It is not "pointless" to gather as much information as possible before making a decision.

As I have previously noted, the plan has already changed considerably since its introduction (over half a year ago) as a result of comments and information provided by the chapter leadership.

 

[Randy Parrish CPF]

So this has already been decided. This is not a real discussion about the boundary reorganization .

I did not say that. If you want to consult with your chapter leadership and chapter membership right now its the time to do so. As I did say it was discussed with chapter leaders and on the Chapter Leader Exchange, you were considered the chapter president until John Heltman and John Barlowe were elected very recently. There have been many efforts, by many chapters to help other inactive chapters out to little or no effect.

 

[Robin Gentry MCPF]

Any constructive comments are welcome. This discussion is open until the 20th. After that it will be closed. So now is the time to comment. After the 20th the boundaries will be reassessed and tweaks made if needed. Currently nothing has been finalized.

The National Board and the CRC opened this discussion to the membership for input. It would be nice to hear from more members as to the concerns they may have. Also from members who have previously been unaffiliated with a chapter or who have been in chapters which are inactive. If any of you are in contact with any members please ask them to join the discussion. If they do not want to jump on the forum publicly the are welcome to message, email or phone me privately. I included contact information in the letter.

 

[Kai Vanuffelen]

Having sixteen members for a chapter does not seem enough to be viable and have a rotating leadership. Probably a minimum of 25 members per chapter is workable.
There certainly is much interest in this discussion as I cannot recall another thread have so many visits and posts.
Members do care about their chapters. Is it easier for some to discuss these and other matters while sitting in front of a screen, than to go to an actual meeting?

Do many of us look at Youtube to view framing techniques instead of mingling with other framers and watch a demonstration on a framing technique? A sign of the time?

 

[Glenn Renick]

When you look at the area which now is the Northern Rockies Chapter you need to consider they are divided by the Rockies. This has proven over the years to be difficult for the chapter as no one will cross the mountains. Also at certain times of the year I am sure it is not something you want to do unless it is an emergency. So the current suggested division takes that into consideration.

Glenn there are some members in the area you are referring to that have worked in chapter leadership and may possibly step in to help on the North Central board with their area. With the help of a stronger chapter to guide them they may be able to build the membership in the area to a number which would support itself over time.

IF the boundaries are redrawn there is nothing that says they can not be altered in the future. IF members step in and membership grows smaller pockets (chapters/hubs) can form and break off from the larger areas. IF these changes occur and everyone says this is just not working we will look at things again and make changes. Nothing is stagnate (well unfortunately things are to a degree right now), we have the ability to change and try new things. We just can not continue to do the same things we have been doing over and over and over and over with the same results. It is time we try something. As someone said earlier if everyone that has commented on this thread would step up at the chapter level and help with something it would make a difference. I do realize there are several that have commented that are very active in the chapters and your hard work is greatly appreciated. We just need your volunteer ethic to rub of on more people!

So anyway one last comment: Albert Einstein - Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins133991.html#LoYeADYKavIYFQYU.99
​

Just a couple of other thoughts (I keep saying that, don't I :smile.

It certainly seems to be a benefit to pick up the additional membership subsidies when chapters gain members from consolidation. Along with that is (or should be) a responsibility to welcome and support those members and not just take the money for "doing the same thing". In the case where the new members are impossibly far away (for our east coast friends, Billings, MT to Minneapolis is exactly the same distance as New York City to Atlanta) some creative solutions are going to be necessary. Holding gathering type events and meetings that a significant number of remote members will never be able to attend is not fair when their money is paying for them. Trying to hold events on both sides of a 1000 mile wide chapter, with some distances reaching 1300 miles, especially when no one lives in the middle half of the territory, might require operating as two distant but cooperating chapters under the leadership of one board. Based on her response, this might be the strategy Robin has in mind.

Again using Billings as the focal point of the members in eastern Montana/Wyoming, the distance to Minneapolis/St. Paul, where the North Country Chapter is currently based, is 850 miles. Denver, which appears on Randy's map to have a membership concentration close to the size of the twin cities, is 550 miles away. I'm not sure if saving 300 miles is significant when we are dealing with these kinds of distances. But it still seems more logical to me to put the eastern half of Montana, and certainly NE Wyoming, in the same chapter as Denver. At least it would be within a one-day drive instead of two. On the other hand it would extend the Mountains & Plains even more than it's currently planned massive size. I suppose the logic of this would depend on how much activity would take place in or around Denver. I'd encourage at least taking another look at the best affiliation for the folks in Wyoming.

By the way, for those who are proud of their 2 hour drive each way to go to a meeting, a Delta Airlines non-stop flight Billings to Minneapolis is 2 hours gate-to-gate time. :shocked: