Shareholder Relations Committee: February 22, 2002





Shareholder Relations Committee

The unapproved Minutes for the meeting of Feb. 22, 2002


As recorded by Rick Moulton at the 2nd floor Basebox- MRG




1.Review and acceptance of minutes from the meeting of 12/28/01

2. Shareholder comments

3. Review recent Coop Board action pertaining to Committee¹s recommendations

4. New and old business

5. Owner comments


The meeting came to order at 6:20


Rocky Bleier, committee co-chair, presided


Shareholders in attendance: Fritz Branshofsky, Vivian Branshofsky, Dee Dee Cartinelli, Ian Forgays, Irma Heeter, Bill Heinzerling, Deri Meier, Suzanne Meier, Rick Moulton, John Schultz, Andrew Snow (representing management), Jim Vann


The minutes from the meeting of 12/28/01 were accepted unanimously as written without discussion.


The committee moved on to agenda item #3, and Rocky Bleier presented a description of the board¹s decision to “streamline” the committee¹s requests for referendums on the requirements for suspension and termination from the coop. Because of the large number of items being asked for the shareholders to review and vote on, it was decided that a fair compromise was to just offer the shareholders the termination bylaw change. The proposal as made by the committee therefore will go before the shareholders for a vote as an article change as opposed to a bylaw change. The change is to require a 2/3 majority of the Board, or 6 votes, to terminate.


Mr. Bleier referred to this action as a compromise. He mentioned that a concerned shareholder could always create a petition by obtaining signatures of 10% of the owners and thereby require the board to address whatever they feel is important. The Committee turned to the member who put the most time into drafting its suggested action on termination and suspension, Fritz Branshofsky. Fritz said that he fully understood the logic of the board. With so much going before the members, only dealing with the one issue this year made sense as far as he could understand it. The committee voiced interest in revisiting the suspension issue next year.


Mr. Bleier further reported that the “conflict of interest” issue that the committee had split emotions about would not be addressed this year as part of the compromise.


A discussion then arose about the lack of out of state candidates. Several members asked if this was the result of out of state shareholders not knowing that the election was coming or not aware of the deadlines for when candidacies needed to be declared. The procedures of the election Committee were discussed. It was noted that request for nominations and candidates was posted in a timely fashion on the bulletin Board, printed in the Echo, posted on the shareholder-only website and on the list server. Are these channels adequate for getting the word out? Deri Meier offered that he understood there had been a handful of candidates who considered running but withdrew indicating that membership knew about the election but for whatever reasons decided against running. It was noted that that the list server was not used to inform shareholders about candidacy deadlines and procedures.


After some discussion a Motion was made:

The Shareholders Relations Committee respectfully requests that in the process for the future Coop election of board members, the Election Committee place the same announcement that goes on the Bulletin Board and in the Echo, on the Web Server as well. This Motion passed 8 for with Deri Meier in abstention.


Rick Moulton recalled last year when the Committee launched the survey, it was thought of as the first in an ongoing process to explore the consensus of the shareholders on their views. Mr. Moulton expressed hope that the polling process continues, and that the committee could have a more specific survey ready in a year or so. Suzanne Meier reminded the committee members that just 6 coop owners did most of the tabulation for the last survey and the workload was considerable. Thoughts on how to share this workload and make the tabulation simpler were discussed. Fritz noted that since we now we know why our members love Mad River, and why they ski here, we can ask pressing questions that have might even have specific answers like what do you think about the proposed new Mission Statement?


Use of the survey was discussed. It was mentioned that in addition to being on the Web site and an overview in the Echo, and copies are available at the office, up to now no one has called at the office for a copy.


Rocky reported that the Board, during its Strategic Planning sessions had reviewed the survey. A discussion then took place about what was discussed by the Board. Bill Heinzerling reported that the question being asked by the Board (at the 2/22/02 Strategic Planning Session) was what do we want Mad River to be like 25 or 50 years from now and how do we get there?

Again it was noted that the survey results were only offered on the Web site with an overview of the survey in the Echo. Rocky noted that the Committee had requested management to also post the survey information on the bulletin board. Andrew Snow said he would see that it got up soon. A discussion evolved about the materials on the bulletin Board and the committee¹s past recommendation that a second bulletin board be placed down stairs across from the Men¹s room.


Mr. Snow explained that management was out straight and hard pressed to get to this task.


Bill Heinzerling put forth his past description of a simple method for making the bulletin board. His plan was unanimously accepted. Since management agreed in its need and placement but will not be able to get to it this season, Bill stepped up to the plate and said that he would be willing to construct the new Bulletin Board. The committee enthusiastically supported his effort. (Go Bill Go.)


The committee then noted that although the postcards (sent out with upcoming Mad River and coop events) were attractive, that they were chronically late. If February is half over when you receive February¹s calendar doesn¹t it hurt the credibility of the mailings in general? It was agreed to pass the word to management that they needed to address this lateness in mailing. The committee suggests tracing the problem, be it the printer, fulfillment, or whatever. It hurts communication that otherwise would be very praiseworthy.


Discussion evolved about the loss of the Chute publication and the limited number of Echo editions. Bill Heinzerling recalled when he edited it with Roland Palmedo and it came out monthly.

Fritz suggested that a proposal be made to the Board at our next meeting regarding what specific expectations were going to be, for next season¹s print budget.


Vivian then suggested that the committee declares otherwise positive support for the current management of the mountain and made the Motion:


Shareholders are happy with our area¹s management under General Manager Jamey Wimble and want to praise him and the entire staff for a job well done. Additionally the Shareholders Relations Committee thanks management for the inclusive support of Andrew Snow¹s participation in our meetings. This Motion passed unanimously.


It was determined then that the next meeting will be held on Friday March 15th at 5:00 on the second floor of the Base Box.


Meeting Adjourned at 8:20