Updating Board Selection and Strengthening Community Input

Yes, members will decide. The vote will happen in person at our annual meeting in early 2027. Think potluck: good food, good company, and a chance to talk it through together before casting your vote. We’ll announce the date and location well in advance.

• What you’re voting on: An amendment to the Coalition’s Articles of Incorporation, with matching bylaw updates, so that board members are appointed by the board instead of elected by members.
• Who can vote: Coalition members in good standing. We’ll confirm the details in the formal meeting notice.
• Turnout needed: At least 10% of our members must take part for the vote to count. Historically, only about 3–5% of members have voted in board elections, so every person who shows up matters.
• To pass: More than two-thirds of the votes cast must be in favor.
• If it doesn’t pass: Members will continue to elect the board as they do today.

Before the meeting, every member will receive formal notice, including the full text of the proposed amendment.

Thank you to everyone who filled out the survey, came to the social at Ruby’s Lounge, or reached out directly. We’ve read, re-read, and discussed every response over several board meetings. A few themes came up again and again:

• Transparency. You want to see how decisions get made. We’re drafting a board meeting observer policy and a member engagement plan.
• Term limits and staggered terms. Several of you suggested these as an alternative or complement to appointment. Board size, term limits, and staggered terms are on the table as we finalize the bylaw updates.
• Representation beyond Harrisonburg. A published skills-and-needs matrix will include geographic representation across the counties and communities we serve.
• A real say in the decision. That’s why this is going to a membership vote instead of being adopted by the board alone.
• Western Slope passes. We heard interest in separating the trail pass from membership. That’s a separate question we’ll take up as we look at what membership means going forward.

The Coalition’s mission is not changing.

We will continue working to build a region where trails, bicycling, walking, and active transportation are central to inclusive, vibrant, and healthy communities.

This governance change does not change:

• • Our commitment to trails, public lands, greenways, bicycling, walking, and active transportation.
  • Our work with local governments, land managers, volunteers, community partners, and supporters.
  • Our commitment to listening to the people who care about this work.
  • Our work to connect with volunteers, donors, members, committee participants, and community advocates.
  • Our openness to board interest, board nominations, and self-nominations.
  • Our commitment to transparency and public accountability.

People will still be able to express interest in serving on the board. In fact, one reason for this change is to make it easier to consider board interest throughout the year rather than only during a narrow election window.

The Coalition has changed significantly over time.

What began as a fully volunteer-led bicycling-specific organization is now a regional nonprofit working across multiple counties, public agencies, trail systems, transportation projects, community programs, and advocacy efforts.

That growth creates new responsibilities for the board and the need for diverse skills and representation on the board.

The board needs to be able to recruit people who bring specific skills and perspectives. For example, finance, fundraising, governance, law, planning, public lands, transportation, community engagement, nonprofit management, equity, communications, and regional relationships.

The current election process has not been a strong tool for participation. In all the years we’ve held them, not one board election has been contested, and only about 3–5% of members vote in any given year. 

The board believes that a fully appointed model, paired with stronger community input and clearer engagement pathways, will better serve the Coalition and the communities we work with. Ultimately, as a board, we believe this change will result in a more impactful and effective organization to continue building a regional movement for trails, biking, and walking.

We considered that. The core problem wasn’t just low turnout — it was that the election format itself wasn’t surfacing candidates with the specific skills, relationships, and capacity a growing regional organization needs. We believe a fully appointed board, paired with real accountability and more frequent ways to give input, will serve the Coalition better than trying to fix turnout in a volunteer-run election. This is exactly the kind of tradeoff we are asking you to weigh in on directly.

Not at all.

The goal is to move from a narrow form of input, a low-turnout, uncontested board election, toward broader and more meaningful ways for people to help shape the Coalition’s future.

We want to create clearer ways for people to:

• • Share priorities and concerns.
  • Suggest board candidates.
  • Express interest in board service.
  • Join committees or working groups.
  • Give feedback on major organizational questions.
  • Participate in surveys, listening sessions, and community conversations.
  • Help shape the future of membership, volunteering, advocacy, events, and programs.

The board is still working through the details of these engagement pathways. We want your input as we build them.

Yes.

You can still suggest someone for the board and express your own interest.

The board will continue to consider people who bring needed skills, perspectives, relationships, and commitment to the Coalition’s mission. The difference is that the board would be able to consider potential board members throughout the year rather than waiting for an annual election process.

Board interest/nomination form

We are not the first organization to face this question, and we looked closely at how our peers handle it before bringing this to you.

In fact, the precursor to the Bicycle Coalition, the Shenandoah Mountain Bike Club, was structured in this manner with a self-perpetuating board of directors that was appointed by the existing board.

We reviewed governance structures across more than 40 peer organizations: national bike, trail, and active-mobility advocacy groups, as well as regional nonprofits in Virginia and the mid-Atlantic. The pattern is clear. Roughly 85% of the organizations we studied use a self-perpetuating board, where the board appoints its own members. Member-elected boards are the exception, not the rule, and are concentrated almost entirely in a handful of large urban coalitions.

Organizations closer to our size and mission, regional trail and active-transportation nonprofits with budgets in a similar range, overwhelmingly use board-appointed models. This is simply the standard structure for organizations doing the kind of work we do.

Some peer organizations pair member elections with a smaller number of board-appointed seats reserved for specific skills. We looked at that hybrid approach, as well as the fully appointed model most of our peers use, before bringing this proposal to you.

We also looked at what happens when organizations get this transition wrong. A few peer organizations that tried to change their governance model ran into real trouble, and in every case we found, the failure was about process, not structure. Boards that changed how they were chosen without bringing members into the conversation faced backlash, lost trust, and, in some cases, had to reverse course. Organizations that made similar changes transparently, with real opportunities for member input, did not.

That is the lesson we are trying to apply here. The model we are considering is the one most of our peers already use. How we get there, with honesty, with your input, and with a real seat at the table for your feedback, is what will determine whether it works.

No. The current decision does not eliminate membership.

The board is also discussing how membership and supporter engagement should work going forward. We know that “membership” has meant different things to different people over the Coalition’s history, from Western Slope access to the trail community to donor support to organizational identity.

We want to be thoughtful about what membership means in this next chapter.

Some of the questions we are asking include:

• • What should it mean to be a member or supporter of the Coalition? A member of this broader movement?
  • How can members and supporters have more meaningful input?
  • How can we make participation feel more open, welcoming, and useful?
  • How can we better connect people to volunteer opportunities, committees, advocacy, events, and local projects?
  • What language best reflects the kind of movement we are trying to build?

We welcome your thoughts on these questions.

No immediate change is being made to Western Slope pass mechanics as part of this governance decision.

Western Slope access, passes, volunteer expectations, and related details are separate operational questions. If any future changes are considered, the Coalition will communicate those separately. Any Western Slope Trail Pass changes would be led and initiated by the Western Slope Team.

Separately, we’re also hearing interest in decoupling the Western Slope trail pass from membership entirely. That’s a distinct question from board governance, and one we’ll address as part of the broader look at what membership means going forward. If you feel strongly about this please let us know.

A board-appointed model only works if it is paired with trust, transparency, and real opportunities for community input.

The Coalition is exploring several ways to strengthen accountability, including:

• • Clearer board recruitment criteria.
  • A published skills-and-needs matrix used to evaluate every candidate, including geographic representation across the counties and communities we serve, not just Harrisonburg.
  • A target board size range and staggered term limits, so no single appointment cycle can replace a majority of the board at once.
  • A short code of conduct and expectations that every board appointee agrees to.
  • A requirement that all board appointments are approved by a full board vote.
  • Public information about how people can express interest in board service.
  • Regular supporter surveys.
  • Listening sessions or open conversation opportunities.
  • Better committee pathways for people who want to contribute.
  • More transparency around board decisions and organizational priorities.
  • Stronger communication about where the Coalition is headed and how people can help.

We are not assuming that board appointment alone solves anything. The governance change is one piece of a larger effort to build a stronger, more participatory organization.

We want to hear from you.

You can share feedback in several ways:

1. 1. Fill out our one-minute form. Let us know what you think –> Share Your Thoughts
   2. Suggest someone for the board or express interest yourself Board Letter of Interest
   3. Talk with a board member
   4. Email us directly [email protected]

We are especially interested in hearing:

• • What parts of the Coalition’s work matter most to you?
  • How would you like to participate?
  • What would make board service, committee service, or volunteering more accessible?
  • What should membership or supporter engagement look like in the future?
  • What concerns do you have about this governance change?
  • What would help you feel informed and included?