I'm not "old-guard," only having been a member for a decade or so. I'm not a regular bike tourist (but I have tours I've been planning for years). In fact, as a recumbent trike rider, ACA doesn't really provide a whole lot of support (trail wise or detail wise) for my style of touring. But, I have been a member of organizations with BODs that did stuff that didn't pass the sniff test, and this one doesn't. I'm not necessarily against selling the building, but I am against selling it now, in this way, without a specific plan for how the proceeds would be used to advance the mission of ACA and had that plan signed off on by the membership. If you can't make a case, and (from what I've seen) try to cut corners on keeping the membership informed in detail about the whys and wherefores, then you need to put on the brakes and present a better, more detailed plan. Building new membership options and planning for growth without gatekeeping is increasingly difficult across the board for all organizations these days, and I want to know what the plan is before I vote to divest a valuable asset to fund that plan.
Not that anybody asked. But I've seen this type of situation end up badly before, and, since I do believe in the mission of ACA, I'd hate to see that this go around.