Question:
What is the difference in roles and responsibilities between Flag and General Officers of the Executive. Nothing I can see in the bylaws illuminates this, and it seems to somewhat demean the General members. From observation it has nothing to do with workload.
Response:
All Flag and General Officers are directors of SCYC and collective form the Executive Committee. All members of the Executive Committee (Flag and General Officers) are equals in all respects when it comes to conducting the affairs and business of the Club. Duties of the Executive Committee (Flag and General Officers) are outlined in Section 8 of the By-laws. Traditionally, and because we are a yacht club some traditions are of value, flag officers are those naval personnel who fill a position that is entitled to have its own flag. Years ago the club decided to name the sea going executive positions with naval names and along with that called them flag officers. This is a maritime tradition that in no way affects the implementation of our by-laws or the operation of SCYC.
Question:
The reduction in dues by 50.00 is presented as a result of Covid reducing services. This is fair enough as a good will gesture, however this is somewhat diminished by making this “optional”. Why? This comes across as “sure, you can save 50.00 if you really want to you cheapskate”. Was any thought given to applying this rebate only to Social Members, who have lost the most access?
Response:
Given the challenging year we’ve had the credit is a gesture to acknowledge the importance of all existing SCYC members. We know that collectively our normal social activity calendar was significantly affected. We know that some of our regular members took advantage of the reciprocal and cruising benefit last year, while other regular members (for whatever reason), did not. But as Covid presented challenges for all of us – in a variety of ways, we did not want to differentiate between members nor between class of membership. Some regular members may choose to forego the credit, should they feel totally satisfied that they have received good value for their dues, as a result of their usage of Club benefits such as cruising stations and reciprocal moorage. This is a value decision put in the hands of all regular and social members to accept or not. Each members decision, to receive the credit or not, will remain confidential.
Question:
Regarding reducing the initiation dues. I absolutely agree they need some attention. From the many potential new recruits that I have talked to, this often seems to be a ‘turn off’. I think that we have lost a few due to this. Having said that, I rather think that simply reducing the joining fee to $500 raises quite a few potential problems from existing members who have already contributed the $1000 initiation fee, and who may feel they are short-changed. Also should the club at some point get dissolved, the assets are divided among all members and the bulk of our assets are actually the accrued initiation fees. My suggestion would be that rather than cutting the amount by half, it might be better to allow them to pay the $1000 over a number of years, perhaps 5 yrs x $200, in addition to the regular dues. This would mean the initial hurdle on the first year would only be $200 supplement. This, I think, would seem more attractive to many. If we do go down the line of reducing it by half, perhaps somewhere these members should be flagged up a separate sub group in the event of dissolution of the club, with reduced access to the assets.
Response:
As the SGM documentation outlines, the initiation fee reduction is a part of the membership campaign strategy. A strategy intended to attract members to reach a stated goal. Both the amount of reduction and various payment scenarios were considered by the executive committee. We settled on the one-time $500 initiation, for impact and simplicity of accounting. If we offering a payment plan over numerous years it presents additional burdens of record keeping. We also discuss the issue of fairness in context to dissolution and bylaw 4.1. We know that the club’s current membership has members who joined under various differing initiation fee plans (some when it was zero, others between $200 and $500, and since 2008, members have paid $1000). Given that our by-law does not carve out various dissolution amounts for our existing members, we consider inconsistent to impose a new sub group for members who join during the $500 dollar initiation time period.
Recent Comments