Hi Andy,
One quick comment, your response is major surprising to me in attacking people rather than the arguments. That is the same response I mentioned as being a problem with the board in my first message.
I have seen no prior evidence to support "we" are willing to listen. Your comments were the first.
After I left SBARC, I became a board member for two other non-profits, and have been a force in building ARDF in the US including competing at the World ARDF Championships and serving as an International Referee since 1998. Anyone who says I don't get involved has been misinformed.
Another point well worth mentioning about the smaller board size is what happens when whoever these people are leave for whatever reason. SBARC has never provided any real training for people to take over running the club. And the "training by example" has not been very admirable.
Thanks!
Marvin
On 2013-11-10 10:03, Andrew Seybold wrote:
Jay--because it has worked in the past is not indication it will work in the future, as far as I can tell you are not active in the club in anyway, have not attended any board meetings, and just came out of the wood work to throw stones--if you don't like the proposal on the table then come up with your own and present it here.
One point I failed to make is that when we raised the funding for the radio site we were turned down by several organizations because they don't donate money to a club--and in one case we were turned down because of our board structure, another turn down was the fact that when they looked at the finances of the club they asked us how we could survive long term and what plans we had in place.
So to quote an old saying: Lead, Follow, or get out of the way!!!
If you or Marvin want to put forth your own ideas for a way to grow the club we are all more than ready to listen, if you are just here on this reflector to throw stones at others and not participate then your words will be discounted by the many intelligent people in the club. I was always taught that if you don't like something, get involved and change it, if you offer up criticism then offer up a way to fix what you believe is wrong--you seem to be saying that business as usual is ok--we can and will survive--I challenge you to prove that in some way--I challenge you to look at the past two years of club financials and tell me how we will survive the way we are currently doing business and I challenge you to go out and find a source of funding for projects which the club (as a whole) decide are important--do any of these things--bring a proposal forward, but don't just sit back on your high-horse and poke at others who are trying in their own way to make things better--
Report back on the reflector and PROVE that business as usual will work going forward--and tell me why you think that business as usual is the right way to go--if the Board decides and the members decide to keep the board the way it is, will you and Marvin become active in helping to revitalize the club or will you just, once again, fade away not to be heard from again until the next time? Action--Jay, NOT words--let's see what you are Marvin are really worth and why, since the two of you are not involved in the club to you even care?
Andy
-----Original Message----- From: sbarc-list-bounces@lists.netlojix.com [mailto:sbarc-list-bounces@lists.netlojix.com] On Behalf Of Jay Hennigan Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2013 9:21 AM To: sbarc-list@lists.netlojix.com Subject: Re: [Sbarc-list] SBRC; Can it live on in this environment?
On 11/10/13 8:35 AM, Andrew Seybold wrote:
Marvin--you have made some interesting points BUT you missed some things too, I will focus on funding in this reply and perhaps later today will tackle your other comments.
Raising money for the club $100 at a time is good, no doubt about it, but it won't keep the doors open. If Shackmaster Dave had not taken on the task of asking for and receiving donations for the rent when the Red Cross was charging us rent we would have lost the Red Cross station--the club did not have the money to pay the rent every month.
But he did, and he did so under the current Board structure, and it worked.
When the technical committee needed to upgrade the Vic Trace master site for SBARC/ARES we raised over $100K from foundations, we appealed to the membership, I printed a flyer about the need but zip from the members who use the repeaters and zip form the rest of the club. We took it upon ourselves to raise the money from SB based organizations who funded us because we are providing an important service for the community.
[snip]
And this was done under the current Board structure, and it worked.
Recently we had to pay $200 to have the brush and weeds removed from the site because that is part of our agreement with the City--the club paid the money ONLY after repeated attempts to get members to volunteer to meet at the site on work on the issue.
And we paid it under the current Board structure and we aren't broke.
You stated in your response to me that we need to have people who can grow an organization based around a hobby--this is NOT what needs to be done. We need a board who knows how to run the "business of the business" as W1UUQ would say--the board is NOT about running a hobby club, the board is about running the non-profit, business and financial side of an organization which happens to support a hobby. Without business management, fund raising capabilities and sound business judgment the "club" will continue to lose members and fad away on its own accord.
Based on your examples above, it looks like we're doing that now.
I would like to see a smaller board, a board of people with business expertise who know how to manage a business, and let the members run what they like and want to do. One final point here--this is not about change for the sake of change, it is change because times have changed and if we really want to succeed we need the support of the community and in order to EARN their support we have to be ready to make the changes required.
There may be merit to that. Perhaps not. The idea has JUST NOW been presented to the membership and is producing healthy debate. This proves that the basic concept warrants consideration. It has also been pointed out that the document has some serious flaws. Haste makes waste, and a hasty decision to drastically change the structure of SBARC management by adopting a flawed set of Bylaws isn't in my opinions a good thing.
Al Soenke's email states that this has been in discussion for over 30 years and that the overall vision was presented to the Board in February. Yet the majority of the membership heard about it for the first time via an un-signed document with no explanation less than a week before they are supposed to vote on it.
On the one hand, this proposal is presented as a deliberative process that has been in the works for a long time. On the other it's a dire emergency that requires immediate action.
Based on the reading of the document and the errors within, it seems from my viewpoint to be hastily prepared and in need of serious rework.
One more thing that everyone is missing here--the CLUB and ARES are different organizations, today both are in flux--and both need an infusion of assistance from those who know what they are doing. IF we lose ARES we will lose access to ALL of the radio sites we now have use of--the reason we are on these sites is because of ARES--and just add to that, if we did not have the technical leadership of Bill, W1UUQ who works with the site management people every month, we would not have access to the sites. Many clubs are paying rent as high at $500 per month for a repeater site--we have access BECAUSE we help maintain them, because we help their management understand what works and what does not and because when they call us we respond.
The relationship with ARES doesn't seem to change under the proposed bylaws, other than the liaison to ARES becoming an appointed position with no vote on the Board. This would result in greater separation between ARES and SBARC management than exists today.
Insulting the intelligence of your readership isn't generally a good way to gain favors. Words like "You just do not HAVE a CLUE" and "...needing an infusion of assistance from those who know what they are doing" don't help your position.
You say that if you were elected President you would come back into the club--that might be something I could support --HOWEVER--since you are also focused on the bylaws you must know that you would have to come back as a member prior to an effort to elect you as president--and since you are outside looking in I doubt that you fully understand what is going on to benefit SBARC that you and others do not see.
Nobody would be elected President if this structure were adopted. They would be appointed President and could be "fired" at the whim of as few as two people.
-- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay@impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list@lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list _______________________________________________ SBARC-list mailing list SBARC-list@lists.netlojix.com http://lists.netlojix.com/mailman/listinfo/sbarc-list