RE: Robert's Rules/Board Meeting

["Frangooles, Bob" <bob.frangooles@attws.com>]

>As the other person who voted "no" last night (and am sort of equally
>confused as to how we suddenly voted a proposal in so quickly without any
>real discussion), I have yet another difference of opinion to add here.

Real discussion? If people weren't comfortable I assume they would have
voted no.  It is not like the board lacks in personalities willing to make
their opinion heard. 


>I had always understood the philanthropy project to involve more than just
>giving money to some outside group.  The examples I had always heard
>involved one or more members of the club actually being involved in the
>project itself.  This notion that we just "give money"  doesn't feel right
>to me in the context of the project.  If the philanthropy project was the
>same as "give money to another organization", I can think of others that
>would perhaps also fit this bill, such as Project Piaba, or the Lake
>Victoria conservation people.

If you feel there are other worthy projects you should bring them up for
discussion.  I am not sure why giving a donation rankles, if people can't
donate time, money is often a reasonable alternative.

>As for the speaker thing: That's what the members want.  That's what the
>members come to see.  And Kathy brings up potential speakers at every
>board meeting, and we discus the relative merits of them.

Kathy's work on bringing in speakers is greatly appreciated.  She has done
fantastic work on that front that has certainly been of great benefit to me.

However, while we discuss the relative merits of the programs, the
discussion is typically around the merits of the content, not the cost. I
have yet to see us clamp down on a speaker because of cost.  

Deeming speakers as what the memberships wants is perhaps a bit unfair, we
know it brings in crowds, but we don't know how many are members.  In fact,
speakers may benefit more people from outside the club than they do members.
Should we charge those people so they don't get a freebee?

Also, you and Kathy derive a lot of benefit from the speakers coming in, you
get to host them and get to know them well.  I believe Kathy has earned this
privilidge as she has had the gumption to wrangle the speakers, but there is
some vested interest implied.

Bob