amendment for life membership change in structure:

It the BOD responsibility to inform the membership of potential consequences so every member can make an informed decision. Without that direction, people may be voting for something which while it seems like a good thing will actually be detrimental to the club.

What if an amendment was submitted that called for free membership for all who have been a member for more than 3 years. Sure it would benefit most people and if they were thinking about only themselves, they would be foolish to not vote for it. The problem is that the club could not support that type of amendment financially.

Similarly while this amendment seems attractive for most members over the age of 56 it is my obligation to warn members of potential consequences.

The Life Member rate multiplier was not a number pulled out of the air. It was well thought out to support the club based on age groups and member expectancy. To allow those at age 56 the ability to get life membership at 10x the current rate will be detrimental to the club. What happens 10 years down the line when all those people are still members and the Life member fund runs out?

This option would be perfect if a $30 membership only costs the club $20 and we have $10 in reserves for each paid year. But that's not the case. The club spends 100% of each persons membership fees providing a quarterly magazine, insurance, storage, postage and a multitude of other items.

If this amendment were to pass as is, the BOD would be forced to raise dues immediately to cover the loss in revenue. Think its tough to get new members now at $30, just wait till it gets raised to $45 a year.

Sure the amendment as written benefits a lot of people individually, but does it benefit the club? What good is a life membership in a club that is bankrupt in 10 years or has only life members because the dues are too high?

Now I know that the person that submitted this amendment had the best intentions and never even thought of these potential pitfalls. I for one actually support a decreased life membership rate for elderly members who have many years paid into the club. But the part where we reduce fees for 80% of the club is where I have to draw the line.

The numbers simply don't work and I believe that 100%.

If this amendment passes as is, there will be a change. Either the rates will go up, or the quality, and or the number of yearly issues will decrease. None of those options are in the best interest of the club.

That is why I urge all members to vote no on this amendment. If I neglected to tell everyone I know that, I am not being a responsible member of the BOD.

I sincerely hope everyone understands our position,
Doug