Inquiring minds want to know
TheAlchemist
I believe that other non-Saints involved in the theatre community,
particularly those in leadership in area performing arts
organizations, may read this discussion board. They may also have an
interest in the outcome of Andy's experiment in "democracy."
For this reason, I have provided a copy below of Andy's message to the
membership in its entirety.
Dear Fellow Saints,
As I have stated in the past, I am a strong supporter of free will and
democracy. I believe that all our members have their own likes and
preferences and have the capacity to make decisions about what they
want and what they are willing to pay for and what they do not want or
are not willing to pay for. If there is anything that we can
reasonably and logically make optional (the printed Spotlight – for
example) then we should not force that on any member, one-way or the
other.
The topic on my mind, that I have previously communicated, is
membership dues and dues structure. Membership dues for next year are
to be decided at the next Board meeting, per our bylaws. I therefore
would like to know what each of you think regarding this, a topic that
would affect each and every member. Along with free will and
democracy, I also believe in transparency. Therefore, here is some
related information –
This year our renewal dues of $45 are expected to be spent
approximately as follows – Overhead and Services: $17.50, Grants &
Donations: $20.50, Subsidy for printed Spotlight: $5.00, Balance
saved: $2.00. Overhead and Services is what enables us to function as
an organization and provide all the service to the members that we
do. The subsidy for Spotlight should disappear next year. Thus, if
the dues stay at $45 next year, and there is no reason to believe that
our expenses would be drastically different then, we would be left
with $27.50 mandatorily collected from each member, which may be
applied as a charge towards Grants & Donations and Savings. In
addition to this, we would have about $110,000 (or roughly $55.00 per
member) accumulated in the Saints' Treasury from savings from previous
years.
Therefore, specifically, the choice is –
(a) should we change our dues structure and make contributions
towards Grants and Donations voluntarily
or
(b) should the contribution towards Grants and Donations stay as a
mandatory part of our dues as we have today.
In either case,
(a) the Grants and Donations program will not be eliminated. It
will be funded from voluntary contributions in one case or from
mandatory collections included in membership dues in the other case.
(b) we will continue to be a IRS 501(c)3 Not-For-Profit corporation
(c) our Annual Benefit Function would not be terminated
(d) other services that we provide to the members would not be
affected in any way.($ 20.00 per member, which is about $ 40,000 a
year is plenty of money for that)
Those that believe we are or should be primarily a charity would favor
a mandatory collection towards Grants & Donations. Those that believe
that we are or should be primarily an organization of volunteers for
the performing arts would favor a voluntary contribution. The
critical point is that if we made the contributions voluntary, the
people who want it to be mandatory can still decide to contribute as
much as they wish with no limitations. On the other hand, if we made
the contributions mandatory, the people who want it to be voluntary
are left no avenue to get their wishes fulfilled.
Therefore, personally, I favor making the contributions towards Grants
& Donations voluntary. However, this is not the position of all the
Board members. In fact, some of the Board memebrs were strongly
against me sending you this e-mail to ask your opinion. So this is
not coming from the Board, but from me.
There are four of us on the Board who favor the new structure with
lower dues, two appear to be definitely against the new structure with
lower dues and the other two appear to be leaning against new
structure with lower dues. When we make decisions by voting on issues
(such as what your membership dues will be next year), as President, I
vote only in case of a tie (to make or break a tie). So it is
important that all Board members know how each of you think on this
specific issue.
If you prefer a new membership dues structure with basic membership
dues of about $20 a year and optional contributions toward grants and
donations, please send an e-mail to new.st...@yahoo.com (no need
to write anything – a blank e-mail will do)
If you prefer the old structure of about $45 membership with mandatory
donation included, please send an e-mail to old.st...@yahoo.com
(no need to write anything – a blank e-mail will do)
Mark Jeffries, our Communications Chair has agreed to monitor these
two mailboxes. He will consolidate all your responses and bring them
to the March Board meeting for the benefit of all the Board
members.
Please respond one way or the other and let us know what you prefer
and help us be a transparent and truly democratic organization! It is
really, really important!
Sincerely,
Andy Lingras
Donna Oswald
anonymously (arguments are much more persuasive when you know
persuader), I agree with what (s)he has to say. Andy sprinkles words
like "democracy" & "transparency" through his communications to the
membership/board, yet doesn't actually practice what he preaches. He
has stated he set up his "poll" without board approval, yet co-opted
the name of a respected board member to "monitor" the email addresses
in an attempt give this power grab legitimacy. He did not provide the
passwords to the new email accounts he set up. So only Andy gets to
to see the votes (if anyone votes). Where is the transparency? The
results of the "dues poll" are on the agenda for this Saturday's board
meeting, yet Andy & Andy alone has decided it's a closed(executive)
session. Where's the democracy & transparency in that?
One board member has expressed the opinion that open meetings are no
longer required because we now have Q&A at the membership meetings.
Andy has stated he's closing the board meetings because of the
"theatrics" & the need to get down to "real work". If "theatrics" are
members observing the board at work, then we've all been had by the
theatres we usher for & have been wasting our nights & days ushering.
The only theatrics at board meetings are due to Andy & his actions,
which uniformly violate Roberts Rules of Order, Our Bylaws (which he
has stated he wrote) & the Illinois Not For Profit Act.
As another Saints member has pointed out, according to Roberts Rules
of Order:
"The purpose of executive session is to allow frank discussion of
sensitive or confidential issues, affecting the organization, among
Board members. It shall not be used as a means to avoid public
discussion or controversial issues or to hide conflicts amongst
members."
Write the board,
Tell all of your Saints friends to write the board,
Post your opinions in response to the many who have posted concersn on
this discussion board
Take back the Saints!
> donations, please send an e-mail to new.struct...@yahoo.com (no need
> to write anything – a blank e-mail will do)
>
> If you prefer the old structure of about $45 membership with mandatory
> donation included, please send an e-mail to old.struct...@yahoo.com
aege...@comcast.net
displayed. Is there no way for the board to ask him out right what is his vision (leaving out the outrages terms democracy and transparency)?
Al Geller
aege...@comcast.net
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Volunteer Ushers' Discussion Group - Saints" group.
To post to this group, send email to UshersDisc...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to UshersDiscussion...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/UshersDiscussionGroup?hl=en.
Donna Oswald
unfortunately, Andy doesn't give a straight answer, he much prefers to
play word games. For an example of this check out a previous
posting: EMAILS TRADED W/ANDY RE HIS EXPERIENCE AND HIS LETTER .
This is just one example of numerous exchanges between a Saints member
& the board president. In one other exchange when asked about his
previous non-profit experince, Andy's reponse was that the questioner
had to "wait until the autobiography" came out! As to the purpose of
the Power Grab, that's what it is pure & simple. It's an ego trip by
a controlling individual who unfortunately appears to think they
posses expertise that experience has clearly shown they do no have -
much to the determiment of the Saints. When an individual does not
participate in an organization but goes to any means to have control
over the organization how can you conclude that it's anything other
than an ego power trip?
On Mar 5, 11:09 am, aegel...@comcast.net wrote:
> What is the purpose of Andy Lingras' "Power Grab" as it has been labeled. It can't be for The big money($000,000.00) he receives. Has he taken a fragment of a previous era and magnified? Has he never heard of the old cliche " if it isn't broke don't fix it". The Saints are not in financial difficulty as an accounting has been openly
> displayed. Is there no way for the board to ask him out right what is his vision (leaving out the outrages terms democracy and transparency)?
> Al Geller
> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/UshersDiscussionGroup?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -