GL results from California?
Doug Freyburger
on in California GL a few weeks ago? My California lodge included brief
summaries in last month's trestleboard.
Carryover-
08-08 Change the way life membership funds are handled.
That one interests me. This month my Shrine voted to make it mandatory
to withdraw the interest each year (long term result - the fund drops
with inflation). This year Illinois GL pushed changes to our life
membership fund to a vote next year.
08-09 More of the candidate fees go to the George Washingto Masonic
Memorial.
Current-
09-01 New award for spouses
09-02 Simpler financial reporting
I remember the annual audit being pretty easy. I gathered all fo the
monthly treasurer's reports then looked at the most recent statements
from the banks. I made sure the bank statements agreed to the ten
dollar digits. Then I watched the accountants discuss the cents digit.
09-03 Bigger GL committee on investments
Economic down times happen in cycles. Folks want to react to the
current situation. As much as I try to take the long term view, how
often do I actually manage to pull that off?
09-04 New rules for NPD
09-05 Something about unused dues
09-06 Agenda change at Research Lodge
And the GL should care abut RL why?
09-07 A brother can serve as Secretary of more than one lodge
This came up when I was in the line in California in the 1990s, Someone
must really want it top propose it every decade. Won't the brother
explode from the workload?
09-08 Gives Secretary a GL vote (bringing count of votes per lodge from
4 to 5). Gives Inspector a GL vote (called DDGM in most jurisdictions
this increases the number of non-lodge votes and thus increases the
power of the grand line)
This is the other one that interests me. The Secretary known more about
the business of the lodge and how the lodge and grand lodge interact
than any other member in both of my lodges. I figure that's pretty
common. But many Secretaries don't want to attend GL. Interesting in
how it would give more influence to the faction among Secretaries who do
want to attend GL.
09-09 Allows bingo
Unless California state law changed significantly since i moved out this
would cause lodges to be considered businesses in California. We'd go
from being more like the Boy Scouts (who can exclude atheists and girls)
because their only sources of funding are donations, to more like the
Girl Scouts (who have to admit atheists and boys) because they sell
cookies and thus are businesses. California laws are rather strict in
how they draw the line between businesses and private clubs.
09-10 Expands permitted fund raising by Shrine Centers
Given the very strict California laws I mentioned above this one should
be quite technical as well.
Torence
> This year Illinois GL pushed changes to our life
> membership fund to a vote next year.
Area Deputy GM waiting for me to register with a message that the
Grand Master needed to see me before the session start. M.W. Bro.
Yandel then asked me to resubmit these changes for the next year which
would actually start the two year process over again. Recently, we in
Illinois, using a GM constitutional prerogative, have begun calling
for votes without the extra year hold over. If these changes are put
into a more palatable form, our new GM Rick Swaney might consider
doing the same in these cases. To date, I have submitted and had
approved 14 changes to our Constitution and By-Laws; but who is
counting?
I have asked our parliamentarian, R.W. Bro. Jim Tungate, for
direction on these Life Membership changes and he has not yet replied;
but during the review at the session he commented that the changes
contained good ideas that needed to be put up in smaller doses.
> 09-01 New award for spouses
20th she gave me permission to keep girl friends. I wonder what I
will get for our 25th ? Seems to me that she deserves one of these
awards.
> 09-02 Simpler financial reporting
> I remember the annual audit being pretty easy. I gathered all fo the
> monthly treasurer's reports then looked at the most recent statements
> from the banks. I made sure the bank statements agreed to the ten
> dollar digits. Then I watched the accountants discuss the cents digit.
to piece the receipts and disbursements together in preparation for
our annual report due November 17th. I too used the Bank statements as
the best source for information.
But, Illinois lodges have fought vigorously over the years to keep
the Grand Lodge out of their financial affairs. We have never, even
when it was the fashion, allowed our Grand Lodge to build a permanent
home for itself; all sound business practices, IMHO.
> 09-03 Bigger GL committee on investments
> Economic down times happen in cycles. Folks want to react to the
> current situation. As much as I try to take the long term view, how
> often do I actually manage to pull that off?
taught, comes from work.
> 09-04 New rules for NPD
a thirty year cycle of losses. But the way this has been accomplished
is by making it nearly impossible to suspend a member for non-payment
of dues. The lodges then pick up an extra burden from the indolent and
must pay per capita until our GM lets us suspend the brother.
I agree that a lost address or lost contact has never been a good
reason to drop a member from our roles. But a simple accommodation for
lodges from the Grand Lodge where per capita is not required when the
lodge has not received its dues money is the better way to �save�
members. If the Grand Lodge, who uses the Post Office disks, Social
Security Records and other forms of skip trace, can then locate the
errant Brother for us, we can then make that personal contact that
usually saves the situation. Often, that delinquent Brother, once
contacted personally, will surprise us by purchasing a life
membership. These situations are usually ones of lost contact rather
than financial hardship.
> 09-05 Something about unused dues
by case, lodge decision, basis, IMHO. To say to a widow that so and so
died and so here is a refund on the unused portion, though well
intentioned, could be misread as the lodge being done with even his
memory.
> 09-06 Agenda change at Research Lodge
> And the GL should care abut RL why?
product. Last year the Master of our Lodge of Research, was �removed
from membership in the Masonic fraternity� though I do not have the
details of his case and do not want to make assumptions. Every
jurisdiction should have its own free press Masonic newspaper. Ours in
Illinois is the �Temple Topics.� It was formed over a century ago in
response to the �Trowel� a magazine started by Grand Secretary and
later Grand Master Harmon Reynolds.
The innovation that our ForeBrothers who formed the US constitution
that has saved us the agony of violence experienced under other forms
of government, is the open forum of the free press. It fulfills a need
intended to be satisfied, originally, by the courts. But whereas the
intent was that the courts were to belong to the people, the US
experience has been since Marshall that they were corrupted into a
tool for the elite. If only Brother Aaron Burr wasn�t branded a
traitor. Funny that you brought this up, bro. Freyburger as it is the
theme of my November Temple Topics article.
> Won't the brother
> explode from the workload?
Having served now as Secretary of one that does, and one that doesn�t,
not having a building to contend with makes the job very manageable.
> 09-08 Gives Secretary a GL vote (bringing count of votes per lodge from
> 4 to 5). Gives Inspector a GL vote (called DDGM in most jurisdictions
> this increases the number of non-lodge votes and thus increases the
> power of the grand line)
Wardens and elected Grand Line Officers only�and no others. Any other
form of Masonic government is an aberration.
> But many Secretaries don't want to attend GL.
representatives to vote? Shouldn�t we collate first, as a poll, a
consensus opinion from the lodges on legislation, elections etc.
before the session even starts? Lodges need to counter, somehow, the
political persuading that occurs in favor of reason and intelligence.
Grand Line Officers can only report to the participants the opinions
from their small circles and the voice of the 70,000 other memberships
in Illinois goes largely unheard.
> 09-09 Allows bingo
The dog? I like dogs.
Fraternally,
Torence Evans Ake
Senior Deacon & Secretary Pro Tem
Auburn Park Lodge No. 789 - Crete, Illinois
PM - Arcadia Lodge No. 1138 - Lansing, Illinois
Steve Crane
We made changes to the Life Membership in Idaho a couple years
ago. The problem was that when originally instituted a member could
buy Life membership for 21 times the current Lodge dues. That was fine
for a few years, but with some Lodges holding dues down at levels that
simply were not realistic, the return on the investment was no longer
enough to even pay the per capita, let alone contribute to the Lodge
itself. I suspect the hope was back 40 years ago that as Brothers went
onward to GAOTU the difference would be made up. It didn't work that
way. One Lodge nearby inherited a chunk of change 15+ years ago from a
Brother and elected to pay for Life membership for all the Lodge
members - when the dues were $10. That Lodge now is faced with serious
problems. Most of members are still alive and the returns are not
sufficient to pay the per-capita, let alone pay the light bill.
We changed the Life Membership regs to include a minimum amount
(originally set at $700) which increase each year based on the
governments inflation rate. Additionally we altered the payout from
the fund. Previously it paid out all interest in equal shares based on
investment to the various Lodges, who then paid per capita from those
dollars. Now the fund pays out only the interest gained over and above
the previous years inflation. Hopefully this will help to keep the
fund growing some small fraction to overcome the impact of inflation.
Steve Crane
Lakeside #42, Sandpoint ID
Creston #54, Creston BC
Topeka #17, Topeka KS
Torence
> The problem was that when originally instituted a member could
> buy Life membership for 21 times the current Lodge dues.
in the eighties was also for a 21 year payment; but the Grand Lodge
was taking Life Membership Programs away from Lodges that ran their
own Life Membership schemes and wanted to offer a reduced rate as an
inducement for lodges to surrender their arrangements.
But when a Brother signs up, 15 years of per capita which was then
$7 and is now $10 immediately goes to a Grand Lodge Life Membership
Fund from which the Grand Lodge draws the interest. But the Grand
Lodge does not deem it necessary to report to us separately this
interest from other interest and dividends. In 2009, our budgeted
interest and dividends were $250,000 and we realized $265,719. But the
plan was also to post a gain on the sale of investments of $195,000.
We lost, instead, <$21,002>. (It is that last $2 that really irks me).
I do not know if the Grand Lodge actually draws off their interest as
was the original intent. If they do not and were to start, that action
could mitigate at least to some degree the need to draw from our Homes
and Homes Endowment Funds to operate. This year those totals equaled <
$148,700>. Our Homes Endowment Fund lost another <$10,637,230> despite
our action here in Illinois to sell our Retirement Home to a private
vendor.
The Local Lodge gets the remainder ($25 if their dues are $35, more
if they raise dues above State minimum) credited to a Lodge Life
Membership Fund for every member from which the Local Lodge draws the
interest annually and no longer pays per capita to the Grand Lodge for
the member. My lodge receives annually anywhere from $1,000 to $1,200
but the results for 2009 will not be seen until January.
But, Lodges here are not allowed control of the principal amounts
even in our theoretically own Local Lodge Life Membership Fund. A
withdraw, say for a principal amount that represents our dead members,
can only be made by order of the Grand Master. Grand Masters in our
recent past have refused any withdraw even when they have expelled
members whose jib was not cut to their specifications. That refusal
then gives the expelled members a property right which is just one
basis for a cause of action.
The new legislation proposed included provisions to raise the Life
Membership Investment to 20 years and correct these and other
conditions.
Generally speaking, it is a 20th Century approach to Masonry and not
a 21st Century one whereby Lodges and Grand Lodges operate from large
roles of indolent names. Brothers who attend no Lodge and do not
participate with them other than as dues paying and/or Life Members
have no chance to get much that is worthwhile from their memberships.
Whatever the terms of payment, this approach to doing our business is
doomed to extinction because 21st Century men have jibs that are cut
more square. My question about the condition is whether or not the
Craft is ready for the change that is already well underway? When we
answer that, then we can consider what the best form of government is
for us to keep as well as how best to finance it.
Fraternally,
Torence Evans Ake
Senior Deacon & Secretary Pro Tem
Auburn Park Lodge No. 789 � Crete, Illinois
PM � Arcadia Lodge No. 1138 � Lansing, Illinois
Doug Freyburger
>
> We made changes to the Life Membership in Idaho a couple years
> ago. The problem was that when originally instituted a member could
> buy Life membership for 21 times the current Lodge dues. That was fine
> for a few years,
Twenty-one times should be fine for an unlimited length of time. It is
supposed to be enough to cover long term inflation plus historical up
and down market swings. As I read farther I continue to understand that
the 21 number is not related to the problem at all.
> but with some Lodges holding dues down at levels that
> simply were not realistic,
If the dues amount is not realistic then the lifetime version of it will
also not be realistic. Thus the problem isn't the lifetime fee but the
annual fee.
I favor linking lodge dues to the consumer price index and then
encouraging life memberships plus encouraging members pay for brothers
so there is less need for remits.
> ... I suspect the hope was back 40 years ago that as Brothers went
> onward to GAOTU the difference would be made up. It didn't work that
> way.
If dues had kept up with inflation it would have worked that way. There
exist lodges that have had popular life membership programs for
centuries and they can live off the investment income. But how to make
the transistion to that status is a very slow process.
> One Lodge nearby inherited a chunk of change 15+ years ago from a
> Brother and elected to pay for Life membership for all the Lodge
> members - when the dues were $10. That Lodge now is faced with serious
> problems. Most of members are still alive and the returns are not
> sufficient to pay the per-capita, let alone pay the light bill.
I am astonished that no member did the simple arithmatic to figure this
out. Few lodges could survive a sudden change in finiances like that.
But again the problem wasn't the number 21 times it was the size of the
dues in the first place. This is an arithmatic problem I was put
through when I was going through the line to teach why we wanted some
life memberships each year but not a large number.
I have ended up encouraging certain brothers to purchase a lifetime
membership - If a brother admits that he is going through his degrees so
he can join the Shrine I suggest he purchase a lifetime membership.
That way he will never have to worry about going NPD and getting kicked
out of the Shrine if he forgets to pay the lodge his dues. Some
Shriners are never seen again at the Blue lodge and every so often one
of them gets lost and goes NDP.
> We changed the Life Membership regs to include a minimum amount
> (originally set at $700) which increase each year based on the
> governments inflation rate.
A GL rule to fix a bug that should have been handled by a simple
arithmatic lesson at the local lodge level. Sigh at the nanny state
approach of it.
> Additionally we altered the payout from
> the fund. Previously it paid out all interest in equal shares based on
> investment to the various Lodges, who then paid per capita from those
> dollars. Now the fund pays out only the interest gained over and above
> the previous years inflation. Hopefully this will help to keep the
> fund growing some small fraction to overcome the impact of inflation.
The issue of inflation is only half of why trust funds use the 5% or 20
times number. It's also about the historical decade long up and down
trands in the market.
By tying the payout to inflation the fund will tend to withhold funds
when they are needed most - Interest is lowest during down economic
times. By typing payout to inflation the fund will tend to pay out
funds when they are needed least - Interest is highest during up
ecomonic times.
This assumes that interest rates track the economic trends and that's
only partially true. Again that's why the 5% or 20 times number is the
standard for trust funds. It is evened out across that trend as well.
The 5% or 20 times number does pay out better in good times and worse in
bad times, but it does so less sharply.
On the topic - I have also written my lodge secretary to ask about the
results.
Coolness about my California lodge Pasadena 272 - I was in the East in
1999. The brother who is WM this year went through his degrees the year
I was in the East. In the decade since the line has cycled once through
and the regular line officers are now all men who took their degrees
since I moved away. The Secretary, Treasurer, Organist and Chaplain are
still regulars who were my friends as I went through the line. The
Inspector (DDGM) was going through the line at the same time I was. The
logo I used on the Trestleboard "Proud to Be a Mason" is still the logo
on the trestleboard. It shows how Masonry has some members who stay and
attend decade after decade and some members who progress through the
chairs. Continuity and change together. Plus sa change, plus sa meme
chose.
Somehow I've transistioned from one of the newbies with under a decade
of membership to one of the oldbies among the repeat PMs yet I'm still
not to two decades of membership in.
Steve Crane
> > � �We changed the Life Membership regs to include a minimum amount
> > (originally set at $700) which increase each year based on the
> > governments inflation rate.
>
> A GL rule to fix a bug that should have been handled by a simple
> arithmatic lesson at the local lodge level. �Sigh at the nanny state
> approach of it.
Agreed to a point. Unfortunately Grand Lodge (those who attend and
vote) have not so far felt comfortable dictating to an individual
Lodge what their annual dues must be. Silly, I agree, as there is
little difference between setting minimum Life dues and setting annual
dues at some minimum.. For those Lodges who had good management and
have sizeable funds invested the perceived need to raise dues simply
escapes them. Never mind that a sense of pride ought to encourage a
Lodge to have appropriate dues and utilize the funds for appropriate
activities and actions.
Having attempted to provide simple arithmetic to several Lodges
without much success I suspect that isn't the answer either. I've sat
down with numerous Lodges while District Deputy and tried to get them
to visualize a simple budget - dollars in and dollars out. About half
of them listen and about hal fof those take action. The rest go about
business as they have for years.
I think that for much too long we have picked fruit from trees our
forebrothers planted and drank water from wells our forebrothers dug
and have failed to plant new trees and dig new wells. A "comfort"
level of dues that doesn't provide funds to upgrade the heating
system, put on a new roof with ease, or keep the facility painted
seems all too easy to accept and doing the math doesn't seem to reduce
the slumber for many.
Doug Freyburger
>
> Agreed to a point. Unfortunately Grand Lodge (those who attend and
> vote) have not so far felt comfortable dictating to an individual
> Lodge what their annual dues must be. Silly, I agree, as there is
> little difference between setting minimum Life dues and setting annual
> dues at some minimum.. For those Lodges who had good management and
> have sizeable funds invested the perceived need to raise dues simply
> escapes them. Never mind that a sense of pride ought to encourage a
> Lodge to have appropriate dues and utilize the funds for appropriate
> activities and actions.
I am a (life) member of two blue lodges that have to change their dues
by a by-laws change. I am a member of the Scottish Rite and Shrine
where the dues get set annually by some other mechanism. I've gotten to
the point where I would favor a GL rule that links minimum dues to
inflation. But who's going to put such a proposal before GL? I'd want
to have passed several others before I push for such a hot potato!
> Having attempted to provide simple arithmetic to several Lodges
> without much success I suspect that isn't the answer either. I've sat
> down with numerous Lodges while District Deputy and tried to get them
> to visualize a simple budget - dollars in and dollars out. About half
> of them listen and about hal fof those take action. The rest go about
> business as they have for years.
I remember preparing an annual budget the first time I went through the
East in 1999. When the year completed I compared the expenditures to
the budget. What I saw tought me an interesting lesson - Few of the
details matched the budget even approximately but the total amounts
matched the prepared budget nicely.
When I went to the East again in 2007 and again in 2008 I applied that
lesson in a way several officers didn't understand until after it worked
- I wrote out the annual dollar incomes and expenses. I wrote out the
planned large expenses. I divided the rest of the expenses into a
"monthly burn rate" and that amount was my budget for the year. Months
we spent less than that dollar amount were below budget months. Months
we spent more than that dollar amount were above budget months. At the
last meeting of the year I reported the results and asked the brethren
if they would like to donate the below budget amount to a charity or
roll it forward for the next year.
Essentially I had used the event calendars of previous years as a map
and the total dollar budgets of previous years as a speed limit sign and
then I had started the trip. Without having detailed way-points I was
able to know if the lodge was spending too much or too little. It was
extremely simple and it worked great.
Not having an accounting background I had little interest in the
details, but I had a vision for my years. All I really needed was a way
to tell if expenditures were in line with expectations - A few line
items and a general annual total.
> I think that for much too long we have picked fruit from trees our
> forebrothers planted and drank water from wells our forebrothers dug
> and have failed to plant new trees and dig new wells.
On the one hand this matched the gradually decline in membership over
the years. As long as the historical cycle repeated and the petition
rate went up again it made sense to shepard the old resources. And sure
enough the petition rate has increased again. It was a strategy that
worked at the time and it needs to be viewed as a short term approach
that no longer applies.
> A "comfort"
> level of dues that doesn't provide funds to upgrade the heating
> system, put on a new roof with ease, or keep the facility painted
> seems all too easy to accept and doing the math doesn't seem to reduce
> the slumber for many.
I'm a member of two lodges that have taken opposite approaches on that
front.
Pasadena 272 owns a magnificent building in Pasadena, CA about a block
from the auditorium used for the Emmy Awards. It's been extensively
refurbished in the last two decades. As a result the lodge has been the
target of consolidation 4 times during that time and because of prior
and multiple consolidations the lineage includes 7 lodges. The building
is so nice it is regularly used for everything from wedding receptions
through episodes of TV shows like "Unsolved Mysteries" and "JAG". There
is a constant stream of events that have the building fund its own
further improvements.
Arlington Heights 1162 owned a building with insufficient tenants to pay
for its own repairs. We ended up selling it and now spend about half of
the interest on charitable donations. We've harnessed the proceeds of
the building to benefit our neighborhood.
In one case there are fewer lodges. In the other case there are fewer
buildings. Both can be viewed as negatives or as positives.