Despite insinuations by Will Cokeley that we were trying to do something underhanded, I have always intended on providing information on the increase and the reasons for this increase in the club packets (which we had already prepared). The district directors, who have been involved in this decision and are aware of the issues, would be able to carry out discussions at their district meetings. Then, at the state body meeting, I would respond to any concerns or questions from any member. This procedure has worked well for us in the past, and I expected it to do so again.

While I believe this forum to be an invaluable asset for our state and our sport, I do not believe it works well for making decisions on matters like this. It is difficult to really ascertain whether comments are coming from a vocal minority or truly represent the will of our members.

Having said that, when I saw that Will had requested information on the use of our funds, I believed it appropriate and important to attempt to answer his request. His request for a COMPLETE (his emphasis) breakdown was unreasonable due to the large number of transactions that our state office processes in a single year (out of curiosity I just checked Quickbooks and found that there were 3970 transactions last year). However, I did my best to provide answers to what I thought he was asking. It was only after he questioned my integrity that I decided to desist from any further attempt to respond to his posts.

If these posts truly represent the will of the general membership, I would not oppose having the board revisit our decision. However, I would first question the underlying assumption being made: that our nonprofit organization does not pay for services. Is this true for the officials that we use every week at our tournaments? Is this true for the coaches that work at our camps in the summer? Clearly, we have certain jobs where it is not deemed appropriate or feasible to expect volunteers to do all the work for nothing.

Nationwide, most states with any significant membership have a paid staff person(s) handling these duties. Before the board considered this proposal, I checked with other states and found that the stipend we were considering for Kathy was on par with those states. Furthermore, it seemed like a slam dunk to spend $2, for which Kathy does much more than just process cards, instead of spending $5, for which we don’t get anything else.

If there are specific questions that you have, ask them and I will try to get an answer posted.