"Lets Make a diffrence! Vote off old HMGS Board" Topic

you got your ballot make a diffrence

Vote for: David Waxtel, John Spiess, Scott Landis, Neil Brennan

David Waxtel:

Since Cold Wars I've taken the time to contact many of the individuals it has been my pleasure to game and work with over my many years in the hobby. The purpose of these discussions was to access whether or not others have noticed the same problems I have and to gather some ideas of what to do about them. Quite frankly, the response was more than I had expected. Many of these contacts are members of the Legion of Honor and vendors who still attend the shows. The Duke, Bob Giglio, Frank Prezisoa, Russ Dunaway of Old Glory, Dennis Shorthouse of On Military Matters, Lon Weiss of Brigade Games (to name a few), and many others all agreed there is need for change and have offered their support to make it happen. Being a big believer in keeping the membership involved, I felt obliged to put out a short position paper detailing what we had learned.

At the last HMGS membership meeting (Cold Wars 2015), we were astonished to find out that only 2,452 people including vendors attended the last HISTORICON (2014): this is clearly a failure in administration. Decisions made by the current HMGS Board (BoD) do not reflect the original purpose of HMGS; support of the hobby. What I offer is common business sense. In the past, HMGS grew and profited by its ability to put on three great shows – COLD WARS, FALL IN, and HISTORICON. In order to differentiate ourselves from the local conventions and game days, over the years we provided the broadest array of dealers; signature events like our speaker programs (War College) and Hobby University; show specials such as Mystery History Theatre 2000 and Sharpe's Museum; kid friendly events such as the Pirate Treasure Hunt, Teddy Bear roundup and "Kidz Room". We made our bones by transforming each convention into can't miss events. Now, however, there is very little buzz about us, even after each convention is over.

Recently, it seems we have gone from being service oriented to cost callous. It seems negotiation for better deals on hotel rooms and amenities provided by the convention center are VERY low priorities. Feedback I have heard from convention directors tells me they are constantly under pressure to reduce cost and cut the budget. Meanwhile, table costs and admissions continue to rise, with no attempt to keep attendee costs down. With regard to HISTORICON, with numbers so drastically down and costs so high, it is no wonder vendors tell me they are not making money in Virginia.

Vendors are a major key to the cons and we should be thinking of expanding the pool. To do this we need to move the convention back northeastward where the population center is higher and more centered on our membership. This should result in restoring a higher attendance to the convention, generating more income for the organization. At its peak, seeing 3,500+ attendees was not uncommon for HISTORICON. Hit the right numbers and we may even be able to entice a couple of the European (particularly British) vendors to make the trip over here.

This brings up another important factor required to straighten things out. Every new Board of Directors (BoD) promises us a greater level of transparency and most have failed miserably. The BoD is proud of the money it has made "$50,000 net in 2014 with about $293,000 USD in the bank…the most ever"…but at what cost? Let the members see timely income and attendance statistics so they can compare them and judge how the BoD is really doing. These stats are always held back and released only after constant appeals for the information. On the other hand, the BoD seems to have a penchant for wanting to know the details on other members,,,and this brings us to Referendum 11. As for the matter of background checks, this is an agenda driven item that many have suggested was added mainly to prevent me from running. Clearly it has nothing to do with wargaming and should never have been considered. Along with all the obvious pitfalls and animosity something like this can cause, the BoD has already shown how easily something like this can get out of hand. I will explain below…

What is Referendum 11:

The following is quoted from the ballot sent out for the current election.

"11. Modify Article VII, Officers by adding the following as a new Section 4: Section 4. Candidates for election to the Board of Directors and individuals proposed as Convention Directors will be required to undergo a background check in accordance with such background check policies as the Board shall determine and as it may amend such policy from time to time."

"Rationale: This change is in accordance with the direction of the membership as proposed during the Annual Meeting of the Members in July 2015 and approved by motion to go before the membership at the General Membership meeting held March 6th 2015."

If I may quote Bob Giglio:

"Worse, is the line that says ‘and approved by motion to go before the membership at the General Membership meeting held March 6th 2015.' Well, this did NOT happen, and that also invalidates this to anyone that is paying attention (though most won't!). When this was discussed at Cold Wars, very briefly as it was not on the agenda, the Board said (arrogantly) it was ‘a done deal…to go out to the membership for a vote.' I pointed out the direction was for a full plan and the policy to be presented to the members before a vote. The President said ‘it will all be included with the referendum for members to vote on.' Well, that didn't happen either; no plan, no policy, nothing."

In this manner, we could be assured of steps taken to protect the member's privacy and keep future boards from gaining access to the info or broadening the scope of the member approved referendum. We would also be assured of seeing what their plan was for securing this confidential personal information. Instead we got the same open ended item you see above.

Please don't drop the ball on this, vote NO on Referendum 11, and vote to change the BoD and get our hobby back on track. Please consider the slate of David Waxtel, John Spiess, Scott Landis, and Neil Brennan. We are gamers serving gamers, we can actually follow direction from the membership, and we will restore our organization.

Nice write up
Thanks
Clif

We go though a "throw the bums out" phase in HMGS every year or so. I have been on all sides of the con experience. I have run games for over 20 years. I have worked as staff on and off for around 5. I have worked in the vendor hall for the last 2. My belief is that we need to focus on the core con experience.
Paul Trani is invaluable from what I have seen in the registration area. I will be supporting two new candidates as well. I hope we can find a solid solution to the challenges all three cons face

Tell your New Yorkers and others who only day trip to PA to get off their chunk and come south for a change. It is HMGS, not just HMGS-NE.

Which candidate has a van called "Scooby"??

And, what scale is the van?

Excellent write up. I'll be sending in my ballot this weekend and I'll strongly consider your post Yankees.

Why does a gaming group need that kind of money, and what do they do with it?

With that kind of money in the bank, it needs to be part of your by-laws that a treasuer's report (with an accounting of all money in and out) will be distributed to the membership every two months.

With all due respect to the slate…um..no. They can come south for one convention..This is HMGS-East, not HMGS-NE as Sgt. Paper put it. And for the record, I was born in NY, and I used to live there..things like this make me glad I left.

"Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."

We have been throwing the rascals out for years, haven't we?

@King30

Just joined HMGS last month, where do I go vote?

Nothing like a post by an anonymous TMP member to get the ball rolling.

Personally I find Referendum 11 silly and not worth the effort. A real attempt to find a problem to solve (and so open ended in its wording to be dangerous).

Moving the conventions around again? I automatically eliminated any candidate who in their write-up spouted that nonsense. My attendance has been spotty because life has decided to interfere with the selected dates, not because of location.

Excellent points…I have wanted a real change for years.I know 2 of the 4 candidates mentioned and I know their dedication to making HMGS a stronger and most importantly, a more member friendly organization.

A couple of points in response to what has been said above:

1) There are plenty of gamers, GMs and vendors in the North and Northeast, myself included, who have made the trip to VA for Historicon. As was said at the Cold Wars membership meeting in March (attended by only 24 people, mainly current or past HMGS BOD members and/or convention directors (one, Pat Condray, sadly, since deceased), the Historicon attendance numbers would be even lower if these so called "Cranky Yankees" (yes, that term has been used by some in HMGS) did not show up.

2) Vendor attendance at Historicon has dropped to about 50, plus or minus 1 or 2. That is about the same level as for Cold Wars and Fall In. In case you missed it in the discussion about the auction, major dealers, such as Brigade Games, are considering dropping Historicon because it is no longer worth the effort in terms of expenses vs. profit. Once such major dealers as Brigade Games, Old Glory, etc. realize they have a "Vendors' Veto" over a location, it's "game over" for the FCC. Some clients are so large that they can turn out the lights on their service providers. We are now fast approaching that point for HMGS and Historicon at the FCC.

3) As Yankees pointed out above, the official attendance number for Historicon 2014, as announced by the HMGS BOD at the Cold Wars membership meeting in March, was 2452. Compare that to a number in the 3000-3500+ range when the convention was in PA.

4) My question to all those of you who think "The Move" to the FCC was a good idea is a simple one: how low does attendance at Historicon in VA have to go before you are willing to admit that The Move, however well intentioned at the time it was made, has failed and is no longer in the best interests of HMGS?

I don't expect to convince anyone to vote one way or another. Those few who do vote (under 300 voters in the last election in an organization which claims membership in the 1500--2000 range) will make up their own minds. However, the election does give various groups and individuals an opportunity to express their views on the direction and future of HMGS.

Certain candidates may (or may not) win this time around, but don't be surprised if they are back again. They have laid out their positions and future events will determine whether they were right or wrong.

We'll see.

Now I have to go send in my games for Historicon before the April 21 deadline.

Hope to see you there.

Well after attending Fall-In 2014 and staying in the Host I vowed I would never attend another convention at that dump. Not only was the HVAC not working properly and both the tub and sink had cracked and been poorly repaired but the room stank and on Sunday there was no water.

Now I have no problem with moving the convention from FCC but if you're implying we should move it back to the Host then count me out. I know there are other hotels around but I like the convenience of staying where I can walk back and forth to my room within a few minutes. I've been attending HMGS conventions every year since 2001 and the Host has just gotten worse and worse.

So before I vote for you and your gang tell me, where are you planning on moving Historicon to?

Annnnnnnnnnnnd let me guess….the ideal proposed location for "moving H con" "back" to the NE is um…..

Could it beeeeeeeeeeee……

"The Host"?…

Just a point about cons at the Host – no one has to *stay* at the Host. There are plenty of better hotels next door and across the street.

And regarding moving Historicon back North.

There is absolutely no reason that it being in Fredericksburg is showing declining attendance if one believes that there is a large contingent of convention goers in the DC/Balt/VA area and South. If you don't want it to move to an area with a track record of better attendance, if you haven't attended it, get off your bums and go this year. Some past attendees are clearly voting with their feet by not attending since it moved South. Only the HMGSE members who have not gone can prevent any future move.
It is in your hands.

In regards to the original statement by the poster, If it is true, I find it troubling that an item was included on the ballot that did not follow proper procedure to get it on the ballot. Personally, when I read it I was put off by the all encompassing nature of the wording of it – basically it gives the power to the BOD to determine the criteria for excluding someone from running. A very dangerous precedent.

I think any member would want to club to listen to the membership and put on great conventions every year for their members. All the other stuff has no place in the organization.

Nobody said anything about the Host, gentlemen.

For the record, I'm in favor of HMGS dropping the Host at the earliest possible opportunity.

I'm not a candidate, but I know there are other alternatives as far as locations are concerned. If you elect different decision makers, you might get a different result.

I'll let the candidates speak for themselves, if they so decide.

Dave:
While I generally support your reasoning, especially on this background check nonsense (why do this??? To waste money??), I am curious, as several people have already stated, as to where you would propose to move Historicon and what your position is on remaining at The Host for any of our CONS. Would you please respond to these questions, as your answers will determine my voting decisions.

While no one has to "stay" at the Host, to me it doesn't make sense to have a convention at a hotel where the rooms are sub-par and have been for quite some time. To get to most of the hotel rooms you have to cross "the highway of death" so that pretty much means having to load my grand kids in the car (oh and lose my parking space) just to go back to the room for a few minutes.

And as this new group claims to be all about listening to the membership, many of which have complained about the Host for years. So again before I vote for them I want to know where they plan on moving the Cons, or if they have a plan.

When will people get it through their thick skulls? The Host DOES NOT WANT HISTORICON. Summer is their big tourist/golfer season (not to mention weddings), and they can make far more money off the golfers and bus tours than they can off the (cheap) gamers. And Historicon also involved closing the Comedy Club (a major profit center) for a week.

If you really want to drive away the dealers, move to a unionized convention center where they will have to pay for two union guys to sit and watch them set up and take down their displays. At $50 USD/hour (or more), with 4 hour minimums.

This Cranky Yankee makes no apologies for forgoing a 7 hour drive when I have 2 bum knees.
So I account for one of the 1000 attendee drop in attendance from The Host to wherever the hell it is now. And I resent those who hold it against me and I vote that way.
So there! Harrumph.

A follow up to what was said by Brigade Games:

When "The Move" was first proposed, one of the reasons given by those who supported it was that there were all these alleged (perhaps "imaginary" is a better term) gamers in the northern VA area who would be attracted to the new location. So far, they have failed to appear, at least in sufficient numbers to replace the real gamers who were lost from all locations, including, but not limited to, the Northeast.

To put it in historical terms, when Lee invaded MD in 1862, he thought, in part, that the invasion would bring new recruits to his army. Things didn't quite work out as he planned. Same for HMGS and the FCC.

There's a big difference in being able to offer vendors a convention with attendance in the 3000-3500 range (and growing) vs. a convention with attendance in the 2500 range (and declining). That's one reason vendor table prices are coming down for this year. It's an effort to trade some profit by Historicon to keep the vendor numbers from falling any further.

Like I said, we'll see.

Here's an unwelcome FACT about SE PA and attendees from the Northeast. It is a much longer trip to Lancaster (for instance) from ANYWHERE in New York than it is from Northern VA.

I've lived in the Metro DC area and now I live in New England, which is even farther afield. So I know both.

in FACT, contrary to the mythology of the move, it has NOT been the attendees from south of DC who have been making the longer drive to SE PA. In FACT, it has been the attendees from the Northeast who have been making the MUCH LONGER drive all along, uncomplaingly until now (I might add). Moving the convention even farther south did not redress some imbalance. It skewed it even further.

But facts don't obtain, I realize. So flame on, boys, flame on.

I have a few comments regarding the Host. I stayed there at Fall-In 2014 with my daughter and we also had no hot water on Sunday morning. When I checked in again at Cold Wars 2015, I politely complained to the manager at the front desk about my past visit, and thought it would be fair if I was given one night free on this visit. He didn't even blink and just apologized and gave me the credit. It made me wonder if anyone on the current BOD even attempted to get a reimbursement for its members. It wasn't that hard. With almost $300,000 USD in the bank, even if a general reimbursement couldn't be negotiated with the Host, I thought some sort of reimbursement by HMGS to the people who stayed there at Fall-In could have been a nice gesture.

I'm told we have signed contracts at the Host for Cold Wars and Fall-In through 2017. I don't know if there are any provisions for cancellation. In any case, I think the Valley Forge Convention Center can be considered as an alternative. The construction is complete and the space available is good for those conventions. If you haven't been there since construction was completed, they have a website with plenty of photos.

As far as background checks, having worked for large banks for the past 25 years means I have had more than I can count. My job requires me to initiate or approve wire transfers for millions of dollars on a daily basis. Any expensive background check that HMGS can come up is just a stupid idea in my humble opinion.

Lastly, only a few hundred members voted in the last election. I encourage everyone who has received a ballot to vote.

Whatever the outcome, I'll still be at the next convention running a gigantic siege game with my kids. Stop by.

Respectfully submitted,
John Spiess
Candidate for the HMGS BOD

Perhaps the loss of vendors/dealers could be addressed by lowering the fees for their booths. No con should be run on the back of the vendors/dealers as they are one of the draws to the Con (right after the games).

HMGS-NE certainly has enough money to drop the booth fees.

Just saying.

Winston, you were "cranky" before Historicon was moved to VA, but I understand why you (and others) don't want to make the drive.

Maybe we'll get t-shirts made up: "I'm an HMGS Cranky Yankee."

In NY Yankees blue, of course.

I drive over 8 hours to get to the Host and about 9 to get to FCC. I don't understand all the complaints about driving distance.

Tom

I have attended Historicon a number of times from western Canada, some 8 hours drive north of Minneapolis. Distance, if I can afford to go is not determined by PA or VA.

Yankees makes some good points, as do others.

Dealing with Yankees comment on vendors – critical to me, who is flying/renting a car and coming from farther away. If vendors are not at the show I am less inclined to be there. I go all that way to game, meet friends, SHOP in the dealer room and the flea market. The vendor attendance is declining, why I am not sure but if we made dealer room presence free or near free for major vendors then perhaps that offsets THEIR costs enough to make a trip more worthwhile versus Internet based orders. That has to be assessed regardless of whether the convention is better served in VA or PA. Good point Yankees!

Regarding the Flea Market – PA (the Host) was easy access, lots of material being sold. I walked in, shoulder to shoulder with others and scanned all the tables in short order before returning to a couple. The VA flea market was, well painful… Long line up, waiting to look for a bargain, crowd control limits on who was in the flea market at any given time – I acknowledge that public safety drives things but to Yankees point (or supporting evidence). How come a PA convention with 3,500 attendees has a huge flea market with lots of customers shopping simultaneously without crowd control (audience count with NO line ups) when the VA convention with 2,500 (approx.) has huge $*!$_%&!? line ups for a bargain in the flea market. Explain why a convention with 1,000 more attendees runs their vendor room at full and their flea market multiple times the size of VA's with no line up or wait to get in?

I attended VA once two years ago so yeah, I am speaking from a limited experience. Let us just say I do not plan to return to VA often because the shopping experience is too time consuming given the distance I have to travel (2,000 miles) to get to the con. I am not waiting in any line up and have been looking to other cons for a change.

Don't get me wrong, VA=wonderful holiday experience. After 1 day at VA HCON I spent a week on the beaches and visiting historical sites where I did not have to wait (Colonial Williamsburg). Why = VA HCON had little shopping and logistics.

Host HCON (and Fall-in/Cold Wars wherever) but help the dealers. The dealers are part of the show, no different than a world science fiction convention where the convention covers costs for major authors and film makers to make their guest appearance comfortable. It also draws bigger crowds, whose registration covers costs for these people.

Heck yes. I would definitely buy a Cranky Yankee tee shirt but NOT in Nrw York Yankee blue. There are some things I will not lower myself to.

From my little perspective on this subject.

The Host is a dump and I won't spend a dime to stay there.

I have heard several vendors state they could not afford going to HMGS-east cons any longer. Which goes along with several people stating they were not going to HMGS-East con cause the vendors were bailing on the con due to high costs.

I have 2 points that I would like to make and a statement. The first one to rmaker, I was a union rep. and please do not bring in unions in this matter. Point number 2the Host is and was a dump the last time I was there. Why are you still going there? Also I thought this is a hobby and not other Civil War!!!!! Mike Adams

The Host is the mecca for historical miniature wargaming, I know it can't support a Historacon but they accommodate us with food and a place to do our gaming, and they are willing to bend over backwards for us over the years.

We need a facility that can be accessed by the major population centers in the east. Fredricksburg does not even meet the guidelines for a HMGS convention.

70,000 square feet, 500 rooms minimum at $100 USD night. If we are going to fill the hotel up give us free space. Bring in more vendors (British ones, there are 50 little companies that would show product never seen), and bring in a big names to fill the hotel up and the lecture halls with wargamers. Pay to put on games that are show pieces. look at Salute OMG. Spend the money, don"t think you are doing something by showing whats in our bank account, over charging gamers and vendors and delivering poor attendance and the same convention every 4 months.

Vote out the old and bring in people that want to make a diffrence

David Waxtel, John Spiess, Scott Landis, Neil Brennan

70,000 square feet, 500 rooms minimum at $100 USD USD night.

How many locations in the Northeast meet this requirement? Looking thru old posts it seems that if a place has the floor space the rooms are expensive and if you find a place with cheap rooms, they don't have the square feet for gaming.

Good luck though.

I had a pithy comment regarding the host being a mecca, but figured it wasn't worth the DH'ing.

"I had a pithy comment regarding the host being a mecca,…"

Well sometimes you do have to circle the host 7 times in a counterclockwise direction to find a parking space.

It's great to see new blood stepping forward to volunteer to help run HMGS.

Other than moving Historicon from FCC back north what are the positions and goals of these four individuals?

I attend all the cons what I here people say is the bank account gets fat and the entrance fees get higher. Lower fees for membership which may increase numbers which will benefit all.

I would like to see some of the extra funds used to entice back dealers. I think that the dealers are the central hub of a large convention. Otherwise, we can all get together and game in our own groups and hit the local cons with 200-400 people attending. Those are great and they have their place, but to me the big cons are about the dealer area. It makes no sense to me that it should be expensive at all for a dealer to come and set up a booth. I may be alone in this, but if it is deemed too costly to just drop dealer fees and you cannot justify supplementing them out of the HMGS funds, then I would pay an extra few dollars to attend to cover some of that cost. Also, I run games at every Cold Wars and Historicon and I don't understand why that gets me in the Con for free. I think that if I were given a discount for the trouble of dragging out and setting up my game, that would be fine. Maybe, 1/2 price or something like that. I run games not for the free admission, but because it is fun to run games for people.

I could be way off base, but I think it all comes down to the dealers. If you had 100 dealers and some of them from overseas, convention attendance would rise considerably in my opinion.

Allen

I agree with most points. Yes dealers are the lifeblood and members are too.

The Host is dated. The vendor area is not disabled friendly. No elevator.

The Host needs upgrades which is outside of our control.

It is time to find another site. Better access to transportation to accommodate everybody. Do not have to be in Virginia, Philly or new York. But somewhere where you can stay and walk to your gaming.

The mission statement of HMGS was to support the hobby. NOT to make money! at the expense of all else.

I have seen an increase in many cons due to some of the decisions of the BOD which has chased people away.

I have been attending since it started. (yes I new God as a master-sergeant).

Remember why we started HMGS. Make it affordable for everyone.

above all fix registration. We had it down to a science then lost it again.

Get back to basics boys!

I do support Scott Landis.

Need a red shirt 4x since I am a Philly fan!

Oh goodie! Another "Move Historicon Now!" Movement!

I left HMGS during the last idiocy, and am glad I haven't returned! So rather then rehash most of the previous points, and endless threads on this topic how about some new thoughts!

First, instead of promising much and delivering little maybe this new stock of candidates should take a reality check! After almost 30 years the three HMGS cons have fallen into a rut! They are basically the same old thing every 4 months year after year. Nothing changes except the rising frustrations of those who attend them! So just maybe it's time for the so called BOD to rethink the whole convention program, and MAKE real changes to that program rather then trying to figure out where to move them, or how best to enhance their personal status in the hobby!

There are around 50 vendors who support all three shows, most of them seem to carry the same stuff, and never enough of any thing! So maybe it's time to cull the herd of vendors so as to allow new vendors to fill the spots, or simply reduce the number of vendors all together. Next, can the whole registration system, and come up with a simple means to allow folks to check in without all the excessive questions and computer key strokes! Especially as a large portion of attendees are not even members, nor wish to be! End the GMs getting in for free! This would aid in improving the games being run!

Has anyone ever really followed how many games that advertise say 6 players actually have that many playing the game? Maybe, it's time to reduce the number of games being offered thereby reducing the amount of space needed!

Maybe it's time to drop one of the conventions all together! One really good show every six months might be better then a mediocre show every four months!

What's the point of having several thousand dollars in the bank for an organization that doesn't really have anything worthy to do with all that money? Just what in this day and age is HMGS for?

You will never be able to attract vendors from England, or anywhere else for that matter, if you are holding shows in some out of the way corner of PA! Not to mention, if your attendance is in the 3k to 3500 range dreams of grandeur at some Major Convention Center in some large East Coast city are JUST that! So get over yourself, and get in touch with a little reality!

So candidates; ask yourself: Who are we, and What are we about! If you have some REAL answers then DO something about it! Save the lip service for someone else!

Hey Vagamer, Just curious what idiocy caused you to quit HMGS?

I think location has little to do with the attendance problem. I contend the "economy" has changed many peoples attitude to travel . I can tell you being a reenactor for over forty years the economy has drastically curtailed participation all over the country . Put Historicon where you will and I like many will attend it when finances allows. Like everything in life " changes"

So Dave… and other worthy candidates. I have not been a member for a few years now. (Voted with my wallet). I do go to the two Lancaster shows and some of our local shows during the year. Many day tripper are very tired of paying a large fee to give money to the vendors. Twenty-five dollars for four hours or so is a lot. Would you consider a shopping only ticket? Say 10 dollars for four hours allows you access to the vendor hall and flea market. I would personally volunteer to sit with a cash box and hand ticket out for cash. No registration, just purchase power. This would free up the registration area. Many people do not appreciate the information mining just to shop and have lunch. I have never run a business of any sort, but it would seem to me that you should always make it as easy as possible to hand over the cash. I truly believe this would entice middle aged men with Saturday commitments to come in the afternoon.

Also, I am Patrick Devine. Many of you know that I have two boys 13 and 10. I have noticed over the last few years that the Lancaster shows have begun to fill up with more kids. Could we help with a "kid" agenda? I personally do not believe in background checks, but as far as asking to work with children I would offer to get a one like a youth coach would get. I would like to tie in with hobby U and when the kids paint up Car wars cars that night they get to unveil their creations that night.

I liked Philly. Except for the locals. But they only came on saturday.

Why is it always assumed that declining attendance is due solely to moving Historicon to Virginia? The bad economy, the graying of the historical hobby…those are both culprits as well. I have been going to Hcon since 1992. Quit your griping and enjoy the drive south for a few years, or all of these purported "unhappy" northeners could break off and start their own chapter, if it's such an issue. We have an HMGS South and an HMGS midsouth. Go for your HMGS North if you want. Really…you can do it! ;-)

I would like to see the increased funds squerreled away and not one thing dime spent if it doesn't have to be. Then when we have $1,000,000 USD we can put it into a high yield annuity that will give us $60,000 USD a year to bankroll the conventions out of pocket, and any money taken in is gravy. That way EVERYONE can get in for much lower prices, including the dealers.

LIE LIE LIE

It is the most egregious and colossal of Lies that the Host does not want it back. The year H-con was moving to Baltimore was the year I began "The Weekend." In this I canvassed all of the hotels in the Lancaster area to put on a small convention and talked with their group sales people. The FIRST place I called was the host, reasoning that they would have LOTS of room.

On the contrary the Host Group Sales Representative told me they were holding that weekend reserved for the HMGS in case they changed their minds. They also were going to do this the next year.

So the HOST not wanting us is a LIE.

Let's examine Referendum 11.

This is what the official information sheet that came out with the ballot says.

1. DELETE ARTICLE VII, Officers, Section 1 in its entirety and replace it with:

SECTION 1. The Board of Directors will elect a President, Vice President, a Secretary, a Treasurer, a Director of Convention Operations, and such other officers as they may determine. ANY TWO OR MORE OFFICES MAY BE HELD BY THE SAME PERSON EXCEPT THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT, DIRECTOR OF CONENTION OPERATIONS AND SECRETARY (my emphasis) .

The rationale is Removes references to chairman, requires a Director for Convention Operations be a Board member and prohibits the new Director for Convention Operations from holding multiple offices.

NOTE! The president is not prohibited from being the treasurer, NOR is he prohibited from being his own Vice President, that is, sole power of the executive AND has control of the Purse. NOTE also that while the President is prohibited from holding two offices, the Vice President is not. This means that the President can arrogate to himself with BOD approval the control of finances, and thus free from any scrutiny. Further, the Vice President could be secretary and thus prevent ANY communication from the Board to the Membership. Also note that the Director of CON Ops is NOT prevented from being treasurer, nor is the secretary, so one person as secretary could control both the money and the means to report malfeasance of same.

Also note- There is an escape clause in section 2

2. delete article IV, Membership Meetings, Section 3(a) in its entirety and replace with.

SECTION 3.(a) All meetings of the members shall be presided over by the following officers in order of seniority: the President, Vice President, or if none of the following is in office or present at the meeting, by a chair chosen by a majority of the members in attendance. The Secretary of the Corporation shall act as Secretary of every meeting When the secretary is not available the presiding officer will appoint a Secretary of the Meeting.

NOTE NOTE NOTE!!! What does "if none of the foregoing is in office". What does that mean? Does it mean that if the President or VP deighns not to come the meeting is presided over by a chair chosen by the attending members? But what if NO officers are present, can there be a meeting.

5. Delete Article VI, Board of Directors, Section 2(d) in it's entirety, and replace with:

(d) rescinded.

Rational Removes 1995 transition process verbage.

Pleas excuse my nasty little secret policeman's mind, but I am always suspicious when things are deleted but we are not told what is being deleted. They told us what was being changed elsewhere, why not here?

7.DELETE ARTICLE vi, Board of Directors, Section 7 in it's entirety and replace with:

The President shall preside at all meetings of the Board of Directors. in his absence, the Vice President shall preside and, if there be no Vice President, or in his absence, any other Director chosen by the Board of Directors shall preside.

UMMMMM… WAIT A MINUTE! According to 2 above, the order goes, President, Vice President, or if none of the foregoing is in office or present at the meeting, by a Chair chosen by a majority of the members in attendance.

You may say that 2 regards meetings of the MEMBERS and the 7 is the meetings of the BOARD OF DIRECTORS, but a membership meeting is ALSO a meeting of the Board of Directors ipso facto, OR is it the intent of the officers of the corporation to absent themselves from the membership meeting and let the general members choose someone not on the board and hence with no permanent power. Shades of the Star Chamber.

As I said, the big print giveth and the small print taketh away. This is a conflict within the Referenda. Which one holds? Or are they to be applied at the convenience of the Board?

There are lots more problems. Most of which is the background check and who will have control of it.

Give me a few days more to pick on this and I'm sure I will find lots more.

In my view this is simply an attempt to blur who has what responsibility, avoid fiscal and policy supervision, and make the BOD even more a closed, corrupt, self-selecting agency irresponsible to the membership of the society.

Tyranny in any form should be opposed. In my humble opinion this new referendum is nothing more than a grab for power by the BOD which is basically a grab for control of the treasury. Speaking of the treasury, HMGS was granted recognition as a not for profit educational organization by the IRS for tax purposes. If the IRS would examine how much money was being earned and bankrolled by the organization and how much was actually spent on educational purposes and found a great disparity between the two, it could revoke HMGS's tax exemption. This would require that our organization be subject to taxation. I think HMGS is walking a fine line nowadays with what appears to be large "profits" being used for non educational purposes. Charging more for conventions with the appearance of using the money just to build up a large amount of cash reserves is just wrong. I am not a lawyer, but I would certainly like to hear from one concerning this tax situation to see if I am totally off base with my comments.

it started as a non profit organization. NOW we wonder?

NO one person should have control over finances. The news is filled with embezzlement.

Yes lower the entrance fee and go back to our mission statement.

Meanwhile, look into a transportation friendly location.

vic