Re: (erielack) Unansered Questions

[William Shultz <wshultz1_@_twcny.rr.com>]

Randy,

I must admit I find some of your replies rather curious, 2 and a half 
months ago you where one of the people on this list speaking out the 
loudest for compliance with the by-laws and having the financial 
statement available.

Why should anyone care what it costs to produce the Diamond? Because it 
directly relates to dues. As I am certain you are aware, a nonprofit 
cannot give a premium of greater value than it costs to produce, in this 
case the printed matter you receive. You cannot subsidize the cost of 
that publication outside of what you take in for a regular membership. 
Even if every member were a sustaining or patron member, or donated a 
million dollars, you cannot subsidize what a member receives for their 
dues with that money unless you raise the amount of the dues that is not 
tax deductible.

So let's say you have XYZ publishing printing the magazine and it costs 
$28.00 per year to produce. Then XYZ comes along and says that sorry, 
but they have increased costs to pass on and now it is going to cost 
$31.00 per year to produce, you have to increase dues to cover that 
price increase and you have to reduce correspondingly the amount which 
is tax deductible from the sustaining and patron memberships. Ask the 
IRS about that if you doubt it. If you don't increase dues, you 
jeopardize losing your tax exempt status.

Janet & Randy Brown wrote:

>Well, here we go again!
>
>As member #16, having been here from before year 2, I offer a viewpoint:
>
>He said -- she said -- I want -- you want --
>
>And that's my question.  WHAT DO YOU WANT?
>  
>

For there to be a healthy ELHS when I am your age.

>We read that the ELHS must change to survive.  OK . . .
>
>WHAT DO YOU WANT?
>
>Put forth a proposal that produces real progress.  Remember -- all progress is change, but not all change is progress.
>  
>
And rarely will stagnation lead to survival. I do know that if you don't 
try, rarely will things happen for the better.

>More financial reports?  Not for me, thank you!  If Andover Junction is happy, and if we can pay for it, why worry?  Maybe Maple Corners Mimeograph could do it cheaper, but do we want that?
>  
>
Because not having a written, formal contract with them is stupid. They 
are in business to make money, not be altruistic. That is totally 
reasonable, but for us to hand them the keys to the kingdom without 
specifics of the business relationship and what our requirements out of 
that relationship are, is foolish and inept. If we are subject to 
varying, unexpected costs, this can directly or indirectly threaten our 
tax exempt status. Remember the relationship isn't just as a printer, 
switching printers is a great deal easier than taking back editorial 
control which is what would have to happen now.

>
>Do we want to buy a dining car?  It's been done.
>  
>

No, the ELHS would do a lousy job at it and I wouldn't want to see us 
get involved in such matters. The ELDPS does a much more capable job of 
it. And with open elections too I might add. It would however be a 
wonderful thing if the ELHS were fiscally healthy enough beyond our own 
needs to help financially support such efforts.

>Do we want to establish archives in a stable educational environment?
>We've done that.
>  
>

And when is the last time you were there? It might as well be in 
Timbuktu for most members. Look at the demographics sometime.

>Do we want to sell products?  We're doing that, meeting the perceived market.  N scale?  Who wants it?  O scale? Who wants it?  (I do !!!)
>  
>

Sales of models and modeling items account for a large portion of the 
additional, self generated income we earn. This is what helps fund the 
ELHS beyond dues. It is an extremely important facet of our future.

>Of course, I want Erie. Lackawanna was fun, but Erie Lackawanna is, to me, a degeneration of two grand railroads.
>
>And there's a big part of my point -- each of us wants something, and few coincide perfectly with others.  
>
>We've seen much dis-satisfaction with the staus quo, but I've seen little remedy offered.
>
>  
>
I disagree with you completely, there have been proposals made as you 
well know. Either that, or you haven't been listening or reading for the 
past 6 months and I know that isn't the case.

>FOLKS -- IT'S TIME TO BET OR FOLD !!
>
>There are many other aphorisms, but they get get more abrasive.
>
>Let's get something productive going -- or admit that Fargo (who didn't even say "thank you" for the three responses he got!) is right.
>  
>
That IS the point and that is what some of us are trying to do. Care to 
formally and publicly join the effort? You can complain or you can 
participate, the choice is yours.

>If the current board cannot react, I expect someone to propose a NEW historical society to replace this one.  But they must present a program, and a structure, and incentives to members.
>
>ANYBODY ??
>
>  
>
A splintered ELHS helps no one. It certainly doesn't help preserve the 
history of the railroads or of the people that worked for them. Already 
the collective contents of remaining Erie, DL&W and EL materials are 
widely dispersed. A new society to cover the same railroads would be 
foolish. As a DL&W fan I have another alternative, you Erie and EL 
people aren't quite so fortunate.

>Randy Brown, ELHS #16
>

Will Shultz

------------------------------