[sac-board] Re: Grand Canyon Star Party SAC sponsored Pizza luncheon
- From: David Fredericksen <david.fredericksen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: sac-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 07:10:03 -0700
OK with me!
Clear Skies,
David
kellerjt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>The Grand Canyon Star Party is June 4th-11th this year. We've been =
>sponsoring a lunch for the last 4 years--starting first with this big =
>shindig put on by a former treasurer, that ended up costing ~$300. For =
>three years after that time, we've been toting $200 worth of pizzas from =
>the little village near to the S. Rim to the camp ground It has worked =
>out great and has been a meaningful contribution to the greatest public =
>star party in the history of the world. There is also a general "SAC" =
>campsite held for us so even if you can't do the required number of days =
>for a free campsite reservation, as a group we are able to have a SAC =
>rep. for the duration.
>
>I would like to propose this for a board vote now and also relay it at =
>the meeting on the 25th as a way to recruit some more of SAC to this =
>Star Party.
>
>If you are on the board, please post a vote regarding spending this =
>$200.
>
>Thanks,
>Jennifer Polakis, VP
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Keller, Jennifer T.=20
>Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 8:43 AM
>To: 'sac-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
>Subject: floating lead balloons.
>
>
>Last year we had 12 speakers due to the Blue Moon in July. I think of =
>the last 13 speakers, 3 or more have waived their honorarium. We were =
>considering raising the honorarium as well to $100 for out of town =
>speakers. I'd like to see a $1,000 annual budget for speakers with the =
>refused honorariums being returned to it to build funds to fly in out of =
>state speakers. I think it is the speakers and the Newsletter that make =
>the club and the reason we have dues. It makes absolutely no sense to =
>hoard thousands of dollars of other folk's money to make 2% on it at a =
>bank.=20
>
>From my standpoint, arranging speakers is difficult but enjoyable and I =
>don't really want to lose the "enjoyable" part of it for the rest of the =
>year. =20
>
>I'll get with Dean Ketelsen on the dates for the GC star party as well. =
>Is that $200 or $300, ie is it a board vote or a membership vote?
>
>Jennifer Polakis, VP
>
> =20
>-----Original Message-----
>From: sac-board-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:sac-board-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Paul Dickson
>Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 5:15 PM
>To: SAC-Board@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [sac-board] SAC Budget for 2005?
>
>
>What's SAC's budget like for 2005? I don't think SAC's membership has
>seen the budget (let alone approved changes) in two or three years.
>
>Back when I was treasurer, the biggest item in the planning was a
>projector with the planned price between $2000 and $4000. Fortunately =
>for
>SAC, the cost of these projectors have declined since then. Now with =
>the
>projector purchase under way and the replacement bulb purchase due soon,
>we may well have a surplus of funds remaining. We may no longer have to
>keep the income and outgo balanced for the moment, at least until we =
>reach
>a lower balance.
>
>We need to set a budget for the year and try to stick with it. When =
>Steve
>Coe brought in an out-of-town speaker, he had funds available in the
>honorarium account (savings from using in-town speakers vs out-of-town).
>While I'm not against Jennifer flying in out-of-state speakers, I think
>this should be against the honorarium account.
>
>The honorarium, as last approved is $825 (11 months times $75 each). If
>Jennifer wants to add $210 to this budget ($285 - $75), this should be
>brought before the membership (to reapprove the $825 yearly budget and =
>add
>a one time addition of $225).
>
>Are we going to have a GCSP luncheon this year?
>
> -Paul
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
