[Board] PYC Membership Question
PETER DAWSON
poko at comcast.net
Thu Jul 16 19:44:37 MDT 2020
Thanks Art for the time you spent in detailing historical discussions and definitions (of family (including children)). With the addition of club operations (complications) due to Covid, the use of PYC by children may warrant further discussion.
The scenerio of an 18yr. old and several friends out for an afternoon of boating could produce problems on their return, including driving away from PYC after an afternoon of fun.
Is there any plan for a meeting (next) Thursday as we discussed? An email round-table may be easier.
Best,
Peter
> On 07/16/2020 7:46 PM Jeremy Small <jsmall.105 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Back in May of 2019, I asked for a review of the constitution so we could allow children age 16-21 of members to access their family boat. Was this ever done? If not I would like to make a motion at the next board meeting in regards to this issue. Children of members age 16-21 are allowed access to parents boats, either in slips or by launch, with written permission from the member. The access would be using only the gate entrance and not give access to the club interior or to hang out on the patio.
> [image.png]
> Above is from the minutes from the May 9th 2019 meeting.
>
> Unfortunately, it looks like I dropped the ball on continuing this conversation which would have avoided the entire situation.
>
> Thank you.
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 5:47 PM Karen Niland < karen.niland at me.com mailto:karen.niland at me.com > wrote:
>
> > > Dear Commodore Dowey, VC Kenepp, RC Dionne, Steward Kat & Capt. J. Small,
> >
> > I am hopeful the following information will shed light upon the ongoing confusion about the definitions of family and membership at PYC. I appreciate your attention to the issues and I submit these comments respectfully to assist in the process of resolution. Previous correspondence with Rear Commodore Dionne are included below.
> >
> > It saddens me, as this discourse stems from an event in which our son, Spencer, did not violate the safety, use or function of the club and did not infringe upon the rights or responsibilities of PYC staff or members. As a licensed boater and a dependent adult child under the age of 21 living in our home, it seems reasonable to assume his right to access our boat within the guidelines of the club. Captain Small’s comment in the 2018 board meeting notes demonstrate this is not an unreasonable assumption, however, I do not find evidence of any formal resolution in Club documents.
> >
> > With all due respect, Rear Commodore Dionne’s statement “children were never included” is incorrect. Please see the attached document from the PYC Constitution and By-Laws provided in 2015 which states in ARTICLE XI, SECTION 4:
> >
> > “Active membership includes individuals or families. Family is defined to include spouse and dependent children under the age of 21.”
> >
> > Changes to other Constitution Articles explicitly state “Article [ ] r eplaced in entirety by vote...” where Footnote(7) re: ARTICLE XI SECTION 4, states: " altered and expanded [ ] the definition of family to include marital type relationships…”. Removal of children from the definition of family in the Constitution is a substantial change in the rules of membership without specifically being addressed in the documentation. The intention of Footnote(7) was to update the word spouse to be more inclusive. It was created in response to the Supreme Court same-sex marriage legislation at that time and it was not written to remove children from family membership in ARTICLE XI SECTION 4. If there is documentation of discourse and a decision to remove of children from family membership, please share. If not, may we please address it at the annual meeting?
> >
> > I welcome current or former Board Members to contact me with any insight or questions. I hope to better understand the changes to the Constitution which have created this confusion and look forward to helping the Club clarify the rules with appreciation for the history, legacy and future of PYC as an inclusive and welcoming organization.
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Karen Niland
> > 603-833-7751
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > On Jul 15, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Arthur Dionne < adjd at aol.com mailto:adjd at aol.com > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear Mrs. Niland,
> > >
> > > As to your first question concerning my email, I was wrong!
> > >
> > > As to your second question, the 2015 footnote is correct, it was made to include marital type relationships; however, there was no "removal of children in the definition of family" as children were never included. Children have never been allowed to use PYC's facilities without having a parent present. The Board of Directors reviewed this issue during their meeting on August 9, 2018. the following is taken form the Minutes of that meeting:
> > >
> > > 2. Membership Designations - Comm. Michael
> > > Comm. Michael said that the term "Family Membership" is confusing because some members believe that it means that their children are entitled to use club facilities without their parents present. Conversation ensued about the fact that wording in the Constitution is not specific. Family is defined as two individuals living at the same address in a marital or marital-type relationship. The Constitution does not define the family as including the children and does not specify the age of the children. The Constitution intends a membership to be a person or a couple. Some Board members said they understand there is a problem but that it may not be an issue which could be addressed at this time. PC Coffey said there should be a system in place where we could continually educate members about rules. Capt. Small suggested there could be a process where the child of a member could access the family boat via the club. Comm. Michael said this should be addressed in the future.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Arthur Dionne, R/C
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Karen Niland < karen.niland at me.com mailto:karen.niland at me.com >
> > > To: Kev Niland < kevenn43 at yahoo.com mailto:kevenn43 at yahoo.com >; Arthur Dionne < adjd at aol.com mailto:adjd at aol.com >
> > > Cc: pdowey at gmail.com mailto:pdowey at gmail.com < pdowey at gmail.com mailto:pdowey at gmail.com >; dave.kenepp at gmail.com mailto:dave.kenepp at gmail.com < dave.kenepp at gmail.com mailto:dave.kenepp at gmail.com >; frieda.kat5 at gmail.com mailto:frieda.kat5 at gmail.com < frieda.kat5 at gmail.com mailto:frieda.kat5 at gmail.com >
> > > Sent: Wed, Jul 15, 2020 12:01 pm
> > > Subject: Re: PYC Membership Question
> > >
> > > Dear Rear-Commodore Dionne,
> > >
> > > I have a follow-up question regarding Article XI Section 4. Is there an amendment in which PYC voted to eliminate children from the definition of family?
> > >
> > > Your initial email (copied below) implies our dependent child is "a member via our membership” and your concerns were regarding our son’s age and address; both which fall within ARTICLE XI, SECTION 4 of the PYC Constitution and By-Laws from 2015:
> > > “Active membership includes individuals or families. Family is defined to include spouse and dependent children under the age of 21.”
> > >
> > > The current PYC Constitution and By-Laws (online) denote your reference to Footnote (7):
> > > "Constitution ARTICLE XI, Section 4: The definition of a family membership was altered and expanded by vote at the Annual Meeting of October 8, 2015 to include two individuals living at the same address in a marriage or marital-type relationship on the date they become members. Also, provision for retaining membership if the relationship is dissolved is guaranteed to both parties. At the Annual Meeting October 13, 2016, reference to the date the living arrangements began were removed so that any person living at the same address in a marriage or marital type relationship with the original member,regardless of the date when the relationship and living arrangement began is considered a member.”
> > >
> > > Presumably, the footnote of 2015 was in response to the Supreme Court Legislation recognizing same-sex marriage and prior use of the word “spouse” was not inclusive of a “marital type relationship”. The intention to expand the definition of family to include marital type relationships is clear but, the removal of children in the definition of family is not explicitly addressed.
> > >
> > > Please confirm my understanding or clarify if there is PYC documentation to eliminate children from the definition of family.
> > >
> > > Respectfully,
> > >
> > > Karen S. Niland
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > > On Jul 13, 2020, at 3:55 PM, Arthur Dionne < adjd at aol.com mailto:adjd at aol.com > wrote:
> > > > Hi Keven,
> > > > We have a little problem. Your son came to PYC alone and took your boat out today. Does he live with you and Karen? If he does, he is probably a member via you membership; however, depending on his age he may not be permitted to be at PYC unless you are with him.
> > > > Please provide me with any pertinent information.
> > > > Thank you,
> > > > Art Dionne
> > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> >
> > >
>
> --
> Jeremy Small
> 603.661.7371
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://portsmouthyc.org/pipermail/board_portsmouthyc.org/attachments/20200716/8a458911/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 102091 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://portsmouthyc.org/pipermail/board_portsmouthyc.org/attachments/20200716/8a458911/attachment.png>
More information about the Board
mailing list