Hi Mike -

"Disgust" is also a very negative word, but it got used anyway. I agree that a volunteer with that sort of attitude will have great difficulty navigating a way forward. We have a fundamental disagreement that the sailors have an obligation to "step up." That's quite a sales pitch. FYI, there were several years when the venues and boats weren't known until well after New Years - your situation wasn't unique, so don't feel too put-upon.

The balances of the Hoyt-Jolley and the two Steven's funds should have been reported to you at the AGM. Don't forget those important tools. For perspective, the $2,000 interest language was written in 1998 or 1999 - the charter fee was bumped to $4K shortly after that (2001), and got bumped twice more as we were required to replace promotional consideration with cash. Consider that for a moment - it was the office that drove the cost of charters up as they made national sponsorship agreements that increasingly marginalized the manufacturers' support.

In the entire history of the event (through 2011), we never got anything other than a unanimous vote of the Board to allocate whatever charter fee the committee deemed necessary to run the event. We had to stand before the Board and talk about the event and the budget, but that was all. The resistance to spending the money came solely from an employee who had never been to the event. It was the pervasive attitude on the committee that our job was to host a quality event as long as possible under the tightening constraints of sponsorship that did nothing for the sailors or the host's bottom line. I take it back - we got cool hats. The last Chair was ready to take the event in a new and sustainable direction, but got shown the door for his ideas. The committee was in full agreement that our primary function wasn't to have a bank account. How were the Hoyt-Jolley funds spent this year? Absent charter fees, they don't appear to have gone toward entry fees for competitors...

I know that calls were placed to previous champions (well, some of them, anyway ) to ask why they weren't attending. I know what several of them said; a BYOB event isn't attractive as the Championship. I'm seeing that message got diluted somewhat in the translation.

You guys have a chance to get many more boats for next year, though it may only be a flash in the pan due to location and the fleet being considered. It will certainly be conducive to a much more marketable event for the future if you can take advantage of the situation - I can't imagine this year's sponsors are thrilled, or that prospective sponsors are very impressed or motivated. The committee got what they wanted this year - it's impossible to say that past committees who posted full rosters to over a quarter century of events were failures. Take what lessons you can from this year and be humble enough to apply them.