UNION MEETING 9\/5\/15<\/p>\n
Oh What an Interesting Meeeeeeeting\u2026<\/p>\n
Before the meeting, in discussion with a couple of Local 47 members,
\none told us: You watch, they\u2019re going to try to call this a \u201cClub 47\u201d
\n meeting and not a \u201cLocal 47\u201d meeting\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhy?\u201d we asked. The words \u201cClub 47\u201d didn\u2019t appear on the post card
\nthat was sent nor the four page special \u201cOverture\u201d (Official Publication
\nof Local 47), though references to Local 47 were blatant and prominent.<\/p>\n
The only use of the words \u201cClub 47\u201d were on the inside cover of the
\nprinted Overture, where few would see it,\u2026 and the electronic version
\n of the Overture (With the only direct reference to \u201cClub 47\u201d) came out
\n just YESTERDAY, one day before the meeting.
\nAs Comedian Billy Connelly would say, \u201cHow Convenient!\u201d
\nYep, they knew exactly what they were doing.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn any case, what difference does it make?\u201d we said.<\/p>\n
\u201cA big difference\u201d, he explained, \u201cBecause, the members have far
\nfewer rights to speak at a Club 47 meeting. The board controls it
\ncompletely, and you cannot make motions\u201d. \u201cJust wait, he said.\u201d <\/p>\n
Boy was he right. The first words out of the President\u2019s mouth after
\nthe pledge, once the meeting was called to order, were that it was a
\n\u201cCLUB 47\u201d meeting. They hadn\u2019t even got out of the introductory
\nremarks and a bait and switch was pulled to shut down the membership
\nparticipation by way of motions. The chairman was called on it by a
\nmember bigtime, but it made no difference, they simply ignored him.
\nEveryone there, however, took note of the willful deception. It would
\nnot be the last of the evening.<\/p>\n
In fact, the membership had been disenfranchised by the action, to
\nkeep participation to a minimum in some ways. And certainly not
\nthe best way to get the membership to trust an already very murky
\nsubject.<\/p>\n
Below you will find a synopsis of the meeting with the more
\nimportant comments framed by \u201c**\u201d <\/p>\n
——————————<\/p>\n
Meeting called by President Acosta at 7:31.
\nPledge recited.<\/p>\n
Roll call taken.<\/p>\n
The Chairman tried to introduce the meeting s a \u201cclub\u201d meeting,
\nwhich would limit the members participation.<\/p>\n
Member: \u201cIt is not a meeting of the club, nothing about club
\n47 was on any of the mailings\u201d. Members at Club meetings
\nhave far fewer rights than at a Local meeting.
\n\u201cYes is was\u201d, said the President.<\/p>\n
Counsel says the same right for members in either type of meeting.
\nMeeting will proceed with Robert\u2019s rules.<\/p>\n
EXPLAINING THE VOTING
\n\u2022Board Member- All members in good standing are eligible.
\nInactive life members cannot vote nor can suspended members\u2022<\/p>\n
Local has rented PO Box to accept ballots, board member will
\npick up ballots from the box.<\/p>\n
*Need over 3200 ballots to have a legit vote. Need 50% plus 1 for
\nthe vote to be legitimate, of that 50% Plus 1, 50% plus one must vote
\nto sell.*<\/p>\n
Ballots will have bar code to verify identity. Locked box will be
\nkept in a locked cabinet in the Secretary\u2019s Office.<\/p>\n
On a weekly basis election board will gather and store ballots
\nwithout being opened. <\/p>\n
If 50% of ballots are not reached the ballots will not be opened.
\nThe Local cannot decide to change the bylaws to 50% plus one of
\nthose who vote. It is federal law.<\/p>\n
\u2022Election Board will be counting ballots, not an outside company.\u2022
\nThere can be witnesses to the counting. Anyone who wants to
\nobserve can. Counsel requests requesting to observe.<\/p>\n
Member: All members of Local 47 are members of the club. Club
\nowns the real estate. Is there conflict of interest in officers sitting
\n on both boards?<\/p>\n
Answer: Club has been set up so the board mirrors both organizations.
\nIt\u2019s always been that way.<\/p>\n
Theory is if the Local is sued, the building is protected by the Club\u2019s
\nownership of the building. Also, AFM cannot take the Local.<\/p>\n
How does the membership benefit from the sale? Member benefit by the
\nnew building being bought and the use of it by members.<\/p>\n
Member: When will the ballots be back in?
\nAnswer: hopefully middle of December.<\/p>\n
Member: How did you arrive at the decision to sell the building?
\nWho is the realtor, etc.
\nAsked to wait till after the president\u2019s presentation.
\n[EC: Realtor is Hilton and Hyland]<\/p>\n
\u2022Member: Local has not set up a specific cut off date for the voting.
\nThe board could wait till they DO have enough, since they will not
\nCLOSE the voting. Will keep it open till they get the votes.<\/p>\n
Member: Create cutoff date. (EC: This sentiment was repeated several
\ntimes throughout the night, but since no motions could be made, it
\ncould not be fixed. How convenient.)*<\/p>\n
PRESENTATION BY PRESIDENT
\n1950 – 14,000 members, 52 Employees
\n2015 – 7,000 members, 22 Employees<\/p>\n
In the 50\u2019s the whole building was used
\nNow less than 50%, of the building is rented.<\/p>\n
$ 761,000 deficit in 2014, though Local is in the black now.<\/p>\n
2015 \u2013 Voluntary wage freeze for the Officers, cut salaries and expenses.<\/p>\n
Building looks crappy – $80,000 to spruce it up.
\nElectrical is at capacity using $50,000
\nRoof needs to be replaced – $200,000 needed.
\nElevator would cost $200,000.<\/p>\n
Reserves are low, less than 1mil in bank.
\nOne major lawsuit can break us.<\/p>\n
Shows rendering of new building<\/p>\n
WHY BURBANK?
\nConcentration around 134 Freeway, majority of members are in that area.
\nIncreased services
\nRewards program
\nSound treated rooms.
\nCredit union on 1st floor
\nADA Compliant (Handicap accessible)
\nModern office space.
\nState of the Art Recording Studio
\nEcofriendly Construction
\nLocation near studios and sister unions.<\/p>\n
130 parking spaces.<\/p>\n
WHAT WILL BE DONE WITH THE MONEY?
\nMoney goes into bank account.
\n24 million sale price
\n5-8 million to buy new building
\n3 to renovate the building
\nLeaving
\n11 million in bank
\nCurrently the local has $975, 806.<\/p>\n
After sale $11,975.806<\/p>\n
From $186,366 to $891.790 annual earnings<\/p>\n
QUESTION AND ANSWER
\nMember: Capitol Gains? Don\u2019t we have to pay that?
\nCounsel: Not required to pay Cap Gains as long it\u2019s reinvested or put
\ninto another non-profit organization.<\/p>\n
Member: What\u2019s the breakdown to the use of the money.
\nAnswer: Trustees would continue to oversee it, but an investment
\nmanager will be brought in.
\nThere\u2019s no plan for where that money can go before we vote\u2026
\nOnce the money is transferred a plan would be created.<\/p>\n
TRUSTEE: When you vote you vote for 3 trustees, 6 directors and officers.
\nHistory of the investments of this local are CD\u2019s. We\u2019d stagger the dates
\nof the cd\u2019s. As of now we\u2019re lucky to get 1 percent on those investments.
\nIf we get them money they will invest as wisely as we can.<\/p>\n
Talks up the sale.<\/p>\n
Member: Sale has to be done. Bid is from a company called 5 points. Realtor
\nteam is at the meeting. Some years ago, Red Studios offered to build new
\nunion building. They were approached again and passed.<\/p>\n
Member:
\n1)\tIs a big deal. It\u2019s a boat load of money that comes in. I\u2019d prefer to see IN WRITING a prospectus of what will be done. A Legal document
\nthat shows all of our protections against the misuse of this money.
\nAll laid out.<\/p>\n
2) Good idea to clean up this election process.<\/p>\n
Counsel: Officers of the local are financially responsible for misuse. Prohibited
\nby Musicians Club; Laws in California; Federal Labor Law; Prosecution by the
\nDOL if there is misconduct.<\/p>\n
Member: Full court press to get the sale. What was the process to get you here?
\nBeen in discussion for years. More acutely in the last year. Board was unanimous
\nto pursue a sale.<\/p>\n
Member: Thanks the board. What is ecofriendly? Lots of the companies are
\nattached to the utility companies. Much more beneficial to BUY solar panels,
\nnot rent. Other group was in same situation. Arranged with County to have
\ntheir forensic accountants to be involved to guarantee transparency. To
\nwatch out for scams.<\/p>\n
Member: Loves the idea. But will not vote for it unless we know what the
\nrenovation will cost.<\/p>\n
Answer: Cost was estimated to be 3 million dollars, 11million in profit is
\nafter the renovation.<\/p>\n
Member: Have any members been asked what they want in the new
\nrehearsal rooms? Because this place sucks. Need more members.<\/p>\n
Member: Question of confidence in the leadership. Not so worried
\nabout corruption, more concerned with cluelessness, follow through
\non proposals, project management. <\/p>\n
We do not have a great record on oversight. CONVINCE ME!<\/p>\n
Member: Elephant in the room, unions way of doing business is not working.
\nIf we sell building, and we have all this money, they\u2019ll be even more
\ndisconnected from the needs of the members. When model stops working,
\nthe proceeds are sold and the profits go to that union. Are we best served
\nas members through the sale of this building? <\/p>\n
Member: Just 12 folks are making these decisions for all the members. Never
\ncame up when I was involved. Local has a history of deficit spending. Taken
\nin 24 million over 6 years, but spent 26 million. $290,000 last year. Building
\nbrings in enough money to pay our bills. It\u2019 a lot of trust,.. don\u2019t have enough
\ntrust to vote for the sale.<\/p>\n
Member: Two issues – Transparency and Trust. Never had a board of
\ndirectors entrusted with 11 million dollars. We have to protect that investment
\nfor a worst case scenario.
\nTransparency: Engage the members. Member must believe.
\nOne meeting doesn\u2019t cut it. have more meetings. We had three on non-union recording.<\/p>\n
Member: In favor of sale. There have been many conversations. Everything will
\nbe decided by the membership. [EC: Except the listing of the building last July and the finding of the new building.]<\/p>\n
Member: Many things are wrong with the picture. Has been worked on for a couple
\nof months now (since July). No deadline set. Set a deadline. What\u2019s the hurry?
\nRESOURCEFULNESS: No one has asked us what we want? No Survey.<\/p>\n
Governance should come from the members, not thrown at the members.<\/p>\n
Member: Property Tax? What will that be?
\nRealtor\u2019s team answered – 1.25 percent of purchase price.
\nIncome is 130-135 thousand from 3 surrounding restaurants.
\nNo cap gains taxes.<\/p>\n
Member: What is property tax hit on new building? What\u2019s the
\nhit here? Tenants come and go, cannot count on them being there.
\nAnswer: One of the restaurants has a 10 year lease.<\/p>\n
Ballots are coming out too soon, we don\u2019t have the info we need.<\/p>\n
Member: At the local in Phoenix, money problems, partnered with
\nballet company and created a Bingo night. Indian gaming came in the
\nwhole thing left the bingo game high and dry,..
\nLocal was looking at insolvency.<\/p>\n
We need to explore. Not just look to a pot of money.<\/p>\n
Member: Verify salary freeze \u2013 YES, Officer\u2019s salaries are frozen.
\nMembers were not told that the building was being listed, nor that
\nA building search was already happening.<\/p>\n
The mailing, the board paid $5,000 of our dues money to a pr firm to
\ndesign, And an additional 5-6 thousand to mail, had no balance at all.
\nWas a total sales pitch. The Overture that came out today didn\u2019t have
\nANY letters to the editor, Nothing from the members on the sale.<\/p>\n
Said there should be a Motion to have voting cut off date of March 1st,
\n2016. According to the Secretary, they\u2019d not received any comments
\nfrom members about the sale.<\/p>\n
Member: In the budget are you including – realtor fee? It comes off the
\n24 million. Budget: Cannot estimate till the members say what they want. <\/p>\n
OFFICER: Realtor has schooled the board on the cost of a renovation.
\n* Address of proposed new building – 1011 Alameda in Burbank*<\/p>\n
A block away from Team music. Insistent on having totally union labor.
\n$120 per square foot to renovate, building is over 30,000. One-story building.
\nCan make it what we want. Surrounding ourselves with the best team out there.
\nGo by and check it out! Parking is 50 spots for employees, 120 in the front.
\nAAA and School will provide extra spaces on the weekend.<\/p>\n
The realtor is a member of Local 47 member. Him being a musician is an asset.<\/p>\n
Realtor donating back $100,000 of their fee. $50,000 to the relief fund and $50,000 to music performance trust fund.<\/p>\n
Member: We don\u2019t know enough. One information meeting is not enough. It\u2019s just not enough. We live by feelings, we can\u2019t live that way about real estate.<\/p>\n
One property suggestion? Really? Need more. Ballot should be delayed by 60
\ndays while we find out where the skeletons are buried.<\/p>\n
Member: Who gets the commission, and is that a conflict of interest?
\nThe procedure is tying the membership\u2019s hands.<\/p>\n
\u2022Member: \u201cWhat\u2019s the sense of the room?. Of the folks who are here who wants a delay?\u201d President won\u2019t let a vote take place. <\/p>\n
The president is eventually forced to allow a show of hands.
\nVast majority of those in attendance support a delay in the referendum (Over 95%)*<\/p>\n
Member: Thought it would be a debate,.. not a one sided presentation.
\nWant to hear both sides.<\/p>\n
Member: 4 or 5 bids, highest of which one is 24 millions.
\nThe PROJECTION is not accurate. We\u2019re being asked to vote on a projection.
\nI see a lack of trust, didn\u2019t give enough info, not allowing motions, only a show
\nof hands.<\/p>\n
Want to know about rehearsal rooms. Get the info out and you might build
\nmore trust.<\/p>\n
Do not have an open-ended ballot, need a cut off date.
\nIf we weren\u2019t hurting, would we be asking to sell?
\nOfficer: Absolutely. We\u2019ve done our due diligence.<\/p>\n
Member: Have you gotten a 2nd opinion?
\nAnswer: We had four different real estate firms.
\nYou still need to get more options.<\/p>\n
Member: Is there an expiration date on the 24 mil offer?
\nAnswer: No.
\nWas hoping presentation had more info, pictures of the neighborhood, SOMETHING. Should have had the meeting 6 months ago.<\/p>\n
Member: I\u2019m a realtor. Can understand this confusion. I\u2019ve sold commercial, cathedrals.
\n1)\tInterest rates go up, sellers market will dry up.
\n2)\tRealtor has a good reputation
\n3)\tIn my opinion, if you can sell for 24 mil, and buy for 10 and renovate for 3 million, move ahead now.
\n4)\tAll these people are honorable.<\/p>\n
\u2022Member: Have total respect for all involved, but also lots of concerns. You\u2019ve
\nspent months working on this when you SHOULD be working to improve our
\nwork situation. Also, the contractor who did the auditorium rehab was non-
\nunion. Why are we consulting the same company that used non-union on the auditorium?\u2022
\nAnswer: All companies give both union and non-union quotes.
\nZip codes were used to chose a location? But how many of them are active musicians?
\nNeed to do more research on locations.<\/p>\n
Member: Am worried about the recording studio. WHY MAKE A STUDIO? $250,000 – $500,000 for board and nothing else\u2026. Need more info and hard numbers.<\/p>\n
Board Member: Whole board was put in by your votes. Everything is coming into place, time is now is valid. The Burbank building is our little gold mine. Prices for renovation could escalate. Send your proposals to the board. Timing is everything, and this is the time. The moment is valid.<\/p>\n
Board Member: You elected us,\u2026 go forward. Four sets of realtors, talked to attorneys.
\nYou want a budget\u2026 but we\u2019ll present more at the next meeting. If you think starting voting 5 days is to soon, you might be right. Go ahead and let\u2019s do it.<\/p>\n
Member: In my retirement I had to look at a middle set of numbers, low sets of numbers and high sets of numbers. We need more and more info if you want an informed opinion.<\/p>\n
Member: If there was not a height restriction here it could sell for far more.<\/p>\n
Member: Musicians Club is in the black, can you separate it out.
\nAnswer: Yes.
\nClub borrowed $584,000 from the Local for Rehearsal Rooms
\nand auditorium. How can you say we\u2019re fine with a 584 thousand unsecured
\nloan on the books?
\nWe need outside agency to do the counting.<\/p>\n
Officer: 50-100,000 a year goes back to Local to pay back the loan.<\/p>\n
Board Member: Have before us a unique opportunity. It\u2019s about the relationship
\nof our musicians, finding new opportunities. Been a lot of effort and thought
\nput into trying to move this forward. It\u2019s hard to see 14,000 members in 1950
\nbut only 7,000 now.<\/p>\n
We should have a building we have pride in. There are 1000\u2019s of members that
\nare not here. <\/p>\n
*Lease back option?: Realtor: We were told what you wanted to ask the buyers
\nto have a free lease back option for six months to give us time to renovate the
\nnew building. If longer than 6 months, a small rent of $50,000 per month will
\nbe asked for. There is a real estate attorney involved.\u2022<\/p>\n
Member: Don\u2019t want an open ended ballot. Set a deadline 4 months. Count the
\nballots, if they have the numbers have the vote. If not give it up.<\/p>\n
Member: Deadline should be 4 to 6 months.<\/p>\n
Member: Should set deadline to March 1st, 2016<\/p>\n
Member: We need to get comfortable with the idea of leaving and selling.<\/p>\n
Adjourned at 9:57<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
UNION MEETING 9\/5\/15 Oh What an Interesting Meeeeeeeting\u2026 Before the meeting, in discussion with a couple of Local 47 members, one told us: You watch, they\u2019re going to try to call this a \u201cClub 47\u201d meeting and not a \u201cLocal 47\u201d meeting\u201d. \u201cWhy?\u201d we asked. The words \u201cClub 47\u201d didn\u2019t appear on the post card […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-127","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-committee-newsletters"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/127","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=127"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/127\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=127"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=127"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=127"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}