Home › Forums › Where I Stand › Are CLC rules “Fake News?
- This topic has 1 reply, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago by Elizabeth Breier.
April 22, 2023 at 11:18 am #8106Rana GoodmanKeymaster
Quite a few years ago, when I was far more active in the community, my favorite committee was, Community Lifestyle Committee (CLC), then called the Lifestyle Committee.
Some of my reasons for favoring that group was their devotion to assisting clubs and their membership do what is needed to form the club, overseeing them so all residents could enjoy what they had to offer. At the time, they made sure that no resident could be excluded and basically, made sure all “played well” together.
Over the years, however, it seems that with new members heading up the committee, rules change and two of the most important, in my opinion, have fallen by the wayside.
For example, the use of email addresses of the membership. As you can see below, from the committee’s rules listing on the SCA website, emails can only be used for club business. However, no one seems to be enforcing this rule and I believe it to be an important one. Yet it seems some club board members have been using those addresses for personal and/or political issues.
- Use of Club Members’ Contact Information
A club is responsible for safeguarding the privacy of its members’ contact information, which is confidential and intended for use for club business only. Club members may not use or disclose such information for any purpose other than furthering the activities of the club.
The only exception is that the information shall be disclosed to Association management, upon the request of Association Management or the BOD to further Association purposes.
A club may receive permission from a club member to share his/her contact information with other club members, but such permission must be in writing, a copy of which must be retained by the club.
When communicating by email to club members, individual email addresses must be shielded by using blind copy (bcc). An option to decline to receive club emails and telephone calls must be offered to club members.
A club must protect members’ contact information on club websites/web pages by ensuring that information is not publicly available on its website to anyone, including other members unless the member’s permission is on file. Only contact information for club officers, at-large leaders, and others involved in planning, organizing, and managing club activities, or as otherwise expressly permitted by a club member, may be set forth.
Then we have the problem of discourse between a member and one or two members of the club board. The rule says that if a member has an issue with the club they are to, first take the problem to the club’s board leadership and then if that does not solve the issue, take it to CLC. But what does one do when the dispute is with a member of that club board?
A couple of years ago I personally had that problem, and did take it to the chair of CLC, you would have thought that I had started WWIII. A few days ago, I heard from another resident who is in the same situation and is finding herself “ghosted” by the board member she has a problem with and CLC seems to prefer to “kick the can down the road.” My question is why make rules you don’t intend to follow?
It is also humorous that the CLC guidelines insist that you take the issue to the club Board but in the case of many of the Clubs – the Board members do not have their emails on the club website. Some provide phone numbers and I suppose one could call each Board member and request their email or have individual conversations with each Board member – which would be very time consuming.
Many of the Clubs have an opportunity to send a message – you don’t know who is receiving it or whether they would share it with the rest of the board and of course that gives them your contact information, but you don’t have theirs.
I understand the CLC even suggested an anonymous letter dropped in the Club mailbox – but again – who will receive it – will they share it? In complete contradiction to the CLC guidelines as provided herein, one Club that I am aware of even lists all their current members – no designation as to whom the officers are, but every member’s first and last names listed.
So, the question arises, who is watching the store? Does the CLC have a purpose and if so, what is it?April 22, 2023 at 12:31 pm #8110Elizabeth BreierParticipant
The CLC requires that a club member with an “issue” or complaint should contact the entire Board of that Club. It would seem to me that it would be kind if they CLC would at least require the Clubs to make the contact information (email) of all Board members readily available. As I peruse the clubs on the SCA website I notice that many do not provide that information. Rather, there is a have a link to a message center and then of course the sender has no idea who is actually receiving the message and if it is being shared with the entire Board as is required by the CLC Guidelines. I also noted approximately 4 Clubs that list their membership – and while the contact information is not available, I am not clear as to how this is allowable in light of the fact that the Clubs must protect members’ privacy. So, in answer to the question, who is watching the store? Not sure anyone is.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.