Association Forum - Elections-By-Law Changes

Assn Members Area · Join

Home.

Association Forum

Ships Store

Cruising

Racing

Technical Tips

Photo Gallery - New

Boat Search - Updated

Manuals & Brochures

Swap Meet

Links

Officer Flag Line & Staff

Bylaws & Constitution

Members Area

Join the Association

Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Association Forum

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

Catalina/Capri 25/250 Sailor's Forums

General Sailing Forum

Elections-By-Law Changes

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

sailing2
Deckhand

Member Avatar

USA
23 Posts

Initially Posted - 10/20/2004 : 15:24:09

I am voting against most of the proposed By Law changes because they do not adequately address the issues. I am also urging all Association Members to do the same for the following objective and subjective reasons.

Objective:

The Objectives stated in the Association’s Constitution are quite clear that the intent, sub paragraph A, is to ensure competition between boats of identical design and performance in all essential areas such as hull lines, weights, and sail plan and sub paragraph B that it is to test the skills of the skipper and crew. Both of these paragraphs clearly supports the racing rules as written, rule E1a that “Spinnaker sails are authorized and may be used in the National Championship Regatta and all sanctioned Regattas as a separate spinnaker class.” Rule P, Interpretation, 1998 states that: “The Standard and Tall rigs shall race as separate classes.”

Both of these existing Catalina 25 Design Racing Rules supports the Association’s Objectives as stated in its Constitution. As written there could be four separate classes depending on participation, C25 standard rig, C 25 tall rig, and both with or without spinnaker. (I personally favor no spinnakers for the national championship, more on that later.) I believe that these four divisions level the playing field of major differences between boats and sail plans. Examples that come to mind are:

1. The tall rig gives time to the standard rig under PHRF. In light to normal wind conditions a tall rig has a distinct overall performance advantage over the standard rig. As the wind builds to the moderate to high range the two rigs performance tends to equalize. NOTE: I have raced against tall rigs and know that as soon as the wind pipes up and our standard rig approaches hull speed the tall rig and standard rig become more equal in performance.

2. In light to normal wind conditions the added sail area of a boat with a spinnaker has a definite advantage over the boat with just a genoa. The standard rig Catalina 25 carries approximately 376 square feet of working sail, main and genoa. The spinnaker adds approximately 504 square feet to this sail plan which is an increase of 134%. Assuming that the Genoa is not used when the spinnaker is flying, subtract 244 square feet, this is still a whapping 69% increase in sail area over the jib and main rig. Again as the wind becomes stronger and the jib and main boat is able to maintain hull speed the non spinnaker and spinnaker rigs become more equal in performance.

3. PHRF ratings do not take into account factors such as persistent currents found in most rivers. On a windward leeward course when a windward leg with the current takes 15 minutes to sail and the reverse downwind leg takes 45 minutes against the current the boat with a spinnaker has a great advantage. It is like sailing one leg upwind and three downwind. If the wind was reversed and the windward leg was against the current and the downwind leg was with the current then the Genoa only boats would have the clear advantage. Also PHRF ratings do not adequately address the variable wind speeds in regard to differences in performance of either the Catalina 25 tall or standard rigs and weather they have or do not have spinnakers.

The Association’s Constitution is quite clear on the intent of providing a level playing field when racing so that the skill of the skipper and crew is the determining factor of who wins or looses. The board proposes to move the requirement of separate classes for tall and standard rigs from the interpretation section to the main body of the Association By-Laws. This is OK, there is no change to the substance of the By-Laws and is still supports the Association’s Constitution. I see that combining the spinnaker and non spinnaker fleet into one and using PHRF to equalizing their respective performance as being against the Associations Constitution as written. I also wonder why the board thinks it is OK to maintain the tall rig and standard rig as separate classes and combine spinnaker and non spinnaker. I ask the question should we change the Association’s Constitution to do away with its provision of leveling the field so the skipper and crews skill can determine who wins and looses and combine tall rigs and spinnaker and non spinnaker fleets into one and add all those variables that a PHRF or for that matter any rating system is supposed to equalize? I do not think so.

Subjective:

Having sailed and raced in many local, state, regional, and national regattas, in various one design class boats including both the Catalina 22 and 25 and with the added perspective gained from racing on other sized boats one must remember: KEEP IT SIMPLE, and KEEP IN MIND WHO YOUR SAILORS ARE. Most Catalina 25 and 250 sailors are family-inclusive and not hard core racers. This is not to say there are no hard core racers, heck I certainly try to win rather than loose. Most hard core racers tend to gravitate to the higher performance boats such as the various J classes, Olson’s, and Santana’s. At the level of most Catalina 25/250 sailors racing makes them more comfortable and safe cruisers who will use their sailboats more and take them to places they otherwise wouldn’t have. Racing with jib and main with a few extra races for those who want to fly spinnakers will get the most “bang for the buck” for most people, and most people sailing Catalina 25s/250s use them in that configuration most of the time. Except for the demands of some locations because of area constrictions or wind conditions, the widest use of Catalina 25s/250s is the jib and main configuration. Most owners and therefore most potential participants for national regattas would come from this group. So we should go to our strength with the most emphasis. I support a separate tall and standard rig class using jib and main. If there are some that would like to test their skills with spinnakers then add a few races for them as an add-on. We have all witnessed the slow shrinking of various groups who lost sight of there broad membership and what interests those members had.

Other Issues:

Our Commodore made the following statement in the October Telltale: “In order for the proposal to pass it must be approved by a 2/3 majority of those members voting.”

I am confused the only reference I can find in our Association Constitution and By Laws is 2/3 majority of the Regular members in good standing. So if the association has 600 regular members in good standing then it would take 401 “yes” votes to pass.

I am also confused over the statement our Commodore made that paragraph L presently allows combining jib and main and Spinnaker fleets into one fleet and applying a handicap. Paragraph L specifically states that “…under no circumstance will equipment be permitted which is not allowable under the rules governing the class.” The present rules clearly state that spinnaker sails are authorized and may be used in the National Championship Regatta and all sanctioned Regattas as a separate spinnaker class. Under the present rules paragraph L does not allow combining the jib and main and spinnaker fleets into one class.

Scott Hefty
Ho'O Kolohe C25 #5539

Edited by - sailing2 on 11/01/2004 16:05:46

JimB517
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
3285 Posts

Response Posted - 10/20/2004 : 18:30:12

All I can add is this. There was a HUGE debate running for the last few months between the officers and staff regarding the proposed rule changes. The objective was to consider what occured at the last Nationals, level the playing field for Kansas, and make a better race for our members. Everyone involved worked very hard towards this end.

I am not an experienced racer, so I stayed out of the discussion other than to state my position to keep the number of classes as small as possible. Only about 20 boats show up for these races.

The decision was made not to bring this discussion to the general Forum. Bring it to a vote, yes.

I don't know about the number of votes required to pass, but I'll tell you this, we'll most likely not get even 100 votes cast.

Your TellTale Editor,

JimB

Edited by - JimB517 on 10/20/2004 18:30:57

sailing2
Deckhand

Members Avatar

USA
23 Posts

Response Posted - 10/20/2004 : 19:44:27

JimB
I am glad that you feel the way you do about limiting the number of classes. This is exactly what I was addressing in the subjective part of my discussion. To reach the most sailors, keep the lowest number of classes, and to keep within the Association’s Constitutional Objectives is why I proposed having a separate tall and standard rig class limited to main and jib. This reaches buy far the largest number of Catalina owners with the fewest number of classes.

Edited by - on

Sea Trac
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Vanuatu
1357 Posts

Response Posted - 10/20/2004 : 20:54:04

Scott,

Thank you for caring enough, and taking the time, to seriously evaluate the proposed Design Class Rules; open discussion amongst the members on the ballot issue is both welcome and encouraged. I'm sure many, myself included, are printing out the current rules, the proposed changes and your comments for a more thorough review.

For clarification purposes, however, the balloting instructions were incorrect. The Constitution and By-Laws are governed separately from the Design Class Rules. Therefore, the balloted modification vote shall be carried based upon Paragraph O ("Revision of Design Class Rules") of the current Design Class Rules which state:

1. Ballots will be made available at the time of publication and voting will close by the date printed on the ballot. Results are to be published in the first issue of Mainsheet or TellTale following the balloting.

2. Only Catalina 25/250 owners are eligible to vote (only one vote per boat), balloting, etc., in any election.

3. Any interpretations of these Rules by the Rules Committee shall be published annually when the rules are published but the interpretation shall not be considered a part of the rules.

Generally accepted voting procedures hold that a majority of the votes cast is required to carry an issue unless special conditions are specifically stated, such as the supermajority condition stated in Paragraph IX of the Constitution and By-Laws. However, Paragraph IX of the Constitution and By-Laws only addresses the issue of voting on amendments to the Constitution and By-Laws themselves.

Thanks again for your participation!

Edited by - Sea Trac on 10/20/2004 20:56:24

ClamBeach
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

3072 Posts

Response Posted - 10/20/2004 : 21:05:33

If you don't have enough spinnaker boats, why couldn't you let the tall, std and 250 spinnaker boats race together with PHRF handicaps? These folks should be used to PHRF racing and if they don't feel they could get a 'fair' class under regatta conditions, I guess they could always elect to fall back to the appropriate jib and main class. (before racing starts of course)

That would give 3 classes.. tall j&m, std j&m, and spinnaker w/handicap (given not enough boats showing up).

This might aslo give the 'family' boats a more even class as I think the spinnaker class would attract the more serious racers.

Edited by - on

coach
Navigator

Members Avatar

USA
231 Posts

Response Posted - 10/20/2004 : 22:13:54

Tall rigs and standards should have their own classes when it comes to racing. No PERFs should be used.

To me it would be the equivalent of racing Indy cars vs CART cars. They are pretty much the same thing, but not.

Edited by - on

Frank Hopper
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

Pitcairn Island
6776 Posts

Response Posted - 10/20/2004 : 22:28:18

What about the 250 non spinnaker fleet? That makes four.

I did not participate in the officer and staff discussions of these rules. I tried to supply some information to some of the participants but that is all. Discussing anything other than an up or down vote is a red herring. The ballot is set and the questions posted. People SHOULD campaign for their position on the questions, that is awesome involvement. Early on in this discussion the general membership was asked for ideas, now they are being asked for their vote. I hope these issues are refined every year until our organization reflects the most realistic racing scenario possible. This is a start.

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5909 Posts

Response Posted - 10/21/2004 : 10:00:10

I am voting in favor of all the proposed rules changes, and urge others to do so as well.

All these issues have been discussed extensively in open forum as well as off-line among the officers and others.

1. Should C25 Standard Rigs and Tall Rigs race in separate classes?

The rule has always required standard rig C25s and tall rig C25s to race in separate classes, and they have, in fact, always raced separately. But that rule is not as clearly stated as it should be, resulting in repeated debates over the subject. In about 1997, the national association issued a written "interpretation" of the rule, to clarify it, but that wasn't enough to stop the debate. Unending debate over fundamental matters such as this is undesirable, because these issues are never settled, and disagreements sometimes become unpleasant. The rule should be clear enough so that everyone can understand it. The proposed rule change clearly and unequivocally provides that "The Standard and Tall rigs shall race as separate classes."

2. Should C25 Spinnaker boats race in separate classes?
Presently, the rules require that spinnaker boats race in a separate class from other boats of the same class. The proposed rule requires that spinnaker boats and JAM (Jib and Main) boats all race against each other in a single class, and that spinnaker boats be handicapped to equalize them.

To the best of my knowledge, the existing rule has been in effect since the rules were first written, but, in all those years, it has never been followed. By changing the written rule, we are simply legitimizing the practice that the association has followed for all these years.

I have raced in five national regattas, and have seen that spinnaker boats and JAM boats can compete fairly against each other when appropriately handicapped. (I race JAM, and don't feel that I am at a disadvantage when racing against spinnakers.) In most national regattas, the number of boats that want to fly spinnakers is so small that a separate spinnaker classs would consist of only one or two boats, and that isn't enough to justify a separate class. If only one spinnaker boat shows up in both the standard rig and tall rig divisions, then those boats will automatically win their national championship without having to compete against anyone. That result is ludicrous. Moreover, for each spinnaker boat that is put into a separate class, there will be one less boat in either the standard rig or tall rig class. Because the tall rig class, on average, only has about three boats racing in the average national regatta, that means the size of the tall rig class would usually be too small.

The proposed changes also allow the use of assymetrical spinnakers, with appropriate handicaps. Many of our members like to fly assymetrical spinnakers, and if that can be allowed fairly, with a reasonable handicap, I see no reason why they should not be allowed to do so.

I certainly see no reason to disallow spinnakers in the national regatta. While most participants at most C25 national regattas do not use spinnakers, there are usually some who do. If they can all race fairly against each other with an appropriate handicap, why shouldn't they be allowed to do so? Why should the national association tell our members who love to fly spinnakers that they can't use them in their national regatta? That would discourage people from participating in the event when we want to encourage them to participate.

Scotty argues that spinnaker boats have an inordinate advantage when the race course is on a river with a strong current. I'm not sure the current has anything to do with it, because I suspect the current affects all the hulls the same, whether the boat is flying JAM or spinnaker. But, the wind direction is certainly an important factor. If the race course has an exceptionally long downwind leg, the spinnaker boat has an advantage. When the racecourse is on a river, it might not be possible to set up the racecourse in any other way than a windward-leeward.

The only national regatta that I know of that has been on a river was last years, and, even though the winds were very light, it was the most successful regatta in years. In yacht racing, local conditions often temporarily make one boat or another more competitive. In the America's Cup, for example, a flimsily designed and constructed boat might not be able to cope with the winds and seas encountered off Freemantle. To me, it is challenging to race on a different kind of course every once-in-a-while, although I might not want to do it all the time. You should write the rules to cover the usual conditions. If a rare and unusual condition creates a rare, anomalous result, that's just a risk of competition. On one day the wind is blowing in a certain direction, and on another day it is not. You shouldn't write the rules to try to cover the eccentricities of a rare and unusual race course. The eccentricity of the race course is one consideration that should be made in selecting a site for the event.

Scotty asks the following question: "I also wonder why the board thinks it is OK to maintain the tall rig and standard rig as separate classes and combine spinnaker and non spinnaker."

As Scotty points out, standard and tall rig boats perform quite differently in different wind strengths, and I don't believe they can be handicapped in a way that would permit them to race fairly against each other in one class. But, when all tall rigs (for example) are racing against each other in the same class, there are nationally accepted handicaps that can be applied to enable spinnaker and JAM boats to compete against each other fairly.

I have discussed the proposals in the context of C25s because that is the context of Scotty's comments. The reasoning that supports the C250 proposals is the same.

These proposed rules changes were devised by a group of people who represented the interests of tall rig and standard rig sailors, and spinnaker and JAM sailors, and everyone vigorously represented his own interests, but also considered the interests of others with a spirit of fairness. These proposals are good and important changes, and they should all be made in the best interests of the association and its members.

Edited by - on

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3324 Posts

Response Posted - 10/21/2004 : 11:02:17

Perfectly put, as usual Steve!
I agree with all of your comments and reasoning.
Derek

Edited by - on

Buzz Maring
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1772 Posts

Response Posted - 10/21/2004 : 11:20:05

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Derek Crawford
 Perfectly put, as usual Steve!
I agree with all of your comments and reasoning.
Derek
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I concur completely. Thanks for the excellent explanation, Steve. For those of us who don't race, your explanation was a godsend.

Frankly, after I read Scotty's post, I was beginning to wonder if I had made the wrong choice when I cast my vote in favor of the changes ... now I'm convinced the changes (as Frank put it) are a step in the right direction.

As a side note to Scotty ... thank you for your input! Whether or not the changes to the bylaws pass, I hope you stick around the Forum ... we need honest, well-thought-out opinions like yours to keep us headed in the right direction.

Edited by - on

wmeinert@kconline.com
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
353 Posts

Response Posted - 10/21/2004 : 11:44:01

OK Guys,

#1 This form is over run with just a few simple minds that obviously have the time to think about racing rules. They are but a few and if the rest of the membership ever piped in all at once we would never get anything done, (Unfortunetly)

#2 We keep comparing classes of boats to boats with out a successfull solution. If we are going to have a balance Nationals every year, lets just worry about that format, and let the local fleets take care of their own class issues.

#3 From my perspective, the reason why we as a fleet never get coverage on a national level (magazine, papers and journals) is because we can't even come up with ONE single champion! We want to have three or four. When I won the 2003 championship (C-25)STD I still did not win it All. There were two other skippers who I would have liked to have beaten as well, but accept for boat class.

#4 Here is a thought, we have at least five fleets, instead of having to worry about all the classes, how about on a rotational basis lets identify the boat of choice for the Nationals and only have the one class with composit crews that share knowlege, expences, fleet spirit, and the same BOAT. Lets make being the National Champion a NATIONAL TITLE that we all can be proud of. Instead of the current local knowlege issues over the last 4-5 years.

#5 Let's Table this matter until an Elected Pannel(non officers) given a Task Goal can come to the table with a solid propsal for all to vote on. Then we need to unite the masses and support the change. Change is not always a bad deal if it is fair accross the board. We are dealing with a boat that is over 20 years old and in need of a repair. Unlike "J" boats that were designed as a racing class we were not. But our boats can be very competeative if we form the "racing Class" and restrict it to racing at the National Level Only. But then we as an Association will have to pay the respect and dividends to the National CHAMP. We, at least in my opinion don't do that very well. Think about it, off the top of your heads who are our National Champs, are we proud of them, and how do we show it!

Bill the L O N G Wind Guy.

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 10/21/2004 : 12:09:30

As another non-racing, non-Nationals-participant, I voted FOR the changes based on the following principles:

1. They were arrived at after open discussion here, followed by long debate and discussion by the people we elected to perform that function. (Thus, my vote was primarily a vote in support of our leaders and the process.)

2. They are apparently based on practical experience at recent Nationals--considering particularly the number of participants in the various categories--balancing fairness and participation. Until we have 50 boats showing up, that will always be a challenge.

3. They can be changed in the future to reflect the latest experiences.

Thanks to all...

Edited by - on

Dave Bristle
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
10005 Posts

Response Posted - 10/21/2004 : 12:42:06

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Steve Milby
 ...Scotty argues that spinnaker boats have an inordinate advantage when the race course is on a river with a strong current. I'm not sure the current has anything to do with it, because I suspect the current affects all the hulls the same, whether the boat is flying JAM or spinnaker. But, the wind direction is certainly an important factor. If the race course has an exceptionally long downwind leg, the spinnaker boat has an advantage...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Hmmmmm... Wouldn't wind that's against the current have exactly the effect of making the downwind leg disproportionately long?

Edited by - on

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3324 Posts

Response Posted - 10/21/2004 : 12:49:38

Bill, with all due respect I could not disagree more...
Unfortunately, we are not a One Design Class like the J-boats, and we have to accept that fact. If we limit the Nationals to a one-version boat on a rotational basis, then 4 out of 5 years we would have a pitiful attendance - only the standard rigs seem to turn out in decent numbers.
We started with 2 Champions (STD & TR) and when the C250 was produced we added a 3rd trophy (The C22's don't even allow their Mark II's to attend Nationals!)
It is my belief that the Officer's have attempted to solve the problem in the fairest way possible. If we have to adjust ratings for various configurations, so be it - the important thing is to have as level a playing field as possible.
Derek

Edited by - on

aeckhart
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
1709 Posts

Response Posted - 10/21/2004 : 12:51:09

Gents,

I know I'm probably beating a dead horse here but it occurred to me that spinnakers are not the only differences that effect performance. My tall rig/wing keel for instance, is equipped with an asym cruising spinnaker, a 150 and 110 jennys, and, when the wind really pipes up, a 60% working jib. My main has two reefs, a loose foot, and the largest roach allowed under PHRF rules. The main also has an internal outhaul with 4:1 mechanical advantage, and the boom is supported by a rigid vang. So, am I over-equipped for the nationals? Am I more competetive than the average family tall rig/wing keel in a variety of wind conditions? The answer is of course, YES. My final question than is, to equalize the playing field what do I leave home or do I bring it all?

Al
GALLIVANT #5801

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5909 Posts

Response Posted - 10/21/2004 : 13:43:04

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">#1 This form is over run with just a few simple minds that obviously have the time to think about racing rules. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">Obviously you're not referring to you and me. It's all the rest of these guys....

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">#2 If we are going to have a balance Nationals every year, lets just worry about that format, and let the local fleets take care of their own class issues.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> The national rules only govern regattas that are sanctioned by the national association, not local regattas.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">#3 From my perspective, the reason why we as a fleet never get coverage on a national level (magazine, papers and journals) is because we can't even come up with ONE single champion!<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> The rules don't prohibit the sponsoring club from handicapping all the boats (C25 TR, C25 SR and C250), and awarding a special trophy to an overall winner. It could have been done by the local organizers in your national regatta. Whichever boat turned in the best times, after figuring the handicaps, would have been declared the overall winner.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">#4 Here is a thought, we have at least five fleets, instead of having to worry about all the classes, how about on a rotational basis lets identify the boat of choice for the Nationals and only have the one class with composit crews that share knowlege, expences, fleet spirit, and the same BOAT.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> This takes the idea of one-design racing much too seriously for a boat that is essentially a cruiser-racer. It is suggested that we will race only C25 standard rigs in one year, C25 Tall Rigs in the next year, and C250's in the third year, or some similar sequence. If your boat is a C250, for example, it means you might have to wait three years before you will be able to race your own boat in a national regatta. If the national regatta happens to be held on the west coast, and you live on the east coast, you might have to haul your boat across the entire US to race, or wait for another three years, in the hope that the next national regatta will be closer to you. In "off-years," you can try to find a crewing spot on a C25.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">#5 Let's Table this matter until an Elected Pannel(non officers) given a Task Goal can come to the table with a solid propsal for all to vote on. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">A ballot is currently before the members to approve some straightforward rules changes that were made after thorough discussion among officers and members alike. Please just take a few minutes to read the proposals and vote on them. Rules revision is an ongoing process, and we can take it up again next year if someone comes up with a new idea that the members find appealing. Anyone can open a discussion of any such idea at any time on this forum.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Am I over-equipped for the nationals?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"> Al, the rules allow up to 3 headsails and 2 spinnakers. Your sails would have to be measured to be sure they conform to the limitations of the rules, but the mind-set of the Chief Measurer is usually weighted towards approving them in a close case, rather than preventing the owner from competing. The roach on the mainsail isn't measured. I don't know for sure about whether some of your hardware would be considered legal or not, but it would be easy enough to change it out temporarily, if necessary, until the regatta is over. Bring all your stuff, and the Chief Measurer will tell you if there's anything you can't use. Some of us have extra sails and hardware, and would be happy to loan them to someone, if his own sail didn't pass measurement.

Edited by - Steve Milby on 10/21/2004 14:06:03

Topic

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Jump To:

Association Forum

Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.