I would first like to say, in response to a negative posting about the
AMICA convention, that I _did_ respond to the person who emailed asking
for a reduced fee -- twice. The first response was, "I'll ask and get
back to you", the second response was something like, "The committee
says 'no', but I'll continue to advocate for you".
It is rather unfair for this person to claim he never got a response.
All email on the web site came through me, and I personally responded
to both emails.
As for the cost of the convention: as a person who was on the planning
committee, I can say that the committee worked as hard as possible to
keep the cost to a minimum. There were many things we decided to not
do, based on the cost. One simply cannot put on a 5-day convention for
150 people at a low cost. Hotels that can handle 150 people not only
for rooms, but for meeting rooms, meals, etc, are going to be on the
high end of cost for what they provide.
Here is an example. Two of us who put on workshops desired internet
access. The price quoted by the hotel was $250 per meeting room per
day. Two of us wanted to have projectors for our computers -- we were
quoted $200 per day per meeting room. These costs being in addition
to the costs of the meeting rooms. This does not even take into
consideration the 13.5% "gratuity fee" applied to everything by the
hotel: rent an easel, pay the rent plus 13.5%. The fee applied not
only to food service but to _everything_ the hotel provided.
At every committee meeting we would go over the cost estimates as
compared to the final actual costs and reduce one thing to balance out
increased costs in another area.
I would also like to point out that the convention was basically a
"break even" proposition for the chapter. Everyone, including local
chapter members, paid the convention fee; even those people who put in
hours and hours of work paid the fee. There are a lot of costs people
might not think of, such as paying piano movers to bring in all the
various pianos that were used (around $1500).
I will not personally defend the committee's decision as far as "all
or nothing", but I do believe the writer was somewhat unfair in the
rest of his posting.
John Miller
Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA
|