If you don't care about any of this and want to know what happened to the sailsea.org website, skip to the Domain Name section.
I became aware of SEA in June, 2000. I received an email from someone on the board after I posted a request for crew on sfsailing.com. Shortly thereafter, I joined the organization and began teaching sailing. I joined the board in late 2002, and I became president of the board the following year. I was reelected to the board by the membership and as president by board members unanimously five time in succession (2003 through 2007).
Every year at the first board meeting, the election of the new officers takes place... e.g., president, treasurer, etc. At every meeting I've attended during my tenure on the board no one expressed any interest in being president (not to mention other positions), and since nobody else was willing, I agreed to do it. The time commitment I found to be huge, especially when there was a contract or legal issue involved or when there is a new hire. My best guess is that it can easily exceed 40 hours per month. For example, when the last program manager was hired, she called me three or four times a day for months! No complaint intended, just a fact of life. At one point, I was working in the office three days a week, all of this unpaid of course.
In addition, it's typically very difficult to get anyone to join the board. I've asked people repeatedly over the years, and they've mostly declined.
My goal throughout my administration over the five years was to expand the organization to include a more robust sailing program. Revenue and membership increased, and we increased our community involvement and outreach. Think Sail Camp, Camp Clipper, etc.
Many of the current and most of the previous board members were students of mine. During my years at the organization, I taught a significant number of the membership in the adult, keelboat program. I considered many of the members my friends, but when things started to go south, I only heard from a scant few, and in recent months, nobody. You've heard the term fair-weather friends?
You can read more about Perez in the Libel, Dept. of Justice Complaint, Accusations, Misrepresentation, and Lies sections.
I agreed that it should be allowed, since he had apparently expressed an interest in the position. I regret that decision for a number of reasons, one of which is that it really didn't jibe with the spirit of the bylaws' requirement to give a "reasonable opportunity for all members to choose among the nominees."
In any case, Joyce was defeated in the election by a very narrow vote, and Ken joined the board. I sincerely regret how this happened, and not just because of his future behavior. In hindsight, I don't think Joyce was treated properly, and I hold myself responsible for not treating her with the respect she deserved. She was and has been continually involved in the organization, never failing to participate when volunteers were needed. Perez also volunteered, but he should have been required to present himself to the general membership or deliver a written statement, as all the other candidates did in advance of the meeting.
In any case, Ken Perez joined the board, and he very quickly began a campaign against me.
One of the many things I volunteered to do at SEA was to publish The Masthead, our (mostly) quarterly newsletter. In the course of getting one together, I asked Perez to revise an article he submitted via Ted Miller. Here's the email. It seems pretty mellow to me, but you decide. (Apparently, the Masthead is no longer being published, which is too bad.)
Hi Ken,
I hope all is going well!
Ted forwarded me your article for the Masthead, and I was wondering if
you could help me out.
I'd like to publish it, but in its present form, it probably not
appropriate. Basically, it highlights a dangerous situation that
shouldn't have happened. While the article reads really well, it is in
a sense airing our "dirty laundry" to the membership.
I was wondering if you'd be willing to rework it from the perspective,
say, of how to make sure the proper maintenance should be done and
what the consequences are if a rig fails. Unfortunately, it's going to
take some of the excellent drama out of the article, but I think it'll
be more appropriate.
What do you think? If so, I need it back asap.
I've included a Word doc that has your article.
Regards,
From: JG
To: "Ken Perez"
Subject: Masthead article
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 19:51:54 -0800
Jonathan
I agree that the article may need expansion of its material on proper
maintenance and check-ups, which is why I included a link to another
article wich goes into great detail about standing rigging care and
maintenance. Perhaps this article can include some of its more salient
points. However,
The only dirty laundry stories I know about dangerous situations in
the club so far involve the following:
Wayne and crew banging into another boat and creating not only serious
damage to another vessel but also a liability, banishment and scorn
from a specific area of Richardson Bays' live aboard residents,
Wayne flipping over a dinghie with crew
Sandor present while a boat almost sank and losing a mast,
resulting in wirecutters that are now kept aboard vessels;
The floating dock being towed with members and catching a bow wave and
spilling all riders who then needed rescue;
and you probably know many more 'events'. These are just a few that
Ive heard down the grapevine in my 5 months of membership.
What I've rarely heard from other members is a story in which SEA
crew faced a dangerous situation and was able to recover rather
placidly due to the experience and expertise of those aboard.
While I would be more than happy to expand on maintenance and
emergency procedures, I am not convinced our little story deserves
dilution facing so many others members already know of albeit
subjectively percieved catastrophes.
In my opinion, members need to trust the new wave of checked out
skippers whom have no history of liability and accident, and in these
instances can improve upon the spots and loses of the past.
So, you can see that he's starting to lash out, or at least that's how
I read it. However, we let it drop and the article wasn't published. I
never received an update for this article, nor did Ken Perez submit any
other article.
Then, a few months later, during a discussion of acquiring liability
insurance, Perez was at it again. Notice the interesting use of
capitalization.
During the course of Perez' attempts to "get" me, he sent a complaint full of libelous material (typos included) to the California State Attorney General's office (the California Department of Justice).
The complaint, which you can read for yourself, alleged that I violated both the spirit and the letter of the laws governing registered non-profit organizations in the State of California.
I categorically denied and continue to deny these allegations. I drafted a response to the Attorney General.
Amazingly, at the time of the complaint, Mr. Perez was a board member of Sailing Education Adventures, and he had been fully educated on more than one occasion about the procedures he needed to follow to obtain this information. These procedures are documented in the Bylaws of the organization.
After Ken Perez submitted his complaint and after SEA's official response, which I drafted after hiring an attorney at my expense, he stopped attending board meetings and remained absent for the remainder of his term. Amazingly, Ken Perez was subsequently reelected to the board of directors. I was present at the annual meeting, and I found it curious that I received so few votes, given my long-standing involvement in the organization. While I can't prove fraud in the vote count, I found it disturbing that he was "hovering" around the people counting the ballots.
According to recent information from the current program director, Mike Mason, Perez is "no longer with the organization," due to a "combination of bad behavior, behind-the-scenes scandal mongering, and failing to attend board meetings." This is the same sort of behavior that Perez engaged in during his campaign to have me removed from the board and from being reelected, as I later found out. He was, apparently, spreading lies about me throughout the membership via email and in person. If you want to see an example, keep reading.
Even though I brought it up continuously, the SEA board was uninterested in being diligent about following USCG regulations. At one point, I decided to resign, changed my mind, thinking I might be able to work it out, then changed my mind again, determined to resign, but I never got the chance before I was removed as President.
Another board member became totally disillusioned and tendered his resignation at a board meeting, when the other members tried to remove me the first time. I convinced him not to resign at that moment, but he did anyway a couple of weeks later.
During the process of removing me from office, I was accused of several things, all of which were either made up or gross distortions. While there's no doubt that the original perpetrator was Perez, he was aided and abetted by Tom Volts, who accused me of "modifying the bylaws" inappropriately. The email he sent is in the Accusations, Misrepresentations, and Lies section. Note the last sentence, which I've highlighted in bold. (Bascially, he didn't do much research - just enough to accuse me without foundation!)
This was promoted in public to the rest of the board by Robert van Gool and then quickly retracted.
Prior to Perez' complaints about me and the organization, I took it upon myself to ensure SEA's compliance by volunteering to teach, without pay of course, all the intermediate and advanced classes involving paying students on sailboats with auxiliary engines. In fact, I did teach all of them except the last one of the 2007 season. Why not that one? Read the next section.
As far as I can tell, SEA is no longer "teaching" on the auxiliary sailboats, at least not openly. Fancy footwork aside, let's hope that's the case, since it's both a safety and legal issue. I was honestly shocked when I attended the 2007 annual meeting and John Paul Watts confessed to me to "not really ... knowing" some of the restricted visibility light and signal "Rules of the Road" (even though he was taking members on night sails on the bay and beyond).
Gary Harbison was the same person who, when not selected by the board to be the program director (a position offered and accepted by Russ Huebschle), cancelled his commitment at the last minute to be the chef at SEA's annual SEAfood BBQ on Angel Island. In addition, his wife (Tina Lewenhaupt) refused to release the graphics work she was doing on behalf of the organization. As a result, we had to scramble to find a new chef and recreate the logo graphics.
Don't believe me? Check out the email exchange here.
Subsequent to and after my removal from the organization, the board of directors refused to honor my repeated requests to remove my name from their website information. It remains there today.
I know for a fact that they received my requests, because I got the following "return receipt" from Gary Harbison's email program:
Subject: Read: remove me from your website and change the whois info
Your message
To: abbe@abbedaymerchant.com; Gary Harbison;
was read on Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:42:57 -0800
Final-Recipient: RFC822; gharbison@calhydro.com
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:42:57 -0800
From: "Gary Harbison"
To: "JG"
ocean2sierras@yahoo.com; sctm2002@yahoo.com; wayne.m@sbcglobal.net;
hubenschlagen@gmail.com; info@sailsea.org
Cc: domain.admin@site5.com
Subject: remove me from your website and change the whois info
Sent: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 23:00:36 -0800
Disposition: automatic-action/MDN-sent-automatically; displayed
X-MSExch-Correlation-Key: 35R05tkFi0aV69G6O+8NXA==
I didn't cash the check for several reasons. No specific cause was described that would constitute termination, and:
The relevant Bylaws section follows Sue Miller's letter. (Note that this was send via the US Postal Service not via email as indicated in the "letter" that follows.
Of course, nobody responded.
\no letterhead\
December 6th, 2007
Dear Mr. Ganz,
In accordance with SEA's Bylaws under Section 7.b., please accept this
email as notification of termination of your membership with our
organization, Sailing Education Adventures, effective immediately.
We, the Board, have authorized the office to send you a check to
reimburse you, on a prorated basis, for the 25 days remaining on your
2007 membership, which is 25 days /365 x $75.00 annual membership or
an amount of $5.14 that you will receive in the mail shortly.
Furthermore, in accordance with Section 8 of our Bylaws, all rights of
your membership shall cease upon termination of this membership as
herein provided.
If you have any questions or comments, you may contact me directly at
1-415-806-4501 as the representative of the Board in this matter.
Sue Currie President, SEA
ARTICLE 12 - MEMBERS
SECTION 7. TERMINATION OF MEMBERSHIP
Grounds for Termination: The membership of a member shall terminate
upon the occurrence of any of the following events:
(a) Upon his or her notice of such termination delivered to the
President or Secretary of the corporation personally or by mail, such
membership to terminate upon the date of delivery of the notice or
date of deposit in the mail.
SECTION 8. RIGHTS ON TERMINATION OF MEMBERSHIP
All rights of a member in the corporation shall cease on termination
of membership as herein provided.
(b) Upon a determination by the Board of Directors that the member has
engaged in conduct materially and seriously prejudicial to the
interests or purposes of the corporation.
(c) If this corporation has provided for the payment of dues by
members, upon a failure to renew his or her membership by paying dues
on or before their due date, such termination to be effective thirty
(30) days after notification of delinquency is given personally or
mailed to such member by the Secretary of the corporation. A member
may avoid such termination by paying the amount of delinquent dues
within a thirty (30)-day period following the member's receipt of the
notification of delinquency.
Sue Currie, President
Sailing Education Adventures
Building 35 South, Upper Fort Mason
San Francisco, CA 94123
Re: Termination of membership
Dear Ms. Currie,
I am returning your check of $5.14 for the prorated portion of my 2007 membership for the following reasons.
You have not identified any action on my part that could be construed under the requirements of Article 12, Section 7 of the Bylaws to be materially and seriously prejudicial to the interests or purposes of the corporation either within the letter containing the check, in person, via telephone, or by e-mail.
You have not given me an opportunity to address whatever concerns you may have, nor have you given me an opportunity to defend myself, confront opposing witnesses, or hear the evidence against me, as required by Due Process.
I would like to remind you that whatever actions I've taken were to ensure that the organization remained within the law and were strictly for the safety of the members.
I expect you to reinstate my membership for the remainder of 2007, not prevent me from renewing my membership without showing good cause, and restore to me all privileges that go along with my membership.
I have not asked for nor will I accept money.
In a somewhat recent conversation (November, 2008) the current program director (Michael Mason) indicated that a letter of apology sent to me and copying the membership as a whole might be appropriate.
Belated though it would be, I agreed, but no such letter was forthcoming.
The following items should be considered. The one in bold is non-negotiable. None of these requests would cost SEA a dime and would likely result in increased income to the organization.
If you're reading this, that means I have not received a response to my repeated inquiries.
PIU Complaint: 176578
Below is the result of the feedback form.
It was submitted by kendowit@hotmail.com
========== DOJ USE ONLY ==========
NEW_TYPE:
========== DOJ USE ONLY ==========
TYPE: CPL
First Name: ken
Middle Initial:
Last Name: perez
Address Line: 1025 powell st
Address Line 2: #32
City: San Francisco
State: CA
Zip: 94107
Zip4:
Area Code: 415
Phone Number: 5592241
Company Name: Sailing Education Adventures
Company Address Line: Building 35 South
Company Address Line 2: Upper Fort Mason
Company City: San Francisco
Company State: CA
Company Zip: 94123
Company Zip4:
Company Area Code: 415
Company Phone Number: 7758779
Comment Or Question Message: I contact the president of the non profit, as a boar member, twice via email asking for:
1. date current board members originally elected
2. terms of each board member, and when they are up for re-election
3. election procedure clarification
4. originally signed bylaws of the corporation
The president has refused to furnish information, even though he is fully aware the current secretary does not keep the election information, the president does, as it has been his policy for the last few years. No one else in the organization seems to keep track of election status/results.
My first request from the president via email was two weeks ago, the second was sent last week.
While the president enjoys following parliamentary procedures and is mostly likely expecting a written notice of phone call, I do not feel it necessary to take it to that level to get simple elected officers information.
The president is Jonathan Ganz.
Affirm Information Accurate: Yes
Send This Complaint: Yes
Request Copy: Yes
Email: kendowit@hotmail.com
Confirm Email: kendowit@hotmail.com
[End of comment or complaint information]
Here is the PDF of the Department of Justice letter sent to SEA.
\SEA letterhead\
7/18/2007
State of California
Department of Justice
Public Inquiry Unit
PO Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
Attn: E. Brooks
RE: Notice of Complaint - PIU 176578
Dear Sir or Madam,
This letter is in response to the above referenced case number directed to Sailing Education Adventures, and more particularly, to the President, Jonathan Ganz.
I. The Complaint alleges that the President refused to provide certain information requested to a certain Ken Perez (hereinafter Complainant). The President denies the allegation.
More precisely, the President, based upon information and belief, responds:
1 that the information requested by the Complainant in items 1 - 4 of
the Complaint is available at the Corporation office;
2 that Complainant has been told both verbally and in writing that
this information is available at the Corporation office;
3 that Complainant has at no time contacted the secretary to determine
that the information is available at the office, and;
4 that Complainant has, as a matter of fact, made no bona fide effort
to acquire the information.
II. Complainant further implies in his complaint that the President is the sole maintainer of certain records and information, and that this is by his choice. This is categorically false. The Bylaws of the Corporation, in Section 7, specifically enumerates those records that must be kept, who may access them and how access for inspection is obtained, and where and when such access may be gained.
III. Lastly, the Complaint asserts a violation of California Corporate Code 8333. This section states:
"The accounting books and records and minutes of proceedings of the members and the board and committees of the board shall be open to inspection upon the written demand on the corporation of any member at any reasonable time, for a purpose reasonably related to such person's interests as a member."
Section 7 of the Bylaws addresses this code requirement directly. The language and enumerated documents put forth in the Bylaws were selected specifically to be in complete concert with the law. Since the sought after records are available at the office per both the Bylaws and California Corporate Code, the Complainant's complaint is baseless and meritless.
Should you require them, copies of the Bylaws, e-mail correspondence, and other corporate records can be made available upon request. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Ganz
President,
Sailing Education Adventures
\signature\
cc SEA office, Ken Perez
After the following email, NOT ONE member of board ever brought up either the letter, my response on behalf of the organization, or Perez' involvement.
Then, Tom went on in this email to castigate me for following the bylaws! (I did not included the emails here, due to them being tedious and long-winded at best. If you really want to read them, let me know.)
I was surprised in reading your email below that you have filed a
formal response to the AG that you neither reviewed with the rest of
the board in advance, or even copied us on when you filed it with the
AG. As you point out, this is a matter for the entire board to be
involved in, and I believe we should have been included in reviewing
the formal response before it was filed.
Either way, could you please send a copy of the formal response that
you have filed with the Attorney General, on behalf of SEA to the
board of directors? (As required in the
complaint, I copied SEA and Perez.)
And once again I think once again your summary of the bylaws is not
correct. Below you write....
And, he goes on and on and on, none it making any sense whatever.
I will not attend a board meeting until they are open to all. bylaws
do not require that i attend. save your calls. the membership demands
it and they will, if they are forced to, hold their own special
meeting and override your objections. just ask them.
I'm very concerned about the following statement that was sent to me
and that you were copied on at one point.
Please know that I have no interest in starting a fight here. I was
very clear at the end of the last Special Meeting that I was willing
to move forward, and Ken and I shook hands on it. I have also said
this to Ken privately a couple of times.
That said, I don't think it's appropriate for a board member to
boycott a regular board meeting in protest. I also don't think it's
appropriate for other board members to condone this sort of thing,
which is apparently the case. When we signed on as board members, we
agreed to attend all the working meetings.
Of course, things come up that are beyond our control, we have to
work, have family issues that need attention, etc. We all have a life
and other obligations. I get that, and I've missed meetings from time
to time over the years.
Ken says that he refuses to attend future meetings until we vote his
way. This is inappropriate in my opinion.
Is this what we've devolved into? Is this how the SEA board should
function? How can we have a discussion if board members refuse to
attend until we vote their way? Is this in the best interest of SEA?
Since I'm clearly not the right person to talk to Ken, perhaps someone
else can get clarification about his intentions about whether or not
he plans to attend future meetings.
As you know, we have serious legal issues to discuss at the upcoming
meeting. I've called and either spoken to or left messages for all of
you. So far, I've spoken with Jeff, Robert, Tom, Leslie, and Ted. Leah
is out of town, and I hope we can talk when she returns. I've not
received a return phone call from Ken, Karri, and Wayne.
Jonathan
Ken,
You've violated both the spirit and letter of the agreement that was
reached by unanimous consent at the previous Special Meeting by
emailing this to the membership. Please do not do this again. This
sort of internal communication is inappropriate to distribute. I know
you're a very angry person, but you're damaging the organization by
doing this. This is what you agreed to at the special meeting:
4. The Board of Directors shall have the following responsibilities
with respect to communication: No Board of Director member(s) shall
e-mail the membership as a whole, without prior consent and approval
of the BoD, in accordance with the SEA BoD voting by-laws.
5. The above stated communications criteria are applicable to any
volunteers or members of SEA in addition to the BoD.
ok netkop
Is this an appropriate, mature response?
Oh sorry i googled u and it seemed like it was your nickname.
Ken,
Please stop emailing me your vile comments. If you continue, I will
make a complaint to your ISP for abusive email. I have done nothing to
warrant this behavior from you.
Lets see how many times you can include the entire board in our
private exchange netcop. meanwhile. i will forward all your more
mature emails to the entire memberhip outside the sea mail router as a
concerned member.
As I am currently in anger management treatment,
my therapist suggested I do not return to a board meeting until I can
have a few guest members around to restrain me should I suddenly
strike out and email someone.
Ken Perez and his farcical email tirade
Ken Perez's libelous complaint was almost certainly in response to
the following (partial) email exchange that took place the month
before. You notice that he attempted to copy the entire membership,
but he wasn't quite smart enough to get the address right.
From: "Ken Perez" kendowit@hotmail.com
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007
To: members@sailsea.org, board@sailsea.org, "JG"
Subject: RE: board behavior
From: "JG"
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 5:35 PM
To: "board@sailsea.org"
Subject: board behavior
Ken (6/20/07): "I didn't attend the last board meeting in protest, and
other board members knew that I would and will not attend another
meeting until they were open to the general membership."
From:"JG"
Sent:Thursday, June 21, 2007 7:13 PM
To:"board@sailsea.org"
Subject:RE: board behavior
From: "Ken Perez" kendowit@hotmail.com
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 12:19:53 -0700
To: "JG"
Subject: RE: board behavior
From:"JG"
Sent:Thursday, June 21, 2007 7:33 PM
To:"board@sailsea.org"
Subject:Fwd: RE: board behavior
From: "Ken Perez" kendowit@hotmail.com
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 12:43:12 -0700
To: "JG"
From: "JG"
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 8:00 PM
To: "board@sailsea.org"
Subject: Fwd: RE: RE: board behavior
From: "Ken Perez" kendowit@hotmail.com
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:07:02 -0700
To: "JG"
From: "Ken Perez" kendowit@hotmail.com
To: board@sailsea.org
Cc: Russ Hubenschlangen hubenschlagen@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Requesting Date Change for Next BoD Meeting
Dear fellow board members,
One reason that Ken was probably attempting to obtain the original copy of the Bylaws was because he had some concern that the bylaws may have been altered without a proper review and approval by the board. I was pretty confident this had not happened, and in preparation for talking with Ken more about the issues he has raised, I wanted to be able to tell him that at least as long as I have been on the board (since Jan 2006), the bylaws had not been substantially altered.
After some searching, I was able to locate a copy of the Bylaws that Jonathan sent me on January 4th, 2006. I then compared those to the copy sent to me by Jonathan on May 23rd 2007. You may recall that Jonathan was using the Bylaws at that time to call a "special meeting" to discuss his conflict with Ken. At that time, there was some question of whether we could get a quorum for a meeting that some of us felt was not appropriate for the board to resolve.
To my surprise, the Bylaws had been modified where I do not think there was any discussion or decision by the board as a whole. One problem with the Bylaws sent to me this May was that the quorum for a Board of Directors meetings was defined in two different articles. Once in Article 3, where it is defined as six members. This definition remained unchanged. However oddly, in Section 5, of Article 13 ("Meetings of Members"), the text was significantly altered, to add a new, and potentially easier to obtain definition of a quorum when there were vacancies on the board.
Section 5 of Article 13 of the Bylaws from January 2006 read: ----start-----
SECTION 5. QUORUM FOR MEETINGS
A quorum shall consist of ten percent (10%) of the voting members of the corporation.
The members present at a duly called and held meeting at which a quorum is initially present
----end-----
It appears that this section was substantially modified to the following in the newer version of the Bylaws, sent to me in by Jonathan in May of this year, to:
----start-----
SECTION 5. QUORUM FOR MEETINGS
A quorum for Board of Director meeting shall consist of half the currently voting board members plus one voting board member.
A quorum for the general membership shall consist of ten percent (10%) of the voting members of the corporation.
The members present at a duly called and held meeting at which a quorum is initially present
----end-----
I had hoped to assure Ken, but unfornately, after making an effort at due diligence, I could not give him any assurance.
I have attached a PDF that includes a comparison of the two versions of the Bylaws. Anything in RED indicates it was added in the newer version.
Respectfully,
Tom Voltz
Members of th board
This constitutes a serious breach of the bylaws and our confidence and trust in Jonathan's leadership.
I feel we have no choice now but to institute a full review of the bylaws past and present. We need to review board minutes to see which modifications reflect legitimate board aprovals and which do not. Furthermore, we need to obtain a copy of the original bylaws.
Best,
Robert
In addition, the "original copy" of the bylaws will tell you nothing, since they've been modified many times over the years.
Keep at it. I'm sure you can dig up something I've done to warrant my removal for cause.
Members of the Board,
Upon further thought, we do not know who made the changes to the bylaws without authorization from the board. It was wrong for me to point fingers right off the bat. However, we do need to get to the bottom of this, outlined in my previous email.
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:20:46 -0800 (PST)
You and I need to speak face to face.
Can't wait to see you soon.
W
To: Wayne Mcintosh
Hi Wayne,
I hope you're doing well and I hope you have a wonderful holiday!
Happy to talk to you in face, on the telephone... whatever you'd
Regards,
Subject: Re: I will see you soon
like. I'm not in the bayarea much, but I'm sure I can arrange
something.
Jonathan