Most organizations whose members pay dues or initiation fees have in their constitution or by-laws stipulations for raising those fees over time. These happen in the recognition that the costs of doing business increase from year to year, and even in organizations that are largely volunteer-run have overhead costs subject to price increases. Add to that the introduction of new expenses as new products and technologies become available to the organization…those that become impossible to do without. How did professional societies ever conduct business before they had websites, computers, software, office, staff, we wonder. But we do have all these things, and these things have a way needing to be upgraded and paid for, with regularity as it turns out
At any rate, HGS has resisted raising dues over of the last few years, but now all arrows point to the time being now. So members can anticipate dues rising 20% to $36 per year. This will take effect when registrations for the next fiscal year come around in June. We have been posting notices in the bulletin and website so that members won’t be blindsided when it comes time in June to renew membership. We hope all members will view this as a nominal increase only and that it not be a big hit to family budgets.
It has never been the expectation by HGS –at least not in anyone’s memory—that dues would entirely pay for the cost of operations. Perhaps in the very distant past, I suppose. In the chart shown above it is obvious that no magnitude of dues increase is going to be the magic solution to profitability. In recent years they have covered only 6% to 11% of annual expenditures (see chart). During this time span we have reduced annual expenses from about $1.5 million to about $500 thousand. A significant portion of the decrease has regrettably come from the costs that came from putting on our traditional big events…big conferences, popular social events, etc in which the revenue we generated from for these events well exceeded the costs. As the popularity of these events fell, so too did the revenue, which eventually came down to the point where they couldn’t even break-even. Long story short, not all of the cost reductions have come from the prudent application of good fiscal pruning. Some of them came from reducing or eliminating once popular events. It’s all part and parcel of trying to figure what the “right size” is.
By comparison to the large scale fall in the budget, the revenue from dues has stayed relatively consistent, although it too has fallen. From the $90 thousand level 8 years ago down to about $70 thousand in the 2019/20 fiscal year, it started to raise eyebrows in previous HGS boards. In 2020/21, total dues collected dropped to only $48,000; this has been attributed to the pandemic aberration, although it is hard elaborate on the specific cause and effect mechanisms. In the past couple years the fall in dues income, and by implication, the decrease in membership, became a large area of concern. The current board is examining different ways to conduct new membership initiatives, something that many of us believe should be an ongoing theme in upcoming years. Clearly HGS has a challenge in arresting the decline in membership. The reason for raising dues goes beyond the small contribution to helping our bottom line. We continue to take all steps, big and small, to increase sources of revenue and to chip away at our costs.
I think when dues are too low, they project an image of cheapness and a low level of professionalism. Consider the dues amount as being a measure of the value of the membership in HGS. A higher value perceived by members may be followed by a more meaningful participation in the Society’s activities and higher level of mutual respect for fellow members, with a shared feeling of having more skin in the game. We need the support of our fellow geologists and Society as we engage our communities.
As we speak out in our communities, as trained earth scientists we should hold ourselves responsible for challenging falsehoods posing as scientific “facts” in the popular news sources. We understand paleo climates, glacial/interglacial interactions, and large-scale sea-level changes throughout time and should assertively offer our understanding of earth’s processes, since they are so misunderstood. We should also step outside our comfort zone and learn more about how the energy-dense fuels we explore for are directly responsible for the high standard of living enjoyed by those countries who use them. And how the people who are forced to live in energy poverty desperately want to advance to the level of the dense energy-using countries.
Instead it is tempting to many of us to feel disparaged as we listen or read the daily news. From all sides we are bombarded by news of the impending death of the fossil fuel industry and all the policies that are being enacted to make it happen soon. At times, it seems like these policy makers are more powerful than marketplace forces that undergird the very essence of human living standards. Will they get away with it, we wonder. And therefore I took a good measure of contentment when the latest depiction of energy-use components was issued by EIA. The chart below shows the now familiar curve shapes showing the relative energy fuel contributions projected forward. Nothing new under the sun. The charts released by the various planning agencies and organizations always show the same basic shape, with oil and gas at the top tiers in the energy mix. The responsible adults in the room haven't factored in the end of fossil fuels. In the meantime let’s assume our livelihood will remain robust for some time to come….and Keep Up With Your Dues.
Mike Erpenbeck
President, HGS
