[MR] From a SCA Cook

[Kelly Keck]

Greetings to the Tavern,

I feel compelled to point out a few things regarding the topic of whether
guests at high table should pay for feast.

First of all, I think it's a misnomer to say that any group's financial
policy "demands payment" from guests at high table.  As a rule, people
attending event are expected to pay.  People eating feast are, likewise,
expected to pay for their meal.  Financial policies spell out the **specific
exceptions** to that general expectation--those people who provide some
special service related to the event and are therefore "comped" because of
it.  Royalty are generally comped, many groups comp landed baronage, and
some comp key event staff such as the autocrat or head cook.

It's not that groups have written in their financial policies "Guests at
high table must pay," but that they do *not* have financial policies that
state, "All guests at high table will be comped, with their meals paid for
by the barony."   It's not a matter of demanding, it's a matter of *not*
making a specific exception for someone called to sit at high table.  And it
is **Kingdom** financial policy that requires any group providing a comp to
budget it in advance.  It must be in the budget for the event, with a
written justification, or it must be written into the group's financial
policy.

Specifically, kingdom policy says "Branches in Atlantia may choose to waive
event fees (agree to absorb the cost themselves) for the following event
attendees:  the king, queen, prince, princess, and local landed baronage.
To waive the fees of additional attendees, the local branch must include a
list of those approved for waived fees in the branch's financial policy
and/or have the waiver of fees approved by the branch's financial committee
with justification/documentation for the additional names added to the Event
Report."  Therefore, as per kingdom, a group is not allowed to simply decide
to waive the feast fee for someone who's not on kingdom's list of approved
comps and has not been added to the event budget.  At the very least, the
group would have to call a meeting of their financial committee (assuming
enough members of the committee were even on-site) in order to add to the
list of people receiving a free meal and would have to provide documentation
to kingdom.

Secondly, when dealing with money, an autocrat or local officer has many
obligations.  He or she is accountable to the barony for how the group's
money is spent and for ensuring that the group's rules are followed, as well
as being accountable to kingdom and regional exchequers for the same.
Certainly, a kingdom exchequer might question why a group fed 100 people,
collected money from 90, but only had 4 in the budget as comps.  That's also
the sort of thing in an event report that would look rather shady under an
IRS audit.  Also, what about the case of a kingdom event?  If six people are
given free meals that were not budgeted or approved, that cuts into the
event profits, including kingdom's share of the profit on that event.  In
that case, the kingdom would be well within its rights to hold that shire or
barony accountable for the "missing" money.

An autocrat who unilaterally decides at the last minute that someone will be
comped (in the case of having someone sit at high table who hasn't paid for
feast) has gone against kingdom policy, as well as shire or barony policy.
Someone who's willing to disregard the rules laid out by kingdom and the
local group isn't necessarily someone I want as an autocrat.

Legally, we're also accountable to the IRS, which has rules dealing with how
non-profit groups may spend their money.   As I've never been an exchequer
or a lawyer, I won't delve into that too deeply (since I'm sure others will
do so), but I do wish to point out that the question has been raised whether
it's even *legal* to provide a free meal to someone simply because they were
asked to sit at high table.  Generally, money belonging to a non-profit
organization isn't supposed to be spent on gifts to individuals--this is why
things such as queen's teas or special food for high table don't come out of
group budgets.  If a group *did* wish to pay for the meals of all high table
guests, that group would have to have such a financial policy approved by
the kingdom exchequer.

I do agree that events should be about more than making money.  Having fun,
learning about the Middle Ages, and striving to recreate a chivalric
atmosphere should be our first priority.  However, everything the SCA does
costs money, and if we ignore that bottom line completely, how will we put
on events?   Most events are already funded pretty heavily from donations as
it is--people donate site tokens, or food, or prizes.  But, as an
organization, we have to be careful about how much we stress the generosity
of our people.  If we budget poorly, what happens when that person who
"always" donates site tokens hits a financial rough spot and can't do it any
more?   Distasteful though it might be to some, we do need to budget our
events with the expectation of making money and to watch our expenses
carefully.

Yes, sometimes there's plenty of food and adding another person isn't an
issue.  Many times, it might not even be noticed that someone has been
added.  It isn't as though most shire or baronial exchequers walk from table
to table at each feast, making sure someone has paid.  However, sometimes it
is an issue.  I've been at feasts where there are more leftovers than the
staff can carry home, but I've also been at a few where wasn't enough of
everything to go around.  Some dishes also can't be portioned by the cup or
half-cup.  While you could take a teaspoon from each plate without anyone
noticing, you can't suddenly add another pie or pastry, nor can you
redistribute something like a whole roasted chicken.

Additionally, on the subject of being a good host, in a sense, a financial
policy that states that high table guests will be comped can make a group a
worse host rather than a better one.  Certainly, the group is being generous
to those seated at high table, but the money that would be spent on those
meals has to come from somewhere.  Because it's all part of the event
budget, it has to come from the feast fees of those who do pay.  Granted,
there are often leftovers, but a responsible cook and autocrat won't just
cross their fingers and hope to have extra--they'll budget for the people
they expect to feed and the money they expect to receive.  So, a cook who
wants to feed 100 people when only 92 are paying will either serve less food
or ask for a larger budget.  Either way, everyone who is not sitting at high
table is paying a portion of the meal for those who do.  While the cook
could choose to go over budget in the interest of being a good host, that's
not a responsible way of handling the group's money.

Also, a group might not be able to afford to budget that all high table
guests be comped.  His Highness cites an average feast of 100-125, but some
feasts are a good bit smaller than that. My barony, for example, often does
feasts for 60-80 people. In that case, the guests at high table represent
10% or more of the feast budget.  If a site is pricey, the budget is
stretched thin, or a group has just lost money on another event and needs to
make a profit on this one, that kind of expense might simply not be an
option.  Kingdom also requires event budgets to have a 10% "fudge
factor"--that is, expected expenses are multiplied by 1.1 before subtracting
them from expected income to get the expected profit.  This is a good idea,
but it means that every planned expense becomes larger than life on the
budget.    Sometimes, the cost of comping all of high table simply can't be
budgeted in.  And, as per kingdom policy, if the group don't plan it into
the budget and get it approved, then they aren't allowed to do it.

Any time anyone is comped, it is a gift, not an obligation or a
requirement.  Groups are not even required to comp Their Majesties or Their
Highnesses.  They do so because they appreciate what the royal presence adds
to the event and the enormous personal sacrifice made by the Crowns to hold
that position.   Comping attendees at high table (*if* it is even allowable
under kingdom policy and mundane law) is also a gift that some groups choose
to bestow.  But to take a gift and a courtesy and say that it would be rude
not to offer it cheapens the gift.  Now, the giver of the gift isn't being
especially generous--all they're doing is not being rude.  Rather than going
above and beyond, they're just fulfilling expectations.

Certainly, it would be rude to have event staff go from table to table
checking feast tokens or asking people if they have paid.  However, I have
never seen this happen.  I've *never* had an autocrat or other event staff
ask if I had paid my site fee or checked to see that I was wearing a site
token (except at Pennsic, of course).  If someone forgot to pay or didn't
realize they needed to, and it wasn't noticed until after the event, I don't
think it's a big deal.  It would also be rude to handle it tactlessly.
There's a difference between standing over someone at feast and demanding
money from them and quietly reminding them that they do need to pay, but
don't worry about it at the moment--enjoy their meal and look for the head
troll before they leave.

Although I feel that we need to remember politeness at all times, I also
feel very strongly that  if it **comes to the attention** of the event staff
that someone who is going to eat has not paid, then the appropriate staff
person (probably the autocrat, exchequer, or seneschal) needs to either
require that person to pay, or make other arrangements (calling an emergency
financial committee meeting if there's some reason the person should be
comped, or seeing if someone else is willing to kick in a few bucks toward
that person's fee).  It might be easier to simply let it slide, and
certainly it would save that staff member from being in an uncomfortable
position.  But it would be wrong to turn a blind eye to a violation of the
rules, especially as an officer of the SCA.  It would be that person's
responsibility to address the situation rather than ignoring it.  Not only
because it's their job to ensure that rules are followed, but also because
if they don't, it sets a bad precedent.  If it's all right to squeeze in a
high table guest who hasn't paid at the last minute, someone will argue that
it must also be all right to provide a free meal for someone else who hadn't
planned to stay, or for someone who came at the last minute to help with a
class or in the kitchen, or perhaps for anyone on the event staff who hadn't
paid for feast, etc. etc. etc.  And it must be all right for the person who
didn't get on site until 5 PM not to pay at all, since troll is already
closed.  Once you start squeezing people in, where do you draw a line?

In the same vein, ignoring some rules also makes it rather difficult to
enforce the rest.  Suppose an exchequer knows that people are eating feast
who haven't paid, but lets it go.  Then, a person who spent money for the
event and didn't get a receipt wants a refund anyway, even though it
violates kingdom policy.  But why, they ask, can't that exchequer simply let
it slide--after all, that's what they did for the guests at high table.
And why can't this other person who was budgeted $50 but spent $150 get a
refund for the full amount?  After all, this group is willing to break the
rules for some--why not in other cases?  Not a position I'd want to be in as
an officer or an autocrat.

In my opinion, the bottom line is this.  If people in the local group are
acting responsibly, they'll take both financial concerns and kingdom and
group policies into account when making decisions and will plan in advance.
Money shouldn't be our only concern, or our biggest, but we can't simply
ignore it.  Nor can we simply ignore the rules laid out by the kingdom and
the society.  Additionally, any time a local group provides a free meal or
waives the site fee for anyone, that is a gift that should be appreciated,
not a right to be expected.  And if a group cannot do so in a certain case,
it is not necessarily rudeness.  Perhaps an autocrat or feast cook who is
trying to, as Lady Tirza put it, "make a penny cry" in the hopes that enough
pennies can be pulled together to make an event successful, should be given
the benefit of the doubt, and should not be assumed to be rude simply
because they haven't included free meals for everyone at high table as part
of their budget.  Likewise, a local group that does not feel it can afford
to provide free meals to everyone at high table, and therefore doesn't write
those comps into their financial policy, should not be assumed to be
discourteous or greedy. Giving others the benefit of the doubt, rather than
reading negative motives into every action, is an important part of
courtesy.

In Service to the Dream,
Lady Adriana Michaels