<% appTitle="Ridecamp Archives" %> Ridecamp: [RC] Bylaws Vote not a referendum on BoD
Ridecamp@Endurance.Net

[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]
Current to Wed Jul 23 17:36:48 GMT 2003
  • Next by Date: Re: [RC] [RC] Proposed Bylaws
  • - Merryben
  • Prev by Date: Re: [RC] [RC] Proposed Bylaws
  • - C. Eyler

    [RC] Bylaws Vote not a referendum on BoD - Joe Long


    People sometimes wonder if anyone's mind is ever changed by arguments
    on Ridecamp.  Well, yes.  Two days ago I was planning on voting "yes"
    on the Bylaws change; as a direct result of the discussion on Ridecamp
    I now intend to vote "no."
    
    First, a "no" vote does not mean that we don't appreciate the hard
    work that went into the proposed changes.  I for one very much
    appreciate all of the hard work, and having sheperded a Bylaws change
    through once upon a time I know how tough it is.  But no matter how
    much we appreciate the effort, we must decide how to vote based on
    whether we believe the proposed change, in its totality, is good for
    the AERC.  And I've been convinced that there are two fatal problems
    with the current package.
    
    One of the problems I now see is the removal of the "Family
    Membership" definition.  Yes, I know the Board can still keep family
    memberships.  But this is one of those "If it ain't broke, don't fix
    it" issues.  Frankly, I don't see the problem with a family membership
    having only two votes.  They get discounted dues, and most families
    only have two adults active in the sport anyway.  If a third adult
    member wants to vote, they have the option of joining as a single
    member.  Remember, the definition of "Family" for Family awards need
    not require that they all share one Family membership (I don't believe
    it does now).  Or, if we want to allow families with more than two
    adults to have more than two votes, that can be been changed in the
    Bylaws without throwing out the definition altogether.  
    
    So, I have become pursuaded that the Family Membership is important
    enough, and enough a part of our heritage, to keep it in the Bylaws.
    
    The other problem I've already addressed, limiting membership to
    citizens only.  I must admit that when I first saw that, I was taken
    aback, then thought "Oh, it's just more of that us-vs.-them attitude
    that we see in the non-member fees."  I decided not to get my knickers
    in a twist about it again.  Now, after reading some of the comments
    here by non-citizen residents, I realize that it is a serious error
    and is alone sufficient reason to vote "no."
    
    Finally, this problem can be avoided next time around by presenting
    the Bylaws changes as line items, voted on individually.  Then we
    won't need to vote the whole package down because of a problem or two
    with them.
    
    -- 
    
    Joe Long
    jlong@xxxxxxxx
    http://www.rnbw.com
    
    
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
     Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
     Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
     Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp
    
     If you are an AERC member - PLEASE VOTE in the upcoming By-Laws 
     Election!!!! (it takes 2/3rds to tango!!)
    
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=