Voting on Proposed Bylaws Amendments

Here’s my take on the Bylaws amendments (I’ve shamelessly lifted some of what Howard wrote on Facebook).

1. Replacement bylaw text. NO

Some good, some bad, some that really ought to be debated separately. So just No for this omnibus proposal.

2. Non-voting membership on the AMC. NO

This is the one near and dear to my heart and I went so far as to submit a Con statement for the Bulletin. Contrary to what some think, this does not take these folks off the board. It saves no money. It means they do everything they do now, which, frankly, is a ton more than many other AMC positions, and then twiddle thumbs and bend paperclips when an actual vote is called for. It also means they cannot vote on the action committees they chair, nor on motions involving budget areas they are responsible for overseeing.

3. Voting membership on the AMC (past chairmen). YES

There is value to past Chairs being around to advise, but in these days of easy instant communication, their presence at the table is no longer necessary. Plus, if you really hate a Chair and vote him out of office, do you want him hanging around voting for another 8 or more years?

4. Recall elections. YES

We need a mechanism in place.

5. Nominating Committee. YES

My personal opinion, based on a great deal of research and reading I did for the Gov’t task Force, is that we need a strong NomComm with teeth. But since that is a no-opt for Mensans who can’t stand the thought of other Mensans sitting in judgment, then what we do have is pointless and should go.

6. Petition Signatures. YES

I ran for 1^st VC. I got my 50 signatures in under eight hours. HOURS. Surely someone hoping to lead at that level should be able to work a little harder and gather up a few more straw votes of confidence.

7. Candidate Nomination Deadline. NO

As Howard wrote: “There is too much potential in this amendment for an extremely short election period — if the removal of the NomComm in Amendment #5 does not pass. One month between the NomComm deadline and the end of the petition process is far too short a period of time for people to know about the NC decisions and choose to run and secure petition signatures.”

8. Nominees for Chair, 1VC and 2VC with AMC experience. NO

I’m wishy-washy on this one, but inexperienced people can run if unopposed—why shouldn't they also run if opposed? If we really want only experienced people in those positions (which I’m kind of in favor of), then the amendment should not allow inexperienced unopposed people to run.

9. AMC meeting announcements. NO

I’m wishy-washy on this, but having been on the board, I know that the only time quick meetings are called are in emergencies, and in an emergency, 14 days is an eternity.

10. Audio and video recordings. YES

Sure, there are some legal risks with having recordings that might contradict the official minutes, but these days, meetings are going to be recorded, openly or surreptitiously, with an electronic devices or by watch dogs with pens and papers. So accept the reality of the modern world and do the right thing to show the members you’re not afraid of them knowing what goes on in meetings.

11. & 12. Duties of the Ombudsman NO and NO

There are pros and cons in each of these, but in my mind, amendments that are originated as reactions to personality-driven conflicts are not the right way to run an organization.

13. Annual Dues. NO

A weak “no,” that is. As Howard wrote: “There is too much ‘wiggle room’ in pushing a dues increase through currently, whether the increase is necessary or not.” True, but Nick makes some very good points in support of how things are done now. I’d really rather nix this amendment and change it next election cycle in some sort of manner than eliminates the wiggle room but still takes into consideration the lead times of meetings and very importantly, the announcement of the MIL component.