RVC replacement discussion continues.
Vote on (my) motion to postpone: Failed (Ayes: Poirier, Sanford, Crawford, Conti, Lederman, Mark, Recht, Becker)
Vote on amendment to motion to take this to the ABM: Failed (Ayes: Sanford, Lederma,,n Norris Mark, Conti, Crawford, Timmers, Kuyper)
Vote on the motion to have LocSecs replace and remove RVCs: Passed (Opposed: Norris, Lederman, Mark, Conti, Crawford).
Saturday, March 6, 2010
RVC Vacancies
Hoo boy... here we go!
This is a series of proposed bylaws amendments to make it possible to replace RVCs via a vote of LocSecs in the region. Also covered is removal of AMC members for cause--again, by the LocSecs.
Lederman spoke against it. Conti spoke against it. Conti moves to amend the motions to put it on the agenda at the ABM. Burg did not accept this as a friendly amendment. Norris seconds the amendment.
I move to postpone this until we receive recommendations from the Governance Task Force. Conti seconds. Burg says put this on ballot now, and if the governance task force comes up with something between now and next spring, then fine, we'll withdraw this proposal. Cyndi agrees with Dan.
Conti asks for closed session to discuss a pending legal issue germane to this topic.
(my notes stop for now, obviously)
This is a series of proposed bylaws amendments to make it possible to replace RVCs via a vote of LocSecs in the region. Also covered is removal of AMC members for cause--again, by the LocSecs.
Lederman spoke against it. Conti spoke against it. Conti moves to amend the motions to put it on the agenda at the ABM. Burg did not accept this as a friendly amendment. Norris seconds the amendment.
I move to postpone this until we receive recommendations from the Governance Task Force. Conti seconds. Burg says put this on ballot now, and if the governance task force comes up with something between now and next spring, then fine, we'll withdraw this proposal. Cyndi agrees with Dan.
Conti asks for closed session to discuss a pending legal issue germane to this topic.
(my notes stop for now, obviously)
Back from Lunch
Taking up the Finance Comm motion again: Rewritten motion about dues adjustment timing. Basically toss the proposed motion and add a sentence to ASIE 1999-101: "Dues increases will be recommended to be effective in odd numbered years except in extraordinary circumstances."
Passed. (Lederman no, Pannke-Smith, Reiger, Becker abstain)
Getting back the governance structure motion... here is an amended motion:
Moved RUDOLPH, seconded RECHT: The AMC establishes a Governance Task Force charged with reviewing the current governance structure (AMC and committees) of American Mensa, gathering data, identifying Mensa's current governance needs based on the Startegic Plan, reviewing comparable structures, talking to leaders and members at various levels of the organization, and making recommendations for the optimum structures to make American Mensa effective, efficient, and responsive as an organization.
(and other words about timing I'm too lazy to type here)
Some discussion about adding in SIGs and Local Groups.
Passed unanimously.
Item C1: Dahl & Conti's motion about more detailed AMC approval of spending.
Mel asked that the motion be postponed until July in order to wait for the Finance Committee to answer some more of his questions and concerns.
Passed unanimously.
Item C2-C4: Conti & Dahl amending ASIEs about site selection committee. Basically he wants to know clearly in advance about time of day that meetings, including planning and committee meetings.
Burg offers C4, which gives the Site Selection the power to set date in addition to location... as opposed to Guy's motions that the AMC as a whole setting the date. Sanford opines that these motions are too operations-- if you need to know the date and time a meeting starts, ask the Chair. Conti points to NY nonprofit law that says the Board sets the time and place for meetings. Elissa says these motions are because she didn't do a good job of letting everyone know the meeting starts Friday last September.
My opinion: yup, this is rearranging deck chairs. The Chair now knows to make it better known in advance about the time of meeting start. Problem solved. No need to carve more in stone.
Burg makes a good point that it's good to codify even things that are well-established traditions.
Conti offers to withdraw his motions and support Burg's motion... and will discuss and perhaps present something even better in time for the July meeting agenda.
Vote on C4: Passed unanimously.
Passed. (Lederman no, Pannke-Smith, Reiger, Becker abstain)
Getting back the governance structure motion... here is an amended motion:
Moved RUDOLPH, seconded RECHT: The AMC establishes a Governance Task Force charged with reviewing the current governance structure (AMC and committees) of American Mensa, gathering data, identifying Mensa's current governance needs based on the Startegic Plan, reviewing comparable structures, talking to leaders and members at various levels of the organization, and making recommendations for the optimum structures to make American Mensa effective, efficient, and responsive as an organization.
(and other words about timing I'm too lazy to type here)
Some discussion about adding in SIGs and Local Groups.
Passed unanimously.
Item C1: Dahl & Conti's motion about more detailed AMC approval of spending.
Mel asked that the motion be postponed until July in order to wait for the Finance Committee to answer some more of his questions and concerns.
Passed unanimously.
Item C2-C4: Conti & Dahl amending ASIEs about site selection committee. Basically he wants to know clearly in advance about time of day that meetings, including planning and committee meetings.
Burg offers C4, which gives the Site Selection the power to set date in addition to location... as opposed to Guy's motions that the AMC as a whole setting the date. Sanford opines that these motions are too operations-- if you need to know the date and time a meeting starts, ask the Chair. Conti points to NY nonprofit law that says the Board sets the time and place for meetings. Elissa says these motions are because she didn't do a good job of letting everyone know the meeting starts Friday last September.
My opinion: yup, this is rearranging deck chairs. The Chair now knows to make it better known in advance about the time of meeting start. Problem solved. No need to carve more in stone.
Burg makes a good point that it's good to codify even things that are well-established traditions.
Conti offers to withdraw his motions and support Burg's motion... and will discuss and perhaps present something even better in time for the July meeting agenda.
Vote on C4: Passed unanimously.
Motion on Timing of Dues Adjustments
Moved Finance Committee: The AMC will review and adjust dues rates in even-numbered years.
EXPLANATION: This motion promotes certainty amongst the membership as to the timing of dues adjustments. It ensures that the AMC doing the review will be experienced rather than newly-seated (as elections occur in odd-numbered years). It removes the adjustments to dues from being overly influenced by political and reactionary thinking. The strategic plan requires the AMC to ensure that there will be, now and in future, sufficient funds for American Mensa to accomplish its goals. While we have every intention of actively pursuing and increasing non-dues income, membership dues will continue to be an essential component of AML's financial support.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: No financial impact for implementing a review and adjustment. The financial impact of the actual dues adjustment will be specified every other year.
EXPLANATION: This motion promotes certainty amongst the membership as to the timing of dues adjustments. It ensures that the AMC doing the review will be experienced rather than newly-seated (as elections occur in odd-numbered years). It removes the adjustments to dues from being overly influenced by political and reactionary thinking. The strategic plan requires the AMC to ensure that there will be, now and in future, sufficient funds for American Mensa to accomplish its goals. While we have every intention of actively pursuing and increasing non-dues income, membership dues will continue to be an essential component of AML's financial support.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: No financial impact for implementing a review and adjustment. The financial impact of the actual dues adjustment will be specified every other year.
Some discussion if we can adjust in odd numbered years or not. Mel tried to suggest a friendly amendment to "only in even numbered years" Cyndi said no. Pam talked about timing of dues increases, fiscal years, AMC meeting schedules, etc. Recht suggests adding "and may do so in odd numbered years if necessary." Dan and Guy suggest adding the word "regularly" before "review." Nick suggests proclaiming a set amount dues will go up each year. Marc suggests postponing so we can consider making the motion something like "dues go up $2 every year." Guy also suggested the idea of setting a regular dollar amount, but not postponing this motion-- we can still do that in July if we want to. Lori spoke out that this motion feels non-transparent.
Postpone until after lunch.
Budget & Dues Structure
Budget passed unanimously. Not much discussion, but that's because there was some talk on the AMC elist earlier, including several members speaking strongly about their concerns that our estimate of membership level was too optimistic. The Finance Committee presented a revised version that had a lower number of members... a few cuts here and there and we still have a budget that ends in the black.
Now Guy Conti is leading us on a discussion of dues rates structures-- possibly having different rates for different ages and family members. The key is, how does it impact retention and our budget? Are there different classes of membership?
For now, all the AMC is doing is contributing ideas of data we need to know to make a good decision on this. How much does it cost to serve a member? How do dues increases affect retention? how much do LGs need to serve members? What is the tipping point at which multi-year members are not cost-effective?
A few members are throwing out suggestions for dues structures. but really, we're just preparing to create a background paper on this topic-- not actually thinking up the solution now.
... and now we're all happily me-tooing and tossing out ideas. Sigh. Horse is dead. We're not supposed to be figuring out the solution now. Move on.
Pam is asking for direction-- if we want a younger member dues structure, are there other options we also want to consider?
Now discussing the general notion and ethical implications of having different rates for different members. Guy just talked- hard to sum it up, since I was listening instead of typing, but he's really on top of this and is thinking objectivley. Props!
Now Guy Conti is leading us on a discussion of dues rates structures-- possibly having different rates for different ages and family members. The key is, how does it impact retention and our budget? Are there different classes of membership?
For now, all the AMC is doing is contributing ideas of data we need to know to make a good decision on this. How much does it cost to serve a member? How do dues increases affect retention? how much do LGs need to serve members? What is the tipping point at which multi-year members are not cost-effective?
A few members are throwing out suggestions for dues structures. but really, we're just preparing to create a background paper on this topic-- not actually thinking up the solution now.
... and now we're all happily me-tooing and tossing out ideas. Sigh. Horse is dead. We're not supposed to be figuring out the solution now. Move on.
Pam is asking for direction-- if we want a younger member dues structure, are there other options we also want to consider?
Now discussing the general notion and ethical implications of having different rates for different members. Guy just talked- hard to sum it up, since I was listening instead of typing, but he's really on top of this and is thinking objectivley. Props!
MIL and the Lawsuit
Talking now about pros and cons of approaching MIL to help shoulder some of the financial burden of our defense of the Mensa name. I'm not completely following this. But it's complicated and the Nat reps will be continuing to discuss and figure this out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)