Hi gang,
What is Denver wanting to change? Or do?
Hunter
Friends,
In my January International President's Newsletter, distributed to the
membership via Constant Contact, I touched on the subject of the Denver
Colorado (DenCo) Unit proposal to amend the WBCCI Constitution. As I
see it, there are two discussion topics - the proposal itself, and the
processing of that proposal. None of what follows deals with the merits
of the proposed amendment.
In my attempt to explain what the Blue Book says and to discuss all the
related misunderstandings and issues, my position paper became 4+ pages.
Too long. I'll see if I can develop a shorter, clearer version. Here
goes.
The WBCCI Constitution, Article XVI, is unchanged since at least 1993,
and it describes two methods to amend the Constitution. Those who
propose amendments must choose one method or the other.
Section 1 of the Article states in part that, "When two-thirds of the
club's chartered Units have ratified the proposed amendment(s) by
majority votes according to their Constitution and Bylaws and the Unit
Presidents have so certified to Headquarters, such amendment(s) shall be
deemed to be adopted." Up to one year is allowed for this process.
This method uses votes from each of the chartered Units. Headquarters
keeps the tally. Neither the International Board of Trustees (IBT) nor
the Delegates are part of this process. I believe this method is the
more complicated of the two. It may be for this reason that in our
Club's 50+ year history, the WBCCI Constitution has never been amended
using Article XVI, Section 1 procedures.
Section 2 states in part that, "Amendments to this Constitution may also
be adopted by a two-thirds vote of the members represented by Delegates
present and voting at the annual Delegates Meeting voting in accordance
with Article XII of the Constitution." All amendments to the WBCCI
Constitution have used Section 2 procedures.
I accept the contention that DenCo's work was done in good faith. I
apologize to the DenCo Unit if incorrect information was provided to
them. At this point, I don't know who said what to whom. It is my
understanding that all units, except Wyoming, in Region 11 have voted on
the proposal. Letters have been written, effort has been expended, and
time has passed. I accept all of that. I also agree that the Article
should be rewritten for clarity. That is why on December 14, I asked
Dona Garner, Club Parliamentarian and Chairman of the Blue Book Revision
Committee, to add Article XVI to that Committee's tasks.
I believe that the initial DenCo proposal got off track by attempting to
comply with processing requirements of both Sections 1 and 2. As
mentioned above, one method or the other is to be used. For example, if
the original intent was to get the proposed amendment before the
Delegates at the annual June 30 meeting, then none of the letters of
certification from all Units in the Club were required. But that
process was begun. If the original intent was to obtain Unit votes over
the allowed one year period, then Region and International Board action
is not required. But the Region 11 Board voted last October.
So where are we today? I recently had a most useful email exchange with
Patti Reed, the new Denver Colorado Unit President.
I have directed Cindy Reed, Corporate Manager to return the original
proposal to her without action. Patti is of the opinion that the
proposed amendment is now a Region 11 motion because it was accepted by
all units in Region 11. Don Shafer, Chairman of the Constitution and
Bylaws Committee, stated that the proposed amendment became a Region 11
motion when it was received a majority vote by the Region11 Board.
Friends, it looks like we have agreement. What is currently on the
table is Motion 5 (Revised), which is on the agenda for the 24-28
January, 2011 IBT Meeting in
Robstown, Texas.
Safe Travels,
Norm Beu
President, WBCCI
This site is not sponsored by or affiliated in any way with Airstream Inc, Thor Inc, or the WBCCI.
0 comments:
Post a Comment