We've been kicking this around for the better part of a month. We started completely over -- never even looking back at the work that was done in our last attempt. Admittedly we crammed too much stuff in there that was really Bylaws and Policy issues -- not constitutional issues.
We tried to make as few changes as possible but we believe it succeeds at the following goals:
1) After proposed Constitutional Amendments are created, negotiated, finalized at the annual Delegates Meeting, it is the membership, ALL members, that will receive mail ballots in the Blue Beret to either ratify or reject that finalized proposed amendment.
2) MALs vote on all International Constitutional changes PLUS can hold offices in Intraclubs.
3) Units can assign and instruct a non-unit WBCCI member as their Delegate.
4) As any final amendment is now decided by the membership, all unit voting strengths become one (1) and ALL ROLL CALL VOTES have been eliminated.
That's it -- that's a wrap. The changes in the constitution set the stage for implementation in the Bylaws and Policy.
We're hoping in particular to get Paul Waddell, Maurice, Jerry Dyann, and Vic Smith re-engaged on this one as we're hoping to start hammering out the final details so that it can be submitted to units club-wide. Of course the rationale still has to be written but for those constitution/bylaws savvy types I think it's pretty clear the format and direction that takes place here.
Of course, 100 posts of engagement would be more than welcome, and the more participants the better. I just learned of another effort to address number 3 above in Region 1. Some of what's in here, particularly Article XII, Sections 3 & 4 may help that cause.
__
__________________
What's next?
6500+ Airsteam families having fun!
1100+ Airstream Events including 650+ Rallies in 2008!
SaveWally's WBCCI Unit Guide
Leo,
I took a quick look at the changes that you propose and for the most part they sound good. As you know, I have been looking at different forms of proxy voting since my unit was not counted at the Perry International.
The one item that catches my eye is the show of hands vote. I may not have been at Perry, but I did listen to many hours of roll call votes. My quess is the show of hands would be to cut the time down on this process. With some units being very large and some very small, a show of hands could be somewhat misleading. If you add the members of the Washington Unit and the Georga Unit together, you have around 10% of the club, but in a show of hands they would only be two in a sea of 137 delegates.
In the case of the motorhome vote in Perry.
122 delegates were present
52 delegates represented units in favor of the amendment
70 delegates represented units against the amendment
Would this have been close enough for a roll call vote?
Leo,
I took a quick look at the changes that you propose and for the most part they sound good. As you know, I have been looking at different forms of proxy voting since my unit was not counted at the Perry International.
The one item that catches my eye is the show of hands vote. I may not have been at Perry, but I did listen to many hours of roll call votes. My quess is the show of hands would be to cut the time down on this process. With some units being very large and some very small, a show of hands could be somewhat misleading. If you add the members of the Washington Unit and the Georga Unit together, you have around 10% of the club, but in a show of hands they would only be two in a sea of 137 delegates.
In the case of the motorhome vote in Perry.
122 delegates were present
52 delegates represented units in favor of the amendment
70 delegates represented units against the amendment
Would this have been close enough for a roll call vote?
If I understand correctly, only a potential 122 hands would have been raised on the moho issue. Any one of those 122 could request that they be counted. If I were one of the 52 losing hands, I would have requested a count and that request would have been honored.
Hopefully this debate will generate 100 or more productive posts.
Great work Leo but, you know I got a large butt, I have a few thoughts...
Art VI, sec. 3 Tells me that MALs are not members of Regions or Units. IMHO, I don't think MALs should be allowed to vote on Unit matters. MALs Voting on Regional and International matters doesn't bother me in the least.
Art XII, sec 3: The members of each chartered Unit and the MALs assigned to it may vote and otherwise participate in the annual Delegates Meeting through a Delegate, or Alternate Delegate....
Art XII, sec 4: Each Unit shall be represented at the Delegates meeting by a Delegate, or an Alternate. A Delegate or Alternate Delegate may only represent one chartered unit at a Delegates Meeting.
Art XV, sec 1: I think I would feel more comfortable seeing a 2/3 super majority.
Art XVI, sec 2: Take out the word "vote" after "two-thirds" for better readability.
I think what you have done here so far is terrific and I'd love ratify it in the near future.
There were two schools of thought on the weighted voting. If 2/3rds of the Delegates (with single vote power) don't vote to send something back to the membership then the final proposed amendment is not a strong one.
A unit's (like GA or WA) real strength lies in its total membership vote which under this proposed amendment makes sure every paying member has at least the opportunity to vote from the comfort of their home.
As for calling for a hand count the Chair should automatically do so if it even looks remotely close, but ANY Delegate has the right to call for a hand count (which takes mere minutes) if from their perspective on the floor (and that's key) believes it looks close.
__
__________________
What's next?
6500+ Airsteam families having fun!
1100+ Airstream Events including 650+ Rallies in 2008!
SaveWally's WBCCI Unit Guide
I have read this again and now I need to have somethings explained to me.
What is the process for MAL's to vote? Would they be assigned to a unit for the porpose of voting? How woould that work? I also have a problem trying to understand why Mals are MALs, but that is a different item.
It looks like your amendment gives each unit 1 vote because you removed the line that states x number of members = x number of votes. Am I reading that orrectly?
One more question: Will you be splitting these 3 items into 3 amendments or are you going to go for broke with all 3 in 1?
I have read this again and now I need to have somethings explained to me.
What is the process for MAL's to vote? Would they be assigned to a unit for the porpose of voting? How woould that work? I also have a problem trying to understand why Mals are MALs, but that is a different item.
It looks like your amendment gives each unit 1 vote because you removed the line that states x number of members = x number of votes. Am I reading that orrectly?
One more question: Will you be splitting these 3 items into 3 amendments or are you going to go for broke with all 3 in 1?
I saw that about MALs too. That's why I suggested the language "and the MALs assigned to it" It was just kind of hanging there.
quote=mistral blue Hopefully this debate will generate 100 or more productive posts.
...I don't think MALs should be allowed to vote on Unit matters.
MALs can't vote because they don't belong to a unit.
The members of each chartered Unit and the MALs assigned to it...
We aren't assigning MALs to a unit. That has nothing to do with this amendment. Besides, I'm pretty sure if the club ever did choose to assign MALs to units -- they'd no longer be MALs.
A Delegate or Alternate Delegate may only represent one chartered unit at a Delegates Meeting.
Yes, we don't want a Delegate Representing TWO or more units. Think about the hand raising issue and all that internal fighting.
Art XV, sec 1: I think I would feel more comfortable seeing a 2/3 super majority.
I'm not so sure Bylaws and Policy share the same critical mass that the consitution does. Does it, really?
Art XVI, sec 2: Take out the word "vote" after "two-thirds" for better readability.
That was a tough one. It's important to show that it's actually 2/3rds of the actual votes RECEIVED. Not the actual votes that could be cast. If 55% of the membership decides to actually vote, you're looking at 2/3rds of that 55% -- not the membership as a whole.
I think what you have done here so far is terrific and I'd love ratify it in the near future. [/quote]
__________________
What's next?
6500+ Airsteam families having fun!
1100+ Airstream Events including 650+ Rallies in 2008!
SaveWally's WBCCI Unit Guide
quote=azflycaster What is the process for MAL's to vote?
Getting notice on Constitutional Amendments comes through the BB just like it does now. Unit members get to discuss them at meetings or not. MALs have to decide for themselves (or through forums, etc..). So Units instruct their Delegates on what to do at the Internaitonal. Whatever comes out of the International goes to ALL members, most likely in the Blue Beret for a tear out, or insert ballot. At that point all members vote the same way -- with a postage stamp.
It looks like your amendment gives each unit 1 vote because you removed the line that states x number of members = x number of votes. Am I reading that orrectly?
Yes your unit voting strength comes into play when something comes OUT of the Delegates Meeting. Going in it's more like the US Senate where every unit (state) has equal representation. View the membership vote as the House of Congress vote.
One more question: Will you be splitting these 3 items into 3 amendments or are you going to go for broke with all 3 in 1?
We're going for broke! The primary goal is to get members a bonafide vote. Making sure a non-attending Unit still has a say (your earlier efforts plus the reality of how many units had no vote in Perry made it clear).
__
__________________
What's next?
6500+ Airsteam families having fun!
1100+ Airstream Events including 650+ Rallies in 2008!
SaveWally's WBCCI Unit Guide
quote=mistral blue Hopefully this debate will generate 100 or more productive posts.
...I don't think MALs should be allowed to vote on Unit matters.
MALs can't vote because they don't belong to a unit.
Proposed Sec. 3
Member at Large An applicant for membership at large, upon written application to International Headquarters and the payment of International dues and a surcharge, as set by the International Board of Trustees, shall be a Member-at-Large of the International Club. A Member at Large shall possess all the rights and privileges of the club, except the right to hold office in a Unit, a Region or in the International Club. Ownership of a recreational vehicle as defined in this article and the payment of annual International dues and the surcharge is prerequisite to retaining membership as a Member at Large.
New response: Then why do we have to remind them they can't hold office in a unit?
The members of each chartered Unit and the MALs assigned to it...
We aren't assigning MALs to a unit. That has nothing to do with this amendment. Besides, I'm pretty sure if the club ever did choose to assign MALs to units -- they'd no longer be MALs.
New response: Clearly the implementation and wording need a lot of work. I'm trying to think of a way to give MALs an opportunity to vote as the World is now. How would they actually do it? I was envisioning Units serving as polling places for MALs. Kind of like when you have to go to your local school to vote. MAL input here would go a long way ...
A Delegate or Alternate Delegate may only represent one chartered unit at a Delegates Meeting.
Yes, we don't want a Delegate Representing TWO or more units. Think about the hand raising issue and all that internal fighting.
New response: I was talking about the sentence preceding this one: Each Unit shall be represented at the Delegates Meeting by one WBCCI Member Delegate, or an Alternate. I didn't think it was necessary to formally require in the Constitution that the Delegate be a member of WBCCI, wise guy! It reads just fine without it.
Art XV, sec 1: I think I would feel more comfortable seeing a 2/3 super majority.
I'm not so sure Bylaws and Policy share the same critical mass that the consitution does. Does it, really?
New response: No, it doesn't. I'm open to being persuaded. My comments here are coming from a gut level feeling is all.
Art XVI, sec 2: Take out the word "vote" after "two-thirds" for better readability.
That was a tough one. It's important to show that it's actually 2/3rds of the actual votes RECEIVED. Not the actual votes that could be cast. If 55% of the membership decides to actually vote, you're looking at 2/3rds of that 55% -- not the membership as a whole.
New response: The offending word IMO is inside the [ ]: Amendments to this Constitution may also be adopted by a two-thirds [vote] majority of the votes cast by the membership on a particular issue. I think it reads better without that particular word.
I think what you have done here so far is terrific and I'd love ratify it in the near future.
[/quote]
I did a cut and paste job with your quote of my quote.
..... I also have a problem trying to understand why Mals are MALs, but that is a different item.....
Richard,
They are MAL because they don't feel like dealing with the constitutional, governmental BS that the WBCCI is notorious for. I went to the International last summer in Salem, while our Sovereign was getting a new water heater in Portland, and I left completely disgusted.....I walked in right as they were discussing (if you want to call it that) the AOAI name change proposal. I let my WBCCI membership expire because of that.
I'm happier being out on the road and exploring on my own, rather than being told what event I must attend and what I need to bring; I guess "does not play well with others" really does apply to me.
Quick Links
What's next?
6500+ Airsteam families having fun! 
Linear Mode
