1M1V vs. Delegate doctrine

[RickDavis]

Originally Posted by mbmbstreamer

1.
3. Currently, those voting at our Business Meeting determine how our unit votes will be cast. Whether the 320+ are split or unanimous is also up to those in the business meeting. By the way, we seldom have a split vote in our meetings, except when more than a single candidate is put for a vote. Then, we split it proportionally.

I believe proportional and block voting need to go.
With a mail and/or electronic system everyone gets a chance to vote.
With the proportional or block voting essentially anyone choosing not to vote or not present at the meeting gets a vote assigned to them by those present at the business meeting.

Just as in our other non club votes, local elections, or what have you, if you don't care enough to vote, it shouldn't be counted.
As anyone knows who follows local elections many vote on the basis of uninformed opinions. That may not be good, but it is their right.

Of course most of this will never matter until there is also a system in place that might actually field multiple candidates for office in a timely manner.

We have seen what happens under the current system when a candidate tries to run from the floor, even when announcing an early start.

And for the record although I have only attended one meeting I do listen to all the audio feeds

[mbmbstreamer]

Do you require a simple majority of votes cast for most issues (2/3 for constitution changes) OR

Do you require majority (2/3) of membership to pass changes? If you only gauge votes cast, you are essentially accepting proportional voting.

Our country decided that a representative form of government would ensure decisions were made by informed individuals who were better able to make the right choice. Popular choices are not necessarily best.

If a large number of votes are cast based only on the IP and CBL Chair recommendations, is that best for the club?

These are difficult questions.

[LI Pets]

Originally Posted by mbmbstreamer

Do you require a simple majority of votes cast for most issues (2/3 for constitution changes)

That's my understanding.

Dona G. did a paper explaining this in detail, it is due to be sent out shortly.

If a large number of votes are cast based only on the IP and CBL Chair recommendations, is that best for the club?

I'll speak to the CBL question, in word NO, his report did NOT contain recommendations per se, they were his personal opinions, only opinions, not based on facts..

Understand although he represented his report as a committees report meaning a group of members he passed off his opinion as the work and/or consensus of the whole committee. This was a false pretense, a prevarication.

The document submitted by the chair is not the report of the CBL committee and should not have been filed as such, IMO



.

[wkerfoot]

Apparently the IP does not agree with you or he would have stated as such. Allowing the report to go unchallenged give it some weight as official.

Bill

Originally Posted by LI Pets

That's my understanding.

Dona G. did a paper explaining this in detail, it is due to be sent out shortly.



I'll speak to the CBL question, in word NO, his report did NOT contain recommendations per se, they were his personal opinions, only opinions, not based on facts..

Understand although he represented his report as a committees report meaning a group of members he passed off his opinion as the work and/or consensus of the whole committee. This was a false pretense, a prevarication.

The document submitted by the chair is not the report of the CBL committee and should not have been filed as such, IMO



.

[Aviator]

Bob,

As a new, but very interested member, I would like to take a stab at answering your question about influence relating to the quoted statement below.

Originally Posted by mbmbstreamer
I would still get concerned about undue influence from the EC5 and IBT. They are simply too insulated from our members to get real feedback. There is always room for discussion.

Bob's question to above;

How can they influence the delegates or members, when?

If I were not following this closely, or did not attend my unit rally in order to ask questions of my unit leadership (which I expect to be highly informed on the issues effecting the WBCCI) then the only source of info I would have readily available would be the BB, or emails from the International Leadership. I hope that the proposed system would also result in emails from my unit, but I don't know that. That is how and when the International would influence the under-informed membership.

I also do not have enough experience within WBCCI to know what other units are like. Are they highly involved, or do they just go with the flow. International attendance has been dropping. If I were a unit leader who just liked being a unit president with no interest to the club as a whole, what is my incentive to even attend the international rally without the requirement to represent my unit as a delegate? This especially holds true if it is a long way to get to it.

So, (hypothetically) now I am back to just getting the information from our national officers. Since I am not all that involved beyond maybe a few local rally's and maybe a caravan, but definitely not particularly interested in politics I would read the BB and base my vote on what they tell me. Without involvement in a unit which has diligent officers what other arguments will I hear? Remember this is the hypothetical uninvolved member.

Worse yet, maybe I am a new member who is still working and raising a family. My family and I love Airstreaming and have joined the WBCCI to meet other airstreamers, camp, and have fun. With our membership we also have access to airstream campgrounds in MN, FL, TN, GA, TX, WA, PA, and others. I need to balance my airstreaming with kids sports and other activities. With this scenario in mind it would be hard to make all of the unit rally's in order to hear arguments other than the BB. I would most likely cast my vote as they tell me. After all aren't they are the most informed as national officers? Some day I would hope to retire and go on the great caravans, attend all my local rally's as well as international, but that is many years off. So I simply vote as those I believe to know best tell me to, that is if I bother to vote at all.

This last example may pay more attention than the member who only wants to camp with the unit and otherwise be left alone, but we need ALL members to be involved and informed if a pure 1M1V is to function. In other words we must have an informed electorate. An ignorant electorate does not solve our current structural problems (as an example look to Washington DC)

I like the idea of member voting, but I also want to see those votes collected and tallied at the unit level (JC for MAL's). It is my humble opinion that this will assist in the education of the membership when casting voting the issues.

DISCLAIMER:

I belong to a 45,000 member organization which is republic in nature and it works well. However, the terms of office are well defined, and the ability of the membership to recall an officer who does not act in accordance with the memberships will is in place. The meetings are frequent and the membership is informed by all electronic and print means possible. We directly elect our local representatives. They as a body then elect the overall leadership and every four years elect national officers. All elected officials are subject to recall by those who elected them. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen. By making this disclaimer, I am trying to say that 1M1V can work, but it works better when those votes are then carried forward by officers able to effect change should new information come to light, or after further discussion in conjunction with informed member input. I suppose it provides some balance to the whole endeavor.

I don't support change simply for change. I do support an improvement which will ensure the club is around for a time when I am able to fully participate in all that it has to offer. I also want to see change which will attract new generations of members. As I look at the demographics in the BB, and within my unit, I see a need for members in their 20's, 30's, 40's, and 50's to come along side the long time members which are now older than that. Through this the knowledge, and rich heritage can be passed along and the club can hopefully return to the vibrancy of the '60', '70's , and '80's.

[pmclemore]

Originally Posted by LI Pets

I'll speak to the CBL question, in word NO, his report did NOT contain recommendations per se, they were his personal opinions, only opinions, not based on facts..

Understand although he represented his report as a committees report meaning a group of members he passed off his opinion as the work and/or consensus of the whole committee. This was a false pretense, a prevarication.

The document submitted by the chair is not the report of the CBL committee and should not have been filed as such, IMO



.

If his report is allowed to stand unchallenged by the IP, and uncorrected by the chairman of the cbl, then who is to question it? Your saying that it should not be valid doesn't carry as much weight as what the chairman of the cbl committee says. Right? Does your statement get delivered along with the chairman's statement?

What I'm saying is that if a guy paints a wall red and although it shouldn't have been painted red - and you say it shouldn't have been painted red - if it stays red then it is red.

Pat

[HowieE]

Politically the IP can not contest the chairman's statement, that just is not done at that level of the Old Boys Club. However it would be nice to hear from the other 2 members that Don S. asked to be appointed to his committee on the first of March.

If a committee prepared that report than it's members should have signed it.

What does remain a fact of history is that Don S was in receipt of the Club's Lawyers report that the Revised Constitution was in compliance with Ohio law 7 days before he signed the report questioning that compliance. Could he not read it or did he just choose to ignore it for personnel reasons.


Yes some will believe the wall is Red but those with closer contact or sight of the wall will know otherwise.



.

[LI Pets]

WBCCI Members,

The following information, from the Constitution Revision Committee, is to address various questions about the proposed Revised WBCCI Constitution.

What is a Revised Constitution?
1. It is NOT an amendment of the current Constitution.
2. It IS proposed extensive changes to the Constitution that are scattered throughout and make this an entirely NEW Constitution. This is the definition that is stated on page 575 of the WBCCI Parliamentary Authority, Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised current edition (RONR).
3. This proposed Revised Constitution, following the current Constitution rules, will be presented by the International President to the Delegates for their consideration. It was developed by a Special Committee created by the Executive Committee and appointed by the President following RONR, page 549. This Special committee and the Executive Committee refined this proposed Revision, which is the document with the line numbers.

How will the Delegates discuss the proposed Revision?
1) Each Article and Section will be opened for discussion and amendment, one at a time in order.
2) Any Delegate can offer an amendment (change) to the part being discussed.
3) Amendments need to be in writing. (More on amendments in a following question)
4) After all the sections are discussed and voted on, the entire document as amended will be opened for a final discussion and amendment. After that is completed, the final vote will be taken on the Revision.

HOW IS THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTION ADOPTED/REJECTED?
1. Following RONR page 553, the vote required to adopt a proposed Revision as amended is the same as that required to amend the current Constitution. For WBCCI that is 2/3 by a roll call vote.
2. The current Constitution remains in effect until a proposed Revised Constitution is adopted. If adopted, the Revised Constitution immediately becomes effective as the Constitution.
3. However, there may be some parts that require time to implement, or transition to, so some provisions have to be made for this transition. These provisions are called "provisos".
4. Since the adopted Constitution takes effect immediately, the provisos need to be adopted prior to the adoption of the Constitution or as "attached provisos".
5. The provisos are not a part of the Constitution; and, as soon as they are fulfilled, they are no longer attached.

WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT?
1) Proposed amendments have to be in writing. There needs to be four (4) copies, one for the Presiding Officer, one for the Parliamentarian, one for the Computer Services for display on the screen so that the other Delegates can see it, and one for the person making the amendment. The original will go to the International Recording Secretary for the records.

2) Amendment forms and copying equipment will be available in the Office at the International Rally and during the Delegates Meeting.

3) The Parliamentarian will be available in the Office if any Delegate would like to check on the wording and form to present their amendment appropriately.

4) If possible, any proposed amendments should be given to the International Recording Secretary before the Delegates Meeting. She will be in the Office as soon as it is open. That way the Presiding Officer will be aware that a Delegate wants to propose an amendment; and, he will be sure to recognize the Delegate who wants to make an amendment. The Delegates have the right to make amendments from the floor; but, because they need to be in writing and copies need to be made, this could take some time.

5) Each proposed amendment will be voted on by "aye" and "no" or a show of hands, or a standing count or whatever is needed.

6) A majority adopts an amendment.

7) After all the sections of the Proposed Revision have been discussed and any amendments voted on, the entire document, as amended, will be opened for any further amendments that the Delegates want to make.

8) When there are no further amendments, the proposed Revision, as amended, will be voted on by a Roll Call Vote with 2/3 needed for adoption.

9) One thing to keep in mind is that the current Constitution is NOT open for amendment during this process. Also, the proposed Revision is NOT an amendment of the current Constitution. If any Delegate wants to have any of the wording from the current Constitution in the proposed Revision, the Delegate will need to propose that wording as an amendment to the Revision. As with any other amendment, it will need to be adopted by the Delegates before it becomes part of the proposed Revision.

10) The document with the lines numbered is the document that is the proposed Revision with the provisos. The numbers can be used to more easily identify the place that a Delegate wants to propose to amend (change). This is the document that will be open for discussion and amendment.

11) The document with the three (3) columns is a comparison between the current Constitution and the proposed Revision. This may help the members see where changes are being made in the proposed Revision.


.

[RickDavis]

Hey -- I hear the international rally might lose money again this year? Looks like the club has a GREAT possibility of pulling off another hat-trick season; membership losses, financial losses and yet another EC7 committee that set-off to do one thing and completely lost their way in the process...

Gee, they manged to make enough last year, around $117 per trailer, to almost wipe out the fiasco of the year before. Based on the price of campsites at DuQouin I expected another huge profit this year based on the $500 price. Of course none of that profit, if any, is coming out of my pocket as long as there is no 3 amp, generator, or other reasonably priced option.

The Presidents page suggests that if you don't go to the International this year your alternative is to let grass grow around your trailer in the yard. Obviously he hasn't seen my schedule of Airstream related activities and I don't have time to do some I would like to.
Probably will spend more than if I went to the International, but I expect to get much more for the investment.

[HowieE]

Just thought you might like to see how the Old Guard, that several of you have all claimed set this committee up and were pushing for it passage is in reality running scared that it might pass and is attempting to block progress.

The Fl. unit, that this comment came from, has a sizable number of IBT, PIP, and BT, plus the one man Constitutional Committee and the past National Membership Chairman in it attempted to railroad a No vote through the greater membership of that unit.

Hi HowieE
I sent that, He is referring to the minutes of their last meeting not attached here, to you so you could see how your old buddy in the FL Unit tried to ram rod the vote against the new constitution. I was livid that they would let 5 people speak for 62 with a vote at an unscheduled meeting.
A few days later after some of us voiced our displeasure, the vote they had their was ruled as not happening. All members have can now vote by mail or e-mail.
I have sent them my vote in favor of the new one

There is something to be said for 1M1V. If they have it they will use it




.

[LI Pets]

Yep another example how well the delegate system works.

[LI Pets]

Originally Posted by LI Pets

Discussions at the Annual Members’ Caucus shall serve to inform members and the originators of proposed amendments about concerns, possible modifications and benefits of the proposal before a direct vote by members takes place.

A debate before the units final meeting on such amendments.
Any member can part take in the debate


Art XVI Sec. 2 Any chartered Unit may submit in writing to Headquarters a proposed amendment to this Standard of Conduct or Constitution.

No longer a majority vote of the units within a Region which can take time prior to sending it out to all the units needing to vote which can take a year and a half or more.

1. Member(s) of a unit propose an amendment, the unit decides it should propose such an amendment to HQ.

2.Goes to CBL if technical correct it moves forward regardless of that committees opinion.

3.Placed on agenda published in BB and web site.

4.Debate at local unit level

5.Caucus debate.

6.Debate at local unit level again if needed

7.Member direct vote

8.HQ will tabulate votes within 5 days of ballot due date

9.Published next BB and website..

Thought you folks may like to read this paper written by Kerry Matilia

There is much misinformation circulating on the relative merits of Direct Member Voting (as proposed in the Constitution revision) and the current Delegate voting system. This paper will try to clarify some of the issues with each.

The current Delegate system is used in varying forms by all Units. How the Units conduct the vote varies widely. Some Units use a vote at a business meeting to “instruct” the Delegate, some Units use mail and/or electronic voting to remove the requirement to attend a business meeting so as to allow all Unit members the opportunity to vote. Some Units simply allow the Delegate to vote his or her conscience. In all cases, the Delegate can then take the actual vote result and prorate it to the number of votes “authorized”, representing the number of voting members in the Unit as per a specified date. Here again the approach varies, with some Units prorating according to the actual vote and others using a “winner take all” approach and casting all authorized votes according to the majority vote of Unit members. This prorated number is the total vote cast by the Delegate at the Delegates meeting.

Let’s look at an example. Consider a Unit with 100 members and say 40 attend the business meeting/rally and vote 30 in favour and 10 opposed on an issue. The Unit may prorate the vote so that the Delegate can cast votes for 75 in favour and 25 opposed or, if using the “winner take all” approach, may decide to cast the vote as 100 in favour. If the Delegate is authorized to vote his or her conscience, who knows how the votes will be cast? Even in those Units that use a ballot system, the vote gets prorated as 100% participation is rare. Do any of these examples truly reflect the preference of all of the members? Only the Unit ballot system comes close and it is not widely used.

There are several flaws with the Delegate system:
1. Those Units that vote only at business meetings are excluding those members who are unable to attend.
2. There is rarely any certification of the actual vote results.
3. Some Unit members do not get to vote or find that the proration approach makes an assumption about how they might have voted.
4. A “winner take all” approach does not reflect the actual will of the members.
5. In order for any of the votes to be cast at the Delegates meeting, the Delegate has to attend. Each year, members of several Units are disenfranchised because they are unable to send a Delegate.
6. Members at large have no right to vote under this system.

The Direct Member Voting concept proposed in the Revision removes the Delegate system and provides a ballot to each WBCCI member directly by mail or electronic means or both. The proposal would still allow ample time for discussions at the Unit level, supplement those discussions with further sharing of views at the Members’ Caucus for policy issues and then give every member an opportunity to cast a vote with the assurance that the vote will be counted. The vote result will be a true reflection of the votes cast. It is the best way to ensure that each member’s individual vote is accurately reflected in the voting results.

The major challenge with the Direct Member Voting system is ensuring that the maximum number of members take the initiative to send in their vote. This is no different than voting in those Units that use a ballot system. The key will be providing plenty of information on how a vote may be cast, and ensuring good information is disseminated so that the member is well informed on the issues to be voted upon. Here the Unit and the WBCCI communications systems will play a vital role. While some are arguing that Direct Member Voting reduces the role of the Unit, we believe that the opposite is the case and the Unit will become even more important as a forum for members to discuss and share views.

With the greatly reduced size of WBCCI, Direct Member Voting is even more practical than it would have been some years ago. Technology is also helping to make it more efficient.


Relevant to all these comments is the following question. Why is WBCCI so obsessed with constantly tinkering with its Constitution and Bylaws? We have 50+ years of continuous tinkering behind us and our Constitution and Bylaws are a voluminous mess as a result. Whatever the outcome of the current revision process, let’s try to live with the product for a reasonable period and stop all the tinkering. We all need to keep in mind that people don’t join WBCCI because of a love for office politics. Most members joined WBCCI because of their love for traveling and camping in their Airstreams. At the end of the day, that is all that matters.

[mbmbstreamer]

Representative democracy or pure democracy?

If a pure democracy is in place, it is unlikely any vote would go counter to the recommendation of the IP. Few participate in this forum. The BB has only one side, and few listen to streamed meetings.

Is that what is best for the club?

[LI Pets]

Leo as usual content to “tilt at windmills”

[dwightdi]

I agree with Matt and some of the points Leo makes are valid. After the way the club treated him, it is a wonder he cares enough about the club to take his personal time to analyze the problems and suggest alternatives.

I do not think the club will completely collapse until the leadership uses up all the money in the bank on travel for themselves. It will be a long agonizing death. Due to the structure and seniority rules, it does take a lot of personal time to become a leader in this club and they think they deserve something for their time. Most people do. From what Forrest posted, it appears the leadership views the club as a social club of old friends getting together and getting along. That may be a valid view from where they sit. Others have a different viewpoint. The leadership tries to make the decisions on what they think is best from their vantage point. Occasionally, the membership stands up to them and rejects their ideas, ie. the Mo/HM issue and the name change. The new Constitution will likely hamper this process.

[rideair]

“tilt at windmills”

I've heard they use to say the samething about people who worried about Russia right after WWII, the "Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965" and terrorism in the early 1970's.

When will people realize they themselves are not always the smartest person in the room.

[LI Pets]

Originally Posted by dwightdi

The new Constitution will likely hamper this process.

Would you care to elaborate on that?

[dwightdi]

Without voting delegates, there will be no need to instruct them, and no need for the units to discuss the issues to develop instruct them. Without proportional voting, getting enough votes to organize a resistance to the ideas of the leaders can only be done by a large letter writing campaign. The content of the Blue Beret is closely controlled by the International President and his EC friends. You can easily see that in the choices of the letters to the editor they chosen to print. Non-approved candidates for office were not allowed to publish their resumes, even when they volunteered to pay the printing and distribution costs. Therefore, the unbiased pros and cons will not reach the members in any organized way. The club lawyers have already threatened people who have used the club e-mail list in the past, so that method of communication has been threatened. The 40 % of the membership, without email addresses, are completely uneconomically reachable. Without the ability to organize and the need to have Unit meetings about the issues, the New Constitution will hamper the ability to organize and resist proposals from the top.

[LI Pets]

Originally Posted by dwightdi

The content of the Blue Beret is closely controlled by the International President and his EC friends. You can easily see that in the choices of the letters to the editor they chosen to print.

I can tell you how to make that happen.

Non-approved candidates for office were not allowed to publish their resumes, even when they volunteered to pay the printing and distribution costs.

That issue was fully addressed in the Revision, agree?

Therefore, the unbiased pros and cons will not reach the members in any organized way. The club lawyers have already threatened people who have used the club e-mail list in the past, so that method of communication has been threatened.

As you know I was very close to that issue, it was miss-handled and money wasted, by a past IP.

You now can amend to allow that without interference, as it is now you can use for club related biz.

The 40 % of the membership, without email addresses,

I think it is closer to 20% but another 20% requested their emails not be listed because they are afraid of spam.

completely uneconomically reachable.

you mean by mail, I agree.

Without the ability to organize and the need to have Unit meetings about the issues

I don't see any difference in the Unit meeting, you have the Caucus to organize any members with streaming.



.

[mbmbstreamer]

I prefer to address serious questions.