WBCCI New Constitution

[Boondocker]

Howie,

With all due respect, you should go back and read that post. It clearly states that the new document places that control with the IBT. Nothing of significance changes.

Originally Posted by bugdoc

The Revision allows the IBT, the governing body, to establish Bylaws for the operation of the club so we have that body responsible for their creation and content.

[rideair]

Rodney,

I'm glad to see someone else understands what I've been trying to say!

The "Forrest Amendment" gave far more control to the club spending and rules to the general membership than the "New Constitution" does. It was easy to understand and my guess would have passed, no problem.

The real power is in who has control and has oversight to the "Bylaws" which as written "is not" in the "New Constitution".

I understand "we can change it". Good Luck!

[bugdoc]

Originally Posted by Boondocker

Howie,

With all due respect, you should go back and read that post. It clearly states that the new document places that control with the IBT. Nothing of significance changes.

Boondocker,

With all due respect, don't believe Howie has a reading problem. The proposed constitution revision will be considered Article by Article by the Delegates and they, not the IBT, will have the opportunity to amend each Article to meet the needs of the membership as represented by the Delegates. If the membership wants to share the control of the Bylaws with the IBT then that could be amended into the proposed constitution. I believe that is clearly stated in my response to Gene.

I look forward to yourself and others examining the proposed constitution and, if you wish, suggest a proposed amendment for your delegate to bring to the Delegates meeting that will address this concern.

Tom

[LI Pets]

Rodney and Paul you two guys just don't get it, (or really want to ) but to the other readers I respectfully disagree with your interpretation and interaction of the the Constitution & Bylaws.

Nor do you understand the sequence of the the two documents and the fact that the constitution is first step.

.

[wkerfoot]

If the revised constitution is passed as is, with no changes, will the members have any additional control over the by-laws than they have now?

Bill

[wheel interested]

Out of a mere 4 members, 2-4 opinions emerge, now multiply that. Which is all the more reason that the document will have to be bullet proofed to hold up to many interpretations and most importantly to the opinion of the parliamentarian and the action of the IP.

Paul I believe Forrest's amendment or the Denco Amendment can still be passed by units or can also be incorporated into the final delegate approved doc and keep the delegate system and reject the caucus. This is kind of like the DIY Messiah, we can all have a part, so sing out.

[rideair]

Oh, I fully understand and with all due respect know the following:

The "current" WBCCI "Constitution" gives full spending control and "everyday" rules setting to the "IBT" that impact most of the bad feelings that current members and those that would like to be members have. Period, no if's, no and's or but's.

The "NEW Constitution" gives full spending control and "everyday" rules setting to the "IBT" that impact most of the bad feelings that current members and those that would like to be members have.

I also understand that we "did not" have to re-write the whole WBCCI Constitution to make the small change needed to give oversight/audit control to the WBCCI Delegates.

So yes Bob, I understand maybe a lot more than most!

[Boondocker]

Tom,

I don't know you or your history, but I do assume good faith on your part. On the other hand, I do know what history has shown on the part of the club royalty, and frankly my assumption of good faith do not extend that far. Take Forest's amendment as a case in point; given how it was thwarted despite the honest-good faith approach that was taken, I don't see any reason to expect that the deliberations this summer will take place under anything approaching a level playing field.

While I do appreciate that you have pointed out the potential for delegates to offer amendments if they have suggestions, other questions remain. I am very curious to hear from you as someone who was involved in writing the new document, why the power structure that is the central problem was left in place- why not fix that upfront instead of suggesting delegates attempt to do so this summer? Why do that?

As a side note, isn't this whole document being presented as a motion of the IP? and if this is the case, would he have to accept any amendments?

I am also curious to know what you are advocating as a backup plan should full consideration of amendments be thwarted or if it should become apparent that the new document is not being brought forth by those in power in good faith. Feel free to call me a naysayer or a cynic, but history has prepared me to suspect such will be the case. I would love to be proved wrong about my suspicions, but somehow that doesn't seem to be in the cards. So what is the plan then?

Having well defined contingency plans is essential to gaining the support of those who have seen the gamesmanship in the past. Without a good plan, and backup plans, there is little reason to believe that this will turn out any different and many people will not invest themselves in the process.

[Gene]

Originally Posted by bugdoc

Gene,
I appreciate your thoughtful opinion that the contents of the Forum represents actual facts, however, as you have clearly stated many of these are the perceptions of individuals and as such are still only opinions (Oxford English Dictionary) unless substantiated with facts.

Having said that, I have read this forum thread, all 40 pages, as well as the previous thread dealing with the revision. In both venues the overriding issue was member input and control of their organization.

The first step toward this is a constitution that allows the membership to take an active part in the control. I believe the proposed revision starts the club down the path towards this. However, one of the things we must always keep in sight is the purpose of a constitution as defined in Roberts Rules and the rigidity with which we protect such a document.

The opinion issues you raised in your post deal with control issues and there needs to be a mechanism in place to address them. The issues raised are actually addressed in the structure of the Bylaws and this is where the constitution becomes important. The Revision allows the IBT, the governing body, to establish Bylaws for the operation of the club so we have that body responsible for their creation and content. Now if your opinion concerns are to be addressed by the membership then there needs to be a way for the membership to have input to the Bylaws.

In other posts I have suggested that the membership needs to address the amendment possibilities of each article in the proposed constitution when it is presented to the Delegates. I have read one post here that has suggested language for the Bylaws article to address the membership input. However, I hope, if this a major issue, that there are others that have thought through how what the IBT proposes or does can be validated by the membership or ???

Considering your experience as a lawyer possible you could also weigh in with some suggestions in this area that might show how to address some of the perceptions that exist in a real way.

Tom

Tom,

I am impressed you have read all of this thread (although you missed the really nasty stuff that has been removed after it was posted) and a previous thread. You are probably aware there have been many other threads blasting the WBCCI leaders.

The perceptions of people are what matters when they decide whether to continue as members or to join the organization. Once perceptions have been created, it takes a lot to change them and even if the organic documents are changed completely to allow members absolute control over everything, it will take a lot to change perceptions. Even those who wholeheartedly support the WBCCI often criticize how it is run—they say they just enjoy camping with their friends in their unit and ignore what happens at the top. That is not a ringing endorsement.

If the WBCCI bylaws (as opposed to the constitution) actually deal with control issues, that does not have to be so. As I understand it, only the leaders can change the bylaws, but the delegates can change the constitution. It would be an unusual situation where those with power give up some or all of that power. So—

1. Can't the delegates change the constitution to remove control issues from the bylaws and insert them into the constitution so as make the leaders responsive to the membership?

2. If so, should not the delegates have prepared amendments to the proposed amendments for that purpose when they assemble?

3. And, should not those amendments be prepared in a manner to avoid be ruled out of order at the meeting?

I might be able to figure out how to do this should I wish to become more involved (or paid enormous sums to do so), but this is not a major part of my life. Thank you for the suggestion I get deeper into this, but I cannot. Also, Robert's Rules does not determine anything unless the organic documents incorporate those Rules into them, and the usual phrasing is something that says they apply except where in conflict with statutes, articles of incorporation or the bylaws (and "constitution" in WBCCI's case). You can do it many ways and create your own structure and procedures within the law. And, the chair, guided by the parliamentarian, has authority to rule amendments to the main motion (which itself will be an amendment to the constitution) out of order if they do not have anything to do with the substance of the motion. Thus, amendments must be submitted that fall within the scope of the main motion. This can be a judgment call, and the chair's ruling is always subject to appeal.

I applaud your willingness to engage in this discussion in a calm manner. Your next to last paragraph may indicate a willingness to explore alternatives meant to change how power flows through the organization. If I were a member, maybe I would know who you are within the organization—it seems you were a member of the revision committee. Are you a WBCCI "leader"?

Gene

[hampstead38]

Originally Posted by bugdoc

Gene,

I did not respond to your 3 questions because there is nothing factual in them, they are only your opinion. Though I respect your right to have an opinion on anything. I find however, if you are not a member of the organization it is difficult to understand the basis of your opinion.

The members of the Revision Committee who have ventured into this forum are trying to deal with misunderstandings or clarifications about the proposed constitutional revision and seek input on real issues. We are not trying to deal with matters of opinion.

WBCCI calls the 2 separate documents, its constitution and Bylaws and Policy the Blue Book, but there are still 2 separate documents. The most current edition of Roberts Rules states that an organization can have the WBCCI format for its governing documents or a single document called Bylaws, we operate with the former.

I would hope you would consider reading the documents and realize that WBCCI is a social organization whose basic mission for its membership is "Fun, Fellowship and Adventure". The proposed constitution is directed to bringing this into sharper focus. If these are things you enjoy you might consider joining.

Tom

Like Gene, I am not a member. I have basically the same questions with one notable addition. How does Jesuitical parsing of documents, rules, bylaws, etc., achieve a mission of "fun, fellowship and adventure"? Sorry, but the imagine in my head is a of a group of 1950s robots sitting around trying to understand why the captive humans are not happy.

The very process the WBCCI is undertaking, the whole "better living through a committee" reflects a fundamental gulf of understanding between the WBCCI and the contemporary Airstreamer. It's a generational, cultural and even spiritual divide.

I have yet to meet Gene in person, but I'll wager he enjoys at least two out of the three "mission elements." He might be getting a little long in the tooth for "adventure." (Just a little friendly kidding there). Gene is also a very bright guy. A ham-handed appeal is not going to sway him, particularly not when delivered at the end of a dry-as-day-old-toast post about "documents." Playing the "fun card," Tom, is more effective when you create the impression of actually having encountered fun outside of a laboratory setting.

Fixing the WBCCI isn't hard, at least not from a technical/organizational development standpoint. It's simply a matter of turning the club on its head, investing all decision-making power with the units. In this model, the IBT would be nothing more than a voluntary, zero-perks, mostly ceremonial body. Of course, this has been said a number of times before so I'm fairly certain the message is falling on deaf ears... or perhaps more accurately, ears that want to retain the power and privileges they have acquired.

So, Gene and the rest of us will go back to finding our fun, fellowship and adventure without the benefit of red numbers or blue beanies. To stay with my robot theme (and borrowing from the X Files)...

The fun is out there.

[Gene]

Originally Posted by hampstead38

I have yet to meet Gene in person, but I'll wager he enjoys at least two out of the three "mission elements." He might be getting a little long in the tooth for "adventure."

Adventure when you are long in the tooth is getting the channel number right on the remote.

Gene

[wheel interested]

You're too much. Thanks for the laugh. Yeah and your adventure to Alaska sounds like fun too!!

[wkerfoot]

Has this happened yet? If so, can you post a link?

Bill

Originally Posted by LI Pets

No I'm sure they are likely correct, but the official copy will be published on Wbcci.org tomorrow the last I understood from HQ.

All the regions were emailed at about 8:00 AM today

[Coloradobus]

Thanks Leo.

[Nuvite-F]

First we were told the official version of the proposed new constitution would be released at the IBT.

It wasn't.

Next we were told it would be posted on the WBCCI web site by April 1.

It isn't. I just looked, and it's well after close of business today.

(And don't anybody deny these predictions--I have the quotes cued up in a text file ready to respond.)

So. . . back to sleep everybody.

We can have an informed discussion of the issues after the official version of the proposed revision is published, together with its supporting documents.

Whenever that is.
.

[DanB]

Please know that I arrived home today to find a priority mail envelope containing the promised paperwork. I really was hoping for an electronic version to save me a step.

When I make it back to my office, I intend on creating a pdf for distribution. This will minimally be emailed to NOVA members. If I can get it posted online somewhere, I will do that also.

[wkerfoot]

Too bad that they couldn't include a CD with the PDF files.

I guess that I will have to wait for my unit president to distribute the documents.

Bill

Originally Posted by DanB

Please know that I arrived home today to find a priority mail envelope containing the promised paperwork. I really was hoping for an electronic version to save me a step.

When I make it back to my office, I intend on creating a pdf for distribution. This will minimally be emailed to NOVA members. If I can get it posted online somewhere, I will do that also.

[wheel interested]

overdue? A redcoat and a watch? it must be awfully important like a party or something...

YouTube - Alice in wonderland - I'm late

[Nuvite-F]

Great metaphor, Carol.

Actually this whole thing has a lot of parallels to Alice in wonderland.

It started with the Red Queen proclaiming, "Off with his head!" (Leo)

We have been through the Red Queen proclaiming "Words mean whatever I say they mean." (numerous examples)

And now the proposed new constitution, if adopted, will bring to the WBCCI the Caucus Race!

Come to think of it, although our resident kwazy wabbit, 2air, has had the good sense to avoid this thread, his hat does look a lot like the Mad Hatter's. . .
.

[LI Pets]

hey guys it was supposed to be published to the web after the region pres were mailed or emailed.

That happened Thursday, I'm as mad as you.

We'll find out from Cindy on Monday what the glitch was