Quote:
Originally Posted by friable7
I think that Lyle is correct on all points.
We have a President instead of a Steward as the only recent Charter change.
Looking at changes to an existing Charter is an amazingly difficult process. We have had fits and starts at this for well over a year-maybe two. Leslie, Bob, myself and others have gathered information on how to do the deed, including many examples of other entity Charters/Bylaws, "how to guides" and what we might want to reference. Other folk think it is good enough in its current state with a couple of possible tweaks. Looking at what we need in a Charter depends on where we think we are as an association (now there you'll find some differences in opinion!) and where we think we are going. Perhaps the incoming Board can give some direction. Then you need to ask; is it time to look at issues of non profit status directly, position ourselves to do so in the future, stipulate what we need to do to operate under another entites umbrella or continue our current business model? It would be far easier to start over from scratch than to amend what we have...not suggesting that, but it would be easier. Hard messy work ahead.
Lyle points out how I read the current Charter. If one member shows up for a Members Meeting and you have a Board Quorum, you can pass a Charter amendment. I am hoping that this issue gets on the agenda at a Member meeting some time in the near future.
Tim N.
|
As I read this I see lot's of questions surfacing with no direction. Does anybody have a proposal? If starting over is better in your opinion. Write out what this new charter might read like. If trimming is the best way can we see what issues might need to be addressed. The problems seem numerous but the solution cupboard is baron. Everybody seems afraid to say, I vote that we change the charter to... Maybe certain people think the charter is adequate... After 8 months of meetings, there hasn't been one proposed charter amendment by the committee on this two page document. When we voted on club members getting to vote for who fills in for our missing Reps, Tim voted that the board should keep appointing representatives of the club on the first vote. He admitted that it made sense that the club should elect it's reps, but because the committee hadn't talked about it, he stated that he felt that it needed to be adequate analyzed.. The next meeting the same proposal was brought up, this time, typed out on and passed around to the club. Tim again voted no, even though the committee had met. Gordy, Bob and Tim tried to curtail us from even voting about it, saying that, the committee needed to talk about how we change our bylaws, before actually changing them. Even if the change isn't done in the most proper way possible(which it was via our actual charter), there is no need to delay positive progress that helps our club exercise one of our two powers given. Or how about producing some language that says to change a charter bylaw, the club must be given 30 days notice. It was suggested but it wasn't really presented. Twice new legislation is shot down for reasons other than there being an actual problem with the change
Well there was more than likely an unsaid problem from board members who wanted to be able to appoint their buddy's instead of allowing the club to decide.
Has everybody seen the list of things that Jeff Crum (sky pilot) has accomplished? I want to see the list of what Gordy, Bob, Jon Verbarg and Tim N. have even proposed!?!? We have leaders that aren't, except for in title.. It is difficult to make this statement knowing that I will be working with at least 2 of these men. I know that they have passion for the game. It is only about
our courses from October-March. The rest of the year it is the Inland Northwest series. While the series is demanding on them and well ran, it is not an excuse to put city course development on the back burner. A charter change that would be a welcome addition would be one that demanded some sort of action by board members. Something that would propel a reasonable amount of work or proposals during the "offseason". A meeting every 4-6 weeks. With back to back meetings being grounds for dismissal (if board member doesn't communicate their absence ahead of time), and a third miss in a row be an automatic dismissal. Missing 4 meetings in a year or 7 in a term being grounds for dismissal. Meeting every 4-6 weeks would mean that there is a minimum of 8 board meetings a year. Which there are probably as many right now. They are all bunched into a 6 month window though. Time to make our club and courses a year round project? I think so.
Let's get some idea's on how to adjust/fix the charter... Shoot it out. Doesn't need to be written perfectly, just an idea