[DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues

[Craig Campman]

All,

Since I have not yet read the exact wording being proposed for the new Bylaw Amendment for Article X, I am basing my comments below on what I have read on this forum regarding the proposed Amendment. I have copied Larry Finch’s recent message below, as it seems to discuss the proposed Amendment in detail.

I appreciate the debate on the new Bylaws Amendment but seem to feel the most important issue (to me at least) is either not discussed or glossed over in most debate I have read. This issue I am concerned about is the combination of allowing a majority of “votes cast” to decide passage of an amendment, along with the definition of only "25 votes to declare an election valid". To me, this amendment in its current wording smacks of the same BS that most of our current government lawmakers try to do by having a great change (electronic voting) at the top of the agenda, in effect hiding fine print that in the long run puts power to make future changes into the hands of a select few (the constant 25 voters).

Considering that to change the Bylaws at the current time requires five-hundred-plus (500+) votes, out of maybe eight-hundred-plus (800+) members, it seems absurd to modify the system to only require twenty-five (25) votes to change the Bylaws in the future.

I am not entirely against defining a number of votes to have a valid election, but at least make it a reasonably sized number backed up by statistics on the number of votes typically received in past elections. If past elections have only received 25 votes, then we have a bigger problem that will not be solved with a new amendment.

In the end I urge all of you to vote NO on the new Bylaw Amendment in its current wording. If the Board and Membership wants to initiate electronic voting, then it should be done by proposing a single Amendment that changes the one issue. Additional issues worthy of change to the Bylaws (such as number of votes for validity, simple majority of votes cast, etc) should be proposed in similar single issue fashion, and not buried in a comprehensive package that forces us to accept the changes "all or nothing".

My 2-cents!

Regards,
Craig Campman
Red #5303


On Mar 7, 2015, at 11:00 AM, detomaso-request at poca.com wrote:

> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 21
> Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 09:10:46 -0800
> From: Larry Finch <fresnofinches at aol.com>
> To: detomaso at poca.com
> Subject: [DeTomaso] Article X amendment - my opinion
> Message-ID: <49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> All,
> 
> I would like to offer some insight as to why I believe the proposed changes to Article X of the POCA By-Laws should meet with the approval of all POCA members desiring to help our club move into the 21st-century.  
> 
> While retaining the paper ballot for those who prefer or need it, the amendment will allow for electronic, internet-based voting. While email voting is illegal in California and quite subject to hacking, there are acceptable online voting services available for POCA to utilize.
> 
> The amendment also provides a method for members to propose By-Laws amendments, a process that previously only the Board of Directors could initiate.
> 
> It further clarifies voting tabulation will be conducted on the basis of the votes received, and specifies at least 25 votes must be submitted in order for an election to be valid.
> 
> If passed, this Article X amendment will thus set the stage for greater membership participation in future POCA business, while all upcoming elections, such as those we can expect to see later this year as our Board of Directors continues to update and revise the rest of the POCA By-Laws, will not become snail-mail disasters. 
> 
> Please realize that with the passage of this Article X amendment, this election will be the very last POCA election that requires the exclusive use of mailed, paper ballots.
> 
> That improvement alone should make passage of this amendment a slam dunk worthy of every member?s affirmative vote.
> 
> Should you have any troubling concerns with some other aspect of this Article X amendment, I would urge you to put such concerns aside for the time being. 
> 
> Let?s first pass this amendment and permanently retire the troublesome, inefficient snail-mail election process.
> 
> Then, if you are still troubled by some portion of this amendment, once it is passed you can gather the necessary fellow members and submit your own By-Laws amendment proposal to correct anything you feel is in need of correcting.
> 
> Please join with me in voting YES on the proposed amendment to Article X.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Larry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------