[DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues
Jeff Detrich
jjdetrich at gmail.com
Sun Mar 8 16:44:25 EDT 2015
We still haven't gotten ours here in Texas!
Jeff
6559
On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 3:37 PM, fastgrandma via DeTomaso <detomaso at poca.com>
wrote:
> Yep, our ballot was mailed out right away!'
>
> Judy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Moore <bill at incendium.com>
> To: fastgrandma <fastgrandma at aol.com>; ccampman <ccampman at cox.net>;
> detomaso <detomaso at poca.com>; sdpanteras <sdpanteras at googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Sun, Mar 8, 2015 1:29 pm
> Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues
> Thanks Judy, have "you" mailed your ballot yet.
> I'm not saying how to vote, I'm saying "vote" !
> If you don't vote you will not be able to bitch.
> Cheers,
> Bill Moore
> Incendium Supply
> Calgary
> -------- Original message --------
> From: fastgrandma via DeTomaso
> Date:2015-03-08 2:09 PM (GMT-07:00)
> To:
> [1]ccampman at cox.net,[2]detomaso at poca.com,[3]sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues
> Craig,
> Just to clarify. While the POCA Board has for many years been
> attempting to update the Bylaws it finally came to a head after the
> last election. To hopefully not have that happen again the Board has
> been working hard on making the critical change to allow electronic
> voting after the last very offensive election and while doing that it
> was realized the wording on the 'majority of POCA members' would never,
> ever happen so therefore the change was needed say to majority of
> 'votes cast'.
> As you are a relative newbie to POCA (we're coming up fast on our 35th
> year), you have to realize as has been mentioned more than once that in
> a normal election there are just not that many members voting. This was
> proven especially the year that in hopes of a better turn-out, a
> pre-stamped and addressed envelope was included with the ballot. Even
> then the number of votes cast was abysmal which just proved that too
> many members figured their vote wasn't needed.
> That is basically the reason the membership needs to vote YES on this
> amendment, plain and simple.
> Judy
> Past VP and long-time owner/member of POCA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Craig Campman <[4]ccampman at cox.net>
> To: detomaso <[5]detomaso at poca.com>; San Diego Panteras
> <[6]sdpanteras at googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Sun, Mar 8, 2015 12:28 pm
> Subject: [DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues
> 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
> Finchas
> 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 avotes casta 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,
> [7]detomaso-request at poca.com wrote:
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> Message: 21
> > Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 09:10:46 -0800
> > From: Larry Finch
> <[8]fresnofinches at aol.com>
> > To: [9]detomaso at poca.com
> > Subject: [DeTomaso] Article
> X amendment - my opinion
> > Message-ID:
> <[10]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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Detomaso
> Forum Managed by POCA
> Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
> DeTomaso
> mailing
> list
> [11]DeTomaso at poca.com
> [12]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
> To
> manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe, etc.) use
> the links
> above.
> Craig,
> Just to clarify. While the POCA Board has for many years been
> attempting to update the Bylaws it finally came to a head after the
> last election. To hopefully not have that happen again the Board has
> been working hard on making the critical change to allow electronic
> voting after the last very offensive election and while doing that
> it
> was realized the wording on the 'majority of POCA members' would
> never,
> ever happen so therefore the change was needed say to majority of
> 'votes cast'.
> As you are a relative newbie to POCA (we're coming up fast on our
> 35th
> year), you have to realize as has been mentioned more than once that
> in
> a normal election there are just not that many members voting. This
> was
> proven especially the year that in hopes of a better turn-out, a
> pre-stamped and addressed envelope was included with the ballot.
> Even
> then the number of votes cast was abysmal which just proved that too
> many members figured their vote wasn't needed.
> That is basically the reason the membership needs to vote YES on
> this
> amendment, plain and simple.
> Judy
> Past VP and long-time owner/member of POCA
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Craig Campman <[13]ccampman at cox.net>
> To: detomaso <[14]detomaso at poca.com>; San Diego Panteras
> <[15]sdpanteras at googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Sun, Mar 8, 2015 12:28 pm
> Subject: [DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues
> 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
> Finchas
> 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 avotes casta 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,
> [16]detomaso-request at poca.com wrote:
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> >
> Message: 21
> > Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 09:10:46 -0800
> > From: Larry Finch
> <[17]fresnofinches at aol.com>
> > To: [18]detomaso at poca.com
> > Subject: [DeTomaso] Article
> X amendment - my opinion
> > Message-ID:
> <[19]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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Detomaso
> Forum Managed by POCA
> Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
> DeTomaso
> mailing
> list
> [20]DeTomaso at poca.com
> [21]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
> To
> manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe, etc.) use
> the links
> above.
> _______________________________________________
> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
> Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
> DeTomaso mailing list
> [22]DeTomaso at poca.com
> [23]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
> To manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe, etc.)
> use the links above.
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
> 2. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
> 3. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
> 4. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
> 5. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
> 6. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
> 7. mailto:detomaso-request at poca.com
> 8. mailto:fresnofinches at aol.com
> 9. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
> 10. mailto:49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com
> 11. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
> 12. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
> 13. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
> 14. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
> 15. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
> 16. mailto:detomaso-request at poca.com
> 17. mailto:fresnofinches at aol.com
> 18. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
> 19. mailto:49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com
> 20. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
> 21. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
> 22. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
> 23. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
> Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
> DeTomaso mailing list
> DeTomaso at poca.com
> http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
>
> To manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe, etc.) use
> the links above.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
We still haven't gotten ours here in Texas!
Jeff
6559
On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 3:37 PM, fastgrandma via DeTomaso
<[1]detomaso at poca.com> wrote:
A A Yep, our ballot was mailed out right away!'
A A Judy
A A -----Original Message-----
A A From: Bill Moore <[2]bill at incendium.com>
A A To: fastgrandma <[3]fastgrandma at aol.com>; ccampman
<[4]ccampman at cox.net>;
A A detomaso <[5]detomaso at poca.com>; sdpanteras
<[6]sdpanteras at googlegroups.com>
A A Sent: Sun, Mar 8, 2015 1:29 pm
A A Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues
A A Thanks Judy, have "you" mailed your ballot yet.
A A I'm not saying how to vote, I'm saying "vote" !
A A If you don't vote you will not be able to bitch.
A A Cheers,
A A Bill Moore
A A Incendium Supply
A A Calgary
A A -------- Original message --------
A A From: fastgrandma via DeTomaso
A A Date:2015-03-08 2:09 PM (GMT-07:00)
A A To:
A
A [1][7]ccampman at cox.net,[2][8]detomaso at poca.com,[3][9]sdpanteras at googl
egroups.com
A A Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues
A A Craig,
A A Just to clarify. While the POCA Board has for many years been
A A attempting to update the Bylaws it finally came to a head after
the
A A last election. To hopefully not have that happen again the Board
has
A A been working hard on making the critical change to allow
electronic
A A voting after the last very offensive election and while doing that
it
A A was realized the wording on the 'majority of POCA members' would
never,
A A ever happen so therefore the change was needed say to majority of
A A 'votes cast'.
A A As you are a relative newbie to POCA (we're coming up fast on our
35th
A A year), you have to realize as has been mentioned more than once
that in
A A a normal election there are just not that many members voting.
This was
A A proven especially the year that in hopes of a better turn-out, a
A A pre-stamped and addressed envelope was included with the ballot.
Even
A A then the number of votes cast was abysmal which just proved that
too
A A many members figured their vote wasn't needed.
A A That is basically the reason the membership needs to vote YES on
this
A A amendment, plain and simple.
A A Judy
A A Past VP and long-time owner/member of POCA
A A -----Original Message-----
A A From: Craig Campman <[4][10]ccampman at cox.net>
A A To: detomaso <[5][11]detomaso at poca.com>; San Diego Panteras
A A <[6][12]sdpanteras at googlegroups.com>
A A Sent: Sun, Mar 8, 2015 12:28 pm
A A Subject: [DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues
A A All,
A A Since I have not yet read the exact wording being proposed for the
new
A A Bylaw Amendment for Article X, I am basing my comments below on
what I
A A have read
A A on this forum regarding the proposed Amendment. I have copied
Larry
A A Finchas
A A recent message below, as it seems to discuss the proposed
Amendment in
A A detail.
A A I appreciate the debate on the new Bylaws Amendment but seem to
feel
A A the most important issue (to me at least) is either not discussed
or
A A glossed
A A over in most debate I have read. This issue I am concerned about
is the
A A combination of allowing a majority of avotes casta to decide
passage of
A A an
A A amendment, along with the definition of only "25 votes to declare
an
A A election
A A valid". To me, this amendment in its current wording smacks of the
same
A A BS that
A A most of our current government lawmakers try to do by having a
great
A A change
A A (electronic voting) at the top of the agenda, in effect hiding
fine
A A print that
A A in the long run puts power to make future changes into the hands
of a
A A select few
A A (the constant 25 voters).
A A Considering that to change the Bylaws at the
A A current time requires five-hundred-plus (500+) votes, out of maybe
A A eight-hundred-plus (800+) members, it seems absurd to modify the
system
A A to only
A A require twenty-five (25) votes to change the Bylaws in the future.
A A I am not
A A entirely against defining a number of votes to have a valid
election,
A A but at
A A least make it a reasonably sized number backed up by statistics on
the
A A number of
A A votes typically received in past elections. If past elections have
only
A A received
A A 25 votes, then we have a bigger problem that will not be solved
with a
A A new
A A amendment.
A A In the end I urge all of you to vote NO on the new Bylaw Amendment
A A in its current wording. If the Board and Membership wants to
initiate
A A electronic
A A voting, then it should be done by proposing a single Amendment
that
A A changes the
A A one issue. Additional issues worthy of change to the Bylaws (such
as
A A number of
A A votes for validity, simple majority of votes cast, etc) should be
A A proposed in
A A similar single issue fashion, and not buried in a comprehensive
package
A A that
A A forces us to accept the changes "all or nothing".
A A My
A A 2-cents!
A A Regards,
A A Craig Campman
A A Red #5303
A A On Mar 7, 2015, at 11:00 AM,
A A [7][13]detomaso-request at poca.com wrote:
A A >
A A > ------------------------------
A A >
A A >
A A Message: 21
A A > Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 09:10:46 -0800
A A > From: Larry Finch
A A <[8][14]fresnofinches at aol.com>
A A > To: [9][15]detomaso at poca.com
A A > Subject: [DeTomaso] Article
A A X amendment - my opinion
A A > Message-ID:
A A <[10][16]49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com>
A A > Content-Type: text/plain;
A A charset=utf-8
A A >
A A > All,
A A >
A A > I would like to offer some insight as to why I
A A believe the proposed changes to Article X of the POCA By-Laws
should
A A meet with
A A the approval of all POCA members desiring to help our club move
into
A A the
A A 21st-century.
A A >
A A > While retaining the paper ballot for those who prefer or
A A need it, the amendment will allow for electronic, internet-based
A A voting. While
A A email voting is illegal in California and quite subject to
hacking,
A A there are
A A acceptable online voting services available for POCA to utilize.
A A >
A A > The
A A amendment also provides a method for members to propose By-Laws
A A amendments, a
A A process that previously only the Board of Directors could
initiate.
A A >
A A > It
A A further clarifies voting tabulation will be conducted on the basis
of
A A the votes
A A received, and specifies at least 25 votes must be submitted in
order
A A for an
A A election to be valid.
A A >
A A > If passed, this Article X amendment will thus set
A A the stage for greater membership participation in future POCA
business,
A A while
A A all upcoming elections, such as those we can expect to see later
this
A A year as
A A our Board of Directors continues to update and revise the rest of
the
A A POCA
A A By-Laws, will not become snail-mail disasters.
A A >
A A > Please realize that with
A A the passage of this Article X amendment, this election will be the
very
A A last
A A POCA election that requires the exclusive use of mailed, paper
ballots.
A A >
A A >
A A That improvement alone should make passage of this amendment a
slam
A A dunk worthy
A A of every member?s affirmative vote.
A A >
A A > Should you have any troubling
A A concerns with some other aspect of this Article X amendment, I
would
A A urge you to
A A put such concerns aside for the time being.
A A >
A A > Let?s first pass this
A A amendment and permanently retire the troublesome, inefficient
A A snail-mail
A A election process.
A A >
A A > Then, if you are still troubled by some portion of this
A A amendment, once it is passed you can gather the necessary fellow
A A members and
A A submit your own By-Laws amendment proposal to correct anything you
feel
A A is in
A A need of correcting.
A A >
A A > Please join with me in voting YES on the proposed
A A amendment to Article X.
A A >
A A > Sincerely,
A A >
A A > Larry
A A >
A A >
A A >
A A >
A A >
A A ------------------------------
A A _______________________________________________
A A Detomaso
A A Forum Managed by POCA
A A Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
A A DeTomaso
A A mailing
A A list
A A [11][17]DeTomaso at poca.com
A A [12][18]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
A A To
A A manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe, etc.)
use
A A the links
A A above.
A A A Craig,
A A A Just to clarify. While the POCA Board has for many years been
A A A attempting to update the Bylaws it finally came to a head
after the
A A A last election. To hopefully not have that happen again the
Board has
A A A been working hard on making the critical change to allow
electronic
A A A voting after the last very offensive election and while doing
that
A A it
A A A was realized the wording on the 'majority of POCA members'
would
A A never,
A A A ever happen so therefore the change was needed say to majority
of
A A A 'votes cast'.
A A A As you are a relative newbie to POCA (we're coming up fast on
our
A A 35th
A A A year), you have to realize as has been mentioned more than
once that
A A in
A A A a normal election there are just not that many members voting.
This
A A was
A A A proven especially the year that in hopes of a better turn-out,
a
A A A pre-stamped and addressed envelope was included with the
ballot.
A A Even
A A A then the number of votes cast was abysmal which just proved
that too
A A A many members figured their vote wasn't needed.
A A A That is basically the reason the membership needs to vote YES
on
A A this
A A A amendment, plain and simple.
A A A Judy
A A A Past VP and long-time owner/member of POCA
A A A -----Original Message-----
A A A From: Craig Campman <[13][19]ccampman at cox.net>
A A A To: detomaso <[14][20]detomaso at poca.com>; San Diego Panteras
A A A <[15][21]sdpanteras at googlegroups.com>
A A A Sent: Sun, Mar 8, 2015 12:28 pm
A A A Subject: [DeTomaso] Proposed Amendment Issues
A A All,
A A Since I have not yet read the exact wording being proposed for the
new
A A Bylaw Amendment for Article X, I am basing my comments below on
what I
A A have read
A A on this forum regarding the proposed Amendment. I have copied
Larry
A A Finchas
A A recent message below, as it seems to discuss the proposed
Amendment in
A A detail.
A A I appreciate the debate on the new Bylaws Amendment but seem to
feel
A A the most important issue (to me at least) is either not discussed
or
A A glossed
A A over in most debate I have read. This issue I am concerned about
is the
A A combination of allowing a majority of avotes casta to decide
passage of
A A an
A A amendment, along with the definition of only "25 votes to declare
an
A A election
A A valid". To me, this amendment in its current wording smacks of the
same
A A BS that
A A most of our current government lawmakers try to do by having a
great
A A change
A A (electronic voting) at the top of the agenda, in effect hiding
fine
A A print that
A A in the long run puts power to make future changes into the hands
of a
A A select few
A A (the constant 25 voters).
A A Considering that to change the Bylaws at the
A A current time requires five-hundred-plus (500+) votes, out of maybe
A A eight-hundred-plus (800+) members, it seems absurd to modify the
system
A A to only
A A require twenty-five (25) votes to change the Bylaws in the future.
A A I am not
A A entirely against defining a number of votes to have a valid
election,
A A but at
A A least make it a reasonably sized number backed up by statistics on
the
A A number of
A A votes typically received in past elections. If past elections have
only
A A received
A A 25 votes, then we have a bigger problem that will not be solved
with a
A A new
A A amendment.
A A In the end I urge all of you to vote NO on the new Bylaw Amendment
A A in its current wording. If the Board and Membership wants to
initiate
A A electronic
A A voting, then it should be done by proposing a single Amendment
that
A A changes the
A A one issue. Additional issues worthy of change to the Bylaws (such
as
A A number of
A A votes for validity, simple majority of votes cast, etc) should be
A A proposed in
A A similar single issue fashion, and not buried in a comprehensive
package
A A that
A A forces us to accept the changes "all or nothing".
A A My
A A 2-cents!
A A Regards,
A A Craig Campman
A A Red #5303
A A On Mar 7, 2015, at 11:00 AM,
A A [16][22]detomaso-request at poca.com wrote:
A A >
A A > ------------------------------
A A >
A A >
A A Message: 21
A A > Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 09:10:46 -0800
A A > From: Larry Finch
A A <[17][23]fresnofinches at aol.com>
A A > To: [18][24]detomaso at poca.com
A A > Subject: [DeTomaso] Article
A A X amendment - my opinion
A A > Message-ID:
A A <[19][25]49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com>
A A > Content-Type: text/plain;
A A charset=utf-8
A A >
A A > All,
A A >
A A > I would like to offer some insight as to why I
A A believe the proposed changes to Article X of the POCA By-Laws
should
A A meet with
A A the approval of all POCA members desiring to help our club move
into
A A the
A A 21st-century.
A A >
A A > While retaining the paper ballot for those who prefer or
A A need it, the amendment will allow for electronic, internet-based
A A voting. While
A A email voting is illegal in California and quite subject to
hacking,
A A there are
A A acceptable online voting services available for POCA to utilize.
A A >
A A > The
A A amendment also provides a method for members to propose By-Laws
A A amendments, a
A A process that previously only the Board of Directors could
initiate.
A A >
A A > It
A A further clarifies voting tabulation will be conducted on the basis
of
A A the votes
A A received, and specifies at least 25 votes must be submitted in
order
A A for an
A A election to be valid.
A A >
A A > If passed, this Article X amendment will thus set
A A the stage for greater membership participation in future POCA
business,
A A while
A A all upcoming elections, such as those we can expect to see later
this
A A year as
A A our Board of Directors continues to update and revise the rest of
the
A A POCA
A A By-Laws, will not become snail-mail disasters.
A A >
A A > Please realize that with
A A the passage of this Article X amendment, this election will be the
very
A A last
A A POCA election that requires the exclusive use of mailed, paper
ballots.
A A >
A A >
A A That improvement alone should make passage of this amendment a
slam
A A dunk worthy
A A of every member?s affirmative vote.
A A >
A A > Should you have any troubling
A A concerns with some other aspect of this Article X amendment, I
would
A A urge you to
A A put such concerns aside for the time being.
A A >
A A > Let?s first pass this
A A amendment and permanently retire the troublesome, inefficient
A A snail-mail
A A election process.
A A >
A A > Then, if you are still troubled by some portion of this
A A amendment, once it is passed you can gather the necessary fellow
A A members and
A A submit your own By-Laws amendment proposal to correct anything you
feel
A A is in
A A need of correcting.
A A >
A A > Please join with me in voting YES on the proposed
A A amendment to Article X.
A A >
A A > Sincerely,
A A >
A A > Larry
A A >
A A >
A A >
A A >
A A >
A A ------------------------------
A A _______________________________________________
A A Detomaso
A A Forum Managed by POCA
A A Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
A A DeTomaso
A A mailing
A A list
A A [20][26]DeTomaso at poca.com
A A [21][27]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
A A To
A A manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe,
etc.) use
A A the links
A A above.
A A _______________________________________________
A A Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
A A Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
A A DeTomaso mailing list
A A [22][28]DeTomaso at poca.com
A A [23][29]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
A A To manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe,
etc.)
A A use the links above.
References
A A 1. mailto:[30]ccampman at cox.net
A A 2. mailto:[31]detomaso at poca.com
A A 3. mailto:[32]sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
A A 4. mailto:[33]ccampman at cox.net
A A 5. mailto:[34]detomaso at poca.com
A A 6. mailto:[35]sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
A A 7. mailto:[36]detomaso-request at poca.com
A A 8. mailto:[37]fresnofinches at aol.com
A A 9. mailto:[38]detomaso at poca.com
A 10. mailto:[39]49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com
A 11. mailto:[40]DeTomaso at poca.com
A 12. [41]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
A 13. mailto:[42]ccampman at cox.net
A 14. mailto:[43]detomaso at poca.com
A 15. mailto:[44]sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
A 16. mailto:[45]detomaso-request at poca.com
A 17. mailto:[46]fresnofinches at aol.com
A 18. mailto:[47]detomaso at poca.com
A 19. mailto:[48]49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com
A 20. mailto:[49]DeTomaso at poca.com
A 21. [50]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
A 22. mailto:[51]DeTomaso at poca.com
A 23. [52]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
_______________________________________________
Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
Posted emails must not exceed 1.5 Megabytes
DeTomaso mailing list
[53]DeTomaso at poca.com
[54]http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
To manage your subscription (change email address, unsubscribe,
etc.) use the links above.
References
1. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
2. mailto:bill at incendium.com
3. mailto:fastgrandma at aol.com
4. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
5. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
6. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
7. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
8. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
9. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
10. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
11. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
12. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
13. mailto:detomaso-request at poca.com
14. mailto:fresnofinches at aol.com
15. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
16. mailto:49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com
17. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
18. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
19. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
20. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
21. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
22. mailto:detomaso-request at poca.com
23. mailto:fresnofinches at aol.com
24. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
25. mailto:49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com
26. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
27. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
28. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
29. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
30. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
31. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
32. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
33. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
34. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
35. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
36. mailto:detomaso-request at poca.com
37. mailto:fresnofinches at aol.com
38. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
39. mailto:49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com
40. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
41. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
42. mailto:ccampman at cox.net
43. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
44. mailto:sdpanteras at googlegroups.com
45. mailto:detomaso-request at poca.com
46. mailto:fresnofinches at aol.com
47. mailto:detomaso at poca.com
48. mailto:49EAEBB2-1702-4D0C-834B-54463EEE62A8 at aol.com
49. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
50. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
51. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
52. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
53. mailto:DeTomaso at poca.com
54. http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso_poca.com
More information about the DeTomaso
mailing list