|
Post by Tricia on Jul 25, 2007 9:34:13 GMT -6
Diane--
Do constitutional amendments have to come from the POD people or can they come from the general membership? Now that this board is unaffiliated with the LBHA, I can't read the bylaws--that is, if the BOD ever had the balls to post them. Another thing my local writers' group is required to do is to re-visit our bylaws every two years, which forces our organisation to stay in the current millenium.
--t.
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Jul 25, 2007 13:14:28 GMT -6
They did have a mission statement and I believe by laws posted.
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Jul 25, 2007 13:33:34 GMT -6
I had found the mission statement, but until now, didn't really give a hoot about the by-laws. I suppose I've learned my lesson that one should pay careful attention to them--especially when you're about the send a non-profit organisation some of your hard-earned profits. Now, of course, those by-laws are in cyberspace ... I could write the dictator--oh, I mean chairman ... hehehe.
--t.
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Jul 25, 2007 18:30:33 GMT -6
The LBHA Constitution is online at www.lbha.org/constitution.pdf. The document is a dinosaur. LBHA has never had by-laws, just the Constitution. As you'll see, it doesn't have a lot to say about Amendments: ARTICLE XII Amendments This Constitution may be amended or repealed, and a new Constitution may be adopted at any annual meeting of Members by the act of a majority of the Members attending such meeting.
Note: This version doesn't not have the amendment passed at the North Platte conference, The Merkel Amendment!
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Jul 25, 2007 23:22:51 GMT -6
Wow, your name has gone down in history!
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Jul 26, 2007 0:38:39 GMT -6
It's actually the Tenth Amendment but one of the board members calls it the Merkel Amendment. It's a long story but, to me, a very funny one.
|
|
|
Post by George Armstrong Custer on Jul 31, 2007 8:00:57 GMT -6
I am not, and never have been, a member of the LBHA. My sole interest here has been the exchange of information and opinion via this message board - a facility for which all credit must go to Diane. My allegience will remain with this board for as long as Diane is gracious enough to keep it up and running. As to the eminence grise behind this upheaval - CSS - I saw this kind of thing coming a mile off. Too many here were too tolerant of CSS for too long - his poison should have been nipped in the bud over a year ago. The guy is, in my view, a psycho who is troubled by homo-erotic fantasies of violence which he has centered around the figure of Custer. His proper place is in therapy, not on this message board. Unlike CSS however, I'm not a keyboard fantasist of the idle threat variety - and if he ever cares to seek me out I'll happily put my fist where his mouth is. Bad things rarely happen without some good coming from them - and on this occasion it seems that the good outfall has become apparent sooner than is often the case. Rock on, Diane! ciao, GAC
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Jul 31, 2007 15:35:15 GMT -6
GAC--
I'm looking at this as a "win-win" proposition. Diane gets to know who her real friends are and we've gotten to know her. I wonder how many of us--your company excluded, of course--have actually joined LBHA because of her efforts at this board?
And how many of us are questioning renewing our memberships now because of that "other" board ... just when you can't get any pettier ... crikey. Hmm ... stock market took a pretty big tumble last week ... I wonder how our "above average investment returns" have faired?
--t.
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Jul 31, 2007 15:35:26 GMT -6
I just had a quick read of the constitution. It mentioned a quorum at one point, but it never, as far as I could tell, specified how many are needed for a quorum. The outfit I work for has a minimum of 15 and a max of 25 directors, and a quorum to hold a Board meeting is one third of the current number of directors, which is usually 15 or so, which means a quorum is 5 or 6. We have board meetings three times a year, and usually get attendence of 8-10. We have about 280 members; I'm told LBHA has about 900. The constitution also says decisions can be made by a majority of directors present--there are only 5 in the first place; does that mean that two people could have a legal meeting and make decisions? Not great, if that's the case. I will have to seriously consider whether or not to renew my membership, though I would miss the publications. And I have told the Board this.
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Jul 31, 2007 16:22:42 GMT -6
Oh, and by the way, re: investments--the guys I work for have their funds handled by Charles Schwab. That way there is no question about what is being done with the money. I have also suggested that the Board might consider a repubtable financial institution to maximize their investment income. (or should I say "our" investment income?)
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Jul 31, 2007 16:23:21 GMT -6
And of course, the chairman has filled whatever quorum that would theoretically exist with his cronies ...
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Jul 31, 2007 16:27:02 GMT -6
Oh, and by the way, re: investments--the guys I work for have their funds handled by Charles Schwab. That way there is no question about what is being done with the money. I have also suggested that the Board might consider a repubtable financial institution to maximize their investment income. (or should I say "our" investment income?") That and a nice audit--performed by the treasurer and two at-large members--would make me feel a lot better about this mess ... but I don't like my dollars being spent from some old dude's personal computer for his daily thrill. Reading those resignation letters last night just made me angry all over again. I have never seen such a Custerfluck of cronyism. --t.
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Jul 31, 2007 16:29:45 GMT -6
Gee, d'ya think a 900-member organization might need a larger Board?
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Jul 31, 2007 17:05:57 GMT -6
Probably. Our writers' group has just over 275 members and our board is eleven persons, plus current officers--and the officers can vote. I don't know how LBHA would handle a Rooseveltian-packing type of thing--since we all have to take DNA tests to be certain we're not long lost cousins and such--but it's current size is clearly inadequate for the 21st Century.
--t.
--t.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Powell on Aug 1, 2007 8:35:51 GMT -6
Diane,
I am sorry to learn of this nonsense, but only to the extent it may have caused any stress to you and your husband. In my narrow view, you are the association, at least the one i want to be associated with. I purchased a membership last year (don't recall if I got the six or the V-8) and included with my check a note addressed (perhaps naively) to you. In case it wasn't forwarded, my closing wish was that you not let them grind you down.
Please remember, dear lady, that we need you more than you need us, so don't even hesitate about asking for money if such will help.
Yours,
Mike Powell
|
|