Correction to AMA Bylaw recommendations
07-20-2005 | 12:33 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Banned
My Feedback: (4)
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 996
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Elk Grove, CA
Correction to AMA Bylaw recommendations
Back in July 12 2003, the AMA put out a set of Recommended guidelines for club bylaws.
Most clubs went with the suggestions verbatim concerning termination, expulsion..etc.
There was an error listed in the pdf that was corrected shortly afterward.
The original error was "2/3 vote of board of directors "for both expulsion and reinstatement.
The AmA has since then corrected it to say "2/3 vote of the membership"
Reason being its'much to easy for a board of directors usually numbering 5-9 members to gang up
on somebody they don't like vs getting 2/3s of the membership to go along with the linching.
The original was (incorrect version)listed as PDF 546, the new corrected version is listed as PDF 535-A
Most clubs went with the suggestions verbatim concerning termination, expulsion..etc.
There was an error listed in the pdf that was corrected shortly afterward.
The original error was "2/3 vote of board of directors "for both expulsion and reinstatement.
The AmA has since then corrected it to say "2/3 vote of the membership"
Reason being its'much to easy for a board of directors usually numbering 5-9 members to gang up
on somebody they don't like vs getting 2/3s of the membership to go along with the linching.
The original was (incorrect version)listed as PDF 546, the new corrected version is listed as PDF 535-A
07-20-2005 | 10:45 PM
#2
RE: Correction to AMA Bylaw recommendations
By the same token, 2/3 of the membership has its holes. My club's Constitution states that the voting members present at a regular meeting constitutes a quorum. 2/3 of those voting members can expel a member. There is no need to try to get 2/3 of all members to show up at any meeting.
Thankfully, AMA's requirements are simply "recommended".
Thankfully, AMA's requirements are simply "recommended".
07-21-2005 | 09:23 AM
#3
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: MAnsfield,
MA
RE: Correction to AMA Bylaw recommendations
Yup!! We have in our By-Laws that 2/3's is required to make major changes in our club, like by law changes etc. However, 2/3's is that in attendance not 2/3's of membership. We have 130+ members and we get between 12-30 members to each meeting on average. so less than 25% of the members run our club. Hmmm....... the few rule the many. The fun part is when the many complain to me. I simply reply and how did you vote at the last meeting? and inevitabley they answer..."uh I wasnt there uh duh uh mmmmm"
Oh well that's the process. Sorry
Oh well that's the process. Sorry
07-21-2005 | 10:13 AM
#4
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 6,059
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Sterling , CO
RE: Correction to AMA Bylaw recommendations
It is fun to set at a meeting and have them call for a show hand or a verbal yea or na Then wonder who is next . It make no difference who holds an office or attends a meeting the same people have the say no matter what is on the ajenda. Just watch for the looks from across the room and you can see a lot of change in votes or no votes at all. Most of us do not have the gutts to speak up, when you do you are the next in line for the block. Yes I was and AM one of those people that believe in rule and by laws but the should apply to even the ones that think they run the club
Then wonder who is next . It make no difference who holds an office or attends a meeting the same people have the say no matter what is on the ajenda. Just watch for the looks from across the room and you can see a lot of change in votes or no votes at all. Most of us do not have the gutts to speak up, when you do you are the next in line for the block. Yes I was and AM one of those people that believe in rule and by laws but the should apply to even the ones that think they run the club
