|
Report from the President and the
E-Board.
Late last autumn the E-board, specifically me asked to
form a task force to look into the amendment and voting process to
determine if any changes were needed to ensure future balloting would
produce enough votes to validate said ballot. With the assistance of Dick
Montgomery (DLC) this task force was formed.
The Task Force consisted of Doug Hamilton, RC-1;
Dr. Nick Fillipone; and David Knights, Esq.
This task force examined the C & BL section dealing
with the amendment process thoroughly. They found the basic process to be
sound however they felt that a number of adjustments could be made to
capture the greatest percentage of ballots cast. The traditional paper
ballot and web site balloting process offer convenient ways to submit a
vote. However, more can be done to put ballots into the hands of the
membership.
The recommendations of the task force are broken into
two categories. Some of these recommendations were submitted to the
E-Board and were approved by them as policy decisions. Other
recommendations will require the changing of the C & BL. It was the belief
that the changes approved by the E-Board will be sufficient to gather a
greater vote count without the need to alter the C & BL document.
It is the belief of the task force and the E-Board that
the following recommendations will maintain the constitutionality of the C
& BL and will fulfill the requirements to gather the needed 15% membership
votes in the future.
The recommendations approved by the E-board are as
follows:
Administrative Changes
Greater visibility to the balloting process in the IPMS Journal.
The paper ballot used in the past balloting cycle was overshadowed in
large part by the radical overhaul of the Journal. Appearing in Volume
18 #4, the first issue under the new Journal team, there was no mention
of the ballot enclosed anywhere on the cover, nor mention made in the
table of contents. The tear out ballot was not located near the
Amendment proposals and may have been missed. There was a ballot printed
on the final page however, which may or may not have been used. This may
have been done by the Editorial team in the excitement to get the first
issue out, and be should addressed in future issues. This is in no way
to fault the Editorial team as they were not given the directive by the
E-Board. We recommend that future issues of the Journal that contain
Election or Amendment ballots be clearly marked on the cover, all
articles and related items be listed in the table of contents. The
Executive Board would implement this by directive to the Journal staff.
Publish the complete original section of the C&BL
alongside the proposed amendment.
This will allow the membership to view both the original text and
proposed amendment together. As is present practice, only the effected
verbiage is included in publication. It is felt that a more complete
understanding of any proposed change will better inform the membership
as to the intent and result of the proposed change. It may also be
helpful to publish the entire C&BL document in the ballot issue when
amendments are being considered. We recommend that future publication
include the entire original section of the C&BL, along with the
amendment in final form, as it will read upon passage. The Executive
Board would implement this by directive during the next publication
cycle. I, along with the E-board feel that this would take up too many
pages in the Journal at this time since it will be published in a future
Journal as happens each year. The C & BL is already on the IPMS web site
Take a more grassroots approach to the balloting
process.
We feel involving the Chapters more in the voting process would
capture more votes, in addition to the current ballot that appears in
the Journal, and the E Ballot that appears on the web site. If each
chapter were to be sent a package containing a text copy of the
amendments, actual ballots, and an envelope to return them in, postage
to be paid by the chapter at the time the balloting opens; this would
stimulate discussion at the chapters meeting. If voting were to be
allowed to take place in a chapter meeting setting this would also
increase the odds of gaining the needed percentage to validate the
ballot. With the process already in use to validate the paper ballots
being returned via Journal distribution, there will not be any lapse in
ballot validation. The need to maximize the number of returned ballots
is obvious. We feel this method would put a greater emphasis on the
balloting process to the individual member, and be more inclusive as a
result. The C&BL is clear in it’s wording to include all members in the
election process. As the current E method of balloting is accepted as a
valid method of casting ballots, without making changes to the C&BL to
validate its existence, E Board directive will be sufficient to
implement this idea. We recommend that all chapters be instructed to
receive, distribute and return ballots collected at their meeting. The
Executive Board by Directive would implement this.
Publish the list of proposed amendments earlier in
the
process.
We feel that allowing more Chapter involvement, coupled with publishing
any proposed amendments earlier will enhance the process greatly. By
putting any proposals in the membership’s hands sooner, the membership
will have more time to investigate and consider future proposals.
Add an “Abstention” box on the ballot.
The recent amendment ballot contained many amendments that may have been
considered House Keeping type amendments, and may not have excited the
membership enough to cast a ballot. While we concede, there is no way to
make the balloting process more exciting, even an abstention will count
towards the needed percentage. This added box will give the membership
the option of casting a ballot, without having to vote for any of the
proposals under consideration. An Executive Board directive can
implement this in the next balloting cycle.
We recommend that the above Administrative Changes be
implemented and allowed to produce quantifiable results before the
following are considered.
Changes Needing C&BL Amendment
We offer these recommendations with the knowledge that
some changes, which may be necessary, fall outside the immediate control
of the Executive Board, and would need the membership to enact by
amendment. These are offered more for long range planning and discussion,
that for immediate action.
Limit the number of proposed Amendment changes
during each year.
Due to the many amendments presented this year, as mentioned earlier,
many were of a “Housekeeping” nature, IE; updating language. These types
of amendments, while necessary, clutter and draw attention away from the
overall process. It is felt that “housekeeping” type amendments be limited
in number to not distract from more important amendments that may be
introduced in the future. It is felt this practice would be best
implemented through the amendment process, as it could affect the overall
status of the amendment process in a way that may prove difficult to site
constitutionally.
Allow amendment balloting only during election
years.
This recommendation would focus all balloting activities within the same
period. It would eliminate any balloting in “off” years, thereby
eliminating the costs associated with an off year ballot, and the greater
possibility of a short ballot count. Attention would be drawn to the
entire process, and a greater focus being shown to the amendment process,
thereby gaining the votes necessary to be declared a valid ballot. Care
must be taken not to limit the membership’s access to the amendment
process, and this may be seen as a step in that direction.
Respectfully Submitted;
Amendment Task Force members:
Doug Hamilton, Chair
Dr. Nick Fillipone
David Knights Esq.
In closing, I would like to thank those members of this
task force who put much thought into preparing this report.
Submitted to the membership by Jack Kennedy, President, IPMS#
12511
|
