[Linux-aus] Re: [LACTTE] Constitution Version 6 - Last one!

[Pia Smith]

On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 01:36, Anand Kumria wrote:
> > This is the final Proposal for Constitution changes unless anyone makes
> > any other necessary suggestions. 
> 
> Well you are probably aware that notice needs to have been by the
> secretary 21 days prior to an SGM (Section 26 part 2). Currently the
> SGM/AGM is marked down for the 15th Jan -- so notice needed to have been
> given by the 25th December.

Notice was given in due time about the SGM, and the AGM (although the AGM only requires 14 days notice)

Please read the email by Stewart Smith dated Dec 22nd, which had notice and an agenda for both events.

This is a minor change, which I believe is acceptable, if not we already had version 5 out at the time of notice, and we can pass that instead.

> That may mean that nominations that are currently listed may be invalid
> and will have to be taken from the floor. I suspect you could argue that
> the changes in draft 5 were given with enough notice ... but you'd need
> to check.

This is completely incorrect, all nominations have been done in a
constitutionally correct way, and due notice was given, but thankyou for
your input. Please see below:
(b) must be delivered to the secretary of the association at least 7 days before the date fixed for the holding of the annual general meeting at which the election is to take place.

> > The only change from version 5 is creating the ability for the 
> > Secretary to approve or reject applications without having to refer to 
> > the committee unless necessary. This will remove the need to have a 
> > meeting to approve members. The secretary may defer decisions to the 
> > committee of course. 

> But it also means the secretary can reject membership, outright, with no
> recourse.

No it doesn't, if you could please read the draft, and find:
"As soon as practicable after receiving an application for membership,
the Secretary is to approve the application or must refer the
application to the committee which is to determine whether to approve or
to reject the application."

This says, that the secretary many outright approve, OR defer the
decision to the committee.

> > Please find this version at
> > http://www.linux.org.au/org/new/constitutionv6.phtml
> 
> [[ Note: it wasn't linked in from http://www.linux.org.au/org/, ]]
> [[ nor was number 7. I've just updated that page so they are    ]]
> 
> While regarding over the proposed changes I was struck by how some
> proposed mechanism, some policy and some specified both. Also some
> changes listed in the amended version of the consitituion (e.g. Section
> 3, parts 4, 5 and 6) don't appear in the list of proposed changes.
> 
> I've chosen to use the changes and apply them to a 'pristine'
> consititution.
> 
> Some other problems:
> 	- The Committee can award honourary lifetime memership but that
> 	only requires a majority (4). Surely something like that ought
> 	to require a unianimous decision?

I think quorum is ok. Does anyone else have an issue with this?

> 	- I'm unclear why change (6) is required. It says the same
> 	  thing but more cumbersomely

the words 'best effort' are important. Also someone being entered in the
database doesn't immediately make them a member. Other stuff is
required.

> 	- Change 7, says that membership ceases at the AGM. I'm worried
> 	  that there might be some strange interaction with that and the
> 	  '28 days to pay rule' (Rule 3, Part 3). Also I think the
> 	  second sentence of change 7 is unnecessary.

It is necessary otherwise life members are included in the cycle of
payments, which they shouldn't be.

> 	- Change 8 needs to be modified unless there are lifetime
> 	  organisation or group membership's available

Why not?

> 	- Change 10, since you have Rule 2 part (c) is why I flag the
> 	  second sentence of Change 7 as unnecessary.

it is easier to manage on an agm to agm basis.

> 	- Change 19, doesn't appear to be required. If you have both a
> 	  President and VP who won't call a meeting to order, this
> 	  allows it to occur.

Anyone second this change?

> 	- Change 20; second part replaces "or by" with "and". Does that
> 	  mean you need to have 3 present _and_ 3 proxy members?

No, you misread. The "and" is in part (2) and requires that a
chairperson must be supported by three other members to have a poll.
Part of the removing too many powers from _ALL_ individuals to ensure a
democracy.

> 	- Change 22; removes the ability of the membership to override
> 	  the committee. Why is part (2) deleted? Surely you want money
> 	  to be deposited as soon as possible?

Part (2) is not deleted, what crack are you smoking ;)

> 	- Change 23; is unneccessary, Common/Company seals are no longer
> 	  required for companies or associations in NSW (they are
> 	  optional).

Actually, if you read the NSW organisations constitution guide, it _IS_
still a requirement.

> There are a number of different models to think about:
> 	- create an IPP (Immediate Past President) position

I think that the best person for the job gets the job, all the jobs. The
past-president and ctte are always welcome to help advise, but aren't
necessarily the best persons for the jobs.

Regards,
Pia
-- 
Pia Smith <pia at linux.org.au>
Linux Australia