2008 Resolutions

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Greetings,

In opening,
Here is Mobile 1. The author (me) is not trying to fix anything as was suggested in another thread post. Improve? yes Quit allowing to much interpretation on the Presidents part? yes Fix? no We have a great basis and the idea of Basic By Laws or the WHAT, and a large more descriptive Ops Man or the HOW, has been sorely misused by the officers to date. Some things just have to be pinned down. This more than likely will not stop our current Pres who believes he is above the By Laws and does not follow them very well or only to suit his needs and desires.

About the Resolution,
Mobile 1 simply puts our Parliamentary Authority into place. Even though our current By Laws state what our Parliamentary Authority is, it leaves everything up to the President, who believes it has no place in our organizational administration except at meetings. Also by changing to the Robert's books, we will always be completely up to date, and have access to parliamentarians to help settle any possible disputes we may encounter.

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Greetings Again,

In Openining,

I am looking for serious discussion and not arguements. Let's agree to disagree, and allow the convention (who, by By Law, will be the final voice anyway) be the decision makers. We can't decide who is right or wrong here, especially since there is no wrong. Resolutions are simply proposals of ideas for the delegation to debate and decide if it is good for the organization. Your voice should be given to your delegate before they attend the convention. I encourage everyone to talk with their delegates about the issues.

The Resolution

Again, this is just a proposal. Here is what I know. This proposal is the way the vast majority of organizations just like ours conducts it's annual meeting. It helps to represent the membership more fairly than one Chapter one vote by giving more voice to a 300 member Chapter than a 100 member. For example this is as it would be if we could get our membership to show up. The larger Chapters would be a stronger voice simply by numbers. Since we have a small Convention attendance this outlines how we determine the number of delegates and who can vote. National wants a membership meeting which simply will not work with the present attendance at our convention. With this proposal we at least give the membership the opportunity to be equally represented. If we go to a membership meeting (one member one vote) we eliminate over 98% of the memberhsip. Again with the convention of delegate model all Chapter members have the opportunity to voice their opinion. (ref: Roberts Rules of Order, Various organizations By Laws, DC Code)

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Charlie,

There will be points of contention.

First, if the convention is a "members" meeting, you must allow more than one proxy per delegate. This will allow you to achieve the greater than 10 percent as required by DC Code. Say Mobile has 400 members and send four delegates. Each delegate could have 100 proxies each, provided they have 100 signatures on a proxy form.

Nowhere in your two proposals are you suggesting a "representative" style, which is what one delegate per 100 members is suggesting.

Now, the losers in this is the MAL. I would add to the proposal that each delegate attending as a MAL have the same voting rights as any other, including all the proxies they can muster.

This of course places the onus on the secretary to certifiy the number of proxies for each delegate and discount any that appear on more than one delegate's proxy form.

With multiple proxies, you could show up with in excess of 10 percent of the membership with less than 1 percent in attendance. One vote plus one proxy doesn't allow for this without a major attendence at the conventions.

Right now, you have members "registered" with a Chapter, but are inactive. Is it fair to count them in the representative voting count? The largest block, MAL, is discounted all together. I believe there was a little thing called the "revolutionary war" over the "governing without representation" issue.

I'll have to review the bylaws before I comment on the Roberts Rules.

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Charlie,

There will be points of contention.

First, if the convention is a "members" meeting, you must allow more than one proxy per delegate. This will allow you to achieve the greater than 10 percent as required by DC Code. Say Mobile has 400 members and send four delegates. Each delegate could have 100 proxies each, provided they have 100 signatures on a proxy form.

Nowhere in your two proposals are you suggesting a "representative" style, which is what one delegate per 100 members is suggesting.

Now, the losers in this is the MAL. I would add to the proposal that each delegate attending as a MAL have the same voting rights as any other, including all the proxies they can muster.

This of course places the onus on the secretary to certifiy the number of proxies for each delegate and discount any that appear on more than one delegate's proxy form.

With multiple proxies, you could show up with in excess of 10 percent of the membership with less than 1 percent in attendance. One vote plus one proxy doesn't allow for this without a major attendence at the conventions.

Right now, you have members "registered" with a Chapter, but are inactive. Is it fair to count them in the representative voting count? The largest block, MAL, is discounted all together. I believe there was a little thing called the "revolutionary war" over the "governing without representation" issue.

I'll have to review the bylaws before I comment on the Roberts Rules.

I completely agree with Joe, Mobile resolution #2 Convention Delegation also fails to address the quorum requirements of the Convention delegation, perhaps there are none. (2) of the proposed resolution. "The convention delegation shall consist of one accredited delegate of each chapter plus one additional delegate per 200 members and major fraction thereof, assigned to the chapter as of 31 May, in the year of the annual convention" The way this reads until all these chapter reps. are in place at the convention there is no delegation. Of the fifty chapters how many must be represented by the requirements of this section to have a quorum and be able to conduct LEGAL BUSINESS?

Why will no one address the quorum requirements of the law? People who violate the law can be fined & put in jail!!!

Jim

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Convention

Convention is nothing more than a tool to accomplish the annual business meeting. It's definition is found in Robert's. It is similar in Nature to Congress. We elect a congressperson to represent us. They do not carry a proxy letter for every voter in their district. Same with convention, we as members of a chapter elect or appoint a representative to speak for us. They do not carry hundreds of proxy letters with them. Never Have! It is a lot more fair than one chapter one vote. Why should (if we are going to represent our membership)a chapter of 15 hold the same clout as one with 400?

A meeting of the "entire membership" is another tool to accomplish the annual business meeting. You and I all know we will never accomplish what it takes to hold a meeting of the "entire Membership".

Members at Large

You are correct, they are the big losers. For the past three conventions we have put items on the floor to help the representation and voting of MAL's only to be met with strong opposition. The vast majority attending convention believe we should do away with MAL and place them in the Chapter nearest their home. Just so you know, we are not the only organization who doesn't let MALs vote or be represented at it's annual meeting.

Quorum

The quorum is addressed. (d.(4)) By law, we, as an organization, can define our quorum. Only if we do not define our quorum, then we revert back to the code. I understand what our quorum for convention is. If someone wants it different then get a resolution on the floor to change it.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Charlie,

This is not Congress.

I agree the chapters with unequal membership does not deserve an equal vote.

I disagree with the premise that a member can have one vote and one proxy. I feel any member can have 5000 votes if they gather enough proxies, certified by comparison to the membership list. Duplicate proxies should be thrown out and the member admonished for signing two proxies by losing that vote.

Chapters should not have votes based on their membership roles, but on the proxies gathered. One person, one vote.

Then comes the problem of quorums.

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Joe,

Under Mobile 2, the proxies are for delegates, not the entire membership. A delegate can carry one proxy for another delegate.

Example: Chap A has 3 delegates in attendance. Chap B has 1 vote that is not attending. One of the delegates from Chap A can carry that proxy.

When we start doing individual member proxies we now have a meeting of the entire membership. Quorum rules are different and what about voting? With out attendance you would need to have a role call vote on every issue. In essence one person could run the convention. Example 44 delegates combined carries 956 votes plus their vote to equal 1000. If I get hot and carried 2001 proxy votes plus my vote, then I win every vote regardless of how the majority in attendance would see an item as benefiting the organization.

And I did not say we were congress, it was a simple comparison to the make-up of governing bodies.

Next question is How do we authenticate the proxy letters? With some suspect conduct during the last election (mail in ballots) I proposed we move election to the convention so no one could stuff a ballot box, and someone running for office would not be making decisions about if certain ballots are allowed or not. Individual Proxies, I believe, would carry some of the same problems and could easily be misused.

You would be correct about all this if we want an entire membership type of governing.

As for the MAL's, we all know how it would work with a entire membership senario, so what would be your suggestion for a Convention of Delegates senario for them?

Charlie

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

The Resolution

Simply stated we have no written rules for convention. We have been using rules we had in the past which was in the old Standing Rules, but we currently have no written rules.

Charlie

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Convention

Convention is nothing more than a tool to accomplish the annual business meeting. It's definition is found in Robert's. It is similar in Nature to Congress. We elect a congressperson to represent us. They do not carry a proxy letter for every voter in their district. Same with convention, we as members of a chapter elect or appoint a representative to speak for us. They do not carry hundreds of proxy letters with them. Never Have! It is a lot more fair than one chapter one vote. Why should (if we are going to represent our membership)a chapter of 15 hold the same clout as one with 400?

A meeting of the "entire membership" is another tool to accomplish the annual business meeting. You and I all know we will never accomplish what it takes to hold a meeting of the "entire Membership".

Members at Large

You are correct, they are the big losers. For the past three conventions we have put items on the floor to help the representation and voting of MAL's only to be met with strong opposition. The vast majority attending convention believe we should do away with MAL and place them in the Chapter nearest their home. Just so you know, we are not the only organization who doesn't let MALs vote or be represented at it's annual meeting.

Quorum

The quorum is addressed. (d.(4)) By law, we, as an organization, can define our quorum. Only if we do not define our quorum, then we revert back to the code. I understand what our quorum for convention is. If someone wants it different then get a resolution on the floor to change it.

Charlie, you are right, we elect a congressperson to represent us just like chapters elect someone to represent them at conventions. In congress it is one congressperson one vote, its call a democracy. If a big state like NY or Calif. had more vote than RI or Deleware just think of what the results would be. The big states could do anything they desired and the small states could do nothing about it. Let there be no mistake, the congresspersons are this countrys Board of Directors, just like elected chapter representives are the CPOA Board of Directors. You keep trying to combine members & representatives votes that is impossible. In this country a poor mans vote counts as much as a rich man. In congress and at the convention a small states vote counts as much as a big state and at conventions a small chapter must count as much as a big chapter.

So on this I must disagree with you & Joe, what say you both?

Jim

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Convention

Convention is nothing more than a tool to accomplish the annual business meeting. It's definition is found in Robert's. It is similar in Nature to Congress. We elect a congressperson to represent us. They do not carry a proxy letter for every voter in their district. Same with convention, we as members of a chapter elect or appoint a representative to speak for us. They do not carry hundreds of proxy letters with them. Never Have! It is a lot more fair than one chapter one vote. Why should (if we are going to represent our membership)a chapter of 15 hold the same clout as one with 400?

A meeting of the "entire membership" is another tool to accomplish the annual business meeting. You and I all know we will never accomplish what it takes to hold a meeting of the "entire Membership".

Members at Large

You are correct, they are the big losers. For the past three conventions we have put items on the floor to help the representation and voting of MAL's only to be met with strong opposition. The vast majority attending convention believe we should do away with MAL and place them in the Chapter nearest their home. Just so you know, we are not the only organization who doesn't let MALs vote or be represented at it's annual meeting.

Quorum

The quorum is addressed. (d.(4)) By law, we, as an organization, can define our quorum. Only if we do not define our quorum, then we revert back to the code. I understand what our quorum for convention is. If someone wants it different then get a resolution on the floor to change it.

Charlie, I am sorry to say but you don't understand "Quorum" if you think what is covered in the bylaws is correct. Bylaws sec 3c(6) "A quorum at the annual convention consist of a majority of accredited delegates registered as attending". A quorum as nothing to do with those that HAVE registered as attending, a quorum has to do with the MINIMUM NUMBER THAT "MUST" be registered. Just because its in the bylaws does not make it correct, when you got that from ROBERTS, you mis-read it. "Those" is a genaric term for who ever is using the book. In congress, its the minimum # of congresspersons, At a baptist convention its the minimum # of baptist preachers, and at a CPOA convention its the minimum # of accredited delegates that MUST be in attendence. Using your interpetation if there are 12, 24, or 36 registered as attending you will always have 100%. If there are fifty CPOA chapters then a quorum would be twenty six registered delegates from twenty six different chapters. one from each.

What say you & Joe?

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Jim,

To offset the large state / small state issue, the upper house was created where every state had an equal vote. This allows my home state ... Delaware, the first state, equal footing.

If the CPOA insists on calling the annual convention a members meeting, they need to insist on individual (or multiple proxy) votes.

If the CPOA calls the annual convention a delegates meeting, then some form of representative form.

If the CPOA returns to the Board of Directors meeting as the Annual Convention, then it's equality for each chapter.


Now to clarify.

For my opinion on larger chapters having larger votes, it would be a membership meeting where everyone can have as many proxies as they can muster. If that means one person controls the convention, so be it. Just because I control 5000 votes, that doesn't mean all 5000 must be cast in one direction on an issue. They can be split. If one person has the wherewithall to gather 5000 proxies, God Bless em. It would truely be a representation of the membership. Then those who fail to gardner enough proxies, tough. They would have to work harder the next time.

Other than the "popular" vote described above, the only fair methodology would be the old BOD representative style where it's One Chapter, one vote.

The roll call votes would be unnecessary, as the member with x proxies would announce how many votes are for or against a proposal, much like a chapter would vote pro or con.

This would piss off some chapters. However, that is the same issue the first congress dealt with when they formed this republic form of government.

You can not just say "x votes per hundred", as we know from the X representatives per 1000 or whatever the current figure is, because those inactive participents build up the base for chapters like E-City, Mobile, etc ... to control the convention.

I wouldn't want a large chapter to control the convention anymore than I would want one person to control the convention. However, using those two as the baseline, I would prefer one person (with proxies) controlling over a large chapter. That is inline with the one person, one vote concept.

Nothing stops the chapter delegates from changing their chapter's instructions when it's time for the roll call vote. That happened as recent as yesterday at an American Legion statewide convention.

At least with signed proxies, the chapter delegate knows what they are representing and not some fictious membership number including inactive members.

I hope this is clear enough for all to see. The checks and balances in our representative form of government is needed ... for the same reasons as illustrated by the founders of this country.

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Jim,

To offset the large state / small state issue, the upper house was created where every state had an equal vote. This allows my home state ... Delaware, the first state, equal footing.

If the CPOA insists on calling the annual convention a members meeting, they need to insist on individual (or multiple proxy) votes.

If the CPOA calls the annual convention a delegates meeting, then some form of representative form.

If the CPOA returns to the Board of Directors meeting as the Annual Convention, then it's equality for each chapter.


Now to clarify.

For my opinion on larger chapters having larger votes, it would be a membership meeting where everyone can have as many proxies as they can muster. If that means one person controls the convention, so be it. Just because I control 5000 votes, that doesn't mean all 5000 must be cast in one direction on an issue. They can be split. If one person has the wherewithall to gather 5000 proxies, God Bless em. It would truely be a representation of the membership. Then those who fail to gardner enough proxies, tough. They would have to work harder the next time.

Other than the "popular" vote described above, the only fair methodology would be the old BOD representative style where it's One Chapter, one vote.

The roll call votes would be unnecessary, as the member with x proxies would announce how many votes are for or against a proposal, much like a chapter would vote pro or con.

This would piss off some chapters. However, that is the same issue the first congress dealt with when they formed this republic form of government.

You can not just say "x votes per hundred", as we know from the X representatives per 1000 or whatever the current figure is, because those inactive participents build up the base for chapters like E-City, Mobile, etc ... to control the convention.

I wouldn't want a large chapter to control the convention anymore than I would want one person to control the convention. However, using those two as the baseline, I would prefer one person (with proxies) controlling over a large chapter. That is inline with the one person, one vote concept.

Nothing stops the chapter delegates from changing their chapter's instructions when it's time for the roll call vote. That happened as recent as yesterday at an American Legion statewide convention.

At least with signed proxies, the chapter delegate knows what they are representing and not some fictious membership number including inactive members.

I hope this is clear enough for all to see. The checks and balances in our representative form of government is needed ... for the same reasons as illustrated by the founders of this country.

Joe, you and I are on the same page.

The CPOA won't call it a members meeting, they won't call it a BOD meeting. They seem to think that they can conduct business anyway they want as long as they don't put a name to it. ie combined member& representative votes.

The one chapter, one vote worked well for over thirty years, I have never been able to find out the reason for these changes. It does offer equal representation to all chapters. As you said its a fair system.

I agree with your statement on vote splitting, at the upcoming democratic convention there will be alot of states splitting their votes among the candidates.

The big reason I see for a delegate changing his chapters vote at the convention is when the question has been ammended.

I see this all as being basic common sense, Example: The national officers can't be BOD, they answer to the BOD, The law says that they are ex officio (non voting) members of Boards & committees. Simple answer, Comply with the law.

Thanks Joe
Jim

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

The big reason I see for a delegate changing his chapters vote at the convention is when the question has been ammended.

I agree but in the example at yesterday's Legion Convention, there was no admended CB&L recommendation. The district commander went against what was discussed the previous day at the caucus. I may agree with his reasoning for his changing, but, that violated a trust, as he changed his vote based on what was negotiated during one of the hospitality "conferences", as most political things are "negotiated".

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

I agree but in the example at yesterday's Legion Convention, there was no admended CB&L recommendation. The district commander went against what was discussed the previous day at the caucus. I may agree with his reasoning for his changing, but, that violated a trust, as he changed his vote based on what was negotiated during one of the hospitality "conferences", as most political things are "negotiated".

As a primary delegate at many conventions, I sometime was instructed by my chapter to vote a certain way, but was also instructed that if the question was changed then to use my best judgement. You are right some of the most powerful lobbying goes on after hours in those hospitality "conferences"

Jim

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Jim,

I agree. Best judgement is always required absent the facts that were decided upon previously.

I wasn't given any instructions by my post, so it was best judgement all the way.

It's like when people ask for an opine and don't like the response. I'd tell them, "If you didn't like what I said, you shouldn't ask for my opinion."

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Joe,

3 questions

1. As a delegate to the Legion meeting did you carry members proxy letters?

2. How many delegates is your Post entitled?

3. Is the Statewide Convention the Legion's Board of Directors?

Charlie

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Jim,

Just so you know

From Websters:



Main Entry: ex of·fi·cio
Pronunciation: \ˌek-sə-ˈfi-shē-ˌō, -sē-\
Function: adverb or adjective
Etymology: Late Latin
Date: 1533
: by virtue or because of an office <the Vice President serves ex officio as president of the Senate>

ex-officio does not mean non-voting. As mentioned in the Code, it simply means officers may (meaning if we decide they can) serve in other capacities such as on the Board.

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Joe,

Under Mobile 2, the proxies are for delegates, not the entire membership. A delegate can carry one proxy for another delegate.

Example: Chap A has 3 delegates in attendance. Chap B has 1 vote that is not attending. One of the delegates from Chap A can carry that proxy.

When we start doing individual member proxies we now have a meeting of the entire membership. Quorum rules are different and what about voting? With out attendance you would need to have a role call vote on every issue. In essence one person could run the convention. Example 44 delegates combined carries 956 votes plus their vote to equal 1000. If I get hot and carried 2001 proxy votes plus my vote, then I win every vote regardless of how the majority in attendance would see an item as benefiting the organization.

And I did not say we were congress, it was a simple comparison to the make-up of governing bodies.

Next question is How do we authenticate the proxy letters? With some suspect conduct during the last election (mail in ballots) I proposed we move election to the convention so no one could stuff a ballot box, and someone running for office would not be making decisions about if certain ballots are allowed or not. Individual Proxies, I believe, would carry some of the same problems and could easily be misused.

You would be correct about all this if we want an entire membership type of governing.

As for the MAL's, we all know how it would work with a entire membership senario, so what would be your suggestion for a Convention of Delegates senario for them?

Charlie

Charlie in your paragraph #4 " it was a simple comparison to the make up of governing bodies". At last years convention the chapter delegates voted themselves out as the governing body. The governing body is now Bruce Garrison, Jack Crowley, Dave Isherwood & the national Officers. The chapter delegates now have absolutely no voice in manageing the CPOA. You can't have it both ways. As the CPOA lawyer said you can't have two BOD's. There is now no reason to have a national convention because now the chapter delegates have no authority, they can only recommend.

Jim

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Charlie,

To answer your questions ...

1. As a delegate to the Legion meeting did you carry members proxy letters?
No. It was my first convention and not only did I not carry proxy letters, I was not given instructions on the issues. I truely was voting from the point of ignorance making a spot decision based on the brief moments of discussion.

2. How many delegates is your Post entitled? Supposedly they were sending three ... but I have no idea if they were entitled to more. I was the only one that went.

3. Is the Statewide Convention the Legion's Board of Directors? I don't know. I know it was mostly the post commanders and the district commanders there.

However, my floor pass stated it was by virtue of my office that I was there. Of course, it's the first time I was notified I had an office. I was asked to attend by the adjudent while eating breakfast two weeks before the event. I attended the caucus' and the floor. I commuted so I didn't stay for the hospitality events.

You could say the officers of the post were akin the the "board of directors", so it can be construed that it's a BOD meeting. I'd have to look into this more.

At the meeting there were two types of votes. The floor vote where everyone on the floor voted and a district role call vote, where each district commander represented X votes based on the something... whether it's membership or officials, I don't really know, one post did have alot of split votes though. The legion seems to have alot of post officers on the books.

Like I said, I'd have to look into this more, as the devil is in the details.

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Jim,

To offset the large state / small state issue, the upper house was created where every state had an equal vote. This allows my home state ... Delaware, the first state, equal footing.

If the CPOA insists on calling the annual convention a members meeting, they need to insist on individual (or multiple proxy) votes.

If the CPOA calls the annual convention a delegates meeting, then some form of representative form.

If the CPOA returns to the Board of Directors meeting as the Annual Convention, then it's equality for each chapter.


What it is called is the Annual Convention? Convention has it own definition, It is covered extensively in Robert's. (got a whole chapter all to itself) Convention is a members meeting not to be confused with a meeting of the membership. The members send delegates (reps). In a meeting of the membership then then the entire membership should be in attendance.

I am of the belief that Proxies should never out-number attendance. (however further research is needed on this point) Here is why:

Websters New World Robert's Rules of Order Simplified and Applied Second Edition, found under Most Frequently Asked Questions Chapter 18 page 283

"... remember why organizations have meetings - so members can meet face to face, discuss and debate the issues, and arrive at a reasonable agreement through a vote. Members often come to meetings thinking that their minds are already made up about certain issues, but after hearing the discussion, they change their mind and vote differently. Proxies cut out that process."

Also found on page 282 of the above, "Note that Robert's indicates that most organizations should not use proxy voting. However, proxy voting is an advisable method to use in organizations in which members have a financial interest, such as business corporations, homeowners associations and neighborhood associations." (my wife has misplaced my 10th edition and as soon as I find it I will get some more detail on this)

And Finally, Jim, From the same reference Page 227 "At a convention, the quorum is the number of members present." Now just what did i misread?

Charlie

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Charlie in your paragraph #4 " it was a simple comparison to the make up of governing bodies". At last years convention the chapter delegates voted themselves out as the governing body. The governing body is now Bruce Garrison, Jack Crowley, Dave Isherwood & the national Officers. The chapter delegates now have absolutely no voice in manageing the CPOA. You can't have it both ways. As the CPOA lawyer said you can't have two BOD's. There is now no reason to have a national convention because now the chapter delegates have no authority, they can only recommend.

Jim

1. The membership always has the authority. No one voted our authority away. Our question here is how we express our authority.

You like the Code. Then quit reading one lines and read the whole thing.

Convention represents the membership. Is the authority of the membership conveyed in the Code? Answer is YES!!!

Board of Directors. Managers of the organization. Is this in Code? Answer is yes.

If we can only have a BOD or Members then why are both provided for in CODE??? And where does it state "choose one"?

The Convention is the Law Making Body, The B O D is then tasked with managing and executing the decisions of the convention. And everything the B O D does is subject to ratification of the Convention, Membership Meeting, or whatever forum the organization decides to use.

Our Attorney is answering Jon Shipps questions. If one ask the right question one will get the answer they want. It is all in wording.

You sent a question to the attorney in which the Pres would not allow him to answer you. Why? You would have gotten an answer contrary to what the Pres wants the membership to hear. That is why.

Now going back to the OLD DAYS, If I understand you correctly, The Chapter Presidents, by virtue of their office, were the B O D and we only held a B O D meeting at convention, and since you cannot combine a members meeting with a board meeting, then the membership has never had a say in this organization. The By Laws did not say the Chapter Members or the Chapters itself were the B O D, just the Chapter Presidents (ex-officio). Now according to you ex-officio members can not vote. So now how did that system work? They could not represent the membership if they were in a board meeting, could they, because you say the code does not allow for a members and board meeting to be combined. Where is that in the code?

Charlie

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

You sent a question to the attorney in which the Pres would not allow him to answer you. Why? You would have gotten an answer contrary to what the Pres wants the membership to hear. That is why.

Isn't this like a "red flag" to anyone else besides me?

Does the word "dictator" come to mind?

Wray... :cool:

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

1. The membership always has the authority. No one voted our authority away. Our question here is how we express our authority.

You like the Code. Then quit reading one lines and read the whole thing.

Convention represents the membership. Is the authority of the membership conveyed in the Code? Answer is YES!!!

Board of Directors. Managers of the organization. Is this in Code? Answer is yes.

If we can only have a BOD or Members then why are both provided for in CODE??? And where does it state "choose one"?

The Convention is the Law Making Body, The B O D is then tasked with managing and executing the decisions of the convention. And everything the B O D does is subject to ratification of the Convention, Membership Meeting, or whatever forum the organization decides to use.

Our Attorney is answering Jon Shipps questions. If one ask the right question one will get the answer they want. It is all in wording.

You sent a question to the attorney in which the Pres would not allow him to answer you. Why? You would have gotten an answer contrary to what the Pres wants the membership to hear. That is why.

Now going back to the OLD DAYS, If I understand you correctly, The Chapter Presidents, by virtue of their office, were the B O D and we only held a B O D meeting at convention, and since you cannot combine a members meeting with a board meeting, then the membership has never had a say in this organization. The By Laws did not say the Chapter Members or the Chapters itself were the B O D, just the Chapter Presidents (ex-officio). Now according to you ex-officio members can not vote. So now how did that system work? They could not represent the membership if they were in a board meeting, could they, because you say the code does not allow for a members and board meeting to be combined. Where is that in the code?

Charlie

Charlie

1. The members do not have any authority unless they attend the convention, at last years convention members right to vote for their national officers was even voted away Where is their authority? How (as you say) does a member express his authority? Is the authority expressed in the code, answer YES, but only when there is a QUORUM of the members present, until then no LEGAL MEMBERS BUSINESS can be conducted. The Law allows for two (2) kinds of meetings, One a members meeting, the other a BOD meeting, what kind of meeting is the CPOA convention? What, you still don't know!!!

2. Conventions do not represent the membership, chapter representatives represent the membership. The articles of incorporation list chapter presidents as the associations Board of Directors, not the national officers, as I stated before the NO's answer to a BOD

Board of Directors, managers of the organization, is this in the code Yes, But the code, Roberts & the associations lawyer said there cannot be Two (2). The CPOA has one for the convention & one for the rest of the year, Where can I find where this is authorized? Which of the two as authority over the other, we know that the super seven can completely rewrite the budget that the chapter delegates spent their chapters money on to come to convention to work on, where is the members authority in this?

More to come charlie, don't give up

Jim

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

1. The membership always has the authority. No one voted our authority away. Our question here is how we express our authority.

You like the Code. Then quit reading one lines and read the whole thing.

Convention represents the membership. Is the authority of the membership conveyed in the Code? Answer is YES!!!

Board of Directors. Managers of the organization. Is this in Code? Answer is yes.

If we can only have a BOD or Members then why are both provided for in CODE??? And where does it state "choose one"?

The Convention is the Law Making Body, The B O D is then tasked with managing and executing the decisions of the convention. And everything the B O D does is subject to ratification of the Convention, Membership Meeting, or whatever forum the organization decides to use.

Our Attorney is answering Jon Shipps questions. If one ask the right question one will get the answer they want. It is all in wording.

You sent a question to the attorney in which the Pres would not allow him to answer you. Why? You would have gotten an answer contrary to what the Pres wants the membership to hear. That is why.

Now going back to the OLD DAYS, If I understand you correctly, The Chapter Presidents, by virtue of their office, were the B O D and we only held a B O D meeting at convention, and since you cannot combine a members meeting with a board meeting, then the membership has never had a say in this organization. The By Laws did not say the Chapter Members or the Chapters itself were the B O D, just the Chapter Presidents (ex-officio). Now according to you ex-officio members can not vote. So now how did that system work? They could not represent the membership if they were in a board meeting, could they, because you say the code does not allow for a members and board meeting to be combined. Where is that in the code?

Charlie

Charlie

Your "going back to the old days" No you do not understand me correctly, The chapter president is by virtue of their office is a BOD member because when the CPOA incorporated in DC the articles of incorporation it was so stated. I did not state that the chapter presidents were (ex officio). I, DC code & Roberts say that THE NATIONAL OFFICERS are ex officio, non voting members of Boards & committees. And yes, ex-officio members may not vote and cannot be counted in the quorum. As far as "how did the system work?" It was & still is simple, the local chapters hold their meetings, at these meeting the members direct the chapter officers on both local and national items. They send their chapter president or other representative to the convention to carry out their desires. All these chapter delegates discuss all items on the conventions agenda and vote for their chapters members, just like the congressperson you refered to earlier. One congressperson one vote & one chapter one vote, ITS THAT SIMPLE!!!!!


Jim

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Isn't this like a "red flag" to anyone else besides me?

Lots of red flags Wray. However, you see four retiree's arguing over the Code and CB&L. I'm not a member of the CPOA, so that leaves three. That's 0.03 percent of the membership in this discussion.

From the participation level, there is no problem as it's just three people bitching.

I wonder how many full fledged members there really are ... and not those half-priced members.

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Lots of red flags Wray. However, you see four retiree's arguing over the Code and CB&L. I'm not a member of the CPOA, so that leaves three. That's 0.03 percent of the membership in this discussion.

From the participation level, there is no problem as it's just three people bitching.

I wonder how many full fledged members there really are ... and not those half-priced members.

Joe, I'm no longer a member either so that's 0.02 percent. My reasons for leaving have been made obvious to all, I saw the red flags.

Jim

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Hope I wasn't counted in the "four" retirees arguing about this.. I am still a lifetime member, but no arguements here.. As they say..
"It is what it is"....

I may never attend anything put on by the CPOA. And,.. until they get their $hit together, I'm going to save my bandwidth for other things...

Charlie, I guess the ball is back in your court. ;)

Wray.... :cool:

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Hope I wasn't counted in the "four" retirees arguing about this.. I am still a lifetime member, but no arguements here.. As they say..
"It is what it is"....

I may never attend anything put on by the CPOA. And,.. until they get their $hit together, I'm going to save my bandwidth for other things...

Charlie, I guess the ball is back in your court. ;)

Wray.... :cool:

Wray, are you a MAL or member of a chapter? Joe , I don't think that I've been "Bitching" just laying out the facts, In every post I have quoted from The CPOA bylaws, DC Code, Roberts Rules of Order and the associations lawyer, I think that its a damn shame that charlie can't understand the written word and other members don't seem to care.

Jim

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Charlie

Board of Directors, managers of the organization, is this in the code Yes, But the code, Roberts & the associations lawyer said there cannot be Two (2). The CPOA has one for the convention & one for the rest of the year, Where can I find where this is authorized? Which of the two as authority over the other, we know that the super seven can completely rewrite the budget that the chapter delegates spent their chapters money on to come to convention to work on, where is the members authority in this?



Other than the lawyers letter, specifically where does it say you cannot have an annual meeting and a board of directors. Even the lawyer did not give any specific reference. WHERE IS IT?

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

And yes, ex-officio members may not vote and cannot be counted in the quorum.

Book, Chapter, and Page please.

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

We have gotten totally off track on why this thread was started. It was suggested we discuss the resolutions. We are now back on the same old arguements we were in the other threads. So back to point attached is the next Mobile Resolution

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

We have gotten totally off track on why this thread was started. It was suggested we discuss the resolutions. We are now back on the same old arguements we were in the other threads.

I have yet seen any comment on Mobile 3. I am going to try to get the National ones. I had asked Jon to have them published on the CPOA Web Site.
Nothing to date.

C

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Book, Chapter, and Page please.

DC Code 29-301.24 (b)The articles of incorporation or the bylaws may provide that any 1 or more officers of the corporation or other organizations shall be ex-officio members of the board of directors.

Roberts Rules of Order: Ex-officio Members of Boards and committees "In counting a quorum he or she therefore should not be counted as a member. (note) this is refering to the president.

Charlie, please don't tell me that your book of Roberts says different.

Jim

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

I have yet seen any comment on Mobile 3. I am going to try to get the National ones. I had asked Jon to have them published on the CPOA Web Site.
Nothing to date.

C

Charlie, I don't see a problem with Res. #3, the one thing I would suggest would be under l. ist time A to Z, and the next vote from Z to A. Each vote reverse the order.

Jim

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Other than the lawyers letter, specifically where does it say you cannot have an annual meeting and a board of directors. Even the lawyer did not give any specific reference. WHERE IS IT?

What do you need other than the lawyers letter, for years we have been paying for his legal opinion and until now we have trusted his counsel. Because he did not tell you and the national officers what you wanted to hear now y'all question his knowledge, you even suggested getting another lawyer. No he did not give a specific reference so I will.

DC Code 29-301.18 Board of directors-- qualifications

The affairs of a corporation shall be managed by a board of directors. This clearly says "A" BOD, not two or more. The CPOA can have all the meeting they desire, call them annual, conventions or any other name you want, that is not the question, the question is one group managing during the convention and another group managing the rest of the year. That is clearly two (2) groups of managers. This is what Mr. Lippert said was "untenable"

You yourself said that the convention delegates are superior to
the BOD and that the BOD answers to the delegates, if this is so and as it says in Roberts, The sobordinate body cannot change any action taken by the superior body, how then can the BOD completely rewrite the budget if they so desire, thats over riding the desires of the membership who the delegates were at the annual meeting to speak for. You can't have it both ways.

Call them board of directors, governors, managers or any other name, you are trying to call them annual meeting, charlie thats not a name its a event with someone as managers, governors or BOD, Question WHO?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass
Jim

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

DC Code 29-301.24 (b)The articles of incorporation or the bylaws may provide that any 1 or more officers of the corporation or other organizations shall be ex-officio members of the board of directors.

Roberts Rules of Order: Ex-officio Members of Boards and committees "In counting a quorum he or she therefore should not be counted as a member. (note) this is refering to the president.

Charlie, please don't tell me that your book of Roberts says different.

Jim

No it does not, however it does have more than one line in it. You are referring to the phrase where the President is made ex-officio of "all committees except the Nominating Committee" and is normally outlined in the Duties of the Pres. In the case of our B O D, Section II specifically names the National Officers as members. Now I will give you the FAQ from the Robert's Website:

Question 2:
Can ex-officio members vote, and are they counted in determining whether a quorum is present?

Answer:
"Ex officio" is a Latin term meaning "by virtue of office or position." Ex-officio members of boards and committees, therefore, are persons who are members by virtue of some other office or position that they hold. For example, if the bylaws of an organization provide for a Committee on Finance consisting of the treasurer and three other members appointed by the president, the treasurer is said to be an ex-officio member of the finance committee, since he or she is automatically a member of that committee by virtue of the fact that he or she holds the office of treasurer.

Without exception, ex-officio members of boards and committees have exactly the same rights and privileges as do all other members, including, of course, the right to vote. There are, however, two instances in which ex-officio members are not counted in determining the number required for a quorum or in determining whether or not a quorum is present. These two instances are:

1. In the case of the president, whenever the bylaws provide that the president shall be an ex-officio member of all committees (except the nominating committee); and

2. If the ex-officio member is not a member, officer, or employee of the society (for example, when the governor of a state is made ex officio a member of a private college board).

Again, however, it should be emphasized that in these instances the ex-officio member still has all of the rights and privileges of membership, including the right to vote. [RONR (10th ed.), p. 466-67; p. 480, l. 18-27.]

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Charlie, I don't see a problem with Res. #3, the one thing I would suggest would be under l. ist time A to Z, and the next vote from Z to A. Each vote reverse the order.

Jim

Can't change the resolution now. Two possibilities, First, as it reads one could simply ask for a reverse call from the floor, and Secondly, if this passes it is a Ops Man item and could simply be changed at the next convention by motion and 2/3 vote if supported.

That type of "every other time call" may deter trend voting as well.

Charlie

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

DC Code 29-301.18 Board of directors-- qualifications

The affairs of a corporation shall be managed by a board of directors.

This is starting to be like a chess match and I don't even know how to play.

Check

§ 29-301.14. Meetings of members--Annual and special.

(a) Meetings of members may be held at such place within or without the District of Columbia as may be provided in the bylaws or, where not inconsistent with the bylaws, in the notice of the meeting.

(b) An annual meeting of the members shall be held at such time as may be provided in the bylaws. Failure to hold the annual meeting at the designated time shall not work a forfeiture or dissolution of the corporation.

Question is how do we accomplish this. Currently accordingly to B L by Annual Convention (as defined in Robert's)

What is it's purpose: Receive reports and any other business that may arrise.

Are they managers: No. They determine what shall be accomplished for the ensuing year as relayed to them by their respective Chapter Memberships. (the decision makers)

Who is the B O D: The body that MANAGES what the membership has passed at it's meetingl (the ones responsible for carrying out the wishes of the members)

Can the B O D completely rewrite the budget: NO!!!!!! They have the power and authority as given to them that is in the B L. They MANAGE the budget, and are authorized to ensure the wishes of the members are met. The Treas and ED are authorized to zero out all line items at the end of year and move the excess to our Savings. PERIOD. Any move other that those described shall be ratified at the next annual meeting.

This comes from the heart and is not a point of contention. What is described above is exactly how every other organization conducts itself. It Works. It provides for a Checks and Balances system if used properly. Unfortunately our Pres has misused it so badly that we will now fight again at convention over his blatant disregard of the By Laws and wishes of the membership. When used properly the above will without doubt nor reservation create a new and improved CPOA that is for the membership, will increase membership, will increase the budget, will provide more benefits of membership, and continue to voice it's strong opinion on "The Hill" about legislation that affects all it's members and provide year round management.

Robert's says "A board is primarily the administrative arm of an organization, and it transacts the business of the organization between regular meetings."

This is not about some power trip. Common sense is that if the larger superior body is meeting, then why would the subordinate body need to make any decisions on anything that arrises. It is the B O D's job to manage what comes from the decision makers, either the members themselves or their representatives, whichever way we decide to conduct our annual meeting. The Annual Convention is the DECISION MAKING process. The Board of Directors are the MANAGERS of those decisions. Notice what Robert's says "it transacts the business" it does not say they decide the business.

And finally, can we please stay on the resolutions and move this discussion elsewhere.

Charlie

[CMC Bruce Bradley]

Okay Charlie, Mobile #4...just what are you trying to say with that one? If we give them full power isn't that now empowering the NOs with what everyone is upset about with them? Or did I miss something somewhere.

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

And the last Mobile Resolution

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Okay Charlie, Mobile #4...just what are you trying to say with that one? If we give them full power isn't that now empowering the NOs with what everyone is upset about with them? Or did I miss something somewhere.

Read my post #38. I think it explains it.

The Board's power is to MANAGE the decisions of the members. We send our reps to convention with what we desire and they discuss, debate, and vote on the best course of action for CPOA. It then becomes the B O D's job to manage that decision. Not change it, discard it, just carry it out the best way possible.

Year round management is what the board provides. Not year round decisions.

Charlie

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Another thought.

It makes the unforseen much easier to deal with. In the past, if an unforseen item came up then National had to try to get 45 or more Presidents to send in a vote. Most of them would not even reply, some did not know to reply, the decision was dragged out over months.

A smaller manageable Board of Directors (and do not think of them as we did business years ago) to manage the affairs of the organization between annual meetings (which is not a board) seems to make a lot of sense to me.

General authority requires ratification. Only specific (charters etc) items do not.

[CMC Bruce Bradley]

But it still makes for a very dangerous situation when give what amounts to absolute power. There is no way to cover every situation at Convention nor in the budget. It leave us open to a lot of freelancing opportunities when we have to wait a year to ask what happened to the best laid plans from the last meeting.

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Charlie

In your #38 "Can the BOD completely rewrite the budget NO!!!!! I suggest you reread that National BOD resolution. Reprogramming of the annual budget between aaccounts as may be necessary

Websters definition Reprogram: to program anew,to revise or write a new program, to rewrite or revise a program.

That resolution gave that power to them.

Jim

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Some body please take over for me, charlie has worn me out, he, I have to admit knows more about the law, DC code than Mr. Lippert the associations attorney. In corporate affairs he makes Albert Einstein look like a 1st grader. He should write a new dictionary to teach Webster how. Anybody that can twist words around to make them mean what he wants them to mean is to much of a match for me. I am sorry that I wasted everyones time that read all that I have posted. It has been a long journey but I finally reached the end of my rope, think I'll spend my $24.00 on miller lite and I don't even like beer.

Jim

[CMC Bruce Bradley]

Some body please take over for me, charlie has worn me out, he, I have to admit knows more about the law, DC code than Mr. Lippert the associations attorney. In corporate affairs he makes Albert Einstein look like a 1st grader. He should write a new dictionary to teach Webster how. Anybody that can twist words around to make them mean what he wants them to mean is to much of a match for me. I am sorry that I wasted everyones time that read all that I have posted. It has been a long journey but I finally reached the end of my rope, think I'll spend my $24.00 on miller lite and I don't even like beer.
Jim

Jim (and Wray), I know how you feel....and the question keeps coming up about why the AD are not more active in the CPOA. Well just look at the very convoluted mess that it has all become. It's not your "Old Guard Chief's" CPOA any more. I have no idea where and what it all is now as my scorecard is up to revision triple bravo and still going like the energizer bunny. I tried to keep up but when we start arguing the DC Code and By-Laws/Ops Manual like we were presenting a case before the Supreme Court how the hell can or would anyone want to keep up. I need my $24 a month just to keep me in Advil or better yet a cold frosty beverage (or Captain M).

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Just in case anyone is still reading, Mobile 4 holds the B O D accountable to the membership which is lacking in the current B L.

Jim, I do not claim to know more than the lawyer, so answer me this, in his opinion (and that is what his letter is, it is not CPOA doctrine) he makes no references except to say "in D C Code". Now I know I have no where near his knowledge of the law so I requested Jon clear up a few minor details.

1. What determined the Convention Delegation to be a Board of Directors instead of a Convention of Delegates as defined in Robert's Rules of Order?

2. In drafting the resolution, other Veterans Organizations By Laws were studied and our resolution was modeled from a variety of them. It is more than apparent the Delegates represent the membership at the Annual Convention and the Board of Directors manage the outcome of the annual meeting and manage the association between conventions in behalf of the membership. What wording would make this happen?

Pres stated we are operating illegal. So I asked the following questions.

Question. What Law, Ordinance, Rule, are we in violation of?

Question. How does the wording of our By Laws make us illegal?

Question. If something is wrong what is the fix?

To date not one of these questions have been answered. Why do you think that is? If I am so wrong about all this, then why have all my questions to National gone unanswered? Maybe it is because I am not so wrong.

Bruce, it is not everyones job to know Code, Roberts, etc. It is the leaderships responsibility and those who take on the extra knowledge about their organization. I apologize for me and Jim getting into the details so much.
I don't find it hard to get into the law and procedure but one does have to research and read alot.

Charlie

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Just in case anyone is still reading, Mobile 4 holds the B O D accountable to the membership which is lacking in the current B L.

Jim, I do not claim to know more than the lawyer, so answer me this, in his opinion (and that is what his letter is, it is not CPOA doctrine) he makes no references except to say "in D C Code". Now I know I have no where near his knowledge of the law so I requested Jon clear up a few minor details.

1. What determined the Convention Delegation to be a Board of Directors instead of a Convention of Delegates as defined in Robert's Rules of Order?

2. In drafting the resolution, other Veterans Organizations By Laws were studied and our resolution was modeled from a variety of them. It is more than apparent the Delegates represent the membership at the Annual Convention and the Board of Directors manage the outcome of the annual meeting and manage the association between conventions in behalf of the membership. What wording would make this happen?

Pres stated we are operating illegal. So I asked the following questions.

Question. What Law, Ordinance, Rule, are we in violation of?

Question. How does the wording of our By Laws make us illegal?

Question. If something is wrong what is the fix?

To date not one of these questions have been answered. Why do you think that is? If I am so wrong about all this, then why have all my questions to National gone unanswered? Maybe it is because I am not so wrong.

Bruce, it is not everyones job to know Code, Roberts, etc. It is the leaderships responsibility and those who take on the extra knowledge about their organization. I apologize for me and Jim getting into the details so much.
I don't find it hard to get into the law and procedure but one does have to research and read alot.

Charlie

I swore I was finished, but I must answer this. Question # 1 " What determines the convention to be a board of directors instead of a convention of delegates as defined in roberts rules of order?"

1st the convention has not a damn thing to do with a BOD, the delegates have nothing to do with a BOD. When the CPOA was founded in 1969 the articles of incorporation were approved and signed by the president of each chapter, the bylaws were written and approved by these same chapter presidents as required by the law DC code 29-301.13 Bylaws " The initial bylaws of a corporation shall be adopted by its board of directors." The chapter presidents were the BOD then and are still the BOD now because the law says that they cannot relieve themselves of their responsibility, they did not make themselves the BOD, their chapter members made them the BOD when they elected them as chapter presidents. These chapter presidents cannot go to a meeting, convention and relieve themselves of what the members gave them. What does roberts rules of order have to do with the rule of law? Answer Not one damn thing.

Jim

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Jim,

I wonder why they haven't changed the Articles of Corporation. Changing them would make all your points moot.

Maybe one needs to look at the CPOA from the other side ... meaning the District of Columbia's view, as expressed in the documents they hold. That is the 501(c) organization called the Chief Petty Officer's Association.

If the lawyer's letter is unclear, and Charlie states he didn't give any reference other than the DC Code, then clarity should be sought from the lawyer.

When a lawyer uses untenable, he most likely means there is no legal defense for whatever issue they are discussing. Using yesteryear's excuses (long delays in getting answers from Chapter Presidents) is untendable. Email has been available for almost 20 years. Video conferencing is inexpensive; well compared to in the flesh meetings. Chatroom addin's are common place for websites.

Lawyers prefer things being tenable; capable of being defended.

That should indicate something is amiss, and could rightfully be illegal.

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Jim,

I wonder why they haven't changed the Articles of Corporation. Changing them would make all your points moot.

Maybe one needs to look at the CPOA from the other side ... meaning the District of Columbia's view, as expressed in the documents they hold. That is the 501(c) organization called the Chief Petty Officer's Association.

If the lawyer's letter is unclear, and Charlie states he didn't give any reference other than the DC Code, then clarity should be sought from the lawyer.

When a lawyer uses untenable, he most likely means there is no legal defense for whatever issue they are discussing. Using yesteryear's excuses (long delays in getting answers from Chapter Presidents) is untendable. Email has been available for almost 20 years. Video conferencing is inexpensive; well compared to in the flesh meetings. Chatroom addin's are common place for websites.

Lawyers prefer things being tenable; capable of being defended.

That should indicate something is amiss, and could rightfully be illegal.

Joe, again you are right on. The lawyer was ask simply if the CPOA could have two (2) BOD's, one for the convention and another for the rest of the year. This is what he said was "untenable", not being a lawyer I would have used laymans terms, Hell No there can't be two. the CPOA still has two they just don't call them both BOD's.

Jim

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

What is a CPOA covention? answer: it is a gathering of the society (association members).

Who may attend? answer: all members in good standing.

What happens at the convention?.
1. Opening ceremony, open to all members
2. commandants luncheon, open to all members
3. Past presidents luncheon, open to all members
4. Guest lecturers, Champus, MCPO-CG, Geico,etc. open to all members
5. Formal Dinner, open to all members
6. closing ceremony, open to all members
7. Hospitality room, open to all members
8. Board of Directors meeting, open to all members to sit in the gallery and observe.

A member need not be a representative or delegate to attend any and all events.

Board of Directors meeting:
1, Who are the society's BOD? Answer: The president of each chapter of the association.
2. Why are alternates & proxies allowed? Answer: Because duties may keep the chapter president from attending, Some chapters cannot afford the send a representative.
3. What are the quorum requirements of the law for a BOD meeting? Answer: DC code 29-301.21, In no event shall a quorum consist of less than one-third of the directors so fixed or stated.
4. The CPOA bylaws specify when voting its one chapter, one vote.
5. When the new BOD resolution was brought to the floor last year there were twenty-two (22)chapter represented, only the delegate occuping his chapters seat could vote if the bylaws were complied with, they were not!! There were 37 votes cast, fifteen votes were illegal!! This resolution would not have passed without these illegal votes. This practice of allowing all present to vote started in 2001 and should have been called out of order then.

So charlie, the convention is not a BOD meeting, it is just a event that happens to take place during a convention. In answer to your question above this is just one of many violations of the law.

Jim

[CMC Bruce Bradley]

Bruce, it is not everyones job to know Code, Roberts, etc. It is the leaderships responsibility and those who take on the extra knowledge about their organization. I apologize for me and Jim getting into the details so much.
I don't find it hard to get into the law and procedure but one does have to research and read alot.
Charlie

Charlie, I agree with you to a point...but when it becomes such an issue that the newest members of the association has no idea what it is all about or how it works, then it's a problem. We need to go back to some KISS stuff if we want to gain and keep the membership, in my opinion.

I have a Masters in Judicial Administration and I'm having trouble keeping up with the constant changes and the who said or changed what. And although I don't claim to know near as much about the working of the association as you and Jim, why should I or any other potential member be that much in the dark about "our" association.

I remember back to my first convention and standing up to have my voice heard, in support of what my chapter sent me there to do. And basically being slammed back down into my seat because I didn't follow the exact way of Roberts in full verbage. Although I didn't call that my last convention and attended a few more, eventually those beatings took their toll when it didn't let up even though I had learned some more but couldn't keep up with constant changes. If we truly want to attract and keep the younger generation of AD Chiefs, then we need to change the association and the way it does business. Otherwise when all of us old guys are gone none of them will want to come in and pick up the pieces as they will be all that is left.

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Charlie, in a previous post I said I didn't see a problem with Mobile resolution #3, but I really saw what I think are many problems with it.

1st Bylaws is one word, not two, By Laws.

2nd Paragraph c. " National officers, past national presidents, and gold lifetime members who are not otherwise eligible to participate may be granted the previlege of the floor, but without a vote." Is this not ex-officio.

In your post #36 " ex-officio members of boards and committees have exactly the same rights and previleges as do all other members, including, of course, the right to vote". Which is it, vote or no vote?

THis resolution also fails to mention the "national BOD" after all the associations members are paying for them to attend, What part do they play at the meeting? are they voting or non voting members?

I see nothing in the resolution that allows members to raise a POINT of ORDER. a POINT of INFORMATION, call for the question, etc, it appears as though you just took a few lines from Roberts and threw them together.

All that needs to be said is roberts rules of order will determine parlimentery procedurer at all meetings.

I would withdraw Mobile #3 because it is so incomplete.

JIM

PS you never did explain what a quorum was at the meeting, how about it.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

... it is not everyones job to know Code, Roberts, etc. It is the leaderships responsibility and those who take on the extra knowledge about their organization.

I strongly disagree. How does the membership know if the leadership is doing things properly? Because the leadership says so doesn't make it right and proper. You can wish one does things right and proper, but, you can also wish in one hand and shit in the other ... and we both know which one will get filled first.

You need to make the untenable, tenable. If your unclear on what the lawyer meant, get them to explain. Going down the untenable path will cause more to disassociate themselves with the organization, keeping alive the ideal of When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another ...

No one from the leadership has visited these pages to engage in the appropriate intercourse to squelch these discussions.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Charlie,

I talked with one of the other members and apparently this department allows one convention delegate for every 50 members or part thereof for the posts. Each delegate is one vote, and without exception, the division commander's voice votes for the entire delegation in their division. Attendence was not required for the commander to use your delegate's vote.

There were some caucus' prior to the convention to get the delegate votes on the issues. IF the CPOA were organized in that manner, there would be three voices voting at the convention, the national BOD or whatever they are called. That would mean that if some chapter didn't send any delegates, those delegates votes would be in the pocket of their respective member of the big three ...

We do indeed live in interesting times.

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Another thought.

It makes the unforseen much easier to deal with. In the past, if an unforseen item came up then National had to try to get 45 or more Presidents to send in a vote. Most of them would not even reply, some did not know to reply, the decision was dragged out over months.

A smaller manageable Board of Directors (and do not think of them as we did business years ago) to manage the affairs of the organization between annual meetings (which is not a board) seems to make a lot of sense to me.

General authority requires ratification. Only specific (charters etc) items do not.

Charlie, The CPOA almost had it right back in 2001 when they voted to have a executive committee for the national officers to go to between conventions. This committee failed because the law required that at least 2 members of that committee be from the BOD (DC code 29-301.22). there were none on that committee. This is the solution that you are looking for, but calling dave, bruce & jack the Board of Directors is not, make them apart of a executive committee with at least two (2) chapter presidents and the problem is solved, what say you?

I'm trying my best to work with you!!!!
Jim

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Charlie, I agree with you to a point...but when it becomes such an issue that the newest members of the association has no idea what it is all about or how it works, then it's a problem. We need to go back to some KISS stuff if we want to gain and keep the membership, in my opinion.

I have a Masters in Judicial Administration and I'm having trouble keeping up with the constant changes and the who said or changed what. And although I don't claim to know near as much about the working of the association as you and Jim, why should I or any other potential member be that much in the dark about "our" association.

I remember back to my first convention and standing up to have my voice heard, in support of what my chapter sent me there to do. And basically being slammed back down into my seat because I didn't follow the exact way of Roberts in full verbage. Although I didn't call that my last convention and attended a few more, eventually those beatings took their toll when it didn't let up even though I had learned some more but couldn't keep up with constant changes. If we truly want to attract and keep the younger generation of AD Chiefs, then we need to change the association and the way it does business. Otherwise when all of us old guys are gone none of them will want to come in and pick up the pieces as they will be all that is left.

Bruce,

KISS, This is a really good rule of thumb at the Chapter and Committee/Board levels. The book even calls for this. Robert's publishes two versions, First the Rules of Order and then the Rules of Order In Brief. This is pretty much for conducting meetings, period. One should be able to learn enough rules to attend any meeting of any size. The Big Book has its place in a convention setting. Sometimes issues are so complex and the debate and discussion gets into points where people are misusing the rules, which creates arguements, loud voices, speaking out of turn, (see where I am going with this?) that we need the great detail of the Entire Book.

Someone else wrote I was wrong that every member should have the knowledge. I did not mean to say people don't need to know because they do, however the level of that expertise will vary. If I am never going to a convention, or run for a National Office, why would I need to become so well versed in Parliamentary Procedure, unless I just found it facinating. The same would hold true with the Law.

Keeping it simple works, and for most debates that is exactly what happens. But then there are some that needs much more order.

Keep it coming, I am glad a few are interested.

Charlie

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

The initial bylaws of a corporation shall be adopted by its board of directors." The chapter presidents were the BOD then and are still the BOD now because the law says that they cannot relieve themselves of their responsibility, Jim, you continually take only part of one sentence completely out of context from 301.22, and try to pass it off as law. Read and acknowledge what 301.19 (a) say's and get back to us.

I wonder why they haven't changed the Articles of Corporation. Changing them would make all your points moot.There is no need. Firstly the Articles can only be changed by a meeting of the membership, not the BOD, Not Convention Delegates, THE MEMBERSHIP. This is the only thing that absolutely requires a meeting of the membership. Secondly, as stated in Code, The Board of Directors are determined in the Bylaws. Only the Initial Board is determined in the Articles. And lastly, The articles never stated the Board of Directors shall be made up by the Chapter Presidents. It list the Names of the initial board which just so happened to be Chapter Presidents (I think) but just because they were, without it being specifically stated it is not fact. The Chapter Presidents role as the B O D was listed in the Bylaws according to Code and The B O D as it is today is listed in the Bylaws according to code. By the way 301.19 allows changes to the board by amendment to the Bylaws.

2nd Paragraph c. " National officers, past national presidents, and gold lifetime members who are not otherwise eligible to participate may be granted the previlege of the floor, but without a vote." Is this not ex-officio. No. This has nothing to do with membership of a committee or board. This simply allows the leadership, and a lot of expericence to assist in discussion on the convention floor which they currently cannot do unless they are also delegates seated at the table.
In your post #36 " ex-officio members of boards and committees have exactly the same rights and previleges as do all other members, including, of course, the right to vote". Which is it, vote or no vote? The voting strength of the CPOA is listed in another paragraph of the Bylaws. Privileges of the floor has nothing to do with membership of a committee or board. Again ex-officio does not apply here.

THis resolution also fails to mention the "national BOD" after all the associations members are paying for them to attend, What part do they play at the meeting? are they voting or non voting members? Stated in the Voting paragraph of the Bylaws.

I see nothing in the resolution that allows members to raise a POINT of ORDER. a POINT of INFORMATION, call for the question, etc, it appears as though you just took a few lines from Roberts and threw them together. See paragraph 1. (Call for the question in Roberts is called Previous Question.) Convention rules are special rules for our convention. ie we require 3 seconds for Previous Question, Reconsider and others. Roberts does not. Why do we do this, to help stop filibusters. The Bylaws apply, Robert's applies, Code applies. These rules (which we already use but they are not written anywhere) help with certain procedure to follow. (Jim in the old days they were Standing Rule 1, remember)

All that needs to be said is roberts rules of order will determine parlimentery procedurer at all meetings. See Pararaph 1.

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

, Jim, you continually take only part of one sentence completely out of context from 301.22, and try to pass it off as law. Read and acknowledge what 301.19 (a) say's and get back to us.

.There is no need. Firstly the Articles can only be changed by a meeting of the membership, not the BOD, Not Convention Delegates, THE MEMBERSHIP. This is the only thing that absolutely requires a meeting of the membership. Secondly, as stated in Code, The Board of Directors are determined in the Bylaws. Only the Initial Board is determined in the Articles. And lastly, The articles never stated the Board of Directors shall be made up by the Chapter Presidents. It list the Names of the initial board which just so happened to be Chapter Presidents (I think) but just because they were, without it being specifically stated it is not fact. The Chapter Presidents role as the B O D was listed in the Bylaws according to Code and The B O D as it is today is listed in the Bylaws according to code. By the way 301.19 allows changes to the board by amendment to the Bylaws.

No. This has nothing to do with membership of a committee or board. This simply allows the leadership, and a lot of expericence to assist in discussion on the convention floor which they currently cannot do unless they are also delegates seated at the table.
The voting strength of the CPOA is listed in another paragraph of the Bylaws. Privileges of the floor has nothing to do with membership of a committee or board. Again ex-officio does not apply here.

Stated in the Voting paragraph of the Bylaws.

See paragraph 1. (Call for the question in Roberts is called Previous Question.) Convention rules are special rules for our convention. ie we require 3 seconds for Previous Question, Reconsider and others. Roberts does not. Why do we do this, to help stop filibusters. The Bylaws apply, Robert's applies, Code applies. These rules (which we already use but they are not written anywhere) help with certain procedure to follow. (Jim in the old days they were Standing Rule 1, remember)

See Pararaph 1.

Charlie, your paragraph #2 Only the membership can change the articles of incorporation is so much BS, in 2001 the articles were changed by Trimble & shipp, In the change they swore that at a meeting of the membership, with a quorum present, the change received a unanamious vote of the members. You were there, can you say with a straight face that there was a quorum of members there? It was a lie then & its a lie today. And again the penalty for submitting a false document to the district is a $500.00 and up to one year in jail!!!!. So to change the articles all the CPOA must do is lie, so much for a guide to follow.

Jim

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

, Jim, you continually take only part of one sentence completely out of context from 301.22, and try to pass it off as law. Read and acknowledge what 301.19 (a) say's and get back to us.

.There is no need. Firstly the Articles can only be changed by a meeting of the membership, not the BOD, Not Convention Delegates, THE MEMBERSHIP. This is the only thing that absolutely requires a meeting of the membership. Secondly, as stated in Code, The Board of Directors are determined in the Bylaws. Only the Initial Board is determined in the Articles. And lastly, The articles never stated the Board of Directors shall be made up by the Chapter Presidents. It list the Names of the initial board which just so happened to be Chapter Presidents (I think) but just because they were, without it being specifically stated it is not fact. The Chapter Presidents role as the B O D was listed in the Bylaws according to Code and The B O D as it is today is listed in the Bylaws according to code. By the way 301.19 allows changes to the board by amendment to the Bylaws.

No. This has nothing to do with membership of a committee or board. This simply allows the leadership, and a lot of expericence to assist in discussion on the convention floor which they currently cannot do unless they are also delegates seated at the table.
The voting strength of the CPOA is listed in another paragraph of the Bylaws. Privileges of the floor has nothing to do with membership of a committee or board. Again ex-officio does not apply here.

Stated in the Voting paragraph of the Bylaws.

See paragraph 1. (Call for the question in Roberts is called Previous Question.) Convention rules are special rules for our convention. ie we require 3 seconds for Previous Question, Reconsider and others. Roberts does not. Why do we do this, to help stop filibusters. The Bylaws apply, Robert's applies, Code applies. These rules (which we already use but they are not written anywhere) help with certain procedure to follow. (Jim in the old days they were Standing Rule 1, remember)

See Pararaph 1.

Charlie in paragraph #1 you say that I take one part of a sentence completely out of context and try to pass it off as law. Please don't be a phony because that is exactly what you have done with the quorum issue, you took one sentence " A quorum at annual convention consists of a majority of accredited delegates registered as attending" This is just one sentence from a whole paragraph on "Quorums" please print the entire paragraph. Here is how the paragraph starts " A quorum of an assembly is the number of members who must be present in order to conduct business legally."
1. We are talking about "convention accredited delegates"
2. Delegates are from the CPOA chapters.
3. How many chapters must have delegates registered as attending?
4. How many delegates can a chapter send to convention?
5. If a chapter send more than one, how many get to vote?
6. Don't the bylaws say "One chapter, one vote" ?
7. SO PLEASE CHARLIE, AS A MAN WITH ALL THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE LAW, PLEASE CLEAR UP THIS QUESTION, WHAT IS THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF DELEGATES THAT "MUST" BE REGISTERED AS ATTTENDING.
8. Did not Jon Shipp Promise "all that show up get to vote"?
9. charlie these questions are simple so please answer each, I'm sure all that have been viewing these post would like to read your response.

I await your response, thanks
Jim

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Charlie in paragraph #1 you say that I take one part of a sentence completely out of context and try to pass it off as law. Please don't be a phony because that is exactly what you have done with the quorum issue, you took one sentence " A quorum at annual convention consists of a majority of accredited delegates registered as attending" This is just one sentence from a whole paragraph on "Quorums" please print the entire paragraph. Here is how the paragraph starts " A quorum of an assembly is the number of members who must be present in order to conduct business legally."
1. We are talking about "convention accredited delegates"
2. Delegates are from the CPOA chapters.
3. How many chapters must have delegates registered as attending?
4. How many delegates can a chapter send to convention?
5. If a chapter send more than one, how many get to vote?
6. Don't the bylaws say "One chapter, one vote" ?
7. SO PLEASE CHARLIE, AS A MAN WITH ALL THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE LAW, PLEASE CLEAR UP THIS QUESTION, WHAT IS THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF DELEGATES THAT "MUST" BE REGISTERED AS ATTTENDING.
8. Did not Jon Shipp Promise "all that show up get to vote"?
9. charlie these questions are simple so please answer each, I'm sure all that have been viewing these post would like to read your response.

I await your response, thanks
Jim

" A quorum at annual convention consists of a majority of accredited delegates registered as attending" This I got out of Robert's Newly Revised. It is not in the Paragraph under quorum, it is in the section under Conventions. You have already told me I completely misread and did not understand what it says. In the Websters RRO Simplified and Applied, (the one currently used by CPOA) it states in the Conventions section "At a convention, the quorum is the number of members present". I am sure you believe I don't understand that sentence either. Bylaws state (under the convention section) "A Quourm is a majority of delegates registered as attending."You want it changed? Become a member, submit a resolution, and get it passed. It is that simple. This answers 1 2 and 3.

4. As many as they wish.

5. One per Chapter for the general business of CPOA. In accordance with Section IX everyone in attendance may vote and have privilege of the floor for Bylaws amendments and revisions. Don't like it? Then become a member, submit a resolution, get it passed. It is that simple.

6. See 5. above.

7. According to Bylaws there is no minimum.

8. You have apparently not read the minutes of the Jun B O D meeting. We will hold convention in accordance with the Bylaws.

9. I did my part, so what about 301.19?

And what does any of this have to do with the resolutions.

Charlie

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Charlie, your paragraph #2 Only the membership can change the articles of incorporation is so much BS, in 2001 the articles were changed by Trimble & shipp, In the change they swore that at a meeting of the membership, with a quorum present, the change received a unanamious vote of the members. You were there, can you say with a straight face that there was a quorum of members there? It was a lie then & its a lie today. And again the penalty for submitting a false document to the district is a $500.00 and up to one year in jail!!!!. So to change the articles all the CPOA must do is lie, so much for a guide to follow.

Jim

I really wish you would quit making this personal. What happened in 2001 was wrong. The change had to happen, but how they went about it was wrong. I was not there. Just because someone does something wrong does not make what I said BS. By Law, the articles can only be changed by a meeting of the membership. Problem, We would never be able to make this happen except with a previous notice and a very liberal set of rules, especially for quorum.

Charlie

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

" A quorum at annual convention consists of a majority of accredited delegates registered as attending" This I got out of Robert's Newly Revised. It is not in the Paragraph under quorum, it is in the section under Conventions. You have already told me I completely misread and did not understand what it says. In the Websters RRO Simplified and Applied, (the one currently used by CPOA) it states in the Conventions section "At a convention, the quorum is the number of members present". I am sure you believe I don't understand that sentence either. Bylaws state (under the convention section) "A Quourm is a majority of delegates registered as attending."You want it changed? Become a member, submit a resolution, and get it passed. It is that simple. This answers 1 2 and 3.

4. As many as they wish.

5. One per Chapter for the general business of CPOA. In accordance with Section IX everyone in attendance may vote and have privilege of the floor for Bylaws amendments and revisions. Don't like it? Then become a member, submit a resolution, get it passed. It is that simple.

6. See 5. above.

7. According to Bylaws there is no minimum.

8. You have apparently not read the minutes of the Jun B O D meeting. We will hold convention in accordance with the Bylaws.

9. I did my part, so what about 301.19?

And what does any of this have to do with the resolutions.

Charlie

#7. According to bylaws there is no minimum, Just because its in the bylaws does not mean that it complies with either the law or roberts, Run it by the lawyer if he agrees that there is no minimum required I'll shut up forever.

#9. DC code 29-301.19 I did not say that the number of directors could not be changed, I just said that they could not vote themselves out of a job. The number of directors was fixed in the bylaws, The bylaws said that each chapter president was a member of the CPOA BOD.

Please explain the vote that change this BOD, It was one chapter, one vote. There were 22 chapters represented, yet there were 37 votes cast, please don't try to tell me this was legal.

The CPOA paid for the attorney's opinion on two governing bodies and when he did not say what you wanted to hear, he was just disregarded, how dumb is that. You have just proven that the association does not need a lawyer, charlie just volunteer your services, you can always spin a word to mean whatever you want it to mean!!!

Jim

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

" A quorum at annual convention consists of a majority of accredited delegates registered as attending" This I got out of Robert's Newly Revised. It is not in the Paragraph under quorum, it is in the section under Conventions. You have already told me I completely misread and did not understand what it says. In the Websters RRO Simplified and Applied, (the one currently used by CPOA) it states in the Conventions section "At a convention, the quorum is the number of members present". I am sure you believe I don't understand that sentence either. Bylaws state (under the convention section) "A Quourm is a majority of delegates registered as attending."You want it changed? Become a member, submit a resolution, and get it passed. It is that simple. This answers 1 2 and 3.

4. As many as they wish.

5. One per Chapter for the general business of CPOA. In accordance with Section IX everyone in attendance may vote and have privilege of the floor for Bylaws amendments and revisions. Don't like it? Then become a member, submit a resolution, get it passed. It is that simple.

6. See 5. above.

7. According to Bylaws there is no minimum.

8. You have apparently not read the minutes of the Jun B O D meeting. We will hold convention in accordance with the Bylaws.

9. I did my part, so what about 301.19?

And what does any of this have to do with the resolutions.

Charlie

Charlie, I have now read the minutes of the june (BOD) meeting, I saw reference to your letter to reword annual meeting to annual convention, and I am really quiet amazed that you all think that changing a word changes the intent of what the meeting really is. Because its just a convention and not a board of directors meeting, and not a members meeting , not a meeting of delegates or chapter representatives, its just a convention and there is no law in the DC code concerning conventions. (have I got it right). At a convention it is now a free-for-all, anything goes, there are no rules, hell rules were made to be broken anyway. There are no quorum requirements, as you said, so once the 1st registered person arrives you can just go ahead an start the meeting, Oh I'm sorry, start the convention. There are no requirements for a chapter to send a delegate, representative, there is no minimum numbers of chapters or delegates. there is no need for accreditation committee. All that is needed to conduct the business of the CPOA is the seven person BOD. The four national officers out-number the three BOD members so they can control the agenda. and bylaws section II gives the national presdent total control of the budget. "Members?, we don't need any stinking members" Just keep sending your dues. Have I got it about right charlie, am I understanding you?

Sounds like McHales navy to me
Jim

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

#7. According to bylaws there is no minimum, Just because its in the bylaws does not mean that it complies with either the law or roberts, Run it by the lawyer if he agrees that there is no minimum required I'll shut up forever. Convention is not a B O D meeting. It has it's own definition. (look it up)The B O D quorum does not apply, and since the membership is represented by delegates then the 10% does not apply. Where do we go from here? Parliamentary Procedure? If So, "At a Convention the quorum is the number of delegates present". The lawyer cost money, I am not, nor, would I ask CPOA to pay for it either. As I stated before become a member and get it changed if you don't like it.

#9. DC code 29-301.19 I did not say that the number of directors could not be changed, I just said that they could not vote themselves out of a job. The number of directors was fixed in the bylaws, The bylaws said that each chapter president was a member of the CPOA BOD. It states by amendment to the bylaws. Is not an amendment change?

Please explain the vote that change this BOD, It was one chapter, one vote. There were 22 chapters represented, yet there were 37 votes cast, please don't try to tell me this was legal. SECTION IX is the procedure to follow for amending and revising the bylaws.

The CPOA paid for the attorney's opinion on two governing bodies and when he did not say what you wanted to hear, he was just disregarded, how dumb is that. You have just proven that the association does not need a lawyer, charlie just volunteer your services, you can always spin a word to mean whatever you want it to mean!!! I will not spin any words. Don't you belong to other veterans organizations. Look at their bylaws and see if their convention delegation and B O D are the same. When you find out they are not then lets discuss why it is ok for them and not for us.
Jim


Have a great day!

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

What is a CPOA covention? answer: it is a gathering of the society (association members).

Who may attend? answer: all members in good standing.

What happens at the convention?.
1. Opening ceremony, open to all members
2. commandants luncheon, open to all members
3. Past presidents luncheon, open to all members
4. Guest lecturers, Champus, MCPO-CG, Geico,etc. open to all members
5. Formal Dinner, open to all members
6. closing ceremony, open to all members
7. Hospitality room, open to all members
8. Board of Directors meeting, open to all members to sit in the gallery and observe.

A member need not be a representative or delegate to attend any and all events.

Board of Directors meeting:
1, Who are the society's BOD? Answer: The president of each chapter of the association.
2. Why are alternates & proxies allowed? Answer: Because duties may keep the chapter president from attending, Some chapters cannot afford the send a representative.
3. What are the quorum requirements of the law for a BOD meeting? Answer: DC code 29-301.21, In no event shall a quorum consist of less than one-third of the directors so fixed or stated.
4. The CPOA bylaws specify when voting its one chapter, one vote.
5. When the new BOD resolution was brought to the floor last year there were twenty-two (22)chapter represented, only the delegate occuping his chapters seat could vote if the bylaws were complied with, they were not!! There were 37 votes cast, fifteen votes were illegal!! This resolution would not have passed without these illegal votes. This practice of allowing all present to vote started in 2001 and should have been called out of order then.

So charlie, the convention is not a BOD meeting, it is just a event that happens to take place during a convention. In answer to your question above this is just one of many violations of the law.

Jim

Jim, I have real heart burn with the above. You have stooped to an all time low of misleading anyone who may have an interest in what we are saying here. What you have stated is no where near the true definition of a Convention.

Convention is a formal meeting. Defined in Robert's with a set of rules also found in Robert's. No where that I can find the definition of a convention as being a group of events or a simple "gathering of the soceity". In your analysis above you left out the general sessions. Why? Are they just an event? or is that what you are calling the B O D meeting? "A session is a series of connected meetings held by a group and devoted to a single order of business or program. Each meeting in the session is scheduled to continue business from the point where is left off in the precedeing meeting. Sessions are very common in conventions." (from Websters New World Robert's Rules of Order Simplified and Applied Second edition pg 225)

[BMCS Charlie Womack (Ret)]

Greetings All,

Since this thread has taken a turn for the worse, it seems senseless to continue. Only two are posting and we are not talking about the resolutions nor is anyone else.

I was going to run the BOD ones by but I really fail to see the need to waste the time.

If there is true interest by association members to discuss the resolutions let me know and I will gladly discuss them with you.

Charlie

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Have a great day!

Read 29-301.17 Quorum, for a members vote the member must vote for them self or have a proxie. Nowhere in this section of the law is what your saying allowed, nowhere does it say REPRESENTATIVE can vote for a member.

The only time a representative can vote for a member is when that representative is a member of the board of directors, the chapter representatives are no longer BOD!!!

This is the Law, the CPOA must obey the Law. And again, there is no requirement that Roberts Rules of Order be followed or even used. What part of obeying the law can't you understand.

It does not matter what other organization do, that has no bearing on the CPOA. you are so hung up on Roberts that you can't understand the difference between Roberts & DC code. One is law and its not Roberts!!!

Sorry it pissed you off but you are wrong

Jim

[MKCM Jim Bridges (Ret)]

Jim, I have real heart burn with the above. You have stooped to an all time low of misleading anyone who may have an interest in what we are saying here. What you have stated is no where near the true definition of a Convention.

Convention is a formal meeting. Defined in Robert's with a set of rules also found in Robert's. No where that I can find the definition of a convention as being a group of events or a simple "gathering of the soceity". In your analysis above you left out the general sessions. Why? Are they just an event? or is that what you are calling the B O D meeting? "A session is a series of connected meetings held by a group and devoted to a single order of business or program. Each meeting in the session is scheduled to continue business from the point where is left off in the precedeing meeting. Sessions are very common in conventions." (from Websters New World Robert's Rules of Order Simplified and Applied Second edition pg 225)

Bruce, Wray, or anyothers who have attended a CPOA convention


Charlie says that my post # 66 is misleading and that what I have stated "is no where near the true definition of a convention" I have attended many CPOA conventions and what I posted was my best recollections of what always took place. Please review my post # 66 and let me no if your memories are different from mine. I was not trying to post "The true definition of a convention", meerly point what has always taken place at a CPOA convention. I must admit to Charlie that the CPOA convention will be much different than the up-coming Democratic national convention in Denver, charlie should the CPOA model their convention after theirs?

I have not yet "stooped"
Jim

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

After re-reading post #66, I'd say that is a very accurate of the way conventioons were held when I last attended. I also remember a "free day" which many would see the local sites with family members or friends..

I do not understand all the confusion here.... I would also suggest anyone having doubts about this review their "Chief" magazine. It usually has a day to day layout of daily/evening events.

I have attended conventions both as a Chapter President and not. Quite frankly, living here in Daytona Beach, I suspect I will never attend another CCTI or convention, unless one is held in Orlando Fl. I see no point in it. Many active duty feel we (the retired folks) are not up to speed on anything currently done in the CG. To a degree that may be correct, but many of us are definately not out of the loop... Particularly those that would attend a convention.

I'd still like to see some numbers.. you know.. active duty vs retired. The CPOA, as I have said in the past is dying a slow death. (just my opinion) I'd love to see the active duty guys & gals pick up the ball & run with it... but please excuse me if I don't hold my breath.

Wray.. :cool:

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Also..... Somewhere in the list of 8 items in post # 66 General meetings are conducted. From the general meeting, often members would be tasked with researching and recommending changes for a host of items...

I remember during one of my conventions I was on a committee that discussed and made recommendations concerning the signatures on the enlisted advancement certificates... For years the only signature on these certificates was that of the Commandant.. As I recall we voted to have the MCPOCG also place his signature on these certificates...

That was only one of the many items discussed at these conventions... Perhaps the list in post #66 didn't show the actual meetings and mini meetings held by representatives.. but they do happen.

Wray... :cool:

[CMC Bruce Bradley]

In case anyone was wondering what the plan was for this year's "gathering", here you go straight from the CPOA web site.

http://www.uscgcpoa.org/0-main/convention/convention_101b.pdf

[MKC Chad L. Royer]

All,

This is why there might be less attendance, lack of participation or droop in membership:

TITLE: PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY

WHEREAS: CPOA By Laws Section I defines Parliamentary Authority as Robert’s Rules of Order and clearly leaves this authority to the discretion of the National President.

WHEREAS: CPOA By Laws Section I does not state the publication nor purpose of this association’s Parliamentary Authority.

WHEREAS: .Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised is the publication all other versions are derived from, and

WHEREAS: CPOA currently uses a simplified version of Robert’s Rules of Order, which is published by an author other than Robert, and.

WHEREAS: Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised is the foremost guide to parliamentary procedure, and

WHEREAS: The publication, Robert’s Rules of Order In Brief, is more than sufficient for Chapter use, and

WHEREAS: Robert’s has an interactive website, can be purchased direct, and is available in CD rom

THEREFORE,
LET IT BE
RESOLVED: By Laws Section 1.1 be changed to read:
“1. The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’ Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the association in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these By Laws and any special rules of order this association may adopt.” and

delete paragraph 2 and renumber paragraph 3 accordingly.

This is to certify that on 2 Apr 08 , with a quorum present at a regular meeting of the Mobile Chapter, this resolution was proposed, read, debated, and adopted by unanimous vote.

Legal Bullsh&t...This is why i'm currently not a member.

Under the KISS method mentioned...did anyone see the commercial "What if Firemen Ran Things"? Blah, blah, blah...lots of papers here saying we need clean water. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1590969502038856746&q=Sprint+Nextel&ei=f7NySMigL4GqrQLy_vjCCA&hl=en

I completely agree with Master Chief Bradley and what he said in post # 52.

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Legal Bullsh&t...This is why i'm currently not a member.

Chad, what a fine example of leadership....

Just because you don't understand the "legal Bullsh&t" is not a reason to turn your back.. don't you think it would be better to jump in and try to learn something?

As the saying goes... if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

Personally, if I were on active duty I would take this entire CPOA issue as a 'challenge' and try to get things straightened out.

Wray... :cool:

[HSC Chris Fly]

I'm still not sure what the purpose of the CPOA is.....

I have to agree with Chad, it seems like 95% of what the association does is argue about how to run it. What has it done for it's members or the community/public lately? I get the magazine and don't see much except articles about a bunch of chapter cook outs...

I pay my $2 a month, but see no reason to get involved with a bunch bickering

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Chris,
Perhaps if you were a little more involved with the CPOA you would know.. If you want a quick run down look at page 36 of the Jan 2008 "Chief" magazine.

By the way, I'm not trying to talk up the CPOA. I am a lifetime member, but will probably have very little to do with it, since I have retired to an area there is no chapter. If I had retired in Yorktown VA, I suspect I would have a muuch different opinion.

What ever the CPOA is or isn't, is mainly dictated by those on active duty. It appears the opinions of you and Chad seem to say it all.

Wray... :cool:

[HSC Chris Fly]

Wray,
Don't you think there is a reason for the majority of Active Duty not being involved? I'm not sure what happened (before my time as a Chief), but I'm pretty sure it's not one sided as nothing ever is...
Chris

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

"What if Firemen Ran Things"? Blah, blah, blah...lots of papers here saying we need clean water. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...Ly_vjCCA&hl=en

Yeah, the details to have clean water was so expertly proclaimed in the video.

The devil is in the details.

I see your a "talking point" voter. The details are unnecessary and inexpensive in your world.

Everything revolves around the legal bull$hit. Your pay, your leave, your allowances ... everything. Don't wait for the comic book version, you can read the sources.

The Resolution format is traditional. I see you don't like tradition, so the CG might as well dispose of the CCTI, as it's history is so short ... less than two decades.

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Wray,
Don't you think there is a reason for the majority of Active Duty not being involved? I'm not sure what happened (before my time as a Chief), but I'm pretty sure it's not one sided as nothing ever is...
Chris

Chris, I don't know... why don't you tell me, since you are "active duty"? I joined the CPOA at the time of my initiation. (MCPO Jim Bridges was my Judge)...

I got involved and drove from Alexandria VA, to Balto for monthly meetings/initations when not underway.. I attended conventions, and when stationed in Corpus started the Corpus Christi CPOA chapter, which is still going strong today..

So, you tell me, why don't the Chiefs today get involved? Is it because they just want to go home at the end of a work day and have nothing to do with the CG after work hours? I have heard that before. I have heard people are worried about their marks, shoud they attend anything where alcohol is served. Another BS excuse as far as I'm concerned.

Like I said, I'm not here to convince anyone of anything. I do understand the CPOA may not be for everyone. I enjoyed my CG time, and my time involved with the CPOA as well. We had a lot