 |
|||
 |
|||
|
Governance 1. Background 2. Highlights of proposed amendments 4. Proposed amendments, AUG 11 The Board of Directors of Arabians in Motion is pleased to present the long-awaited revisions to the AiM bylaws. After months of effort and review by the Bylaws Committee, two Boards and one lawyer, they are ready for your review and input! How these proposed amendments came to be: The most recent committee to take a swing at updating AiM's bylaws was headed by Lisa Kolke, assisted by Sarah Asby, Scott Bowman, Karen Bragg and Kaye Phaneuf. Marcia Donnelly, as the sitting President, participated ex officio (without vote). Kudos to Lisa for her weeks and months of work pulling together the existing bylaws, Oregon Non-Profit Statutes and many other resource documents for the committee’s reference; for preparing and maintaining the many drafts of the working document; and for riding herd to see this project through. Many of the updates were obvious; others were hotly debated. Many proposals were approved unanimously by the committee and/or Board of Directors, some by a slim majority, and some not at all. The Bylaws Committee finished its work last fall and presented their recommendations to the Board (at that time: Marcia Donnelly, President; Sarah Asby, Ahna Bowman, Kathy Darneille, Jon Howell, Holly Lenz, Billie Jo Morley and Kaye Phaneuf) who made some revisions. The revised document was reviewed by the incoming Board of Directors in January (Ahna Bowman, President; Sarah Asby, ZoeAnne Arrington, Scott Bowman, Marcia Donnelly, Jon Howell, Lisa Kolke and Kaye Phaneuf), who also made some revisions before sending it on to Kathryn Hall for legal review. Now these proposed amendments are presented to you, the general membership, for your review and input. The Board plans to ratify the final amendments at their next meeting, 12 SEPT 11, to take effect with the fall elections. Like any club's bylaws, these should be a work in progress, regularly reviewed. They must be robust and dynamic, to respond to changes in laws, technology and the needs of AiM and its members. Because every member is bound by AiM’s rules, the current bylaws-- and the Policies & Procedures Manual, as soon as the first draft is approved -- can always be found on our website. The issues that generated the most discussion were: 1. Meeting frequency. Our long-standing policy of meeting every other month, alternating north and south of the 45th Parallel, evidently never made it into the bylaws. The original bylaws, and the proposed amended version, require an annual general member meeting. Perhaps it should be a year-end awards banquet, with speaker? Or a bigger holiday party? Supplemented by frequent special-interest activities? The Bylaws Committee felt that those details fall under Procedures, not Bylaws, and should be the responsibility of the Membership Committee, overseen by the Vice-President. 2. Directors vs Officers. Which comes first, Directors or Officers? Do all Directors need to be officers? If not, what will their duties be? Do we need two Vice-Presidents? Should the webmaster or the newsletter editor hold office? Neither? Both? Ultimately, the number of Directors was increased to 9 (8 elected + the immediate past president) and the list of officers was pared to 4, with more responsibility transferred to standing committees. 3. Electing Directors and Officers. Who should elect officers -- the membership or the Board? Should candidates run for a seat on the Board or for a specific office? Does the Board know best when it comes to deciding who among it will best serve the club in which office, or should the general membership elect candidates to specific offices? The committee and the Board both voted to clarify but keep the existing bylaw: membership elects Directors; Directors then elect the Officers from amongst themselves. 4. Composition of the Board. AiM is a multi-discipline club. Would members' interests be better served if we followed USEF's model, and apportioned seats on the board by discipline? Many organizations allow only one member of a family/household at a time to hold office. Should we follow suit? If so, where would we draw the line -- members of the same household? Same family, different households? Cousins, aunts, uncles? Trainers and clients? Ultimately, the Bylaws Committee and the Board voted for the status quo. Please submit questions and comments to Ahna Bowman, AhnaBowman@BowmanSportHorses.com , by 26 AUG. A response will be published and further comments solicited until the Board meets to ratify the amendments on 12 SEPT 11. Thank you for taking time to review our work - your input is important to us! Ahna Bowman, President Arabians in Motion |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||
 |
|||