Each chapter's (UG and Grad) delegate strength is determined by the number of members on the chapter's roster. If my chapter, based on it's size can have only 7 delegates, but only 4 members attend the conference, then, my chapter will only have 4 votes for that conference. We vote individually, but usually the delegates are given the directive from the chapter prior to attending the conference. If an issue arises, then the delegates discuss the issue immediately and vote accordingly on behalf of the chapter.

We are also allotted alternate delegates in case something happens. I remember one conference, a soror had to fly out almost as soon as we got there because of a family emergency. One of the alternates was then certified as a voting delegate.

Even our active members not in a chapter have delegates. All actives are part of the decision making process. ;) :D

In APhiA, chapters receive voting delegates based on their numbers by a certain time. Bigger chapters receive more delegates. National Board members also vote, and there are about 20 of them -- five are undergrads.

I personally would rather see all chapters get two delegates, as the current system unfairly advantages alumni chapters, which are greater in number and membership in the first place.

In Alpha Phi Omega, each collegiate chapter gets two votes, each board member gets one vote, and each alumni voting delegate (one from each of the 11 regions) gets one vote. In this case, I feel that each active alumni association should get two votes since at this point it would not unfairly advantage them.

I don't disagree with you 33girl. The difference is that most older adults are able to make more rational decisions than youger adults whose brains have not fully matured or been fully educated. It's the same reason we have alumnae serve as National/International officers not collegiate members. Alumnae who are active enough to attend conventions usually do have the whole group rather than only their alumnae group in mind when they vote. Let me be clear, though, I think collegiates definitely should have a say in ALL decisions. I said SOME think the alumnae should make all of the decisions. The sorority represents both alumnae and collegiates so both should be allowed to vote!;)

I don't think it's a matter of rationality, more of education. I mean we have some alum chapters where the women are OLD and there's no collegiate chapter anywhere nearby that probably had no idea what was going on when we voted on our new structure, or what ASA Advantage is. Basically they want to pay their national dues and be left alone. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, just that it is.

Do you have a mechanism to know for sure how your delegates voted? Our chapters elect/select their voting delegates and expect them to vote the chapter wishes. But there is no mechanism to know for sure that they did.

What do you consider OLD??? :D

This again shows the difference between the NPC and the NPHC when it comes to alumnae. (Not saying one is better than the other--just a different philosophy.) In the NPHC the only difference between alumnae chapters and collegiate chapters is that the former have received their degrees.

We do the same, but there is no way of knowing how the soror voted.

With today's technology--we use electronic voting keypads--I think that information should be made available to that chapter (only) because ultimately that delegate is accountable to the chapter.

In my chapter the voting delegate is our chapter president and the alternate is the first VP. We had a situation one year where the vote on an election was very close and we asked the prez how she voted. She refused to answer. Needless to say we did not elect her to a second term - LOL. But the real issue was did she choose her power to vote her personal desire and not the chapter's. And how often does that happen?

We've received printouts that we voted, but I don't (remember) think that it says what we've voted for. It's been different for each conference regionally and nationally. It is computerized on both levels.

The president and VP are automatically delegates in my chapter.

Just FYI, LXA pays for one delegate from each Chapter, therefore one vote as each Chapter is supposed to have at least one delegate there.

There is also a list of all Alumni who are attending and a meeting to elect Alumni delegates of which I was one at a previous G A.

This insures that no one Chapter will try and control the voting.

Remember, there are Bigger Universitys with with bigger memberships and then State Universitys with smaller memberships.

I will never forget that there was a Officer at our IHQ who wanted to do away with us smaller schools. What a jerk. I won't tell you where he is now but a leader of another GLO of service organization.

1 Vote-1 Chapter.

Kevin, does SN pay for two delegates?

depends on size of the chapter

This has been an informative thread but this discussion needs to go to to next level and engage the "politics" and the political process which these delegate rules engender. A few years ago I was in a chapter where a brother ran for Grand Basileus (national president). It was an eye opening experience!

^^^ I'm not going there! :D ;)

Neither am I! At least not on this board. :D

Well, as an example, we had a chapter at UCLA from 1926-1951, so do the math on the age of the alumnae from there, and they are mainly all in one alumnae chapter.

Then again, as you say, there isn't any difference between how the grad & undergrad chapters are run except for whether or not you're in school. I'm betting that the requirements for chapter formation, number of meetings a year, etc, for NPHC alumnae chapters are FAR FAR FAR more stringent than those for NPC alumnae chapters. But then again, I would wager every state in the union has at least one chapter - undergrad or grad - of every one of the NPHC sororities and fraternities. IFC and NPC groups just aren't like that. If I said ASA or KDR to someone in Oregon, they'd have no clue that I was talking about a national group.