Letters on the Butt.

[mastratton]

Originally Posted by Brother Joseph

3) though all this talk sounds great I need to ask: what type of resolution could the convention write that would actually be enforced. When I think of resolutions I think of nice letters of congratulations, statements on issues, and answers to questions being addressed. They don't seem like things people take all that seriously. I'm probably mistaken with that but I can't thing of any strong resolution off the top of my head.

The Fraternity's Risk Management Policy is one example. It was adopted, as I recall, at the 1996 National Convention. Though I don't think it had the words "resolution," it nevertheless was a policy adopted, but yet is not part of the bylaws.

Mark

[Senusret I]

Mark,

What you think you are doing, what you are actually doing, and how it makes Brothers react are probably three different things.

I ask that you take a hard look on your approach and determine whether it is what's best for the brotherhood, or if what you intend can be proactively teachable through alternative methods such as conferences, conventions, communication through section chairs, etc.

The brothers who are posting these ideas for bylaws concerns on facebook sometimes are brothers initiated within the last two years or alumni who have no other outlet to discuss.

Again, the approach is what troubles me, not the intent. It makes me not want to openly discuss bylaws proposals.

[mastratton]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

Mark,

What you think you are doing, what you are actually doing, and how it makes Brothers react are probably three different things.

I ask that you take a hard look on your approach and determine whether it is what's best for the brotherhood, or if what you intend can be proactively teachable through alternative methods such as conferences, conventions, communication through section chairs, etc.

The brothers who are posting these ideas for bylaws concerns on facebook sometimes are brothers initiated within the last two years or alumni who have no other outlet to discuss.

Again, the approach is what troubles me, not the intent. It makes me not want to openly discuss bylaws proposals.

See, I knew you were talking about me. :-)

But it's a fair point, and I'll try to post something on the other group later to try to provide an explanation on the difference betweeen bylaws and resolutions/policies.

But I absolutely am not trying to stop people from discussing these things, but I do try to get them to think things like, "is this necessary?" or "is this the best way to accomplish this?" That's really what I'm trying to get to.

I'll try to put up something that's more educational/instructive.

But the ability of persons to propose these ideas, and to have people discuss them, improve them, find the best way to make the best things happen - that's the important thing.

Let me give you an example. A few years back, someone wanted to propose making the liaison from the BSA (who sits on our Board) a voting member of the Board. That person is already a voting member. If no one had said anything, that would have been a bylaw proposal that would have gone to a reference committee, that would have been required to be reviewed by that committee, receiving testimony, etc. only to find out that the whole thing was unnecessary. That would have meant that committee would have spent all that time - for nothing. That's not even a teachable moment for the committee, but it IS A teachable moment for the Brother who proposed it, and for the Brother(s) who gave him the wrong information. People have to be able to weigh in on those things. Maybe what you're saying is that *I* shouldn't be the one to weigh in (but I do so based on my experiences and knowledge in this area.)

It's much like the discussion about resolutions. The myth in APO is that resolutions aren't enforceable, and just isn't true. We have to dispel that myth.

Thanks for the note - I appreciate it.

Mark

[naraht]

Originally Posted by mastratton

I do not make apologies for trying to have these discussions in a way that (a) results in the most efficient and effective use of the convention's time and (b) yields the best possible result for the advancement of the Fraternity.

Didn't one of the last two or three conventions finish with actual business sometime in the morning of the 30th? I remember being surprised when I found out that it had finished as early as it did. Is going back to a three day convention a reasonable target?

BTW, the length of the conventions is as follows...
By mail: 1926 and 1928 (not sure of the length of the second part of 1928)
Two days: 1932, 1934, 1938, 1940 & 1946
Three days: 1936 (Our tenth anniversary celebration), and 1950-1986
Four days: 1988-Present.

[mastratton]

Originally Posted by naraht

Didn't one of the last two or three conventions finish with actual business sometime in the morning of the 30th? I remember being surprised when I found out that it had finished as early as it did. Is going back to a three day convention a reasonable target?

BTW, the length of the conventions is as follows...
By mail: 1926 and 1928 (not sure of the length of the second part of 1928)
Two days: 1932, 1934, 1938, 1940 & 1946
Three days: 1936 (Our tenth anniversary celebration), and 1950-1986
Four days: 1988-Present.

Hmmm. Good question, Randy. I don't know that anyone has really talked about going back to 3 days.

The last Convention finished fairly early on the 30th (I BELIEVE it was late morning, or maybe around noon - I don't quite remember.) Part of that was driven by the fact that there was less legislation, but what there was, generally, was more substantive. And, reference committees (because of a lighter work load) were better able to devote time to really getting into proposals. It's all a balancing act, really.

So, I don't know if we'd look at going back to 3 day conventions or not. But, however long the convention is, shouldn't be dominated so much by legislation that voting delegates can't participate in other convention activities. We should not submit fewer pieces for the sake of getting out earlier, I don't think - rather, we should submit only those things that really require the time of the convention. That might mean a longer session one time, and a shorter one the next, or whatever. That's only opinion on my part, however.

Mark

[APhiQuetieACE]

Originally Posted by mastratton

But, however long the convention is, shouldn't be dominated so much by legislation that voting delegates can't participate in other convention activities. We should not submit fewer pieces for the sake of getting out earlier, I don't think - rather, we should submit only those things that really require the time of the convention. That might mean a longer session one time, and a shorter one the next, or whatever. That's only opinion on my part, however.

Mark

I beg to differ. Delegates are there to do the business of the fraternity. Participating in other activities is a bonus. This is just my opinion as a former delegate.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by APhiQuetieACE

I beg to differ. Delegates are there to do the business of the fraternity. Participating in other activities is a bonus. This is just my opinion as a former delegate.

Well, only a fraction of the voting delegates are on reference committees, so remainder can do things on the first two days.

As an aside on that topic, have we had enough Region XI delegates for all of the reference committees?

Randy

[mastratton]

Originally Posted by APhiQuetieACE

I beg to differ. Delegates are there to do the business of the fraternity. Participating in other activities is a bonus. This is just my opinion as a former delegate.

In general, yes, I agree with you. But we shouldn't have any more business than we need to have. So, I'm not for a shorter legislative session - if there's work to be done, then we do the work. But we shouldn't be making work just to make work, either.

Mark

[Sister Havana]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

2) If I were to introduce a bylaw amendment, it would say something like "The symbols of Alpha Phi Omega may only be worn by initiated brothers of the fraternity: actives, alumni, advisors, and honorary brothers."

I am not in favor of petitioners or pledges representing their membership through any insignia other than their pin.

I always thought this was the rule. It certainly is/was in Mu Chapter when I pledged/was active (okay, so that was many years ago...) It was a surprise to me when I found out it wasn't an official policy.

[naraht]

From what I understood from when the University of Maryland Eastern Shore Petitioning effort was going on (late 1990s?) was it was *regional* policy that the Petitioners could wear letters, but only if they were wearing something that indicating that they were a Petitioning Group as well or as part of it.

This lead to probably the single largest "you have got to be sh*tting me" moment in my 25 years as a brother, when a member of the group claimed that the PO on the sleeves of their jackets stood for Petitioning Organization. They must have thought that everyone on staff had forgotten that the charter being reactivated was "Rho Omicron".

[emb021]

Originally Posted by mastratton

But it's a fair point, and I'll try to post something on the other group later to try to provide an explanation on the difference betweeen bylaws and resolutions/policies.

Uh, as someone who setup the legislative FB group, I don't see Mark's comments as being an issue.

What I do see as an issue, based on some comments on this thread, is the attitude that only things in the bylaws are enforcable or the like.

Sorry, just not so.

People need to understand that Bylaws are but ONE of SEVERAL documents that guide organizations.

You have:

* National/state laws
* Articles of Associations/Articles of Incorporation
* Bylaws
* Special Rules of Order
* Standing Rules (which includes any policies/procedures)
* Parliamentary Authority

For APO as a National Organization, we have several standing rules:

* Convention Standing Rules (adopted at the begining of the convention. They seldom change much from year to year).
* Risk Management Policy
* Membership Policy
* National Pledging Standards

These are all adopted by the legislation at Convention, and changed by them.


Mark's point, and I think its a good one, is to get people to think about their proposals BEFORE they propose it. Do we really need it? Could it be handled other then by changing the bylaws (say thru a resolution or the like)?

This is part of the reason why some of us created the old Yahoo Groups for legislation (and why I created the FB group). It gives people a forum for discussion their ideas before proposing it. Maybe some won't be proposed. Maybe some will become a better proposal. Maybe some good proposals will get some additional people to support it. You could almost call it a sort of "pre-reference committee" in a sense.

[Senusret I]

^^^ And the way to do that is proactively, on an ongoing basis, through the mechanisms which already exist to train chapters, leaders, and voting delegates at NCPC and before, good reference committee advisors, and by allowing the reference committees to do their jobs.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

^^^ And the way to do that is proactively, on an ongoing basis, through the mechanisms which already exist to train chapters, leaders, and voting delegates at NCPC and before, good reference committee advisors, and by allowing the reference committees to do their jobs.

Do all Regions have NCPCs?(This did abbreviate to National Convention Planning Conference, but at the last sectional, the P was something other than Planning) I know Region III does but I'm not sure about all of the others, I thought at least one region called it something else.

Hmm. A resolution to encourage NCPCs or the equivalent...

[Senusret I]

I didn't know that it might just be a Region III thing.

[emb021]

AFAIK, few Region do them.

Region IV does not, tho I know some sections have tried to put something similiar together.

H*ll, it was like pulling teeth to just get my chapter to do something like this on a smaller scale within the chapter. Try getting several chapters together to do this??? Good luck.