Hunter
Chasin' the Sunset
No, my name is not on the amendment, literally -- however, my name is all over it. Given the possibility of a perceived threat to the status quo, I'm not surprised that the former president and the BOD took the time to amend the by-laws because of me. I lost the election and don't have any HOF points; however, I now have a by-laws amendment designed in my honor!
The email trail below (which is in chronological order) provides a bit of background.
===============
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2018 9:28 AM
To: Gene Bukys; Mike Bryant; Don Creach; Jean-Marie Deletang; Steve Lee; Terry Meyer; Bud Mundy; Jack Neary; David Woodward; Dan Zaccanti
Subject: President's Agenda Item # 2
Mr. President and Members of the BOD,
I want to share my thoughts on a few the BOD agenda items shown in the September 2018 issue of Precision Rifleman.
...
President’s Items
#2, regarding changing the qualifications for being a director from having been a member for at least “3 years” to “3 consecutive years prior to running for director, with no lapses in membership.”
That strikes me as a needless an ill-advised rule change, intended to tighten-up on what could be viewed as a circle-the-wagons approach to running the NBRSA. The proposed change does nothing to assess a potential candidate’s capability of being a director or his/her interest in helping the benchrest community; rather, it seems intended to blackball certain former members whose views on management might differ from those of the majority of the current members of the BOD – someone who might bring new ways of thinking to the BOD. The NBRSA has experienced a fairly steady decline in membership over many years and it should make it easy for members to run for the office of director. As far as I know, an incumbent director has been challenged only twice in years – that can’t be good for the organization.
In addition to the suspect rationale of the proposed rule, the language of the proposal raises some interesting questions. First, it seems as though the last phrase would exclude anyone whose membership ever lapsed for any reason from running for director, even if the lapse was due to an oversight in the timely payment of dues. Surely, that’s not the intent....
What does this proposal really accomplish other than keeping folks from running for director who might have had a legitimate reason for a lapse in membership – regardless of when or how long that lapse was? I submit that it does nothing and suggest that it not be implemented.
Query – other than me, would the proposed change have prevented anyone in the history of the NBRSA from running for director? This proposal seems to have my name written all over it, but it leaves open the possibility I could run for director in the future.
===============
Date: 9/19/18 4:00 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: Steve Lee
Subject: ...
Steve, ... what was the BOD vote on Gene Bukys’ proposal that the by-laws be changed for the qualifications for being a director from having been a member for at least “3 years” to “3 consecutive years prior to running for director, with no lapses in membership.”
===============
From: Steve Lee
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2018 10:59 AM
Subject: ...
The vote passed. Won't affect you next time assuming no lapses in your membership.
===============
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2018 11:20 AM
To: Steve Lee
Subject: ...
Steve, thanks for responding.
... given that you know I let my membership lapse at the end of 2016, can you explain your understanding of how the “no lapses” clause would NOT affect me?
The email trail below (which is in chronological order) provides a bit of background.
===============
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2018 9:28 AM
To: Gene Bukys; Mike Bryant; Don Creach; Jean-Marie Deletang; Steve Lee; Terry Meyer; Bud Mundy; Jack Neary; David Woodward; Dan Zaccanti
Subject: President's Agenda Item # 2
Mr. President and Members of the BOD,
I want to share my thoughts on a few the BOD agenda items shown in the September 2018 issue of Precision Rifleman.
...
President’s Items
#2, regarding changing the qualifications for being a director from having been a member for at least “3 years” to “3 consecutive years prior to running for director, with no lapses in membership.”
That strikes me as a needless an ill-advised rule change, intended to tighten-up on what could be viewed as a circle-the-wagons approach to running the NBRSA. The proposed change does nothing to assess a potential candidate’s capability of being a director or his/her interest in helping the benchrest community; rather, it seems intended to blackball certain former members whose views on management might differ from those of the majority of the current members of the BOD – someone who might bring new ways of thinking to the BOD. The NBRSA has experienced a fairly steady decline in membership over many years and it should make it easy for members to run for the office of director. As far as I know, an incumbent director has been challenged only twice in years – that can’t be good for the organization.
In addition to the suspect rationale of the proposed rule, the language of the proposal raises some interesting questions. First, it seems as though the last phrase would exclude anyone whose membership ever lapsed for any reason from running for director, even if the lapse was due to an oversight in the timely payment of dues. Surely, that’s not the intent....
What does this proposal really accomplish other than keeping folks from running for director who might have had a legitimate reason for a lapse in membership – regardless of when or how long that lapse was? I submit that it does nothing and suggest that it not be implemented.
Query – other than me, would the proposed change have prevented anyone in the history of the NBRSA from running for director? This proposal seems to have my name written all over it, but it leaves open the possibility I could run for director in the future.
===============
Date: 9/19/18 4:00 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: Steve Lee
Subject: ...
Steve, ... what was the BOD vote on Gene Bukys’ proposal that the by-laws be changed for the qualifications for being a director from having been a member for at least “3 years” to “3 consecutive years prior to running for director, with no lapses in membership.”
===============
From: Steve Lee
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2018 10:59 AM
Subject: ...
The vote passed. Won't affect you next time assuming no lapses in your membership.
===============
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2018 11:20 AM
To: Steve Lee
Subject: ...
Steve, thanks for responding.
... given that you know I let my membership lapse at the end of 2016, can you explain your understanding of how the “no lapses” clause would NOT affect me?