Please vote "No" on FCA proposed bylaws

I would not normally read the proposed bylaw changes that were sent Thursday but given the false starts and the short window to vote, I did read them and have some concerns.

First, these changes represent basically a major rewrite of the bylaws. I went back through my emails and saw no previous communication with proposed changes for the members to review. Instead, there is no vehicle for comment even now only a yes or no, up or down vote due in 31 days since published and they will go into effect on May 1.

It appears that the existing (not former) bylaws call for a voice vote at the Annual Meeting or by ballot by mail yet we are being asked to vote for these by email? How can this be legal and why is it being done this way?

The proposed bylaws change much of the decision making process from member votes to votes by the Board of Directors and/or Executive Committee only. For example, today if there is a proposed addition, restructure or elimination of a region, there are a series of steps that need to be taken including notifying the proposed region members of the formation of a region, apparently so that they have an opportunity to weigh-in. The proposed bylaws eliminate all of the existing steps including notification and replace them with a decision made solely by the National Board.

Article V Section C assigns the Secretary the duty to ensure the safekeeping of the Club Corporate Seal. Yet Article IX Section A specifically says that the Executive Director maintain the custody of the Seal. Which is it? The Secretary cannot be tasked with ensuring the safety of the Seal if it's custody is dictated elsewhere in the document? Admittedly this is not a big deal but this may have been avoided if the BOD had chosen to share drafts of this document with the membership.

Article III Section E - Quorum reduces the quorum percentage at annual meetings from a paltry 5% of total eligible voting membership to merely 2%. To me, this is a dangerous change as it would allow individuals to easily "stack" meetings so that a very small number of people could sway the entire club. If the Club is having a hard time reaching a mere 5% attendance at annual meetings, the answer is to attract more people, not reduce the quorum to 2%

There are many other issues with this document that need to be addressed, not the least of which include the Region and Chapter changes. But, even if much of this document is agreed to in a much more transparent process, at least we can send a message to the BOD regarding their "top down" methods.


I have no political ax to grind and am speaking for myself only. I fear that most members will either not vote or vote "yes" to support the club. Not voting is a vote in favor of these changes so please vote "No".

Joe Hensler
Pacific Region/Sacramento Chapter FCA