[SECC] SECC: Changes?

[K4SB]

Kent McCorkle wrote:
Just a few words regarding the current controversy over what the SECC
should or
 should not be.
 
What is the real problem that the SECC is facing?  The only one that
I've seen
mentioned is lack of participation.  I'm a believer in identifying and
then correcting the root causes of issues, rather than taking a
shot-gun approach to problem solving.
I fail to see the linkage between rewriting by-laws and membership
requirements and increasing levels of participation.
----------------------------------------
Ed
I perhaps have not made myself clear. I have no problems at all with
anything Kent has written, and I have worked hard to increase
participation, as have many more. The problem now regarding the by
laws is simply this. As they are currently written, we have no legally
elected officers. Article II states that 1/4 of the members are
required to elect officers, and makes no other mention of allowing
members to participate by other
means.

I simply want to modify that article to remove the 1/4 restrictions,
and add that members shall also be allowed to participate in such a
vote by email or any other means if they desire.

And there is one other Article which needs a minor correction. 
----------------------------------------
Back to Kent 
If the by-laws of the SECC were to be modified requiring attendance at
meetings, I would probably fail to qualify for continued membership.
---------------------------------------
Ed again:
I have never stated, nor will I, that the by-laws should be amended
regarding attendance. In fact, that may be the other Article I
mentioned. As Kent stated, it is just not possible for some of our
members. And, not necessary.

But this fact remains. Under our present Article II, we do not have
any legally elected officers, and as such, cannot claim affiliation
with the ARRL as a Club because their
requirements require duely elected officers. Simply put, if the ARRL
became aware of this, we would not be a club in good standing. And
submitting a score to the ARRL under these circumstances is deceitful
at the least.

ALL I want to do is amend Article II, and that other minor bug. And in
amending the article, make it retroactive to Jan 1 of 2003 so our
present officers remain. If that is too much to ask, then I'll drop
it. As Kent mentioned, I'll never win another big one.
And that's not important anymore. What is important is getting our
combined scores to the ARRL, having fun, and trying to increase
participation.

I'll make one more post. Since technically, we do not have any
officers, as a member of the Club, I have the right to ask for a vote
by all members to make this amendment.

Simple majority of those voting wins, and I suggest votes be sent to
K4BAI for tabulation. OR, if anyone objects, just post them here.

73
Ed