Bylaw Committee Suggestions

This new ad hoc committee could be déjà vu all over again or it could be the start of a more focused and productive approach to making meaningful and lasting change. Which will it be? I will be a beneficiary if the latter approach is used and a victim if the former approach is used again so I feel compelled to make a few suggestions for a recipe for success:

1. Be clear what the charter of the group is

2. BOD needs to define charter up front and the time allotted to it.

a. Agree up front on progress reports

3. Hire a trained facilitator

a. They can keep the group focused on accomplishing its charter

4. Leave the drafting to a professional

a. Words matter

5. Be transparent and video record your meetings –

a. This serves as a record of why any particular change was made.

6. Be realistic about what can be accomplished

a. Reorganizing the bylaws into a clearer form may not be realistic to accomplish but addressing the top three issues might be.

7. Make a list of specific issues that can realistically be addressed

a. For each issue, research what other like communities have done to address those issues

b. For each issue make a list of alternative solutions then put the pros and cons of each solution on paper. Focus the discussion on the alternatives

c. Vote on the solution and move on to the next issue.

8. Keep a list of “parking lot” items that come up during discussion but can’t be addressed by the committee due to time constraints or scope limitations

9. Keep number of participants to a minimum and base selection on experience/knowledge not patronage.

This concludes my one and only participation in the group. Good luck and have some fun along the way

 

So the committee spends at least a month attending to these tasks. The by laws committee I was only a couple of years did at least half of these and we didn’t need a facilitator.

You may not remember but the committee was given the four motions put forward at the previous members meeting. Do you remember did with those motions, we put them in the frigging by laws. Yes we gave them everything they wanted, yet it wasn’t enough for certain overly vocal members. The Board voted them down because certain Board members had an axe to grind and one said she would vote for them and was name was called said no. We got stabbed in the back. For 5he past couple years the Board has been plagiarizing our work, yes plagiarizing our work because we were correct all the time.

Sorry, but I regard your list as more corporate bs and I have seen enough corporate bs in my 40 years in the corporate world to know this is bs. The previous committee did go word by word and we don’t need a professional to draft the by laws as three people on that committee had a total of over 100 years of legal experience and that included an attorney and a parliamentarian who was also an attorney.

If I sound upset at your list, I am, actually I am furious as I consider it an insult to my intelligence, experience and abilities. Actually, I wouldn’t trust you with a super soaker. Nothing personal, only business.

 

Dave,

Think as you will. Speculate as you always do. Brag as you might about your experience. The result speaks for itself.

John

 

Dave,
You forgot to mention that our committee was THREATENED, yes threatened by the Board president at the time and at least one other Director, that if our bylaws allowed gathering of signatures on RCSC property, they would vote against the entire body of work. That is something I could not agree to and another member of our committee agreed. We both felt the need to voice our opinions. If I remember correctly, you got up and voiced yours as well.

You also forgot to mention that some of the committee held secret meetings after our committee meetings ended. I know this because I was still on Zoom when you began the second meeting. That committee was the most bizarre and highly reprehensible volunteer effort I have served on in fifty years of experience. More than once, we were told some item had already been decided when we had not even discussed the matter.

That leaves one with a bad taste in their mouth and loss of respect for the people who decided things outside our committee's meetings. That's not how decisions should be made.
Janet

 

Geoffrey de Villehardouin, Today at 4:46 PM

JosieP↑
I have put together many of these as part of my job, but you have fun.

I wouldn’t trust you with a Super Soaker let alone this event.
Geoffrey de Villehardouin, Mar 5, 2025

Well John, Now you know what not or to get Dave for Christmas.

 

Did it ever occur to you that people do not think as highly of you as you think of yourself? You are pretty snarky, always acting as if you are more important than other people. Others see people like you as arrogant, conceited, or having a superiority complex. I would say narcissistic because you don't even recognize it.

I will say this has been very cathartic for me. I know where I excel and where I need improvement. You have no clue about yourself other than you believe you are perfect.

Right now I have to concentrate on the important things in my life. Ta Ta!

 

So, if I read that right, what you're saying is, that entire exercise was just another example of a rigged system.

Another dog and pony show that was to make the Members believe something was really being negotiated when the final outcome had already been predetermined by one of the Chairs no less! And the big objection was to a rule that would have benefited the Members.

 

Janet, we may have been threaten, but did we not include that in the by laws we presented? I have a copy of those by laws so don’t even think of trying to gaslight me. The item I was most vocal about was proxies as I believed most people do not know how they work. I also made sure that the member could revoke if they had a change of mind. There were no secret meetings as those are a figment of your imagination. We did schmooze after the meeting because it was the second meeting and we were still getting to know each other.
Yeah, we enjoyed having you on the committee as I always wanted to know how things were handled in West Sand Dune, NE. My nickname for you, which I never told the other members was albatross.

 

Yes, Tom, but I was told that it was common practice for RCSC to have secret meetings by someone who posts on this blog. I volunteered for the committee in good faith. When I had suggestions that I thought would work or that I had seen work in other settings, I was frequently told, "We don't do it that way." No other discussion was offered.

If we decided to change something, the Chair of the committee would come back occasionally that we couldn't change that. I assume it had been discussed at the closed Board meetings or the President of the RCSC had decided that. It wasn't truly a committee that could study, make changes and then present them to the Board for adoption or rejection.

I hope the new committee has more success. It's a huge undertaking!

 

I agree that "being able to collect Member signatures on RCSC property" wasn't included in the bylaws we proposed. That was why two of us on the bylaws spoke against its adoption. The rest of you supported it. No problem, everyone has the right to their position. The Zoom meeting where the rest of you met was not the second meeting because I was at the second meeting in person. You are correct that you discussed proxies. One of the committee members opened her notebook and said, "Now where were we? Of yes, it was the proxies." Then someone noticed that I was still hooked up by Zoom and came to the monitor and disconnected it. If I was still available and you were "still just getting to know each other", why wasn't I included in that discussion rather than eliminated? Then a meeting or two later, it was stated that proxies had been decided. I do recall you being strongly opposed to proxies. Since the Articles of Incorporation give RCSC Members the right to proxy voting in Article VIII, those would need to be changed first. The chairman of out committee was opposed to doing that. The reason was any change to the AOI would need to go to the Secretary of State. There was concern about losing our nonprofit status if we did that. So no, I am not gaslighting you. I am stating what occurred according to my recollection. Are you gaslighting me?

Of course you would have a nickname for me. That is probably standard practice for you. Thanks, I consider albatross a compliment.

The symbolism of the albatross is linked to hope, freedom, strength, and also wanderlust, and navigation. In cultures around the world, it is perceived that these birds have magical properties which are connected to healing. On the other hand, the albatross symbolism in ancient myths resonated with good luck. It was believed to bring luck to seafarers when spotted. https://www.joyceelliott.com/albatross-symbolism

 

Kinda makes you wonder why they even bother calling it a "committee" when the decisions seem to already have been made?

 

The exercise was a joke and calling it anything but that is an insult to all of our intelligence, not just Dave. The only reason it fell apart was because the board member's on it had no interest in fulfilling the motions filed by the membership. It didn't take a rocket scientist to watch from the crowd as two board members sandbagged the entire process.

If nothing else, quit arguing over how or why and use it as another "teachable moment." Moving forward, get real, get practical and then get real practical.

 

And that's the only viewpoint you could see it from because the committee didn't allow any guests to attend their meetings!!!

Truth is, the Chair and Co-Chair didn't want any witnesses!

 

Agreed. Good luck to anyone serving on either the Master Plan or Ad Hoc Bylaws committees. Both will be a huge undertaking so please proceed with an open mind.

 

Our discussion demonstrates to me committees have been misused by past boards to legitimize a conclusion the Board has already made. According to the Bylaws "A committee is a small group of Members, subordinate to the Board, which is organized to assist the Board in specific areas. Committees have no decision-making authority and are limited to presenting ideas and recommendations to the Directors and Management unless otherwise authorized." According to wikipedia "A committee is a body of one or more persons that is subordinate to a deliberative assembly. It is usually formed to explore matters more fully than would be possible if the assembly itself were considering them. Committees are chosen to do a particular job or to make decisions about something. They can be a small group of people chosen to represent a larger organization and either make decisions or collect information for it." Implicit in both these descriptions is a level of autonomy that committees should have to function properly. Said another way, the Board should use committees to form independent recommendations that it can accept, reject or modify and should not manipulate proceedings to give the appearance of independence when it is not present.

 

Right on, John!

 

I have read so many complaints/issues about our bylaws, new contradicting old, making them us as they go, anyway many, many comments about what a mess they are. Has anyone considered having someone from the AG's office to come take a look and help clean them up?

 

As we begin another adventure in the art of the bylaw writing, let me remind everyone of my best friend Ben Roloff's interpretation of bylaws. He rewrote them for every organization we were a part of. It was a simple theory; bylaws should reflect how the organization functions. They should be easy to read and even easier to follow. Most organizations try and make them way too complicated. They jam 40 pounds of crap in a 10 pound bag.

The RCSC is the classic example of how to do it poorly. There was a time when the bylaws were less than 20 pages. Nope, there's no good reason for them to be any longer (preferably shorter) than that...unless the goal is to confuse these trying to read them/follow them. Ours have been bloated and ambiguous on purpose and were taken straight from the Board Policies; which are easier to change (as long as they are in alignment with the Articles and the Bylaws).

Here's where i get disappointed: Would it surprise anyone if i told them i read a revised copy of the bylaws just this morning. It was done by an unnamed RCSC member who simply took a whack a creating a workable document that made sense. It's not my thing, but as i read through it i was stunned by how well it was done.

This is what i mean by people who shoot themselves in the foot and think they have to fix every problem, solve every crisis.

 

Well, sorry you shot yourself in the foot. Left a message with the AG. It's obvious the membership needs help.

 

The AG won’t care but knock yourself out.