This proposal is OPPOSED for the following reasons: 

The proposed bylaw changes are hastily and poorly written. 

Article IV section 1 holds the Board responsible for protection of assets.  However, the Treasurer isn't a member of the board.  Protection of assets and disbursement authority go hand-in-hand.  Article X awards disbursement authority to the Treasurer, President, and Vice President.  Presently all with disbursement authority are Board members.  Under the proposal, none of them are. 

Article IV section 4 refers to the term of officers, where in fact only one or possibly two of the Board members are officers.  It should be rewritten to substitute "board member" for "officer". 

Article IV section 7 is horribly written.  Presently, action between Board meetings includes the word "must" signifying matters of urgency.  This ensures that in the absence of exceptional circumstances, board action is taken in a scheduled, open meeting pursuant to an agenda.  The proposal allows for between-meeting actions to be taken whenever "required or permitted".  This leads to routine decisions being made hastily and behind closed doors.

In addition, there is a bizarre addition which essentially states that "No means yes".  It reads, verbatim, "The casting of a vote by Board members, regardless of outcome, shall be construed as consent as applied to these actions." 

Article V has multiple duplications and conflicts. 

President is responsible for providing the Board with a current status of the Club's finances.  Yet, Treasurer is separately responsible for a large list of financial duties including informing the Board of expenditures in budget items. 

Education and Training is responsible for fulfilling the corporate purpose.  However, this individual is unelected and has no voice in Club governance. 

There is a new position "Manager of Telecommunications".  Seeing as the reason for the existence of the Club is telecommunications, this position makes little sense.  It would be similar to a municipal water district appointing a "Manager of Water". 

Further, this individual's responsibilities require that telecommunications support be provided through mysterious organization referred to as SBTAC.  This is a separate entity about which little is known.   Why should it be coded into the SBARC bylaws that federally-licensed communicators must use an unknown outside agency to provide communications support? 

Also within this job description is the responsibility that this individual provide Club resources, equipment, and personnel to this SBTAC unit.  It also refers to SBTAC as "Club sponsored".  Nowhere else is this sponsorship defined.   Could there be a conflict of interest here?  Who is behind SBTAC and are they behind this agenda of bylaws change? 

There are several conflicts and overlaps between the Manager of Telecommunications and the Education and Training position as well as Emergency Services. 


In addition to the functional issues above, the document is riddled with typographical and grammatical errors. 

Article II Section 3:  Strike the comma after "more" in the second sentence.

Article V - Vice President:  Strike the comma after "duties" in the second sentence.

Article V - Treasurer:  Strike the comma after "President" in the second sentence.  Change "Treasure" to "Treasurer" in the fifth sentence. 

Article V - "Public Information Office" should be "Public Information Officer" in the title. 

Article V - "Education and Training" should be "Education and Training Coordinator" in the title.

Article VI, section 3:  Singular vs. plural.  Change "A newly elected Officer or Directors" to "A newly elected Officer or Director".  Strike the commas after "office" and "elected".

Article VII:   Singular vs. plural.  Change title from "A Publications Committees" to "A Publications Committee".

There are likely more errors. A thorough review with adequate time for members to review and provide feedback regarding these drastic changes to SBARC governance before voting is strongly recommended. Whoever is responsible for bringing forth this proposal on election night is being highly irresponsible.