| |
3. |
It will
eliminate long, drawn-out amendment meetings and also consolidate all matters
to be voted on into one election. |
| |
The argument against this amendment is that the free
and open discussion which occurs in a meeting cannot be duplicated in the
written arguments which would accompany the ballot and that such discussions
play an important part in the decisions of the voting members. By allowing only
those present to vote, the section will be able to make more intelligent
decisions on bylaws amendments. |
| 3. |
This amendment alters the way in which changes are made in
the list of qualifying peaks. The current bylaws call for a vote at a meeting.
The proposed amendment would make votes on changes in the list part of the
yearly elections. If this amendment is not passed, the votes for additions to
and deletions from the list will not be tallied.
The arguments for and
against this amendment are basically the same as those offered for amendment
#2. An additional point in favor of this amendment is that changes to the list
have traditionally been part of the ballot. |
| 4. |
The current bylaws say that to be eligible for an emblem, a
member must have climbed five of the six emblem peaks and then list those
peaks. This amendment would change that requirement to two-thirds of the
current emblem peaks. If this amendment is not passed, the votes for emblem
peak additions which appear on the ballot will not be tallied.
The
argument in favor of this amendment is that it provides some flexibility in our
emblem requirements by allowing them to be changed without bylaws changes. In
this way the emblem list can grow as the peaks list grows. The requirement for
two-thirds of the peaks seems to provide a very good number, for example, 6 out
of 8 or 9, 7 out of 10, etc. Note that a two thirds majority must approve
changes in emblem peaks, the same majority required for bylaws changes.
The arguments against this amendment are: |
| |
1. |
The
current emblem requirements have served well and do not need to be
changed. |
| |
2. |
If this
amendment passes, but none of the proposed additions to the emblem peaks list
(some of which are questionable at best) are approved, only four of the six
current peaks will be needed for an emblem, seriously weakening the
emblem. |
| 5. |
This amendment changes the number of
peaks required for an emblem from fifteen to twenty-five. It does not affect
the status of current emblem holders. The arguments in favor of this amendment
are: |