tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8120982399236985142.post6731995455552157964..comments2024-02-07T06:48:23.474-05:00Comments on Sudbury Steve May: Addendum to "The Constitutional Technicalities of Holding (or not Holding) a Leader Election in 2010"Sudbury Stevehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03959184192546029807noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8120982399236985142.post-87391718779214810322009-12-12T12:56:23.509-05:002009-12-12T12:56:23.509-05:00Steve, let's get this absolutely clear. There&...Steve, let's get this absolutely clear. There's no essential difference between the types of General Meeting, which is by definition a meeting of the general membership, except for how they are called. <br /><br />A General Meeting must be held at least every two years: that's been designated as the Biennial General Meeting. It is called by a majority vote of Federal Council (Bylaw 4.1)<br /><br />Other general meetings can be called according to Bylaw 4.2, which gives five ways of calling such a meeting, including giving Federal Council the power to call one by a two-thirds vote. So a general meeting to amend the constitution can be called by Council with the notice period and quorum given by Article 8 of the Constitution.<br /><br />Splitting hairs over the types of general meeting is irrelevant. They're all general meetings.<br /><br />Amendments to the Constitution and Bylaws are covered by Article 10 of the Constitution. The important points are 10.1.1 and 10.1.3: the proposed amendments must be included in the Notice of Meeting; adopted by a simple majority of people present at the meeting; and then ratified by a majority of mail-in ballots sent to all members. These are the three steps of the process.<br /><br />The inference of this is that there is no provision in the Constitution or Bylaws for an electronic ballot to change the Constitution; only a mail-in ballot is allowed, which is understandable if one considers when the provisions were written, but could be revisited in light of the increased security now possible for electronic voting.<br /><br />Right now, the process is for an expensive, time-consuming, and rather irrelevant General Meeting at which only a very few members will be present. Article 8.2 mandates a quorum of at least 50 members representing two regions. Holding it in SGI or Toronto will take care of that and guarantee adoption of any Constitutional change, as well as any Bylaw change.<br /><br />There are two outstanding issues not yet addressed: first, there is no time limit on the mail-in ratification process; and second, if the amendment is only a Bylaw change, there is no need for mail-in ratification. This may well turn out to be the most contentious aspect of this matter.Stuart Hertzoghttp://greenpolitics.ca/noreply@blogger.com