March 2007 eSounding - Tampa Bay Mensa

Comments on the Proposed "Charter"
Ralph Rudolph, Editor of New Mensican
This year marks my 38 th year in
Mensa. For most of that time I've
been either a local group or national
officer, and I pay close attention to
what is happening. I read the agendas
for AMC meetings and express my
opinions to my RVC. When I saw
Agenda Item #20, the proposed
"charter", I became quite concerned
and wrote a column as Asst. RVC 6
that Ray O'Connor immediately distributed
to our Region's editors and
which I distributed to all other RVCs.
Partly due to my efforts (I hope) the
item was tabled until the March AMC
meeting. My concerns remain:
1. It has been claimed that the reason
for the charter is because lawyers
and auditors want it. But precisely
why they want the charter has never
been explained. A vague example was
brought up that when a group hosts
an AG and has a profit, it is difficult
to explain this one time profit to IRS.
Perhaps so. It seems we have been
successfully doing so since our first
AG, so this "reason" seems spurious.
And it holds no water for AGs that are
hosted by consortiums such as the
2010 AG by Gen-X & Y. So the first
thing I want is the real reason
for this. It certainly didn't come
about from popular demand of
our members.
2. Even votes on dues increases require
advance notice to the members.
Why was this item just "sprung" on
us without much time for comment
3. Previously, the job of checking
whether local groups were in compliance
with the MSBs (and if not, why
not) was left to the RVCs as the
COOs. No doubt, certain national
office staffers or perhaps the Pubs
Officer could inform the RVC of
transgressions, but whether a group
needed help such as an RVC visit or
LDW was left to the RVC. The charter
changes this responsibility to "AML"
which (to me) means any and all
parts of AML from AMC to the National
Office to committees or hired
counsels. This is a fundamental
change which severely reduces our
democratic representation. As such, I
believe it should be a Bylaws change,
not an ASIE, and the charter should
be presented to the entire membership
as a referendum item.
4. Both McBean and Bakke (our chair
candidates!) express that part of the
motivation for the charter is to be
able to more effectively kill off local
groups that they feel are not performing
adequately. That is part of
the reason for transferring "power"
from the RVCs to AML. Is there any
reason to believe that AML, as a
whole, has any deeper understanding
of a local group's problems than the
RVC I think not. Part of my stance is
that RVCs should focus on helping
out smaller groups as they need the
most help. By working together and
independently, they multiply the
chances for reinvigorating moribund
groups, something AML as a body
cannot do. Merging an underperforming
local group with a nearby
large group decreases opportunity
rather than increasing it. Large
groups have always had the problem
of not serving their peripheral areas,
and this would only increase that
problem. I don't see this as serving
our membership better, which
(supposedly) AMC is all about.
10 Tampa Bay Sounding March 2007