Here is the change
I think people that have yearly dues might be unhappy with having to re-pay just because an officer decides to suspend until the next board meeting. We are talking temporary suspensions and forfeiting up to a year of payment.
anyone doing activities that get them suspended by an officer probably doesnt deserve to be at the DMS anyway.
currently the only time this has been used is for situations related to the safety of other members, usually being a follow up for the police having to be called.
3 Likes
It was used with other non-safety situations as well. Stan Simmons being one.
oh you mean for thieves
5 Likes
I can only imply that somehow it’s being argued as in appropriate for thieves… which is still an active crime being committeed at DMS, and would normally warrant a a police call as well.
2 Likes
We are talking about the future and how it might be or could be abused . Bylaws don’t get changed often. This is giving officers the power to cost untried/unconvicted members maybe $500 even if they get absolved by the board.
It doesn’t stop the board from crediting their membership back should they get absolved.
3 Likes
There is no reason to have that overhead nor forfeiture on a temporary suspension. The board can decide to forfeit if they decide it is appropriate or more likely when they expel it already happens. It is just opening the door for abuse or at the very least unneeded overhead.
I doubt there is much in the way of bylaws that can prevent board members and officers from abusing their position, case in point of course is from the previous board. My suggestion is to bring solutions, research and write some bylaw proposals to help curb the types of abuse we’ve actually seen and had to respond to, as well as the theoretical abuses you are concerned with.
5 Likes
I don’t think this has been done even for expulsions for less than the term of an annual member’s dues.
I take the passage to mean “no refunds” since that’s how it’s been carried out in practice.
3 Likes
That’s how I took it too: if you are temporarily suspended for N<30 days while BoD reviews, you don’t get to ask for a pro rata refund, or equivalent membership extension, for those days.
1 Like
Even though there is a basic concept in the USA of innocent until proven guilty, the board would not be doing their required duties if they let a thief stay and continue stealing while a trial ensues.
5 Likes
My argument has nothing to do with them staying and you know it. I’m not restricting officers only leaving the member cost to after they have been expelled and not before a hearing
No. NOBODY knows until after several back-and-forths when you finally spell out your intent and what you want out of the conversation. It’s an ongoing thing with you that it so overly tiresome…
8 Likes
I’m with Draco on this. What has been done in the past doesn’t matter a hill of beans. This bylaw as written would allow for the forfeiture of a year’s worth of pre-paid dues even if the member were reinstated immediately.
The wording should be changed so dues forfeiture only applies to expulsions and perhaps a forfeiture of pro-rated dues for the term of a suspension.
That’s how I interpreted it as well.
1 Like