Reply #58: those are the ones they changed illegally

[Kali]

the ones prior (which mysteriously no one has an actual copy of) were changed to THAT 2002 version. (probably in 1998, but it is very murky, as I said) The "new shiny" 2004 bylaws are the ones they slipped in to thwart the membership election we were petitioning for. Our three main issues were to get a grievance procedure for the volunteers, a majority elected board and to return control of the bylaws to the membership. It should have been an easy win in a membership election. Oh my gawd. The stall tactics, the BS they mailed out to the members, the attempt to damage the career of one of out members, the half assed grievance proceedure they came up with, and the final "majority-elected" structure. Capped with election irregularities including lies mailed to the membership BY staff (on thier own time of course, in an election they are not allowed to run in) abusing their position and inside knowledge to do those mailings, the odd fact that the board felt compelled to run their own slates of candidates despite having OPEN appointed positions remaining etc etc it really goes on and on and on. I need to hire a screenwriter and do a soap opera.

More on the bylaw change. The last GM hired some dickhead lawyer to "research" the bylaw history (because it was so effed up), and he came up with some kind of about a 200 page report - I saw it in a binder at a board meeting. It never got voted as "accepted" into the minutes so therefore I was denied the right to look at it becasue it was not a public document. This same shyster filed a bar complaint against one of our disident members because he was a former board member and the shyster accused him of using "insider" knowledge to harm the organization. That got tossed of course and the correspondence is actually pretty funny to read - I can send you a link to most of it if you care.