|October 11, 2010|
|APR Defenders Dominate E-Group; Trohan Challenged|
|By Jack O'Dwyer|
|The raging dispute over letting non-APRs on the board of PRSA has attracted 27 participants who favor keeping the APR rule and 11 who want change.|
Those who want to keep the status quo won a big victory this week when Society parliamentarian Colette Trohan ruled that the amendment as proposed could not be changed because any change would be outside the “scope” of the amendment that was submitted 60 days ago.
Some members want there to be two qualifications for the national board instead of one (20 years in posts of increasing responsibility). They want to add either APR or Society volunteer service.
Trohan pointed out that, under Robert’s Rules, “Rules protecting absentees or a basic right of the individual member cannot be suspended…”
She says an option is tabling the amendment until next year which is a goal of those wanting to keep APR as a requirement.
However members are also pointing out that Robert’s Rules assumes that delegates who are not present will not be able to vote by proxy.
Last year’s Assembly, ignoring Robert’s, voted in the use of proxies and used 56 proxies to do this.
Since proxies are allowed literally no one will be absent and the will of those not present will not be abused, say members who want non-APRs on the board.
“The Assembly is being hoisted on its own petard,” said one member.
Pro and Con Delegates Listed
Arguing for keeping the APR rule for national board and officer service are the following:
Kelly Ann Kimberland
Lauri Ellen Smith
Arguing for removal of APR are:
Return to Latest News