Greater Huntsville Section

 View Only
  • 1.  Questions on bylaws

    Posted 24 Mar, 2022 06:01
    Edited by Tracie Prater 24 Mar, 2022 06:43

    I wanted to start a thread for members to ask questions on bylaws.

    Tracie Prater

  • 2.  RE: Questions on bylaws

    Posted 26 Mar, 2022 10:19
    Here are a few questions regarding some items that come up that might be helpful for the membership regarding voting on the bylaws.  Don't know if the forum is the best place to answer them or if an email to the membership would be better.

    1. What items in the standard bylaws are specifically driven by the change in the national AIAA constitution?  It's been said that the standard bylaws are required due to changes in the national constitution but some of the standard bylaws changes don't appear to be driven by the national AIAA constitution.

    2. For the non-AIAA constitution driven changes, which items are so significant to READ as to be worthy of defunding and disbanding one of the largest and most awarded sections and why are those items that significant?

    3. What is the cash on hand for GHS?

    4. What is the annual profit/loss for GHS?

    5. How does the annual profit/loss of GHS for the past few years compare to the funds received from national AIAA?

    6. How profitable was the NextGen Symposium?

    7. How is Engage used by GHS?

    8. How many site visits does the GHS section webpage receive?

    9. How much do members view or download the items uploaded by GHS to Engage?

    10. How many articles does GHS have in Aerospace America each year?

    11. How many awards does GHS typically receive from national AIAA each year?

    12. How many members are in GHS?

    13. What percentage of GHS members live outside the Huntsville metro area?

    14. What percentage of GHS events occur outside of the Huntsville metro area?

    Matthew Hitt

  • 3.  RE: Questions on bylaws

    Posted 28 Mar, 2022 16:20
    The bylaws issue comes down to one of simple control. READ wants total control over the sections. We want the control to remain with the members.

    Threatening to kick out one of the oldest, largest and most successful sections in AIAA is wrong

    Read does not have to do things this way. This was a choice they made. They are not bound by any state of local law to act this way.

    READ will try and punish the section if we vote the wrong way, but don’t want us to call it a punishment.

    Based on the discussion READ is totally independent of oversight and we have no path to appeal.

    Any process that allows GHS to be kicked out of AIAA without the ability to appeal to the governing body is flawed.

    Beyond any issues with the bylaws, the actions, attitude, heavy handedness and threats made by READ taint this activity.

    The membership should not be threatened if the fail to comply.

    Please vote no on adopting the READ bylaws.

  • 4.  RE: Questions on bylaws

    Posted 28 Mar, 2022 22:31
    Edited by Tracie Prater 30 Mar, 2022 16:58
    **posted in my personal capacity as GHS member -- views are my own**

    I guess one question that keeps coming up for me is the idea that under GHS bylaws we as members have the final say over amendments.  

    This is article X from our own GHS bylaws:
    "These Bylaws and any amendments hereto made pursuant to Section XI hereof are subject to the approval of RSAC. Further, in accordance with AIAA Bylaws,
    the Section members and Section Bylaws are governed by the AIAA certificate of incorporation, the Constitution and Bylaws of the Institute as well as any rules or
    regulations established by the AIAA Council." 

    RSAC no longer exists -- I think in the updated governance structure it's READ.   There's not a national approval and adoption schema under GHS bylaws, but to me this article shows that we don't have full control and authority for governance flows from the top down...posing this more as a question than a statement.

    Tracie Prater

  • 5.  RE: Questions on bylaws

    Posted 28 Mar, 2022 23:26
    While it is true that GHS bylaws have to be in accordance with national for GHS to be in good standing within AIAA, right now the members do have full control of the bylaws.  Arguably, this whole discussion is because GHS controls its own bylaws.  Granted AIAA may decide that GHS can't be a section any more if GHS doesn't vote to change the bylaws, but the GHS bylaws can't be changed without the vote of the GHS members.  Under the proposed standard bylaws, every single one of the hundreds of members that belong to GHS could be opposed to a bylaws amendment, and the bylaws could still be changed.

    Matthew Hitt

  • 6.  RE: Questions on bylaws

    Posted 29 Mar, 2022 08:52
    Edited by Tracie Prater 30 Mar, 2022 17:00
    **posted as AIAA and GHS member -- views are my own**

    Yes, I agree that under our current bylaws members have control over the amendment process provided the amendment does not conflict with higher level governing documents.  However, at this point to me it's not a question of whether we prefer our current voting framework relative to a framework of national adoption and approval.  It's a question of whether we are willing to accept a requirement to be part of the institute.  So I think for me the debate isn't about the merit of a particular voting approach (both have merits and drawbacks), it's just whether we want to be a section in the future at all.  I do agree people need to understand what the changes are though and consider those.  We each can choose to reject a requirement if it's something we fundamentally disagree with, but also need to know and be comfortable with the consequences of doing that. De-chartering as I understand it in the READ document isn't something that just happens instantaneously -- the section would have the opportunity to develop a compliance plan to maintain the section's "good standing" before being placed into a "not in good standing" status with penalties. 

    Tracie Prater

  • 7.  RE: Questions on bylaws

    Posted 29 Mar, 2022 12:49
    Unfortunately, it has gotten to the point that GHS is having to decide whether it wants to remain an AIAA section or not.  And in my mind, it is unfortunate that READ has deemed what was a previously accepted practice of individual section bylaws is now worth dechartering a section over.

    The discussion of different approaches to the bylaws is relevant to the extent as to whether there is a way where GHS "wins" or if the situation is a "lose-lose" scenario.

    Matthew Hitt

  • 8.  RE: Questions on bylaws

    Posted 29 Mar, 2022 14:18
    I see a difference between we write and vote on a change (from amendments to the sections name) and amendments/changes being imposed by READ. RSAC was always a safety valve. Example, about 10 years ago after we voted to change the section name, RSAC had the final approval. RSAC could never impose a name change on the section. All change originated at the section level. RSAC made sure we never did anything wrong.  READ reverse that role.

    Vote No on READ Bylaws.


    Tom Hancock
    Past Chair GHS