It would appear online voting for AOPA trustees is among the changes proposed for the organization’s governing bylaws. AOPA has posted a revised set of bylaws for the organization that will be voted on at a special meeting on Sept. 19 in Frederick, Maryland. The meeting will be conducted under the current bylaws and is being held to make changes, including online voting by the membership for trustees, which cannot be done under the current rules. “The Saturday special meeting may be the last voting session held before AOPA implements online voting to elect trustees, which is not possible under the current bylaws,” AOPA said in an online post announcing the public release of the proposed bylaw changes. Under the current structure, only members present at the special meeting will be able to vote on the changes. Members can also appoint a member who will be at the meeting to vote by proxy on their behalf.
The changes appear to address many of the hot-button issues raised by members in the period between the dismissal of former CEO Darren Pleasance last February and the May 12 meeting in Frederick. There is language in the new bylaws setting a term limit of four consecutive three-year terms by any member of the board of trustees. A nominating committee will still decide who can run for a trustee position but the committee will be expanded to three members from two and the committee will be chosen by vote of the whole board. Under the current rules, the chairman selects the two members of the nominating committee and that was also a major issue for many members. The new bylaws cover 14 pages of formal legal language and we invite readers skilled at reading such documents to ferret out the significant details and post them in the comments. Below is a document that shows the proposed changes to the bylaws. Other versions of the documents are here.
My two takes (and I look forward to reading interpretations from folks who are smarter than me):
The Nomination Committee, designated by the board, still controls who gets on the ballot. No options/threshold for direct nomination
Votes are still by proxy
I don’t know how many board members think AOPA is on the wrong track (because only Wippler has spoken publicly about it) but, with 11 of them (I think), it’s going to be a while to see if anything changes.
I may have missed it, but I didn’t see anywhere in the proposed bylaws that allows for online voting at a membership meeting; I could only find such a section for meetings of the board.
I also don’t care for the wording in Article IV Section 1 that appears to allow the chairman to continue a meeting of the membership even if a quorum of the membership is not present.
It does at least appear that any member can submit the name of someone they want to nominate as a trustee, though all trustees have to be approved by the nominating committee. (Article IV Section 5a)
“may have missed it, but I didn’t see anywhere in the proposed bylaws that allows for online voting at a membership meeting; I could only find such a section for meetings of the board.”
Article IV, Section 5 is for membership meetings, but see my other comments.
Isn’t it amazing how everything just stays the same? Sunlight IS the best desinfectant, but the second the sun is gone, the rot continues. I have decided to rejoin though and have already set a fixed date for this. It will be in the lte Fall of 3279, so just 1253 years until my support comes back into the bank. 😆
While certainly not perfect, these bylaws are definitely a step in the right direction. After the Pleasance debacle, I canceled the automatic renewal of my AOPA membership. I have now decided to pay my annual dues, but I’m not yet ready to go back to autopay. I think that these alphabet organizations like AOPA, EAA, NBAA, etc. are urgently needed in order to amplify the collective voices of their members in the halls of Congress, the offices of the FAA, and other powerful entities that have the potential to silence us–or worse.
Can we start a new organization? P.S. usually means post script, but it will be a great abbreviation complete with intended pun for the new org’s name, Pilot Society.
People are paranoid. These associations have a habit of turning into large corporate entities run by rich corporate pinguins in suits and with huge salaries and larger than life egos.
Being a member of any advocacy group does exactly NOTHING to slow this trainwreck unless you have people who are involved beyond the credit card.
Slightly higher in the comments you see someone who cancelled auto pay, but upholds his membership. To each their own, other peoples money is not my concern, but… whoopdiwordwithfingdoo – what do we expect to change, if the money keeps coming?
Majority pays and watches on. Minority fails. Save your money. Spend it on popcorn and sugar and alcohol or guns, but not on people who look down on their own members.
Starting a new org will bring out the best in the existing ones and these groups will fight tooth to nail with anyone trying to impede on their territory.
I continue to support AOPA because it does do good for me and general aviation. I have gone to yearly subscription because it sent a small note of disappointment with the way the association is run. I also support EAA, and the Recreation Aviation Foundation (RAF). When one becomes no longer good for me or flying, I will drop them. Easy as that.
May have missed it, but didn’t see any requirement to provide more candidates than openings. Have “membership” in several orgs that think that providing the same number of candidates to openings is democracy in action, reminds me of former/current govts that did/do the same and congratulated the winning “candidate” who garnered 99.9% of the vote.
The nominating committee still holds significant power. While the new process allows members to submit candidates with twenty-five signatures, the committee can still reject them or add their own. This means the committee can effectively control the final slate, which is a common concern in governance. It offers some openness but doesn’t fully democratize the process.
Russ, I’m not sure why you think online voting is really going to happen. The bylaws update says, “Section 5. Election Process. Elections shall be by a majority of votes cast by members present in person or by proxy, including votes cast by electronic means before the Annual Meeting of Members pursuant to any process approved in advance by the Board of Trustees for this purpose.”
Nothing requires the Board to implement or approve any such process. The change makes online voting possible, but it does not require it. I have not yet seen any commitment from a Board member to put online voting in place, and two Board members I spoke to personally outright refused to make any such commitment.
Furthermore, there is still no mechanism to nominate Board members without approval from the Board’s own committee, nor for members to remove a sitting Board member.
I’m sorry, but this looks like window dressing. It appears to me that the Board is firm in their determination to keep control of the AOPA out of member’s hands and to keep the Board a closed club.