Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 21:34:35 -0500
From: "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Good last minute save, WSFA
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

lees103 at verizon.net wrote:
> Ladies and gentlemen:
>
>             On 14 February 2009, Keith Lynch and Mike Bartman said in part:
>
> "> Arguably, they ceased hosting WSFA as soon as they banned him.  If a
>> host picks and chooses which members can attend, he's not hosting a
>> meeting."
>
> "Anyone can ban whoever they like from their house, but WSFA's
> rules require that meetings be held where all members are free to
> attend, so if a potential host won't allow a member, they can't host a
> meeting.  Rules can be changed, but that one seems reasonable as it is."
>
>             With respect, these statements are not true.  There is nothing
> in the WSFA Bylaws or Standing Rules that requires a potential host to admit
> all members.  In fact, the Standing Rules specifically affirm the host's
> ability to set policies for their own homes, including barring uncongenial
> individuals.  Specifically, the second rule in the Standing Rules section on
> General Policies, subsection on Courtesy states "It is the official policy
> of WSFA that meetings are at the invitation of the host and hostess.  Their
> word goes in their abodes."  This policy was established because of back to
> back incidents in which individuals made themselves unwelcome in two
> separate homes.

With respect, you are overlooking Article II, Section A, paragraph 2 of
the WSFA Bylaws, as posted on the WSFA web site:

"2. Members in good standing shall have the right to attend and
participate in all meetings of the membership, hold office and vote."

As you can see, what I said is indeed true. What you say about there
being nothing to require a potential host to admit all members is also
true...anyone can ban anyone else from their home as they please...but
the above places a burden on the president, who designates meeting
locations according to Article VI, Section B of the Bylaws, to choose a
location that is open to all members.  If a potential host refuses to
admit any member, then their location is not a valid candidate for a
meeting location.

Other kinds of WSFA events are not covered by this; such as 5th Friday
parties.  While banning from non-meeting events is legal, I think it
would be damaging to the club to hold any WSFA official event where all
members are not welcome, and should not be permitted by those with
authority in the club.  If someone's presence is intolerable, perhaps
the method of ejecting people from the club should be used, rather than
leaving them as less than full members in this way. Revocation of
membership is covered in Article II, Section C.

    1. A petition to revoke any membership may be presented in writing
at any regular meeting.
    2. It must state the grounds and be signed by at least fifteen (15)
members and be communicated to the member concerned at least ten (10)
days before the presentation of the petition for action.
    3. If the petition is approved by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the
members present at the second meeting vote to revoke the membership, it
is revoked.
    4. The revoked member's dues shall be prorated and the appropriate
portion shall be refunded.

To the extent that the standing rules conflict with the Bylaws, they are
in error, null and void.  You can not amend Bylaws with standing rules.
To change Bylaws requires a Bylaws amendment, the procedure for which is
defined in the Bylaws in Article IX:

    1. Any proposed amendment must be signed by at least fifteen (15)
members and be submitted in writing at a regular meeting.
    2. Such proposals must be read at that meeting.
    3. A vote shall be taken at the next regular meeting after the
proposal is submitted and read.
    4. Passage shall require a two-thirds (2/3) majority of those
members voting.

-- Mike B.