Re: Amendments of Concern

As explained in Walter's mailing which included his initial proposed amendments to our constitution, he intended to improperly submit these amendments for a vote during the then upcoming membership meeting. This was in violation of our Constitution and Bylaws and he was made known that his misconduct by intentionally violating the laws he was attempting to re-write was noticed. Following, he 'sat' on his amendment proposals (for about a year). It wasn't until just recently, Walter sent out our Business Representatives to gather the neccessary percentage of signatures which would then permit the amendments to be introduced during a general membership meeting and then a vote to occur during the follow meeting. -Basically, he followed the rules this time.

As it stands Walter has reportedly gathered the needed signatures to introduce his proposed amendment changes. His intent was to introduce these proposals during the recent general membership meetings but was unable to entice a quorum (15 members) to show up at any one of the three, recent general membership meetings. - According to our Constitution and Bylaws, general membership meeetings with less than a quorum may only be 'informational' (there were 11 members present for the Las Angeles meeting, 14 members present for the San Diego meeting, and an unknown number of members present during the Arizona meeting).

I'm sure it will only be a matter of time until he is able to find an audience of at least 15 members to attend one of the future general membership meetings and that he will be prepared to present his proposals at each of the upcoming meetings.

In concusion, due to Walter's 'new approach' regarding this issue (in addition to his new 'fever' in regards to launching a revised and current official website), I can't help but feel just a little bit responsible and think maybe, just maybe I've done something right here.

Fraternally,

Dustin