Revisions to the By-Laws were discussed. Dan has made further changes to the work jason g. started in August. Dan proposed revisions to the wording and content of sections to better align with the way we've been operating as well as modifications to sections on membership eligibility, access to the building, member storage, suspensions, and terminations.
The revised Member Application Process requires two Member signatures and one Board Member signature. The By-Laws currently require only two Members and the exact wording refers to full members, however it is not clear if full means in good standing or otherwise. It was noted that the current Member Application Form being used has a field for the Board Member signature and that a Board Member is required anyway to issue key fobs, accept dues, and enter the new member into the membership software.
Tom expressed concern that if no Board Members were willing to sign a new member's form, we could effectively deny someone admission despite obtaining signatures from others. When other Members in attendance were asked for their opinions, Ron had no objections and DL said she felt the process was almost too easy and some vetting or interviewing was appropriate. While this concern was discussed in the meeting, it did not illicit any changes to the proposed wording.
The prospect of being able to terminate a Member by unanimous Board vote was considered, however many of us felt that it would give the Board too much power. Past discussions on the message board garnered a fair amount of criticism and such a measure would likely not be supported by the Membership.
The instances allowing the Board to suspend someone's membership were clarified by Dan. Tom asked what the difference is between someone who is suspended and someone who is terminated. Our current policies indicate that if a Member is automatically suspended for non-payment of dues, they must reapply and they may not enter the building during non-public hours, or use equipment. Tom remarked that Members who are terminated appear to have the same restrictions to those in suspension. Brant, Chris, Tom, and Dan discussed the matter in further detail however it did not illicit any changes to the proposed wording at this that time.