Constitutional Review
Committee
of the Society for Chaos Theory in Psychology and the Life
Sciences |
Fred
Abraham (chair), Silliman University (Philippines) & Blueberry Brain
Institute, (USA) Holly
Arrow, University of Oregon (USA) Dick Bird, University of
Northumbria (UK) Greg Manos, Director’s Cut, (USA) Meg Spohn, University of Denver
(USA) |
Our committee was formed in response to charges by the membership at the annual business meetings of the Society in 2002, 2003 and 2004. Formally, in response to those charges we present here, in accordance with existing Article of IX of the current Articles of Organization, also known as the Constitution and Bylaws, amendments to the Articles of Organization. These amendments represent a rather extensive revision of the Articles of Organization. They are being proposed for your consideration and your suggestions for improvement, and after any needed editing, will subsequently be proposed for a vote. The charges to the committee are as follows:
2002 charge: To review the constitution and bylaws [formally known
as the Articles of Organization], identify areas for improvement, updating, and
clarification, and propose specific amendments to the bylaws that would be
voted on by the membership.
2003 charge: To also consider the Journal going to
self-publication and the manner of appointment of officers.
We interpreted the 2003 charge as an amendment to the 2002 charge
as areas that needed special focus. We have deliberated for the past
year, taking our charge to be to completely review the Articles of
Organization, and to produce a revised version if warranted. We felt it was
warranted. The
original Articles of Organization were well done and reflect hard work and
attention to detail, but time has revealed some ambiguities and especially
areas of governance and membership participation and recourse that needed
improvement. We have examined constitutions and bylaws of other scientific
organizations for comparison. We felt that in the past few years the
Society has had significantly increased involvement of members in governance
and other affairs of the Society, and that our Articles of Organization should
respond with increased democratization of the society. Some of our primary
concerns were:
(1) We wanted to insure that
all officers and members of the Executive Committee were elected. (This is not
the case with the current Articles of Organization.)
(2) One of the problems was to
give the Executive Committee a stable size by careful definition of its
membership and by careful definitions of the officers and their duties, and by
streamlining the scheduling of the election of officers. We eliminated the
position of President-Elect by having the elections completed by the end of
June, and having the President take office on September 1, the beginning of the
Society’s and the membership’s year, just two months after the close of the
election. We were
especially concerned with the election of officers and their duties, the
make-up and duties of the Executive Committee, election procedures, the
oversight of the publications of the Society, and the nature of the privileges
and recourse of members.
Because all aspects of the organization
interact with the others, we are reviewing the whole Articles of Organization,
and offering a proposed draft, which is sufficiently extensive such that all
the articles are essentially, an amendment that constitutes a major revision of
the Articles of Organization. This mailing and its simultaneous presentation on
the web (go to ‘About the Society’ on the Society’s web page) is to solicit
comments should the membership want further revision before they are presented
to the Society as a whole for a vote.
Please review this draft, and send critiques, commentary, and
suggestions for improvement, to me (abraham@sover.net), before January 31,
2005. We will then incorporate suggestions that can be reasonably accommodated,
and then send a final proposed draft out to the membership for a vote. We shall
send reminders soliciting your feedback to help us from time to time on our
Society email list and in the Newsletter. We include the current Articles of
Organization along side the proposed draft for those of you who wish to see a
running comparison. We also offer occasional commentary concerning our
proposal.
Thank
you for your assistance,
Respectfully
submitted, Fred Abraham,
Holly
Arrow, Dick Bird, Greg Manos, Meg Spohn
Link to
the Society: http://www.societyforchaostheory.org/
Link to
mirror page: http://www.blueberry-brain.org/SCTPLS/SCTPLS
CRC reports.htm
|
||||
Commentary:
These changes are all very minor. 1. Article I
was split into separate articles for Name and purpose. 2. Article
II: § 2 has been
simplified and updated to communicate more clearly the interdisciplinary
nature of the society. 3. II §1 adds an educational purpose, and makes
explicit the operation as a nonprofit organization. 4. II §2 (updates the areas covered to meet the
previously updated name of the organization, from the mainly psychological,
to include also social and biological disciplines. The language is simplified
and streamlined, and more limited in the ambitions of applications. 5. II §3 adds educational projects. 6. II §4 no change. 7. II §5”future” changed to “subsequent” for tense
and timing aspects. |
|
||
Commentary: Again, mostly
trivial changes. 1.
No
changes in sections §1 & §5; 2.
§2
updates reference to preceding definitions and eliminates reference to
standards. 3.
§3
Secretary-Treasurer was changed to ‘Secretary’ to reflect a split in this
office proposed later in IV §1 4. §4 does not restrict voting the Annual Business Meeting. Defines what constitutes a quorum. Does not specify methods of voting. (These are dealt with later.) |
|
||
§1 Establishes four officers, eliminating the President-Elect and
splitting the Secretary-Treasurer into two separate offices. Establishes
two-year terms with staggered alternate-year elections, and two year terms.
Eliminates appointment of officers by the Executive Committee (old III §2) as
this feature allowed members of the Executive Committee the potential to
perpetuate themselves in office instead of being elected at annual elections.
This was one of the most motivating factors prompting a need for change.
Clarifies that a Past-President cannot be the same as a President succeeding
him or herself. This was another major factor that made for instability in
the size of the Executive Committee, and in the ability of members of the
Executive Committee to appoint themselves or retain their offices. §2-§5 defines
duties of the officers. §6 deals with
vacancies of offices. §7 concerns
officers and the Executive Committee duties between Annual Business Meetings. §8 specifies
how actions of officers may be overturned. §9 specifies
how an officer may be removed from office. §10 defines the
Board of Trustees, their duties, and their succession. Collectively, these articles represent increased democratization of the Society by making all offices elected and giving the membership more avenues of changing the actions and officers of their Society. |
||
|
||
§1&2 define the Executive Committee and
its duties §3 provides means for membership to rescind
or modify an action of the Executive Committee. §4 defines standing and ad hoc committees,
and the appointment of their members and their terms of office, and the
methods of selecting the chairs of the committees. §5-§7 Defines the duties of the standing
committees. §8 Specifies that committees report to the Society. |
|
||
§1&2 specify voting procedures. The
requirement of a mail ballot is remove so that other techniques of
communication can be employed. §3 provides voting on special issues. §4 provides conditions needed for determining outcomes of elections. |
|
||
Article VII makes explicit the purpose and
actions of the Annual Conference and Business Meeting, redefines the quorum
from 10 members to 10 percent of the membership, preferred time window for
the Conference and Meeting, and the openness for participation by the
membership. Article VIII is unchanged. |
|
||
Article IX is essentially the same as
before, except communication to members is not limited to a mail ballot. Article X is the same as previously. |