MSC Constitution/By-laws 2nd revision vote 7/12

Method of Amending Constitution and Bylaws

The constitution may be amended at any regular meeting, provided that the proposed amendment was posted prominently on the MSC website at least two weeks prior to the regular club meeting at which a vote is to be held. A vote in favor of the amendment by 2/3 of those present is required to pass the amendment. (Active members seeking club discussion for possible bylaws or tournament rules changes are requested to notify the president prior to the meeting so that time may be allotted on the meeting agenda.)

Summary of Proposed By-Law Revision

The MSC tournament rules do not address the summer season restrictions on Lake Murray that allow Striped Bass anglers to catch only 5 fish of any length. The tournament rules do not specifically address the length of fish and limits acceptable for MSC tournaments on Clarks Hill/Thurmond Lake. The following proposed text that is underlined will prevent the club from requiring special votes several weeks ahead of the tournaments to allow fish less than the 21-inch minimum to be accepted for competition. It also recognizes that an angler cannot possess more than 3 fish over 26 inches at Clarks Hill/Thurmond Lake and protects a boat captain from being in violation by requiring his team members to be present at the weigh-in if more than 3 fish over 26 inches have been kept by the team. Circle YES to include the new text in the tournament rules as underlined or circle NO to require the club to post any alternative length minimums and vote for their use prior to tournaments.


YES</font id=“size3”>

     	or     		

NO</font id=“size3”>

Tournament Creel and Size Limits

An entrant may possess the legal limit for the body of water fished during a tournament, but may weigh-in no more than the maximum number of fish allowed in the tournament. Teams will

Woody,
I am confused and concerned about a couple things here. First, our Bylaws and the process to amend them are not done by general members of MSC. You have been in an officer role in the past and should understand the purpose and role of the PAC. It is specifically formed of officers and members at large to ensure the club in its entirety (tournaments, meetings and finances) are managed to the best of our abilities. As an active member you are more than welcome to grab the ear of and officer or PAC committee member and discuss any improvement to our club. That recommendation will be discussed on the agenda at the next regularly scheduled PAC meeting. If the decision is voted on and the vote carries, then and only then will it move forward in writing, amendments or general discussion to the club. If it is voted down, I would expect that decision to be fully supported as well.
As you know we have had a lot of new officer / PAC changes in 2016. With that, mistakes will be made and as a club we will move forward and not dwell on them or victimize those that made them. I appreciate all those who “step up” and take on additional responsibilities on behalf of MSC. We should support all of them even if we do not agree at times with decisions or actions that take place. We have processes and committees to hash out rule clarifications, Bylaw changes, or officer vacancies. You have been instrumental on some of the Bylaw changes while you were a PAC member and I (and the club) appreciate them. I have talked to the PAC chairmen and this as well as several other items will be discussed at the next meeting.

“My biggest worry is that my wife (when I’m dead) will sell my fishing gear for what I said I paid for it.”

Rules are rules Richy…what would we have without them? Where does it state, what you consider to be the process, in the by-laws?.. I suggest if the club prefers that to be the process that we write it up for a vote and change the by-laws… The PAC should function to wade through various proposals and options and to do research and provide leadership but ultimately the club as a whole should decide, by majority vote, what we want… In the scheme of things , the two changes that I have proposed are miner, but it does get the club back on track as to how changes to by-laws and tournament rules are intended to take place as written in our by-laws… To do it any other way would be too exclusionary… The process you describe is how, at most, 7 people decide the fate of the club instead of getting 2/3rds of the club to agree without seeing anything in writing to fully understand it…The process in the by-laws allows any member who wants to make a proposal to write it up and present it to the club for a vote and majority decides. Obviously, a member can still bring an idea to an officer or PAC member, if they don’t want to write it up, to get the PAC to make the proposal, but it’s not required…

I saw signs where the new administration was starting to engage in some of the same practices as past officers so I invoked my right to speak out against it. I have had private conversations hoping a return to the by-laws would be upheld but now its on to plan B… To their credit, I have seen no less than 3 examples leading up to the last tournament where the PAC is following the BY-laws more closely and I’m thrilled and hope it continues…

I appreciate the contributions of all as well and I hate stepping on any one’s toes but I have the By-laws on my side and I intend to respect and preserve them. How about you write up the process you are describing for a club vote to include in the by-laws? Follow the process in the by-laws to change it…

There isn’t a faster or more inclusive method than what we hav

Woody,
Your suggestion is duly noted and will be brought up in the PAC. Our bylaws will always be open to criticism and have been in recent years. I do agree they need to be kept up with as changes are inevitable. As I stated earlier, there is a process for that (whether you agree with that process or not).
You are also correct that rules are rules…I don’t think a single member will disagree with you however human beings do make mistakes. I can remember several that you and I made while we were TX directors and we learned from them, clarified when needed and moved on.

The 2/3 membership vote is AFTER the PAC deems the changes are needed or necessary. You are certainly invoking your first amendment right and that’s okay but geeze can we follow the processes set forth by the officers, PAC and bylaws. Do we really need to clarify everything to the point our club is more about politics, semantics and less about a family oriented fishing club?

Finally I am not proposing any changes as I feel they are adequate but that’s not my call either. I am also not saying that your proposed changes are not good or warranted. What I am saying is please give them to a PAC member (officially not on the MB) so they can be reviewed.

Not a big deal here and frankly not worth the back and forth.

Call me if you want to discuss more (even though I am not an officer) lol!

“My biggest worry is that my wife (when I’m dead) will sell my fishing gear for what I said I paid for it.”

The consideration of this amendment is postponed until further notice. Club members can call me at 803 201-8909 for more information.

Team Shad Up & Fish

If you’ve had fun catching fish on the transom bait, you are welcome…

I’ve spent about 85% of my life’s wages on fishing, the rest I just wasted…