[Businessmtg] Motion and operationalizing +

[Jerry]

Biz-Pals,

There is one important part in Steve's message which conflicts with ASP's Founding Policies. Steve's quote from Motion #22 is accurate. The problem is in the wording of that motion. "...by a substantial unanimity of subscribed membership of [the] Business Committee."

All would be well except the use of "subscribed membership."

Our Founding Policies describe exactly what it takes to pass a motion - who make up the base number of participants from which the 2/3rds vote in the affirmative is necessary to pass motions of this significance.

Founding Policy clearly states that it takes 2/3rds of VOTING members to pass a motion:
"b) Substantive changes to the meeting (affects the majority of the membership) require a 2/3 majority of voting members"

Motion #22 has a flaw in that it gives "subscribed members" as the base number for the 2/3 threshold instead of "voting members."

Since Founding Policies can only be changed by a 2/3rds majority vote OF THE ENTIRE ASP membership (which has never happened) and the Business Meeting has no authority to alter Founding Policy, all motions must use the Founding Policy's proscribed method to count votes: "2/3 majority of voters."

I bring this up here for two reasons:
1) Motion #22's wording, using "subscribed members" of the Business Meeting, changes the math required by Founding Policy to pass this motion without the authority to do so.

An Example:
Suppose there are 22 members in a Business Meeting. The count on a motion is 14 in favor, 3 votes against, and 0 abstentions.
~ Using our Founding Policy there are 14 votes in favor, 3 votes against, & 0 abstentions.
14/17 = greater than 2/3rds. Motion PASSES.
~ Using "subscribed members" there are 14 votes in favor, 3 votes against, & 0 abstentions. (5 did not vote.)
14/22 = less than 2/3 in favor. Motion FAILS.

2) If we were to accept Motion #22's wording as the standard for establishing what constitutes substantial unanimity over the Founding Policy's requirements we would not only be ignoring ASP Founding Policy on this point. We would be opening the door to ignoring any or all other Founding Policies according to any whim of the day.

Jerry
-



On July 17, 2025, at 12:53 PM, Steve Rankin via Businessmtg <businessmtg at asp-afg.org> wrote:

Hi folks,

Mary is not only spot on in her perception of a difference between policy and how policy is operationalized, she just pointed out the key difference between the authority of the membership in the Business Meeting and the authority of the members of the Steering Committee as they perform their duties in the day-to-day operation of ASP.

ASP's Motion #22 clearly states that the Business Meeting "Establish general meeting policies by substantial unanimity of subscribed membership of Business Committee."
<https://www.serenitysys.com/A_Serenity_Place/Business/nbm/asp_service_structure_revised_OCT_2021.html>

Please note that the group conscience authority is limited to GENERAL policies. When it comes to IMPLEMENTING policy, Motion #22 states that the Steering Committee is responsible for the "Implementation of ASP policy & practices."

In other words, here in the Business Meeting we have no business telling the Steering Committee HOW to implement policy.  That includes details such as when to implement policy, how to inform the membership, etc.  Since the Business Meeting does not have the authority to specify implementation details, it follows that discussion of those details belong to the Steering Committee, not the Business Meeting.  Likewise, the Steering Committee may discuss implementation details, however in the end, the final decision generally belongs to the individual member of the Steering Committee who is responsible for the implementation.  

Regardless of who we are or where we fall in this process of policy making and implementation, we need to trust the others in the process.  

Love and SERENITY,
Steve






-----Original Message-----
From: Businessmtg On Behalf Of Mary Abbott via Businessmtg
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2025 6:44 AM
To: steve at serenitysys.com
Cc: ASP Business <businessmtg at asp-afg.org>
Subject: [Businessmtg] Motion and operationalizing

 I’m fine with the wording of the motion. I see a difference between policy and how it is operationalized. The motion and vote will set the policy. I feel comfortable letting the SC figure out how to operationalize how the policy is executed. So, I’m fine with the SC figuring out how to let the membership know of the new policy and giving a notice about the details of how archives will no longer being available to the membership. Mary A Sent from my iPhone ____________________________ To Unsubscribe, go to: http://www.asp-afg.org/mailman/listinfo/asp
The ASP web site with all kinds of info for ASP members is http://asp-afg.org/members/ For assistance with other ASP issues, contact Lynne, the List Administrator of ASP, at lynne at asp-afg.org


____________________________
To Unsubscribe, go to: http://www.asp-afg.org/mailman/listinfo/asp
The ASP web site with all kinds of info for ASP members is http://asp-afg.org/members/
For assistance with other ASP issues, contact Lynne, the List Administrator of ASP, at lynne at asp-afg.org