Historical February 1983 report or notice. Original dates, prices and contacts describe the source period; current availability has not been established.
Nearly a year ago, SDCC named a Constitution and Bylaws Committee to study the question of modifying or changing the current SDCC bylaws.
The committee included Ray Breun as chair, and-members Jim McLeod. Harold Williams and Dan McGuire.
The committee studied past documents and talked with many residents.
It became obvious early that the current articles of incorporation needed updating to bring them in line with current state requirements. particularly regarding a formal plan of distribution of assets if the organization went defunct.
A document was presented to the Council by the committee in October. and this was revised for the November meeting. • The proposed constitution and bylaws are printed in this issue of The Paper to make greater discussion possible. Let me outline some of the major changes envisioned.
One of the major confusions in the original bylaws concerned the boundaries of the SDCC area.
The bylaws, did not. define a clear western or southern boundary.
In addition. an extant. early policy statement dating from before 1970 suggests a distinction regarding an area of concentrated activity having its eastern boundary at Union . rather than DeBaliviere, as the bylaws suggest.
The proposed bylaws define both a core area and a service area.
In a ‘second item. the original bylaws specifically eschew personal Or individual membership in SDCC. Only funding agencies and neighborhood associations can be represented on the Council.
In essence, this means individuals, whether residents or • property owners. have no direct voice.
The proposed bylaws envision a new membership organization representation on the Council parallel to the neighborhood or- .ganizations. Individuals could belong to SDCC directly, in addition to or distinct from their membership. in a local neighborhood organization.
This has two purposes: to raise funds for SDCC from individuals as well as•agencies. since the neighborhoods give nothing to support it: and to bring people to the Council who are interested in . the entire area, not just the local neighborhood. Further. some parts of the neighborhood have no representative organization on the Council or are planning to’have one. and this mechanism. makes the process of local organizations more direct.
A third and final major difference is in the committee structure.
The original bylaws tend to create an organization working -as a committee of the .whole in-all its business. • The proposed bylaws suggest stronger committee-tasks and more orderly processing of. business. • The proposed document includes changes in both the articles of-incorporation and the bylaws as they stand now..The ‘timetable for discussion and action on this matter is to have it completed by’ the • March- regular meeting: The current bylaws indicate you Must find.a person in your neighborhood organization. to speak for you. However..Simply call .any of the SDCC.. Council members,..and particularly the members of the committee. Their names and phone numbers are listed elsewhere in this issue:
Originally published in The Neighborhood Paper, February 1983.
Read this article in the original newspaper issue.
Original source: SD_Times1983_02.pdf, printed page(s) 1; PDF page(s) 1.
