The UCO BYLAWS - A Major Policy Change in Review

I have read David's post and the comments which follow. I will not comment on the repaving project, the whistle blower who went to Code Enforcement, the restructuring of the UCO Budget, the technological advances which brought UCO into the 21st Century.

I do although feel that it is important and instructive to briefly clarify the statement “The U.S. President picks his own cabinet” since many individuals have the tendency to model UCO after the U.S. government structure. The president appoints cabinet officers as well as many other members of the federal judiciary. Once the president announces the nominees/appointees the Legislative Branch then conducts Senate Confirmation Hearings where members of the Senate interview and question each nominee to ensure that each is well qualified. The Senate then votes to confirm or disapprove each nominee. This keeps the Executive Branch from nominating people who might support only the political views and agenda of the president. At the same time, it allows the president the ability to choose qualified, fair people to work in key positions within the government. This system of Checks and Balances is used to limit the powers of the President.

This system (of Checks and Balances) has been unanimously approved by the President, the Advisory Committee, Officers' Committee, Executive Board and by the Delegate Assembly. So that everyone is on the same page, I will briefly provide the background information which is necessary in order to gain an accurate picture of where we stand, and where it appears that we are headed to.

1. The UCO Bylaws were amended on March 2nd, 2012. Generally speaking, and with certain named exceptions, the UCO Bylaws have historically granted the President the right to appoint [and create] all standing and special (ad hoc) committees, and more recently, to determine the mission and term of service of committees, unless otherwise provided in the Bylaws. In an attempt to achieve a greater balance of power within the administration, the Bylaws were amended so that the President would now be required to seek the advice and consent of the Officers' Committee.

2.  During the Advisory Committee meeting of May 10th, 2012, I suggested that the previously approved language, originally suggested by David, “The President, with the advice and consent of the Officers' Committee”, increased the likelihood that a deadlock would occur between these two parties when creating and appointing UCO Committees.

3.  After a period of discussion, instead of proceeding as originally planned (to apply this phrase to each committee in the UCO Bylaws, if applicable), it was unanimously decided to remove this language, and to vest the Officers' Committee with these powers, except as otherwise provided in the UCO Bylaws.

Not to be disregarded, is the Bylaw amendment also adopted on March 2nd, which gave the Executive Board, the power and authority to disapprove proposed amendments, and/or to amend them. Article XI, “Miscellaneous Provisions”, (D), “Method of Amendment” now reads as follows.
“The Executive Board, after due deliberation, shall either approve or disapprove the amendment proposal. The amendment proposal, if approved as presented or as amended, shall then be published in the next issue of the UCO Reporter and shall be read and considered by the Delegate Assembly at the meeting immediately following its publication.”

UCO is presently moving toward a major policy change which will require very serious consideration by all parties. There are no Bylaw amendments which can eliminate bureaucratic infighting within the UCO Administration. There are no Bylaw amendments that can ensure that the President of UCO and the other seven Officers of UCO will work together in harmony, regardless of their differing views and personality differences. There are no Bylaw amendments which will convince them to embrace the concept of compromise, and to consistently work toward achieving goals which are in the best interest of our Village. These resolutions can only take place within ourselves, which would require a major change as well.