Beeson

I am waiting on the minutes to get back to me so I can make sure I get posted right. I have been promised to have them by Sunday.

I do not need to call a special meeting the Council has already voted on this Propsal. It was debated in detail and a vote was taken.

I have spoken to Richard and he confirmed that any changes would make this go in to effect the next season. I will post it as soon as I get the minutes back.

Ned

I did not say a Special Meeting "NEEDED" to be called. It was just a suggestion to help this pass. The first question asked, after this was announced, was what about freshmen that are 14. This seems to be the main problem people are having with this proposal. I was just making a suggestion to try and get this to pass. We should not pass a flawed proposal and then try to fix it later.

Richard, would you please provide the specific language from the bylaws that prohibits a proposed amendment from being modified at the state body meeting. If this verbiage does exist please also provide the rational for it if you would.

bump

While we patiently await a reply and clarification from Richard here is a quick thought.

I believe that our bylaws do not restrict us from making a subsidiary motion should one be needed. As long as the subsidiary motion or primary amendment stays within the scope of the main motion no further notice requirement should be needed. Furthermore, pursuant to RONR “An amendment to the bylaws goes into effect immediately upon its adoption unless the motion to adopt specifies another time for its becoming effective, or the assembly has set such a time by a previously adopted motion”.

Debate and amendments are important in allowing the body to reach a conclusion that is agreeable to everyone. With no debate and amendments allowed, members are likely to just vote the whole thing down, but the parliamentary procedures used correctly allow us to perfect motions before adoption and reach compromise for the good of the organization. By not providing the opportunity to debate and/or amend a motion is denying a right to the members.

I am anxious to see the minutes of the executive council meeting to see how the actual proposed motion reads.

As always, an amendment to a motion from the floor will be allowed. What will not be permitted is an amendment from the floor to a written amendment properly submitted to the Executive Director by the prescribed Constitutional deadline.

My position is relatively simple. If a member submits a written Constitutional change the member deserves a vote on their proposed change. If an amendment to the proposed change is made, the change is NO longer the member’s who submitted the amendment.

Just a question. You were asked to "provide the specific language from the bylaws that prohibits a proposed amendment from being modified at the state body meeting. If this verbiage does exist please also provide the rational for it if you would". As you only provided your rationale, I would assume there is not specific language that prevents this, it is just your 'position' that prevents this. Then the question becomes what set of parlimentary rules do you use to develop your positions?? If you check Robert's Rules of Order - Summary Version For Fair and Orderly Meetings & Conventions you will find 'Before the motion is stated by the Chair (the question) members may suggest modification of the motion; the mover can modify as he pleases...'. In other words, the person who wrote the amendment can change it or others can recommend changes as long as the person who first made the motion accepts it. Finally, these rules also state - 'The assembly rules - they have the final say on everything!' The web site is -


http://www.robertsrules.org/

So my question is, why can't a 'friendly amendment' to the first amendment be made and accepted by the body.

In addition, I believe following this rationale, "If a member submits a written Constitutional change the member deserves a vote on their proposed change. If an amendment to the proposed change is made, the change is NO longer the member’s who submitted the amendment." is inconsistent with RONR (Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised considering the following.

Page 38 line-17. "Until the chair states the question, the maker has the right to modify as he pleases or to withdrawl it entirely. After the question has been stated by the chair, the motion becomes the property of the assembly, and then its maker can do neither of these things without the assembly's consent; but while the motion is pending the assmbly can change the wording of the motion by the process of amendment before acting upon it."

Also worth noting - After the motion has been made but before the chair states it or rules it is out of order, no debate is in order (debate is allowed after there has been a second and the chair states the question). At such time, however, any member can quickly rise and, without waiting to be recognized can ask the maker of the motion if he will accept the following modification. The maker can then choose to accept or deny it.

I do not think it is wise to deviate from the parliamentary procedures we are to follow especially without any approved provisions within our bylaws.

Richard, I think we are going to need more from you supporting your position. As I have stated to you privately, it would be a shame if these important issues aren't handled appropriately come the state body meeting and possibly delaying postive changes to KS Wrestling.

Just wondering how the discussion on this topic has gone in the three districts that have met.

Ed,

If this gets voted down and I believe it will, I will submit an amendment. The amendment will basically state that we add the High School division and accept the High School weight classes plus 7 pounds in this division. Freshmen that are in the 14U division will have the option to wrestle up into the High School Division.

A vote was taken and the majority of District 2 supported this ammendment.

If anyone would like to add input for this ammendment, please either pm me or add your comments to this topic.

Chad,
I think we should go to both high school and middle school weights while we are at it. As I have stated, I do not believe this admendment will have a dramatic impact on overall participation, but we need to keep that possibility in mind and go to the lesser number of weights. It is also keeping with what I believe some of the original intent of the admendment was, to create a grand state type of tournament.

Beeson,

I agree with your idea on the amendment. The only small item I would ask you to consider is whether we need to add the 7 lbs to the high school weights.

Here are my thoughts on that one item.....

1. We all know that one of the reasons for doing the high school category is to have the potential for a grand state. We also know that kids cut weight during the high school season and the odds of them cutting to their high school weight for this is slim to none.

2. I am not sure what we really gain by adding 7 lbs. If you really think about it the only thing it really does is hurt the 103 lbers that don't have to cut weight and are older than 14 yrs. For example: the 112 lbers for high school will wrestle at 119 lbs for kids....there is already a weight class for that. The 119 lb high school weights will be bumped to 126 lbs; there is already a scratch 125 lb wwieght class.

That is what I mean when I say that I am not sure what we really gain by adding 7 lbs to the high school weights. From my perspective it really only effects the 103 lbs, 189 lbs, and 215 lbs.

My concern is that by adding 7 lbs, the 103 lb weight class becomes 110 lbs. I think we are doing a disservice to some of our smaller kids that don't necessarily have to cut a bunch to make 103 lbs.

Truth in lending (and for those that know me now, you know how long ago this must have been): I am sensitive to this because in high school I would not have had a weight class to wrestle in under the 7 lb rule. I am biased to providing smaller kids as much oppurtinity as possible, we have enough sports that already take us out of the running due to lack of size.

Just my thoughts but our club would support your amendment. Allowing the freshman, 14 yr olds to have a choice to wrestle U14 or high school is the key for our membership.

Thanks.

Shawn Budke
Leavenworth County Spartans

Beeson,

I like your amendment, but 7 pounds seems like a lot. Wouldn't it be better to have little (2 or 3 lbs)or no allowance and leave it up to the wrestlers to decide if they want to stay at their high school weights or not.

I think his amendment encourages the HS kids to come back and wrestle their weights from the season, thereby making it more likely that we have some grand state caliber matchups.....

Just so I understand correctly, if someone wrestled at 152 for high school they could enter the new high school division at kids at 145 and still weight in at 152, correct?

This is exactly why I wanted some input on the ammendment.

My thought process behind the 7 pound allowance is this: After Certification wrestlers are given a 2 pound allowance, so a 125 pound wrestler is actually weighing in at 127. Most wrestlers are still pulling 5 to 10 pounds to make the certified weight. By allowing an extra 5 pounds the wrestler is more likely to wrestle what they wrestled in High School, thus more of a Grand State Tournament.

This is not set in stone that is why I was asking for some opinions. Now that you know my reasoning....let me know what you think.

Also what does everyone think of adopting the Middle School weights for the 14U?

So what would a 125 pound wrestler actually weigh at weigh-ins? 127 or 132? I'm sorry, I just dont understand, weight allowance is new to me.

Also, what are the middle school weights? I never paid any attention to it Spencer has just started to cut weight and has always just wrestled whatever his weight is.

Im not sure what middle school weights are....the 125 pound wrestler would have to make 132.

So, a 145 high schooler would have to certify at 147 then make 152 for kids, right?

If that is true, when/where do they certify?

Ed, check your private messages and give me a call.