Re: IAC...Contrary to Bylaws?

Jim, at no point have I or do I disagree with your view of IAC. BUT

What will you do when you win this struggle over the IAC.

A board with the power to institute such rules with out discussion and
proper debate with those effected by the rules will make another arbitrary
rule.

Change the rules that govern the board not the rules the board makes.

At 11:06 AM 10/4/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Robins,
>
>This post is to try to describe one more time a very serious problem we
>face in the AHS. The Executive Board one year ago  passed under  its
>assumed authority,  the IAC Policies/Program containing  new rules
>regarding registration. The Program provides for promotion, education
>and use of hostas which are registered but intends to "minimize" ( I
>assume it means discourage, discriminate against, blackball, prohibit
>certain activities and to coerce growers, gardeners, hybridizers,
>scientists, writers, exhibitors and buyers and sellers of hostas from)
>engaging in activities involving unregistered hostas.
>
>This Program of segregation, apartheid and discrimination between
>registered and unregistered hostas appears to conflict with AHS Bylaws.
>Where in the Bylaws is the Board authorized to make an arbitrary
>separation between one group of hostas which it will maximize and
>another group which it will minimize? Article II,  Section A states that
>"the Society was organized exclusively as a non-profit educational
>society formed to foster and promote knowledge of and interest in the
>genus Hosta, to encourage the introduction of the genus into
>cultivation, the development of new and improved varieties and to
>promote International Hosta Registry". If even a part of the strategy is
>intended  to minimize some hostas, this is just the opposite of its
>stated goals regarding these hostas.
>
>Which hostas will it minimize? IAC policy intends to minimize
>unregistered hostas. These include:
>
>1. all hosta species in gardens as ornamentals
>2.all hosta species used in breeding programs
>3.all unregistered  hosta hybrids or sports used in breeding programs
>4.all unregistered streaked breeder plants that differ from their
>registered unstreaked siblings or  progenitors
>5.hundreds of thousands of seedlings being produced by hundreds of
>hybridizers
>6.all seedlings or sports one year or older undergoing evaluation until
>they are mature
>7.all plants used in research and development ( such as natural or
>induced polyploids, sports, or tissue chimeras, plants used in
>physiology studies or  pest control research)
>8.all unregistered plants in tissue culture or other propagation
>methods.
>9. all plants in collections from the wild or from other collections
>worldwide.
>
>The IAC Program is claimed to be a well thought out Program. Really?
>Then why does it appear to violate existing Bylaws? Why has there been
>so much opposition to it? Why has it created more problems within the
>AHS than any unidentified or any undescribed nomenclatural problems  it
>was designed to correct?
>
>IMO, registration is not a crititeria important enough to establish an
>artificial distinction of two distinct groups of hostas...one
>registered, one un-registered... which is so divisive in character.
>
>In addition to the hosta problem, there is the people problem. I have
>learned from experience that if a person dissents against IAC, the
>person gets minimized also. Because one dissents, one may become
>punished and have his rights as an AHS member taken away.This whole
>policy is un-American, undemocratic, irrational, silly, divisive and
>unwize. Because I have also called it stupid, I get accused of personal
>attacks and get "minimized".  This is insane!!! Where is our sense of
>intelligence?
>
>What makes unregistered hostas less "preferred", less desirable for use
>in our gardens? Why is the sigma attached only to those which are bought
>and sold? This looks like interference in the marketplace ( not the role
>of a non-profit organization),  which is a requirement under Article II,
>Section B of the Bylaws.
>
>Is IAC contrary to our Bylaws? I suggest it is. Opinions from anyone of
>the several lawyers on or outside the Board?
>
>Jim Hawes
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
>message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN
>
>
Butch Ragland So. Indiana zone 5

"Conflict is as addictive as nicotine, alcohol, drugs, etc.
I'm sorry to report that cooperation is not."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE HOSTA-OPEN
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index