rejected, the author(s) is notified and may appeal this decision directly to the Board of Governors or the 1 House of Delegates. If appealed to the board, only the reason(s) for rejection are discussed, not the 2 merits of the resolution itself. If the board approves the resolution it goes back to the Speakers. If 3 rejected, the author(s) my still appeal to the House via a new item of business known as the Appeals 4 Calendar. 5 6 If approved by the Speakers, or the board and returned to the Speakers, the next step is to assign the 7 resolution to the appropriate LSMS Council or Committee. Depending on the nature of the resolution, it 8 would be assigned to the Council on Legislation, Council on Member Services, Council of Socio 9 Economics, Council on Public Health, Budget and Finance Committee, and/or the Charter and Bylaws 10 Committee. The resolution would then be studied and vetted by the council/committee who ultimately 11 submits their recommendation(s) to LSMS Board of Governors as to how best to proceed in disposition 12 of the resolution. The board then acts upon the council/committee recommendations for the resolution. 13 As per current bylaws, any action of the board is ultimately ratified by the House and this is no different. 14 For example, if the resolution is approved and creates interim policy it will be referred to as “LSMS 15 Interim Policy X” and will ultimately be presented to the House as part of the actions of the board where 16 it can be extracted and amended by the House if necessary. Mr. Williams further elaborated that this 17 process allows resolutions to be actively addressed 365 days a year versus one or two days when the 18 House of Delegates is in session. Furthermore, it lends itself to majority of wordsmithing taking place 19 prior to the House. As a result, the House should receive better written and less contentious resolutions. 20 This process also engages all LSMS members not just those that serve as delegates, its more inclusive 21 and provides value. Once the actions of the board have been voted upon by the House, they become 22 official policies and actions of the Society. The only caveat to this process is items of business requiring 23 a bylaw change as only the House can approve such changes. In the event a member submits a 24 resolution that requires a bylaws change, the member will be notified as such and provided the date of 25 the next meeting of the House. However, this does not preclude the LSMS Charter and Bylaws 26 Committee and/or the Board of Governors from working on the appropriate bylaws language to be 27 presented with the resolution to the House of Delegates. Again, this process should create a more 28 efficient and effective House of Delegates. Additionally, resolutions can still be submitted directly to 29 the House within the normal guidelines and operating procedures as no changes have been made, or 30 suggested, to that process. 33 Dr. Williams reviewed the four committees and their chairs as 1) Membership (Nunez); 2) Corporate 34 Structure (Paddock); 3) Member Structure (Williams) and 4) House of Delegates (Clark). Dr. Williams 35 then asked ad hoc committee chairs to present their preliminary strategic recommendations to the full 36 board. 39 Dr. Nunez reviewed the committee’s top strategic priorities, which included 1) updating and 40 modernizing the medical student section; 2) expanding peer-to-peer recruitment; 3) developing a 41 mentoring program; 4) develop new recruiting tools; and 5) develop an emerging physician membership 42 category. 31 32 Strategic Planning 37 38 Ad Hoc Committee on Membership 43 44 1. The LSMS should amend the LSMS Medical Student Section to include osteopathic students 45 enrolled in the newly established VCOM-Louisiana Campus in Monroe, LA. This 46 recommendation would require a Bylaws change, which must be approved by the House of 47 Delegates. A draft resolution was attached for review.
48 49
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software