Amendment Proposals 2025
Administrative change
Jongleurs is misspelled as “Joungleurs” throughout the policy document.
PROPOSAL 1
Section IV. Events
Remove IV.7
“Event stewards will abide by the financial policies concerning events.”
and renumber remaining item(s).
Rationale: This is entirely redundant with IV.1
PROPOSAL 2
Section III. Meetings
Edit 2 to add [Regular] to start of sentence.
Regular baronial meetings must be announced at least two weeks in advance by the Seneschal via official channels
Rationale: see below. allows for special council meetings to be called with less notice.
PROPOSAL 3
Edit 3. The secretary should see that the minutes are published promptly following each meeting. This is the only duty of the secretary.
Rationale: “Must be” doesn’t work. There is neither support nor consequence spelled. The change encourages the intent. Concise, prompt notes are better than verbose, long delayed notes.
PROPOSAL 4
Add 4.
4. The seneschal may call special council sessions on short notice to deal with time sensitive issues between regular meetings. With a 50% quorum of individual voting members, special council votes will have the same weight of full council votes.
Rationale: Stuff happens. Especially when we skip meetings in August. Allows from of schedule meetings as needed, such as to approve event edits between regular meetings. Safe guards are not written here as we assume good intentions from seneschal and council.
PROPOSAL 5
Proposed change:
Financial Policy.
Change: Section 6-1-2-1 Change to” Officer and guild stipends. Every officer and guild head is entitled to a $100 per year stipend to spend on the office’s or guild’s needs. Receipts must be turned in to the Exchequer for reimbursement.
(Only change is the amount from $50 to $100.)
PROPOSAL 6
Proposed change
Financial Policy
Add: Section 1-2-1a . The amount of the officer and guide head stipend shall be revisited annually to account for inflation, as part of the annual policy review. The Financial Committee shall make a recommendation to Council.
PROPOSAL 7: Baronage Vote
Intent: Grant their excellencies a vote on the great council.
Rationale: In general, votes in council represent major officers or roles within the Barony. No one on council represents the populace as a whole. Most of the roles are not selected by popular vote, or are selected by a vote of the specific constituency represented. While it is true that their majesties can override the popular vote for the Baronage this appears to be rare, and is still the closest we come to a true popular vote for any office. As such, I believe their excellencies should have a vote on council.
Textual Changes:
Strike 1.E.2
PROPOSAL 8: Joint Tenancy in Office
Intent: Limit votes to one per office, regardless of the number of individuals sharing that office.
Rationale: At present, there are no restrictions on the number of people who can share a given office. While this isn’t common, it has happened. The purpose of this change is to make it clear that each office casts a single vote in instances where that is the case.
Textual Changes:
Add “1.E.4 In the event an office listed in 1.E.1 is held jointly by multiple individuals, those individuals will cast a single vote on great council. In the event that no decision on the vote can be reached by those individuals, jointly, the vote will count as an abstention.