Concord for the December 2010 Meeting

To this, we can agree:

There are at least three criteria for a successful bylaws amendment process:

1. A limited solution to a limited problem.

The current bylaws should be changed only as necessary to satisfy the DNC's guidance of fairness and proportionality. Other changes to the bylaws are unnecessarily controversial and they deserve further discussion.

We have no univocal position on what that change should be, because so many good ideas have been mentioned over the past nine months. The solution should be determined by the democratic process required under our current bylaws.

2. The voting system of the DPCA should balance the ideal of proportionality and our organization's goal of growth.

Whatever solution we adopt must not make junior partners of the country committees which are developing the infrastructure to serve all the Americans living within their area, whether those populations are large or small. Whatever solution we adopt must not discourage small countries from joining or participating in the DPCA by making their votes irrelevant to the decision-making process of the DPCA as a whole.

3. Open discussion of the alternatives to the Bylaws Committee's proposal.

We thank the Bylaws Committee for its hard work and its thoughtful proposal to solve the problem facing us right now. It is clear that there are other ways to approach this problem. For the DPCA's decision regarding the amendment of our Bylaws to be legitimate, we must discuss alternative proposals. For the DPCA's decision to be legitimate, we must be able to decide, separately, on the parts of the bylaws that are reasonably separable from the voting system of Article 3.

These discussions and decisions must be open and official, with broad participation by the members of the DPCA. Most important, the bylaws amendment process must not involve a binary choice between the Bylaws Committee Proposal and the status quo.

What if the criteria are not met?

If these criteria are not met, the DPCA must reject the Bylaws Committee's proposal.

Then, the DPCA must decide, as the democratic and deliberative body that we are, what to do next.

We have faith that the DPCA is capable of determining the way forward.

If we are not able to come to an agreement concerning our bylaws before the regular meeting of 2011, we suggest that an ad-hoc committee prepare a presentation and proposals at that regular meeting.

We suggest that the task for the ad-hoc committee be explicitly limited to the problem at hand: the voting system. The other issues raised by the current Bylaws Committee, which are worthy of careful consideration, should be tabled until the regular meeting. At that time, the process of discussing these less urgent issues can begin in an open and legitimate manner.