Many members often muse about things they would like to see changed about AML. Here are some of the things that come to mind for me as to what I would like to see changed. Hopefully most of these won't be duplicative of what I have written elsewhere on these static pages. (And I expect I'll probably add to it as more things come to mind.)
--The AMC should make sure to prominently publish notice, when possible, of all upcoming AMC meetings. Ideally, this would include notification via the AMLNewsFlash, in an easily found area of the AML website (including the Events Calendar), and in the Bulletin. Certain meetings, such as teleconferences, might not be scheduled far enough in advance to be published in the Bulletin, but the other methods of dissemination are still possible.
--The AMC should put forward an amendment to remove the two Past Chair positions from the AMC. Most often, anyone who has achieved the position of Chairman of AML would be willing to give some advice and even some historical background. This can be done easily by having past Chairmen on the AMC e-list with the privilege to post. There is less of a need to have them flown to the AMC meetings, given the current communications technology, than there once was.
--The AMC should put forward one or both of the following options for recalling and replacing RVCs:
-Special Election of the membership of the region
-Elect an RVC and an Alternate RVC in the first place, where the vacancy in RVC is automatically filled by the Alternate RVC
-Both options should have a special recall election, where the members of the region vote on recalling the RVC if and only if a petition with enough signatures in a specific timeframe is received.
--Ideally, the AMC would revamp the National Hearings Committee system, to make the NHC completely independent of the AMC, so that any review by the AMC of sanctions recommended by the NHC can truly be viewed as an independent appeal. There should also be an automatic appeal of any sanction imposed or recommended by the NHC; currently, the only such appeal is done for recommended suspension or expulsion from AML.
--The AMC should roll back some of the mandatory National Office-accomplished Annual Gathering functions (e.g., registration) and permit such functions, once again, to be performed by volunteers. Note that this would not require volunteers to take on such tasks, rather, it would allow them to do so rather than forbid them from doing so, as the current contractual language states; National Office staff time should be an offer of services.
--We need to know just how much National Office staff time is actually spent on the Annual Gathering. What are tasks which specifically benefit the whole membership (such as the staff time supporting the AMC meeting, like they support any AMC meeting), and which tasks are AG-specific (e.g., registration). Just how much AML dues money goes towards tasks that are specifically AG-centric and should really be factored into AG budgets and paid for by the registration costs of those attending the AG? (Yes, this will likely have registration costs increase. It seems appropriate for only AG-goers to be paying for this support, rather than it coming out of general dues. In fact, earlier this year, the AMC finally passed a motion that would have a surcharge tacked onto AG Committee-determined registration rates to come up with a final registration rate.)
--Are the testing discount promotions or other specials factored into the annual budget? Given the fact that several such specials/promotions are announced during the same month as they take effect (or minimal days ahead of time), they come across as last-minute ideas, rather than well-thought-out plans. This implies that they are not factored into the budget ahead of time as they should be.
--Notify the LGs several months in advance of any special promotions or offers that might affect how they conduct their business, especially as relates to testing and evaluation of prior evidence. (There is some improvement on this lately, but it could be better still.)
--The AMC is required to get a written report from the Interpretive Counsel of all bylaws amendments that have been duly proposed to the membership. Any and all such reports regarding the legal opinion of the Interpretive Counsel dealing with proposed bylaws amendments should be made available to the membership. There is no good reason why any such report should not be published if the proposed amendment is being placed on the ballot.
--The National Office needs to revamp the Search functionality on the AML website. Currently, it is virtually unusable, nearly always giving garbage for results, just about as bad as Yahoo! gives within its various groups.
--The National Office should revamp the entirety of the AML website so as to make it more intuitive and user-friendly. Many people, including those of us who use it frequently, have difficulties finding information on the website. This will go a long way towards aiding the transparency that is oft talked about. (Note: This is a project that was completed in 2011 by the National Office. Some people still have the same criticism of the website. In fact, I frequently do, too.)
