Policy Proposal by Colin O’Brien
In order for a member team to be eligible to vote on league matters (proposed rule changes, policy changes, or Executive Board elections), the member team must pay league dues.
Reasoning: New member teams are currently given two years before they have to start paying league dues. New member teams lack the experience relative to other league teams needed to best judge rule, policy, or executive board candidacy. Following their first two years in the league, the new member team would gain such experience. Also, if a new member team would especially wish to vote, the option remains for the new member team to begin to pay dues early to gain voting rights.
Taken from Facebook post discussion
I maintain this rationale for a couple of reasons. First, there have been several teams throughout league history to start a team and then fold into inactivity within a couple of years. The two year waiting period before vote eligibility would ensure the new member team has established stability within its club before influencing the future of the league. Two, I only included the option for early dues payments in order to receive voting rights as a way for new member teams who were super passionate and dedicated to be able to vote. I personally maintain the stance that it takes two seasons (possibly one in the case of a very active team) before someone truly has the experience to weigh the pros and cons of policy change. This is supported by the fact that in nearly all cases, veteran member teams are led by an upperclassman. (Brandon Meisel is the only sophomore head captain that comes to mind to go against this, and even then he still has Dylan Fettig there among others to help decide what to vote for). I know I felt much better at the conclusion of my second season (upon which I voted as MSU captain) than I did at the end of my first (where I as assistant captain deferred to our captain’s judgement). And third, as Aaron Terenzi said, new member teams would still be able to freely voice their opinions in the discussion of the proposals, they simply would not be able to cast a vote on the manners. The reason I am hesitant to adopt Felix Perrone’s proposal is in the case of years with low new member teams, (say for instance only one joined), then the average would effectively negate the policy.
