... "member club" is a matter of semantics, not substance.

Our club could have defined subordinate organizations as chapters and required membership in the parent club (as was originally the case).

Or, it could have defined them as chapters and not required membership in the parent club (as is currently the case).

Or, it could have defined them as "member clubs" and required membership in the international.

Or, it could have defined them as "member clubs" and not required membership in the international.

Or, for that matter, we could call them "sections", "branches", "subdivisions", or any other word meaning a component part -- and we could either require or not require membership in the international regardless of which term we chose to represent the smaller group.

In short, we can call it whatever we like and do with it whatever we like. There is no essential difference between a chapter and a "member club" (which is a made up term anyway). There are differences only because the ANA defines "member club" in a particular way and we define a "chapter" in a different way.

I remain of the opinion that we should be inclusive rather than exclusive on this issue and will vote against Marv's proposal. Nothing personal against him (he is a good friend) or any of you who support the proposal (many of whom are friends and supporters). Just the way I feel on this subject.

----- jim o\-S