|
Habitaciones Para Latinos Repair Help commented on "Update: David Contreras - Is LULAC’s Governing
Document Compromised?" Apr 2, 2026 From one man's point of view and from live and current circumstances I find that LULAC council members are in flux. I will use the word "Apathy" as the bases for my comment and the bases of my ideas. As defined by most dictionaries' apathy is the lack of interest, enthusiasm, or concern. From my perspective LULAC'rs do not lack interest or concern but do lack enthusiasm. In the council where I am a member it is difficult to get anyone to serve as an officer and maybe even more difficult to put forth a motion for consideration. Even when a great motion is offered, getting a second, getting any discussion or even the minimum number of yes or no votes is like "herding cats, pulling teeth or nailing jelly to a wall". Having members take time to read a motion or an amendment is also difficult. Zoom meeting have proven to be successful and the current leadership has tried that avenue with some success. In my council that is the only way we currently meet. Even at that, getting 100% attendance in near impossible. What I see is "I trust my leaders to do the right thing. To be honest and always ensure the mission or goal of the organization has priority". Any motion presented or amendment added I trust is for the better welfare of the organization. Going forward the Latino Community of which Mexican Americans probably is the backbone, must elect and hold their feet to the fire an individual that will work for the benefit of LULAC and not for some ulterior motive. Is there a Ben Garza, Alonso S. Perales, J.T. Canales or J. Luz Saenz. I believe there is and getting paid will not be a priority. But an expense account would be very appropriate. |
Is LULAC’s Governing Document Compromised?
A Call for Constitutional Clarity and Stewardship
For nearly a century, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) has served as the legal and moral vanguard for our community. We have succeeded because we are an organization built on the "Supreme Authority" of our members. However, as we navigate the complexities of the 21st century, we must ask ourselves a difficult but necessary question: Is our governing document technically and ethically compromised?
At the heart of our recent internal challenges lies a significant procedural mystery: the transition of the National Presidency from a strictly volunteer role to a compensated position. While the spirit of our founders was one of pure volunteerism, our current operational reality tells a different story—one that lacks the clear, ratified paper trail our Constitution requires.
The Procedural Gap (2008–2012)
The 2008 LULAC Constitution is widely regarded as the last baseline of undisputed volunteer service for the National Office. Yet, in the 2012 Constitutional Revision, language appeared under Article VIII, Section 9 authorizing a presidential honorarium.
For an organization that prides itself on the rule of law, the "issue" is a matter of record. In July 2012, a headline in the San Antonio Express-News declared: "LULAC President to Get Paid," marking a radical departure from our 83-year history. However, there is no evidence of a formal amendment number, a recorded Assembly vote, or the mandatory 30-day council ratification process for this change between 2008 and 2012. In the absence of these democratic markers, we are left with a "ghost provision"—a clause that appears in our printed books but lacks the legislative authority of the membership.
The 2018 Grassroots Challenge
The discrepancy between our historical volunteer values and the "2012 Blue Book" did not go unnoticed by the rank-and-file members. At the 2018 National Convention in Phoenix, a formal challenge was mounted from the very heart of the organization.
LULAC Council 673—a cornerstone of our San Antonio community—submitted Amendment No. 3, a courageous proposal to repeal the honorarium clause and restore the 2008 volunteer standard. While the National Amendments Committee, chaired by Miguel Ortiz, moved this forward to the floor, the amendment failed to reach the required two-thirds majority. This failure to "delete" the clause left the League in a parliamentary trap: the disputed language remained in the printed book by default, despite never having been legally ratified by the councils in the first place.
The Fiduciary Cost of Uncertainty
Governance is not about personalities; it is about the protection of our mission. When we operate under unratified provisions, we create a vacuum of accountability. We saw the high cost of this ambiguity during the 2015–2018 term, where the League was forced into costly litigation to define the powers and compensation of the National Office. When the organization spends significant resources on legal fees and stipends that were never explicitly authorized by the General Assembly, we risk our standing as stewards of the community’s trust.
The 2023 Crossroads: A Tabled Resolution
In 2023, a commendable effort was made in Albuquerque to finally address this "legal limbo." By proposing Amendment 12, leadership sought to officially codify and modernize the President’s role and compensation—a move that tacitly acknowledged the 2012 language was legally insufficient.
However, because the entire 2023 amendment package was tabled, the League remains in a state of procedural suspension. A "tabled" amendment is not a "passed" amendment; it is a set-aside proposal. Consequently, we are still following a "2012 Blue Book" that we ourselves acknowledged needed a formal legislative fix that the Assembly has yet to grant.
A Diplomatic Path Forward
Addressing this is not about looking backward with blame; it is about looking forward with integrity. To ensure the "Greater Good" of the League, we must return to a standard of absolute transparency:
- Constitutional Audit: We must reconcile our current printed text with the actual ratified record of the National Assembly.
- Member Consent: If the membership desires a compensated Presidency to meet the demands of a modern non-profit, that change must be passed through the "front door" of the Assembly and ratified by the councils, as our laws demand.
- Restoring the Foundation: Until such a vote is certified, we must respect the 2008 volunteer standard that remains the last legally undisputed version of our mission.
LULAC is more than any one officer or any one board; it is a sacred trust. By resolving these constitutional discrepancies, we don’t just protect our treasury—we protect our soul. It is time to ensure that our governing documents are as resilient and as honest as the people they represent.
From one man's point of view and from live and current circumstances I find that LULAC council members are in flux. I will use the word "Apathy" as the bases for my comment and the bases of my ideas. As defined by most dictionaries' apathy is the lack of interest, enthusiasm, or concern. From my perspective LULAC'rs do not lack interest or concern but do lack enthusiasm. In the council where I am a member it is difficult to get anyone to serve as an officer and maybe even more difficult to put forth a motion for consideration. Even when a great motion is offered, getting a second, getting any discussion or even the minimum number of yes or no votes is like "herding cats, pulling teeth or nailing jelly to a wall". Having members take time to read a motion or an amendment is also difficult. Zoom meeting have proven to be successful and the current leadership has tried that avenue with some success. In my council that is the only way we currently meet. Even at that, getting 100% attendance in near impossible. What I see is "I trust my leaders to do the right thing. To be honest and always ensure the mission or goal of the organization has priority". Any motion presented or amendment added I trust is for the better welfare of the organization. Going forward the Latino Community of which Mexican Americans probably is the backbone, must elect and hold their feet to the fire an individual that will work for the benefit of LULAC and not for some ulterior motive. Is there a Ben Garza, Alonso S. Perales, J.T. Canales or J. Luz Saenz. I believe there is and getting paid will not be a priority. But an expense account would be very appropriate.
ReplyDelete