The Little Rock Fraternal Order of Police (LRFOP) has proposed a change to the LRFOP Constitution and By-Laws for a vote of their membership that would deny the rights of any retired member to his or her current rights to the “benefits” of the lodge, the right to vote on any issue before the LRFOP, as well as the right to hold any elective LRFOP office. In effect, this amendment, if passed, would appear to kick all LRPD retired members out of the LRFOP and, by association, out of the State and National FOP as well because, without “benefits” and “vote,” what possible good could there be in continuing your retired membership in that organization?
That proposed change was approved by the LRFOP Constitution and By-Laws Committee whose membership includes Linda Hudson (Chairman), Jamie Johnson, Rebecca Schug, Stacey Rath, and Kenny Baer, Jr., and was voted upon by the LRFOP Executive Board during their October Board meeting as indicated in their Minutes as follows:
MOTION made by Brother Tommy Hudson to accept the proposed Constitution and By Laws changes and send them to a vote of the membership. Seconded by Brother Chris Phillips. Motion carried (Vote 4 For; 2 Against).
It should be noted that LRFOP Executive Board members Kenny Baer Jr., and Chris Ringgold were absent from that meeting according to the Minutes and that the LRFOP President, Kevin “Bart” Simpson, could NOT vote on that issue but stated he does not support it. The two Executive Board members who voted AGAINST that motion were Immediate Past President John Gilchrist and State Trustee Richard Glascock. The Executive Board members who voted FOR that motion were Vice-President Everett Hopper, Secretary Tommy Hudson, Sergeant-at-Arms Ronnie Morgan, and State Trustee Chris Phillips.
If this measure should pass a vote of their existing membership, which includes retired officers at this time, it would mean the total elimination of any voice for retired members in the affairs of the LRFOP that we have been voting members of since its inception. While I suppose such an effort was inevitable after our recent recognition of our right to vote in LRFOP elections that resulted in the eventual defeat of then President John Gilchrist, I believe it is truly unfortunate and disheartening that some members of the current LRFOP Executive Board have taken this step to attempt the elimination of the rights of their retired membership especially since that retired membership has never taken anything from that organization and has given it so much.
After all, it was our generation of police officers who started that organization in Little Rock. It was our generation of police officers who obtained the land and built the lodge that the LRFOP now proudly occupies. And, it was our generation of police officers who were responsible for many of the police officer rights and privileges they enjoy today and the numerous advances in salary and benefits that they now live upon. For certain members of the LRFOP Executive Board to now show us their gratitude for those things by attempting to strip us of our rights to at least vote on issues that may be of valid importance and concern to us is, in my opinion, unconscionable but I suppose such a fact should have been expected from some members of the LRFOP Executive Board but I CANNOT believe the active duty membership of the LRFOP would ever agree with their position on that issue.
I would caution the active duty members of the LRFOP to consider that, if this flagrant attempt to do away with the retired member’s rights is successful, what would stop those same members of the LRFOP from eliminating your rights or those of other member’s as well? How many of you are in positions at the LRPD of envy by other members? How many of you would be confident in a vote of your general membership or your existing Executive Board to ensure your personal “rights” within that organization? How many of you perform your job with little concern for those “rights” that you may desperately need at some time in the future? And, how many of you believe that if your “rights” can be so easily terminated that they were never truly “rights” at all? Thus, how can you possibly vote to terminate ANY member’s “rights” under these circumstances in good conscience? I do not believe you can or will and I believe the idea that ANY member’s “rights” can be terminated simply for being a member in good standing, as is currently proposed for your retired members, is as offensive to most of you as it is to us!
Additionally, I do not believe such a vote for the elimination of retired officers “rights” is even allowed under the FOP National Constitution that states, under Article 2 Section 4 of that document:
Section 4. This Constitution shall be the fundamental law of the Order and, with the Rituals adopted at the National Biennial Conferences, and such By-Laws as may be adopted from time to time, shall govern the conduct of the Grand Lodge and all state and subordinate lodges. [Emphasis added]
Thus, the FOP National Constitution is the controlling law of the Order for subordinate lodges such as the LRFOP.
A further examination of that document at Article 4 Section 3. A., “Active Membership” states under subsection 1, that active membership “[s]hall include appointed or elected full time law enforcement officers” and, under subsection 2 states:
2. May include retired regularly appointed or elected law enforcement officers.
Thus, while the LRFOP did not HAVE to allow retired officers to join when the LRFOP lodge was originally created, it DID and we are now part of their “active membership” with the same rights and benefits as other active members of that lodge.
Then, Article 4 Section 3. A. 4., of the FOP National Constitution states:
4. Only active members, as herein defined, shall have voice and vote. [Emphasis added]
Thus, as active members of the LRFOP we are guaranteed by the FOP National Constitution to have “voice and vote” in the LRFOP and our lodge, at least in my opinion, has NO authority to deny us those rights in the manner they propose!
However, because I have so little patience with the questionable conduct of certain members on the LRFOP Executive Board and being “politically correct” has never been one of my virtues, I do not and shall not speak for any other retired member of our pension fund but I shall go to the next LRFOP meeting to voice my personal displeasure with this “vote” and raise that “point of order” for the consideration of the President and/or the Executive Board of the LRFOP. Absent a ruling that protects my rights as a retired member of the LRFOP for the good of the Order, I shall file an appeal of any decision that does not protect those rights with the State Lodge and ultimately to the Grand Lodge as is authorized under Article 23 of the FOP National Constitution because, while I may eventually have to leave the FOP over this issue, I will NOT simply bend over and let certain members of the LRFOP Executive Board ram this obscenity down my throat without a struggle!
Finally, it is important to note that a vote on that issue will also include a vote on the new LRFOP Executive Board for 2012. Those positions are largely unopposed with the exception of the LRFOP Presidency and two Trustee positions. The only contested position of primary interest to our retired membership is for the Presidency of the LRFOP which is currently held by Kevin “Bart” Simpson who opposes the proposed removal of our rights and he is running against John Gilchrist who also opposed that action by the LRFOP Executive Board. While John Gilchrist did NOT support that action, he is not generally known to be supportive of the retired membership of our pension fund in other matters.
For all the reasons previously stated, I strongly recommend that both active duty members and retired members of the LRFOP cast a “No” vote on this change to the LRFOP Constitution and By Laws between November 7th at 0001 hours and November 22nd at 11:00 hours online at www.lrfop.org (login and then click the “Online Voting” menu item) to let everyone within that organization know that NO member’s “rights” can be so easily terminated! Additionally, while I have no recommendations for the two other contested positions on the LRFOP Executive Board at this time, I DO recommend that you cast a vote FOR Kevin “Bart” Simpson for President of the LRFOP in what could possibly be your LAST official vote on those candidates as well as casting your vote AGAINST the change to the LRFOP Constitution and By-Laws previously mentioned!
I shall attempt to keep our membership advised as to the results of that election and my subsequent appeal of that issue if that appeal should become necessary.
UPDATE
I couldn’t wait until the LRFOP meeting and called Alan Hamby the next day after publishing this article. Read his post about this matter below!!!
Read the proposed change to the LRFOP Constitution and By-Laws HERE
I cannot believe the current FOP Board would support such a thing and have so little regard for the rights of the retired members. Very disappointing. I encourage everyone to vote against the proposed changes.
Police Pension Members,
I seriously doubt that hardly anyone currently on the Constitution and By-Law Committee, or for that matter, the Executive Board knows much of anything associated with the many struggles encountered with formation of the Little Rock FOP, from what was the formerly the Little Rock Patrolman Association. Equally, I doubt that they know much if anything concerning the many struggles associated with acquisition of the land on the river and construction of the current lodge that they now enjoy. I am sure that an exception is Kenny Baer Jr., and that of course is because his Father is a past President who was very insturmental both in the early and latter days. Sadly enough, I now doubt that most of them even care.
I must admit that since 1992, at which time I became excluded from the bargaining unit, I have almost entirely left matters up to those who were directly impacted by bargaining, and consequently tried to stay out of their business. I have continued to take that approach, at least in my mind, out of respect for those who spend the time to keep everything running. And, I must say that I continue to have a lot of respect for them.
I must admit that I am now a bit saddened by their current actions, I guess because it just seems so very disrespectful for a multitude of obvious reasons.
Although I have in the past often found myself in disagreement with Brother Gilchrist, I do want to take this opportunity to publicly thank both him and Richard Glascock for the quiet “gutsy” position they have taken on our behalf.
I would encourage our members to take the time to vote concerning this issue, and hope that our FOP Brothers and Sisters have a change of hart, and welcome the involvement of their retired counter part.
Thanks,
I guess some of the BROTHERS that pledged there support not long ago are now trying to take the BR off of Brothers and make the retired BROTHERS others.. HUMMMMM some talk with forked tongues. Just think, if this goes through, which i do not believe it will, you LOYAL BR-OTHERS who came up with this one day will be others.. NOT QUICK ENOUGH FOR ME
Steve,
Please find below a statement I have released as to the current constitution and by-law change submitted by the Little Rock FOP.
Brothers an Sisters,
A request has been brought to the attention of the Arkansas State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police (ARFOP) regarding whether or not a proposed amendment to Article 3 of the Constitution and Bylaws of the Little Rock Fraternal Order of Police (LRFOP) is unconstitutional. After careful review and consideration, and after consulting with national board members, it is my opinion that the proposed amendment conflicts with the ARFOP and Grand Lodge FOP Constitution and Bylaws and, therefore, should be withdrawn. Additionally, I am requesting Little Rock FOP review its current language in its Constitution and Bylaws regarding active and honorary members.
Fraternally,
Allen Hamby, Jr., President
Arkansas State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police
I too am disappointed in the position the LRFOP executive board has taken on this issue. Many of our retired members put in a lot of time and effort into the LRFOP and got it where it is today. The LRFOP was at its strongest when Farris Hensley and Steve Young were on the board. I remember Farris and Steve and many others battling with the city on many issues. If I am not mistaken Farris was instrumental on getting membership status for retired LRPD officers. Thank You Farris and Steve and all the other retired members for your tireless efforts for ALL LRPD Officers!!!!!! I will vote against this travesty!!!!!
i may not have standing to vote of fop busines, but i am going to inject my two cents woth anyway. this proposition sounds like our congress. they say to each other, “they got us here, so let’s see how we can shaft them for our own benefit.” just saying… steve and farris have given city hall a fair amount of grief over the years, maybe this move would put the current board in better standing with city hall?
So many new faces have emerged since I retired a short nine years ago. Here’s my question: How important is my vote if I don’t even know the person I’m voting for? Does that not ring of exactly how our country got into the mess we’re in right now? Of course I guess I could ask someone I know that’s still on the department but then I’m casting their vote again. Just sayin.
As you probably know by now, the proposed LRFOP Constitution and By-Laws amendments regarding “Active” and “Honorary” members have been ruled “unconstitutional” by AR State FOP President Allen Hamby. Brother Hamby and members of the National FOP Executive Board carefully reviewed this issue prior to announcing the ruling. Additionally, Brother Hamby has stated that he believes the existing language in the LRFOP Constitution and By-Laws regarding the definition of “Active” and “Honorary” members is not adequate and it needs to be amended. Brother Hamby and Brother Patrick Yoes of the National FOP will be working with the LRFOP to assist in drafting new language relating to this area of our Constitution and By-Laws. The new language will be submitted and voted on at a future date.
As Chairman of the Constitution and By-Laws committee, I feel compelled to address some of the very negative comments posted on this website that were directed towards the members of my committee as well as the current LRFOP Executive Board. First and foremost, I will take full responsibility for the drafting of the language that was proposed for the most recent amendments. No one on my committee was involved in this process, and they should not be subjected to the negative comments. I was asked by members of the LRFOP Executive Board to draft language to better define Active and Honorary members, and specifically to address each members’ rights regarding voting and holding office. The FOP is a member-driven organization and several active, dues paying members had voiced concerns to the LRFOP Executive Board regarding retired members having the ability to vote on issues affecting active employees of the LRPD. This issue came to a head when several retired members wanted the LRFOP to vote against the proposed City of Little Rock sales tax increase, thus putting the jobs of many LRPD officers at stake. These members voiced concern regarding non-dues paying, retired members having the ability to vote on issues that directly affect actively employed officers. I drafted the proposed amendments in an attempt to deal with these concerns.
It is my personal belief that when I retire, and I am no longer paying dues, I should not be able to vote on issues dealing with the day to day operations of the Lodge or dealing with issues that directly impact officers who are still employed at the LRPD. I have worked very hard for the LRFOP and I hope that my work will be appreciated long after I retire. I do believe that as an “Honorary” Lifetime member, I should have full access to the Lodge facilities and all lodge-sponsored events, free of charge. Several of the LRFOP Executive Board Members who voted in favor of putting these amendments on the ballot are very close to retiring from LRPD themselves, and they would be directly affected by this change. Some comments on this website have tried to portray those who voted in favor of the amendments as “self-serving”. How could these Board Members be serving themselves by voting for something that will directly affect them in the very near future? They have nothing personally to gain by voting in favor of the proposed amendments.
I truly appreciate the hard work that many of our retired members put into making the LRFOP what it is today. I also appreciate the hard work of the current LRFOP Executive Board–several of them who have now served the organization for over 20 years. Two members of the current LRFOP Executive Board have served as President of that organization in the past. I was saddened by some of the negative comments directed towards the current Executive Board, implying that they don’t know anything about past struggles, etc. Several current LRFOP Board members were involved in those struggles themselves and they continue to be involved in current on-going struggles. They also continue to fight hard for the members of the LRFOP. Several current Board members have given 20+ years to the LRFOP—sacrificing their own personal time. They have negotiated good contracts, worked tirelessly on pension issues, and have run the LRFOP professionally all while sacrificing their personal time and rarely hearing a “thank you” from anyone.
I hope we can all work together to draft fair and equitable language to better define “Active” and “Honorary” members. I thank all of the retired members of the LRFOP for their tireless service, and I hope that when I retire, the Active members at that time will feel the same towards me. We may disagree regarding this issue, but we should not stoop to the level of name calling and finger pointing. The views expressed here are my personal views and in no way reflect the views of the LRFOP as a whole or any other individual member of the LRFOP.
Fraternally,
Linda Hudson
Little Rock FOP
Curtis,
I apologize for the delayed response to your question but I had a pension board meeting this morning that lasted until about noon and didn’t see your comment until now.
Of course, you are correct that you should NOT vote if you do not know anything about the person you are voting for. However, just like in national and state elections where you probably don’t know those candidates very well either, it is every voter’s responsibility and obligation to learn the positions and opinions of those who seek to represent us and only then to make an informed determination before casting a vote for any particular individual. That concept is also true in elections for the LRFOP.
If you have no idea of who to vote for now, I would suggest you seek out information to enlighten you as to the opinions and qualifications of each candidate. That is precisely why I made no recommendations for the unopposed candidates in the current LRFOP race with the exception of the President of the LRFOP who I have enough information about to recommend him for that job at this time.
If you cannot find someone to give you advice whom you trust, I would recommend you simply call each candidate and ask them enough questions to satisfy yourself in that determination. I believe most of their telephone numbers are on the LRFOP website under the “Member Directory” menu item. Just give them a call and tell them you are a potential supporter and have a few questions. Surely, they would not mind hearing from a potential supporter and, if they refused, perhaps that fact alone would be sufficient to determine that they were not representative of your views.
Finally, the elections are not over until November 22, thus, you have plenty of time to make your determination in one way or another.
Linda,
While I do not wish to get into a protracted debate with you about this matter because it is already settled, I too feel compelled to respond to several comments you made in your post.
A simple review of my article will clearly reveal that the only time I even mentioned the Constitution and By-Laws Committee was to simply list those who are members of that committee as they are listed on your website. There were no “negative comments” made about any of those persons, including you. Whether those changes recommended by your committee came from you alone or your entire committee is irrelevant. The only relevant fact was that the Executive Board voted to send those unconstitutional changes to the membership for a vote.
For those reasons, I directed MY comments in this article to the Executive Board because they were and are ultimately responsible for that action. Certainly, a measure approved by the Executive Board would necessarily carry considerable weight with your membership who rightfully trusts their Executive Board to make decisions for the good of the Order. Unfortunately, in this particular instance, that decision does not appear to have been made for the good of the Order but instead appears to have been made for the good of only some of the Order and, as you have now learned, that is not allowed under the National FOP Constitution. In this article, I only stated indisputable facts and I challenge you or anyone else to quote one instance in that article where you allege that I “stooped” to “name calling and finger pointing” other than to point my finger at those ultimately responsible for this action — the LRFOP Executive Board.
You further state, “This issue came to a head when several retired members wanted the LRFOP to vote against the proposed City of Little Rock sales tax increase, thus putting the jobs of many LRPD officers at stake.” While that may be your recollection and opinion of what transpired, as one of those retired officers, I have a different memory of that discussion held at one of your Executive Board meetings. As I recall, the retired officers knew full well that you would never vote against the sales tax issue because you feared for your jobs and we subsequently merely asked that you wait to announce your vote until your next board meeting which the Executive Board did in an effort to offer us some limited assistance. Additionally, that conversation did not concern any salary issue but only a political issue that we had a deference of opinion on. Surely, you do not believe that having a difference of political opinion is sufficient cause to strip any member of their membership.
Finally, I do NOT dispute the fine work many of your existing Board members have performed over the years. I only disputed this decision that was unfortunate. I shall attend the next LRFOP board meeting where I am certain this issue will be discussed and will have a couple of possible suggestions about this problem that may interest you and others.
Fraternally,
Stephen R. Young
Little Rock FOP
Linda
You know I was going to write up a long cute little article in answer to your article but, then I got to thinking, If you all [by that I mean the majority of the membership] does not won’t us involved with the LPFOP then have a vote [by the membership] to elimate the retired officer honoray or what ever. If you do not won’t us I sure do not won’t to be involed. I do not believe any retired officer would vote to hurt you all. You know I thought we were all in this together but I guess not. If the active and retired officers can not stand together and help each other it is a sad day.
Fraternally,
Donald Wood
Little Rock FOP
Linda,
I certainly had no intention of offending any of you-all, rather just pointed out that many on the Committee and Board are younger, therefore knows very little concerning our history that extends back to the early seventies.
Again, I very much appreciate the many years of dedicated service by you and others in the FOP. I know that it is often a seemingly thankless job, but it certainly does benefit us all.
Thanks again,
Farris
Just read the Article 4 section Steve listed in his posting above:
Section 3. There shall be three (3) classes of membership: Active, Retired and Honorary.
A. Active Membership
1. Shall include regularly appointed or elected full-time law enforcement officers.
2. May include retired regularly appointed or elected law enforcement officers.
3. May include, subject to the approval of his state and subordinate lodges, regularly appointed or elected law enforcement officers who have resigned from their law enforcement duties and who have remained in good standing with their state and subordinate lodges.
C. Honorary Membership shall be comprised of individuals recognized by the Grand Lodge, state lodge or subordinate lodges for exceptional service or contribution to the nation, the state, political subdivision, the law enforcement community or the Fraternal Order of Police.
I believe we fit into A.2. It looks like Lodge 17 could exclude us if they wish. As for myself I would hope they would not do so. As to Honorary Membership, I equate that to someone like Winthrop Rockefeller because he loved and did a lot for Law Enforcement but was not a retired regularly appointed or elected law enforcement officer.
I am proud to be a lifetime member of FOP Lodge 17 and have paid my dues to the State and National Lodge since I retired in 2001. If I ever needed help in some area that had a lodge, I know that my brothers would come to my assistance.