Link to current bylaws - Click Here
Section 2.A.
Statement of Inclusion:
The change creates a clearer, more inclusive statement without relying on a list that can become outdated or unintentionally exclusionary.
​
Section 3.C.
Membership:
Added for transparency and accountability.
​
Section 4.C.
Officers:
Added Term & Election Language to align with Delaware code § 142(b)
​
Section 5.D.
Duties of Officers:
Added financial reporting language for transparency
​
​
Section 6.A,B,C.
Advisors:
Revised to clarify the Advisor position on the Executive Committee
​
​
Section 7.A,B.
Advisors - Appointed:
Section removed as all former appointed Liaisons will be elected Advisors
​
​
​
Section 9.C,E.
Meetings:
Removed Elections language during the annual meeting
Added minute requirements for transparency and accountability.
​
​
​
Section 10.Bii, Biii, Biv, Bv.
Voting:
Added Ranked choice voting for Officers & Advisor positions when there are 3 or more candidates for the same role (See explanation bottom of page)
Added to provide clarity
​
​
​
Section 11.A,Ai,Aii,B,D.
Elections:
Revised language to clarify the changes to Advisors
Revised for clarity
Added language to clarify what happens if a tie vote occurs
​​
​
​
Section 12.A.
Removal of Officers:
Revised language to include sobriety and eliminate the committee chair language that is redundant.
​​​
​
​
Section 13.C.
Financial Policies:
Added Budget language for accountability and transparency.
​​​
​
​
Section 15.
Registered Office and Registered Agent:
New section added per Delaware code § 131.
​​​
​
​
Section 16.
Amendments:
Section rewritten to provide clarity and to increase the member percentage from a simple majority to 2/3rd of those members present at the vote. This is the norm for Nonprofit bylaws, AA service structures or organizations wanting stability and protection against rapid or reactionary changes.
​​​​
​
​
Section 18.
Dissolution:
Added Delaware code requirements
​​​​
​
​
Why GaL‑AA wants to adopt ranked choice: for Officer & Advisor Elections
GaL‑AA believes adopting ranked‑choice voting provides a fairer and more accurate way to reflect member preferences, especially when many candidates run for the same position. Ranked‑choice voting reduces vote‑splitting, eliminates the need for runoffs, and ensures that those elected have broad support across our membership.
​
How it works
You rank candidates in the order you prefer 1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, and so on.
Ranked‑choice voting lets you rank candidates in the order you prefer, and if your higher‑ranked choices already have enough support or are no longer in the running, your vote moves to your next choice so the final results reflect the broadest support from members.
​
Officer Elections
​
-
When three or fewer candidates run for an Officer position, the election uses a simple‑majority vote.
-
When more than three candidates run for an Officer position, members use ranked‑choice voting to ensure a clear and representative outcome.
Advisor Elections
-
All Advisor positions use ranked‑choice voting because multiple Advisor seats are always on the ballot, and ranked choice best captures member preferences across a larger candidate field.