Discussion:
Illinois GL Session & Discipline
(too old to reply)
Torence
2010-10-05 05:47:58 UTC
Permalink
There is quite a bit to look forward to this weekend for those of
us attending the Grand Lodge session in Illinois; and, I hope that
those of us who communicate through the vehicle of soc.
Freemasonry.org but who have not had the opportunity to grip one
another as Masons should will find that opportunity to do so that we
have so long sought.

Our Grand Master, M.W. Bro. Rick Swaney, has announced that this
year the delegates will receive his report on Thursday before the
session starts. That is a wise practice and indicative of the openness
and positive practices for communication with the lodges that has
defined his administration and one that will facilitate discussion on
Friday. It has been many years since we have seen an entire Line of
Grand Lodge Officers as accessible to the Craft as this one; and we
can anticipate successors who are equally dedicated and available.

Last year we had legislation up to require distribution of the
Grand Master’s Report before the session. If the delegates favor it,
we could always reintroduce it again for permanent inclusion in our
Code.

While elsewhere we have discussed the proposed codes, there is much
to consider when we go to do business. In particular, I would like to
hear discussion, not necessarily on the floor of the session, but in
the various apartments and chambers of the hotels and restaurants as
to the proper role and place that we have for discipline in lodges.
Illinois Grand Masters have a particularly heavy burden to bear
regarding the fate of the individual members of the Craft; and the
Grand Lodge delegates here in Illinois have exceeded their authority
in light of our landmarks to require expulsion based upon the decision
of the civil courts. That recent decision denies a Brother his
immemorial right to trial within the Craft, a value for our fraternity
that is as old as King John’s Great Letter. Hitler would have loved
it. He made being a FreeMason a felony in his Germany. How ironic
would it be that we passed legislation that may someday require self-
destruction.

In every case, IMHO, should a Brother desire that his local lodge
review his case regardless of what crime he was convicted, he should
receive that opportunity especially in these economic times when
mistakes involving money can be made out to be criminal malfeasance.
The decisions of the Courts have grown increasingly suspect here
particularly when judges and juries feel that their hands have been
tied to rule one way or another considering bad lawmaking imposed on
us by grand standing legislators. Their criteria, motivated by the
election and re-election process rather than our Masonically required
“Solomonlike” astuteness for fair play for our Craftsmen, has often
led to bigotries, idleness in investigation and prosecution, and cruel
and unusual punishments in the common courts.

When his report is distributed, the Craft will find that this
year’s list of disciplinary expulsions has been dominated by
convictions from our failed and perverse, forty year war against
drugs. Here at the start of this century for our decisions, I would
rather that Freemasonry land on the side of human rights and
demonstrate for the world how we can practice what we preach. We
should show His particular gift for us, Brotherly Love and Affection
for those who put their trust in their peers. And in all cases take
the role of discipline off the already burdensome workload of our
Grand Masters and completely within the dimensions of the Local Lodges
who should be solely responsible for their material.

Fraternally,
Torence Evans Ake
Secretary – Auburn Park Lodge No. 789 – Crete, Illinois
PM – Arcadia Lodge No. 1138 – Lansing, Illinois
Torence
2010-10-11 13:34:14 UTC
Permalink
We had a good session in Illinois, Thursday and Friday. There were
several acts of legislation up that divided the delegates particularly
those regarding discipline.

A motion to prohibit expelled members from petitioning for restoration
for at least five years was defeated.

The condition will continue that Illinois Master Masons, many of whom
are Past Masters of Illinois Lodges, cannot take Grand Lodge Office if
they are not a resident of the State.

The Grand Master suggested that candidates for the degrees endure back
ground screenings and that their degree fees be increased $25 to pay
for the check. He did not use his prerogative to call for a vote on a
subject but instead recommended that the change be put through to next
year for consideration.

It is pleasant to note that our Homes Assets Fund grew by $7 million
this year. The previous year, the fund lost $11 million. This increase
was assisted by the sale of a Trust that put $2.8 million back into
the general account.

I ran into M.W. Brother Nedermeyer PGM of Minnesota and we had a nice
chat about his work with the Masonic Renewal Committee. He is looking
for each jurisdiction to send one representative to the Grand Master’s
conference who are acceptable to their Grand Lines and represent new
voices with fresh ideas but are not in the Grand Line.

Along those lines, Grand Master Swaney has also announced that this
year he will conduct “Town Hall” style meetings attending each in
person rather than sending representatives.

The Grand Master’s Plan is much the same as last year’s plan though he
reduced the qualifications for lodges of less than 80 members.

Fraternally,
Torence Evans Ake
Secretary – Auburn Park Lodge No. 789 – Crete, Illinois
PM – Arcadia Lodge No. 1138 – Lansing, Illinois
Doug Freyburger
2010-10-12 02:37:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Torence
We had a good session in Illinois, Thursday and Friday. There were
several acts of legislation up that divided the delegates particularly
those regarding discipline.
There were two proposals that came to written ballots. I did not hear
the results of those two votes announced. Did I miss the announcement
of the results?
Post by Torence
A motion to prohibit expelled members from petitioning for restoration
for at least five years was defeated.
Maybe the wording of this could be changed to "expelled for being
convicted of a felony" and the objections would be reduced. This is a
topic you and I disagree on.
Post by Torence
The condition will continue that Illinois Master Masons, many of whom
are Past Masters of Illinois Lodges, cannot take Grand Lodge Office if
they are not a resident of the State.
I have since concluded that it should be a resident of an Illinois
chartered lodge - And define "resident" in terms of the traditional
cable tow distance of 50 miles without regard to political boundaries.

The American principle of exclusive jurisdiction has broken with Prince
Hall Affiliation recognition. Consider - To charter a new lodge now in
either PHA or what I call GWA for lack of a better term, one of the two
GLs needs to issue a charter and the other one needs to issue a waiver
of territorial jurisdiction.
Post by Torence
I ran into M.W. Brother Nedermeyer PGM of Minnesota and we had a nice
chat about his work with the Masonic Renewal Committee. He is looking
for each jurisdiction to send one representative to the Grand Master's
conference who are acceptable to their Grand Lines and represent new
voices with fresh ideas but are not in the Grand Line.
I think he invites several Masons whereever he goes. On Thursday after
his speech he invited me to join the committee. It seems like he's
taking the spagetti approach - Throw a lot against the wall and see what
sticks.
Torence
2010-10-12 14:06:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Freyburger
Did I miss the announcement
of the results?
2010 GRAND LODGE SESSION - ACTION ON AMENDMENTS
CONSTITUTION
Article 4 Section U: Grand Lodge voted to send code amendment to
Lodges
If amended the Code would read:

4. The Grand Lodge shall consist of
U. The Masters and Wardens and those appointed as proxies for the
Master and Wardens of the chartered lodges, duly constituted, under
its jurisdiction.

Article 8 - Failed
Article 11 P - Failed

RITUAL
Changes to Ritual - Grand Lodge made a motion to send the change of
ritual to Board of Grand Examiners for review and voted to lay over
until next year for action.
1. The Master will state a purpose for all meetings when
opening on any degree. ie. For business or for work or as appropriate
to the meeting
2. The Master when closing Lodge on any degree will start by
asking the Sr. Warden, Jr. Warden, Secretary, and brethren if there is
anything further to bring before the lodge.

BY-LAWS

Code 143H - Grand Lodge voted to add this Code to read as follows:
CODE 143 H: To determine the mileage rate used for reimbursement of
Masonic travel for approved Grand Lodge official business. The U.S.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issues the standard mileage rate for
operating an automobile for business. The committee will determine
the Masonic mileage reimbursement rate by multiplying the IRS rate by
2/3rds (66%) rounded to the nearest whole cent. This rate will be
used until the IRS rate changes, at which time a recalculated Masonic
mileage reimbursement rate will also then be effective.

Code 162 -An amendment to the amendment was made from the floor and
accepted by the Grand Lodge to change the word "member" to "master
mason". Grand Lodge voted to amend this Code to read as follows:
CODE 162: Whenever the master or a warden of a lodge shall be unable
to attend the meeting of the Grand Lodge the officer who cannot so
attend may appoint any master mason of his own lodge in good standing
as his proxy to represent the lodge in Grand Lodge, and the proxy so
appointed shall be entitled to the same privileges and subject to the
same penalties as the officer appointing him. Such appointment shall
be in writing, signed by the officer giving the proxy and recorded by
the Committee on Credentials. (See Codes 141C and 183)

Code 162 - A second proposal to amend Code 162 was withdrawn by the
proposer.

Code 183 - Grand Lodge voted to amend this Code to read as follows:
CODE 183: The Grand Officers designated in Article 4, such past grand
masters, past deputy grand masters and past grand wardens as shall be
present and shall be members of constituent Lodges in Illinois
(Provided, that if any such permanent member in attendance on the
session of the grand lodge be at the time a sojourner outside of
Illinois his mileage shall be computed from the location of his
lodge), and one representative (the highest in rank) from each lodge
under this jurisdiction shall be allowed the Masonic mileage
reimbursement rate as determined according to Code 143H per mile going
and returning, for every mile traveled from the location of his lodge,
to be computed by the necessarily traveled route and (except the grand
master, grand treasurer, and grand secretary) thirty dollars per day
for each day's actual attendance. Members of committees of this Grand
Lodge shall receive the same mileage and per diem as representatives.
No one shall receive mileage and per diem in more than one capacity.

No representative by proxy shall be allowed mileage or per diem under
this Code when his lodge is represented by a warden thereof.

Code 211 - This amendment failed to pass after a vote by the Grand
Lodge.

Code 217 - This amendment failed to pass after a vote by the Grand
Lodge.

Code 249 - This amendment failed to pass after a paper ballot vote by
the Grand Lodge.

Code 292 - This amendment failed to pass after a vote by the Grand
Lodge.

Code 336 - This amendment failed to pass after a vote by the Grand
Lodge.

Code 341 - This amendment failed to pass after a vote by the Grand
Lodge.

Code 580 - This amendment failed to pass after a paper ballot vote by
the Grand Lodge.

The Grand Lodge voted and approved permission of a request submitted
by Capron Lodge No. 575 (Capron, Illinois) in accordance with Code
463b to sell engraved bricks for display on the interior wall of the
lodge room in new building. The bricks are being offered for $100
each.

Fraternally,
Torence Evans Ake
Secretary - Auburn Park Lodge No. 789 - Crete,Illinois
PM - Arcadia Lodge No. 1138 - Lansing, Illinois
Chris H
2010-10-12 14:06:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Freyburger
Post by Torence
A motion to prohibit expelled members from petitioning for restoration
for at least five years was defeated.
Maybe the wording of this could be changed to "expelled for being
convicted of a felony" and the objections would be reduced. This is a
topic you and I disagree on.
Can you clarify please?
As I read it the resolution says: If you are expelled you can't apply
to rejoin in less than 5 years.

and some want it changed to: If you are expelled for being convicted of
a felony you can't apply to rejoin in less than 5 years

What is the status at the moment? If you are expelled can you re-apply
at all? Or is there no specified waiting time?

Also why change it to convicted of a felony must wait 5 years? Surely if
convicted of a felony you are inadmissible period.

If those committing a felony must wait 5 years what of the others who
are expelled but do not commit a felony?
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Doug Freyburger
2010-10-12 19:50:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Chris H
Post by Doug Freyburger
Post by Torence
A motion to prohibit expelled members from petitioning for restoration
for at least five years was defeated.
Maybe the wording of this could be changed to "expelled for being
convicted of a felony" and the objections would be reduced. This is a
topic you and I disagree on.
Can you clarify please?
As I read it the resolution says: If you are expelled you can't apply
to rejoin in less than 5 years.
and some want it changed to: If you are expelled for being convicted of
a felony you can't apply to rejoin in less than 5 years
That's my suggested correction.
Post by Chris H
What is the status at the moment?
The proposed change failed.
Post by Chris H
If you are expelled can you re-apply
at all? Or is there no specified waiting time?
Currently there is no specified waiting time. There was a case of an
expelled man petitioning his former lodge each and every year. In the
process he kept the hard feelings active and prevented the healing of
time. That was the driving reason for the proposal.
Post by Chris H
Also why change it to convicted of a felony must wait 5 years? Surely if
convicted of a felony you are inadmissible period.
Most years there's discussion of reinstating men who had proven
themselves reformed. Both GLs I am a member of have tended to be
generous for certain types of crimes, unforgiving for others. I recall
a convicted child molester who used to petition California GL every
year while I attended and he never got any yes votes. Yet there have
been men restored years after other felonies. I suspect there's an issue
with which felonies are considered "morally repugnant" and to what
degree by which brothers.

The state could pass a law tomorrow making a parking ticket a felony and
vast numbers of members would have to be expelled before the rules could
be changed. Opinions on which laws are viewed how is a sectarian
political issue that is not to be discussed in a tiled meeting like a GL
annual communication. Being an order of free thinkers it makes sense
that there are Masons who disagree with one felony code or another as
the number of acts that constitute a felony increase. Broadcasting FM
radio above a certain wattage is a felony, as is distilling your own
whiskey for personal consumption not for either sale or gifts. The list
is long enough there are entries many men could consider not "morally
repugnant". There are also Masons who are generous about men who have
proven themselves reformed of crimes that are not considered permanently
unforgiveable.
Post by Chris H
If those committing a felony must wait 5 years what of the others who
are expelled but do not commit a felony?
That was my main objection. Last year there was big news about Arkanas
expelling a member over Prince Hall issues. The year before it was West
Virgina who expelled a PGM member over Prince Hall issues. There have
been brothers expelled for clashing with their grand line officers and
assorted other non-crime reasons. This is why I suggested the
correction in the first place. I don't much care if a local lodge
forgives a reformed drug dealer and wants him admitted before the five
year window is completed, but if a brother gets expelled for some
jurisdictional squabble I don't want to have to wait five years before
the issue can be resolved.

Fraternal regards,
Doug Freyburger
PM 2007-8 Arlington Heights 1162 Illinois AF&AM
PM 1999 Pasadena 272 California F&AM
Torence
2010-10-14 11:47:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Freyburger
Currently there is no specified waiting time.
Too many memberships have been set aside when Brothers go up
against an individual rather than for anything as nefarious as violent
felonies. We can easily point to the expulsion and restoration of M.W.
Grand Master Frank Haas in West Virginia to show the need for and
wisdom of allowing Brothers to repetition as needed and without
troublesome restrictions as well as my own experience within the
fraternity.
Post by Doug Freyburger
Also why change it to convicted of a felony must wait 5 years? Surely if
convicted of a felony you are inadmissible period.
The criminal Code in Illinois was written in 1961. Over the years,
lawmakers who wish to grand stand that they are tough against crime
have not allowed the language to change much. As the term felony
always sounds more severe than misdemeanors, inequities and cruelties
currently exist in the law; and I do not see how we should allow them
to work their way into our Masonic decisions. Men and the situations
that they get into are complex. Our membership deserves more from us
than codes of a singular dimension. We have an obligation registered
in heaven to support one another and to see each other in all of our
complications rather than diminish one another to the sort of word
bite that gets reported in the Common Courts or the Grand Lodge’s
Preliminary Reports.
The more alterations of this caliber that make their way into the
book will work only to negate it. As we move into the 21st Century it
is plain that the immemorial de facto conditions of common sense will
prevail more and more when deciding the operation of the Local
Lodges.

Fraternally,
Torence Evans Ake
Secretary – Auburn Park Lodge No. 789 – Crete, Illinois
PM – Arcadia Lodge No. 1138 – Lansing, Illinois
Chris H
2010-10-14 14:26:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Torence
Post by Doug Freyburger
Currently there is no specified waiting time.
Too many memberships have been set aside when Brothers go up
against an individual rather than for anything as nefarious as violent
felonies. We can easily point to the expulsion and restoration of M.W.
Grand Master Frank Haas in West Virginia to show the need for and
wisdom of allowing Brothers to repetition as needed and without
troublesome restrictions as well as my own experience within the
fraternity.
Post by Doug Freyburger
Also why change it to convicted of a felony must wait 5 years? Surely if
convicted of a felony you are inadmissible period.
The criminal Code in Illinois was written in 1961. Over the years,
lawmakers who wish to grand stand that they are tough against crime
have not allowed the language to change much. As the term felony
always sounds more severe than misdemeanors, inequities and cruelties
currently exist in the law; and I do not see how we should allow them
to work their way into our Masonic decisions. Men and the situations
that they get into are complex. Our membership deserves more from us
than codes of a singular dimension. We have an obligation registered
in heaven to support one another and to see each other in all of our
complications rather than diminish one another to the sort of word
bite that gets reported in the Common Courts or the Grand Lodge’s
Preliminary Reports.
The more alterations of this caliber that make their way into the
book will work only to negate it. As we move into the 21st Century it
is plain that the immemorial de facto conditions of common sense will
prevail more and more when deciding the operation of the Local
Lodges.
Your point is that just as there is no absolute morality laws too are a
moveable feast. What is legal may not be right or good and what is
illegal my not be wrong or bad or even relevant in current society for
laws that are decades old.

A clear case in point is the Chinese person who at the same time wins a
noble peace prize and is under arrest for sedition(?) or similar.
Another example are the civilians abducted and tortured in Guantanamo
and labelled "terrorists".
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
KIV11
2010-10-15 04:35:04 UTC
Permalink
Another example are the civilians abducted and tortured  in Guantanamo
and labelled "terrorists".
I was under the impression that this type of discussion was not
permitted either in Lodge or on this newsgroup. Perhaps the brother
would have a change of opinion if the Parliament building in London
was destroyed by an airplane, hijacked by Muslim fanatics and flown
into the building as was done here in New York City?


======================================= MODERATOR'S COMMENT:
[ And this probably should be the end of it here, yes. Please take it to private email if you want to continue. - Moderator ]
Doug Freyburger
2010-10-15 17:44:42 UTC
Permalink
laws too are a moveable feast.
That's a matter-of-fact observation form history.

Masonry treats with morality, or is supposed to. The discussion about
restoring membership to reformed convicts is rarely framed in terms of
the moral issues, but remembering how the votes go year after year at GL
I have never had trouble seeing it in terms of moral judgements about
the type of crime and the reports of reformation progress though
actions by the convict.

Law treats with morality, or is supposed to. The extent to which law
fails to match morality has been a topic for philosophical discussion
since before Plato's "Death of Socrates". Across history law has
regularly diverged from morality with tyrrany being one of several
results. Is that not an appropriate topic for education and discussion
among Freemasons who are supposed to be educated and interested in
philosophy?
A clear case in point is the Chinese person who at the same time wins a
noble peace prize and is under arrest for sedition(?) or similar.
Where is this on the spectrum between a philosophical discussion about
morality and a sectarian political point? It is a matter of history
that when tyrants come to power they have banned our fraternity and
hunted down the brethren for prison or death because we teach free
thought. The Nobel lauriate in question in inprisoned for being a free
thinker and free speaker who is prosecuted by tyrants. That parallels
the Masonic experience in several other countries in recent history.

How much activism should there be from outsiders when a country reaches
the point it jails free thinkers, with the jailing of Masons as one
litmus test? The Nobel Prize committee appears to have taken a stance
that some level above zero is to be expected, using a similar litmus
test. What overlap is there among Nobel values, Masonic values,
national values and human values? It is not easy to balance between
national soveriegnty, an issue familiar to Masons as jurisdictional
soveriegnty, and human values. The levels for internal action are very
different from the levels for external action.
Torence
2010-10-16 12:36:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Doug Freyburger
The discussion about
restoring membership to reformed convicts is rarely framed in terms of
the moral issues, but remembering how the votes go year after year at GL
I have never had trouble seeing it in terms of moral judgements about
the type of crime and the reports of reformation progress though
actions by the convict.
Our trouble here in Illinois is that we have had a particularly bad
legislator who has employed his time over the years submitting changes
to the Constitution and By-Laws in order to gain for himself some
perceived advantage in his own lodge. This year, our Grand Master
called him on the carpet for his actions and the perversions for the
ballot box that he proposed for this year were set aside by the
voters.
Our modern Masonic education for our Officers focuses almost
entirely on ritual. In many year, they then vote through changes
without comprehending the implication or impact on our way of doing
business because we provide for them no basis from which to learnedly
legislate.
We have for us two troublesome Codes for discipline. 469A which
demands that our Grand Master now “must” expel brothers convicted of
felonies and Code 470 which limits the statements about their cases in
the Preliminary Reports. All the delegates know about their cases are
which lodge involved and the offense. One version of 470 or another
has been around since 1869 since the case of the Reverend J.T. Hugh of
Metropolis Lodge No. 91 but it has always missed its mark of
preserving the dignity of our institution. The code continues to
embarrass the local lodges. Though our modern record would spare his
name, we would however continue to print the “Sinister Minister’s”
offense as stated in the proceedings for that year, “For teaching and
practicing the gross and immoral sin of masturbation and giving the
most sinful and debasing advice to boys and young men.”
Masonic injustice is all too common and Grand Lodge find
themselves being often misused to do no more than rubber stamp the
penalties. The law and order types among us have managed to
institutionalize what is decidedly an un-American process.
I do not know why so many of my peers think it important to put this
or that into our little Blue Book in the first place. We have
legislated that it be at the Master’s fingertips for each meeting.
But, us Secretaries are continually asked about this or that Code. Our
Masters state that they know something of it but do not have the time
to look this or that rule up. They then give us the power that rightly
belongs to them. What we need now more than ever, IMHO, is the
direction that our rising Wardens be required to sign-off that they
have read the book. How much wasted effort from the Grand Master and
Grand Secretary’s office can be saved, if we have them do this simple
thing.

Fraternally,
Torence Evans Ake
Secretary – Auburn Park Lodge No. 789 – Crete, Illinois
PM – Arcadia Lodge No. 1138 – Lansing, Illinois
Doug Freyburger
2010-10-18 17:16:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Torence
Our modern Masonic education for our Officers focuses almost
entirely on ritual.
That's true in Illinois. I've even bugged my DDGM that while it's
appropriate to have the district officers school be about ritual most
months it is not appropriate all months, especially not the month
immediately before GL. He is the District Deputy to the Grand *Master*
after all not the District Deputy to the Committee on Ritual.

How true is it in other juridictions? The only other jurisdiction I
know well is California. They have much more instruction in non-ritual
matters.
Post by Torence
I do not know why so many of my peers think it important to put this
or that into our little Blue Book in the first place.
You could start doing an annual submission to repeal some obsolete
section of the bylaws. It would help keep the total amount of rules
from growing.
Post by Torence
What we need now more than ever, IMHO, is the
direction that our rising Wardens be required to sign-off that they
have read the book.
I was required to do this when I went through the line the first time in
California. If a brother advances one chair per year there's time to do
this. When brothers have to skip chairs to fill holes in the line it is
one of the first items to be dropped in the rush.

Rushing is breaking in this as in some many other things.
Doug Freyburger
2010-10-20 19:41:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Torence
We had a good session in Illinois, Thursday and Friday. There were
several acts of legislation up that divided the delegates particularly
those regarding discipline.
I have a brief summary of the results from California a couple of weeks
before that.

Recommendations by this year's GM
1 - Change the committee who nominates the Junior Grand Warden -
carryover

2 - Protects benefits of membership for senior members - passed

In many states there's a tradition that 50 year members no longer pay
dues. I wonder if this is now true in California.

3 - Changes to trials - passed

4 - Restores historical roles of EA and FC Masons - failed

I wonder if this is admitting them to Stated meetings. It has worked
extremely well here in Illinois and in all other American jurisdictions
that have returned to the world wide standard.

Recommendations by last year's GM that were carryovers last year
1 - Two grand organists and tilers - failed
2 - Personal service of GN edict - passed
5 - Procedure of ballot box rejection - failed
6 - Modify fundraising rules - passed

California state laws about non-profits are very strict so this likely
put Masonry into better adherence.

Carryovers from last year
09-01 - Create Hiram's Pillar award - failed
09-06 - Return of unused dues - passed
09-09 - Permitted fund raising - passed

This year
10-01 - Masonic halls can subsidized Masonic groups - failed

Pasadena 272's building is run at a profit. I wonder if it was about
that.

10-05 - Allows foreign language degree teams - failed

This is bizzare because Pasadena 272 is authorized to do French degrees,
Maya Lodge in my district is authorized to to Spanish degrees. Maybe
the "is" should be "was".

10-13 - Shorter residency for veterans - passed

The list had 16 items this year. I only included the ones I thought
interesting to other states.

Loading...