I like it when I'm surrounded by people smarter than I am. It makes for an interesting association and, of course, you learn things.
Certain people on this forum ("Tom" comes to mind) are smarter than I. After having gotten back my answer from our board's president, Brad Davison, I'm changing my recommendation on ballot proposition #2 to NO.
I say this because the board either purposely, or negligently, decided to omit what it promises on USAT's website, that is, the publication of the changes in the bylaws that will result from the passage of this proposition. The board does not at all feel that proposition #2 is flawed because they've omitted what they promised to give.
Maybe it's underhanded of them, maybe it's sneaky, maybe it's just a difference in points of view that people of goodwill can have. Regardless of the motives behind omitting the actual language the proposition will generate, the current confusion on this was both predictable and avoidable.
I say this because the current bylaws require significant advance notice of any question upon which the membership shall vote. Our current bylaws require the following:
—"...an issue of the federation newsletter that is devoted entirely to the annual election and mailed with the ballot to all eligible voters on January 15 of each year."
—"Ballots for annual elections shall be mailed as inserts in the issue of the
federation newsletter that is devoted entirely to the election."
This is to ensure that the membership have enough advance notice of the proposals to hash them out, talk about them, ruminate over them, and prepare to vote with full knowledge of the questions. To that end, and to ensure that there be no manipulation or influence, according to the bylaw which states...
—"It is intended that federation elections shall be as free from unfair
influence and manipulation as is reasonably possible."
...Our elections are supposed to be run by an outside party. The following bylaws require this...
—"Subject to the terms of these Bylaws, a CPA shall design and administer all federation elections. This CPA shall have no other relationship with the federation."
—"The election shall be certified by the election administrator and notice of the same shall be promptly posted on the federation website."
I do not know who this administrator is. I've asked, we'll see what the answer is. I have a suspicion there is no administrator according to our bylaws.
What will happen if #2 passes I do not know. But for now, I must recognize that smarter folks than I were right. A "NO" vote on proposition #2 is the safest bet. When our federation actually achieves the goal of conducting a fair, open, honest election that honors and obeys its bylaws, I might give questions such as this the benefit of the doubt.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Certain people on this forum ("Tom" comes to mind) are smarter than I. After having gotten back my answer from our board's president, Brad Davison, I'm changing my recommendation on ballot proposition #2 to NO.
I say this because the board either purposely, or negligently, decided to omit what it promises on USAT's website, that is, the publication of the changes in the bylaws that will result from the passage of this proposition. The board does not at all feel that proposition #2 is flawed because they've omitted what they promised to give.
Maybe it's underhanded of them, maybe it's sneaky, maybe it's just a difference in points of view that people of goodwill can have. Regardless of the motives behind omitting the actual language the proposition will generate, the current confusion on this was both predictable and avoidable.
I say this because the current bylaws require significant advance notice of any question upon which the membership shall vote. Our current bylaws require the following:
—"...an issue of the federation newsletter that is devoted entirely to the annual election and mailed with the ballot to all eligible voters on January 15 of each year."
—"Ballots for annual elections shall be mailed as inserts in the issue of the
federation newsletter that is devoted entirely to the election."
This is to ensure that the membership have enough advance notice of the proposals to hash them out, talk about them, ruminate over them, and prepare to vote with full knowledge of the questions. To that end, and to ensure that there be no manipulation or influence, according to the bylaw which states...
—"It is intended that federation elections shall be as free from unfair
influence and manipulation as is reasonably possible."
...Our elections are supposed to be run by an outside party. The following bylaws require this...
—"Subject to the terms of these Bylaws, a CPA shall design and administer all federation elections. This CPA shall have no other relationship with the federation."
—"The election shall be certified by the election administrator and notice of the same shall be promptly posted on the federation website."
I do not know who this administrator is. I've asked, we'll see what the answer is. I have a suspicion there is no administrator according to our bylaws.
What will happen if #2 passes I do not know. But for now, I must recognize that smarter folks than I were right. A "NO" vote on proposition #2 is the safest bet. When our federation actually achieves the goal of conducting a fair, open, honest election that honors and obeys its bylaws, I might give questions such as this the benefit of the doubt.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman