Now we must focus, so we get the best of the best on the board. There
needs to be a better way for those who aspire to run to tell their
history and gain supporters.
If not, it will be the same as when you face a list of judges to vote
for and haven't even taken a recommendation list into the voting booth
from the bar association, Tribune or Sun Times .
Will so many vote for a name that sounds nice?
We will have learned nothing from the past year if people do not
exercise their right to vote for the board.
We will have learned nothing if we have uncontested elections again.
Having a contested election doesn't mean that you "didn't like the
losing candidate(s), it just means that you felt the winning
candidates had a better skill set/experience to bring to the board
THIS year. I would like nothing more than to see 8-10 viable
candidates running for election each & every year. Those not elected
can perhaps gain more Saints experience by working on committees/
commissions in the subsequent year & be one leg up and hopefully run &
be elected the following year. It shouldn't fall on the same group of
people year in & year out to be on the board. That's how burn-out
occurs.
Uncontested elections and/or low voter turnout in got us to the
situation we were in this past year. The only traits of importance
for being on the board should NOT be to be breathing & willing to take
the plunge. Desire alone, isn't sufficient. A firm grasp of what the
Saints are about as well as the ability to function in a board
atmosphere & hopefully some relevant experience are what I seek in
future board members.
On Mar 8, 9:24 am, "Arnold & Beverly Hollander"