Board elections coming. Ideas to change USA elections

[Bret Hess]

Spring is coming.  Plans are in the works for an annual meeting in March.  And we will hold real elections finally, hopefully electronically and not the meeting.  

I want to start a discussion about improving USA board elections, before the elections. The board hasn’t considered these ideas yet. 

We’ve made two bylaws changes in the past few years to make elections easier: we can elect members electronically, and the votes don’t have to be in meetings.

Here is the main problem I see in the election customs the USA has: Board positions don’t really come up for vote each year (even when we hold elections as we should).  It’s assumed that board members will stay in their board seat until they resign or a challenger comes along.  Being a challenger is a hard, negative thing, who wants to do that?  Even removing an obviously poor board member would be a huge emotional event for the club, though how to do it is in the bylaws.  So annual board votes are usually a formality.  Also, some board members may have been appointed to temporarily fill board vacancies, so if someone would like to join the board after a vacancy there is already someone there they would have to displace, making it awkward to say you would like to serve.  The result in practice is that board membership is more by invitation than by election.  That’s probably why it doesn’t seem pressing to hold elections every year…the vacancies are filled, the board doesn’t know of anyone else who wants to serve, and all we need is a formal vote.  All this is not really the board’s fault or the general membership’s fault…it’s the election culture that is failing.

I’d like to suggest that we make a change to the election culture by breaking the presumption of continued board service, so that the board is truly chosen by the club each year.  The way to do this is through ranked choice voting, with members ranking nominees for a seat on the board, rather than for a particular board position.  The highest ranked nominee willing would be president that year, and other high ranking nominees would fill the other elected positions.  Members can choose to decline a nomination, but no one has to “run” for a position. It’s not a big deal to join or leave the board. 

Voting to put nominees on the board rather than each nominee slated for a particular position is more natural to how the board currently works than you might think.  After being on the board for some time I can see that the duties of the board members is only partly determined by the title.  The duties are usually negotiated between the board member and the president and other board members.  

We could make a simple change to bylaws, with the underlined new text:  “Election. The Executive Officers shall be elected by the voting members of the Corporation and shall take office immediately upon election.  The board will establish election details which may differ from simple majority voting.”

Please also see the discussion I’m starting on board structure in general that relates to this. 

Here are the current USA bylaws. 

Please help us think about this.

[Bret Hess]

In this proposed way to do the elections, it would be fine for someone to run for president and plan the board they want.  That candidate would simply tell the club, "Here is the board I would like to have if I'm elected president.  If you support my presidency, rank me first, and include these board members in your top rankings:  Joe X, Sam Y, Judy Z."

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Utah Soaring" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to utah-soaring...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/8acd5886-8559-4b1b-ba72-49055fd38a90n%40googlegroups.com.

[David Cleveland]

Because the board is operated in a communal nature (i.e. all board officers get together and discuss current concerns), and due to the way our club is operated  with four bases (Morgan, Heber, Logan and Nephi), it would be best if the President, Vice-President, Secretary and Treasurer are all elected. We have four disparate groups who make decisions based upon what is best for their own favorite local. Having a President who is elected, then appoints all other officers, would make it tempting for the board to be filled by all officers who favor one local. Because no one local has a super majority, the way we operate now is that we have officers from all over the system providing their input. That's good.

I like the ranked choice voting idea. Good idea. I also like the idea of the board positions terminating and each position truly filling each year.

DC

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/CAAoufPMuwkFD80WkkHSuYtqrsSPiq2jWr%3DEOhkZP4sz9kg_Yjw%40mail.gmail.com.

[drt...@gmail.com]

Hear hear!! 

A bit of democratic process is very much in order.  Do not need nor desire preference based on single-individual autonomy.  Thank you! 

 

Dan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/CANpENvv7-g88Xcp_8ZGbii6pEJLD7PLh%3D9OX0M-TD4bR9q8Oyw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bruno Vassel]

I was not aware this was going to the whole club.  I guess that outs me and I need to hire a campaign mgr.  That all said, if someone else is eager to be president I would very much be happy to run as VP.  Just want to help where I can.

I might have misunderstood Bret's election proposal, but if I did understand it correctly, I have some concerns.  First, every position on the board is very specific and requires very special expertise and interest to even just do the job.  I would not want to see someone get "placed/voted" into the treasurer position if they have no interest of skills in bookkeeping or accounting.  They just happened to get less votes than the president or vp?  Maybe I misunderstood.  

I agree with David about everyone needing to be voted in.  My comment about Jonathan Foster was only that he is willing to serve and I thought I was just mentioning that fact to the board.  In recent years, there have been very few volunteers who have wanted to get onto the board from what I understand.  Most have been asked if they are willing to serve.  Sounds like you Dan are planning pitchforks and torches to burn down this government and help a new one rise from the ashes.  I don't even know what single-individual autonomy is.  ;)  haha.

Bruno

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/000b01d94bd4%2408ee1170%241aca3450%24%40gmail.com.

[Bret Hess]

David, I'm not proposing a change in how many board members are elected.  The words appoint  and designate are very different (and "designate" doesn't need to be the word we use)

In my proposal the president appoints no one.  Just as currently in the bylaws, four board members are elected, and two more board members are appointed by the board.  

The flexibility I'm proposing is that the president designates which member of the board receives which duties.

 “A president and three general board members are elected annually.  The board appoints a Maintenance chairman and one other general board member.  From among the board members the president designates a vice president, a secretary, a treasurer and a safety officer.”

The comment above you reacted to is simply saying a president might tell the club which club members he/she prefers to be on the board, not tell the club who the board members must be. That's not different from the present state of elections.

So your comment about location concentration doesn't apply to my proposal. It's advice to any presidential candidate to not to advocate for a board that is concentrated

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/CANpENvv7-g88Xcp_8ZGbii6pEJLD7PLh%3D9OX0M-TD4bR9q8Oyw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bret Hess]

Bruno see my reply to David's comment just above that nothing in my proposal changes in how many board members are elected vs appointed.  4 elected, 2 appointed.

 "A president and three general board members are elected annually.  The board appoints a Maintenance chairman and one other general board member.  From among the board members the president designates a vice president, a secretary, a treasurer and a safety officer.”

I agree we can't have a random board member assigned as treasurer, just as we can't have a random board member be Maintenance chairman. That's why the board has the authority to appoint to board members with the needed skills: one of those could be the treasurer.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/CAGtjj6Q-ToJrrhywaqq438dnUJ3CrNkzbrLR-ACh3ExxX4AoxQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bret Hess]

My last sentence needs a few more words of clarification:

I agree we can't have a random board member assigned as treasurer, just as we can't have a random board member be Maintenance chairman. That's why the board has the authority to appoint to the board two club members with the needed skills: one of those could be the treasurer.

[Bret Hess]

Thanks for all the feedback.  Perhaps this wording is better:

 "A president and three general board members are elected annually.  The board appoints a Maintenance chairman and one other general board member. The president assigns the following duties to the other board members: vice president, secretary, treasurer and safety officer.”

[David Cleveland]

Ah. Ok. Thanks. I get it now. 

DC

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/CAAoufPP4UM%3DrQ%3Dt_hi2rLxbvMAqTaJ%3D1vJ8vUY42AxZ-F%2BXWxg%40mail.gmail.com.

[drt...@gmail.com]

Nah-  No pitchforks and torches-  wrong perspective.  Just want to ensure an even-keeled process-.  One where input from all members is considered and decisions are mutually agreed from a smart consensus. 

 

Thanks-

Dan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/CAGtjj6Q-ToJrrhywaqq438dnUJ3CrNkzbrLR-ACh3ExxX4AoxQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[John Ackerson]

Can I just say how excited I am to be looking toward a new soaring season.  Quite a few club members made the trip to Reno for the SSA convention.  It was spectacular and educational.   Uys Jonkers personally took a tape measure to my body and measured to see why I didn't fit into the new JS3 Res.  I could have told him that it was just because I was fat, but nonetheless, it was just fun to be there among so many other like minded sailplane crazies.  Our club meeting this March is a big deal in charting our future direction of where we want our club to become in 10 or 20 or 30 years.  Gear up for 2023 as we have a lot of fun to make up for due to the covid craziness from the past few years.   The only social distancing I really accepted was at 14000ft under a cloud street.   See you in March.

John Ackerson

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/001601d94bf2%2434473130%249cd59390%24%40gmail.com.

[K m]

Bruno, Don’t forget a celebrity endorsement from the my pillow guy.

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 28, 2023, at 14:49, Bruno Vassel <bruno...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/utah-soaring/CAGtjj6Q-ToJrrhywaqq438dnUJ3CrNkzbrLR-ACh3ExxX4AoxQ%40mail.gmail.com.