I have been asked some additional questions off list about BFW elections and
policies. There are several issues at hand:
1) the bylaws from about 1995-January 2007 were relatively vague on
elections...stating only that directors would be elected by a plurality of the
votes of the membership and that ballots would be provided to membership 30
days before the election was finalized. I do not know if or in what way the
bylaws have changed since January.
2) until about 2003...there had never been more people interested in being on
the board than available spots. The board regularly had vacancies, in fact.
thus, the current issues did not arise when Jeanne Hoffman was ED.
3) I don't know why...but since 2003, there have been more interested parties
than spots. I like to think this is because I did a good job of recording when
people contacted BFW with an interest in being on the board. I kept records of
those people and presented their names to the nominating committee and reminded
the nominating committee when they "forgot" about those people. It may also
just have been that the organization was growing or that existing board/staff
were doing a better job of recruiting new board members.
4) Yes...people have been left off the ballot in the past...but they were
contacted and talked to and "talked out of" running. Like John Rider. In this
way the slate was reduced to only those who were on the board endorsed slate.
Before now...no one has ever been persistent enough to insist on being included
on the ballot (and subsequently denied). As far as I know...no one has EVER
requested being on the ballot after having been asked to not run ...and thus no
one has EVER been denied being on the ballot.
5) When I was ED...I would have assured that, in accordance with the policy
that I helped draft...that someone like Pam would have been included on the
ballot as an "unendorsed candidate" (I don't know the story with the other
person, maybe they agreed not to run). It had never happened before...but I
would have done that when the issue did finally arise (which I was sure that it
would). I do not know if a)the policy has been changed, b)the policy has been
forgotten, c)the current board never bothered to learn our operating policies
(doubtful, since the nominating committee is not appreciable different than in
January and I know that they were informed repeatedly), d)the policy is
purposefully being ignored
6) It would not surprise me if no one on BFW staff or board is able to confirm
or deny anything with regards to operating policies...the institutional memory
of staff and board members has essentially been purged completely. I have
informed some of the newer board members of the residing places of such
policies...and have offered to assist the current ED with institutional memory
issues. The current ED has failed to take advantage of that offer.
-Dar
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. _______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
