I promised earlier today that I would post something on the 
application/election process.  That whole story is below.  

But first a few folks (whom I don’t really know) claim that my motivation for 
running for the board is other than what I’ve stated.  I will not stoop to that 
level of discourse as their assertions are incorrect and do not merit response. 
 I will however re-iterate why I’m running for the board:
1) I agree with and support stated mission of the BFW.
2) I am displeased with the procedures by which the ED was terminated.
3) I am displeased with the failure of the board to communicate with its 
membership and the media in a meaningful way.
4) By all appearances, the Board was ill prepared to initiate a search for a 
new ED.

I believe I can do better.  THAT is why I want to be on the Board.

We all know that two applicants have been omitted from the ballot.  In the 
email informing me that I had not been selected by the nominating committee, I 
was told that I had the “option” to mount a write-in campaign.  That is exactly 
what I’m doing.  The only means by which I can communicate to BFW members is 
through personal contacts and listserves.  I do not have access to the 
membership database (I respect the organizations dedication to keeping the 
personal information of its members private).

So we are all hear, sharing information on “Bikies”.  What each individual 
takes away from this discussion will determine how they vote.  I have clearly 
stated my motives for running for the board.

If elected and discussion arises as to whether all qualified applicants should 
be listed on the ballot, I will argue that all candidates should be listed.  
Could the board endorse a slate of candidates and inform membership of their 
recommendations.  Sure!  But membership should have the choice.


I’d like to shift gears and walk you through my application process:

Motivated by the reasons stated above I emailed my letter of interest to be on 
the board along with my CV by the deadline on August 16th.  I was contacted and 
informed that interviews would be held by conference call on August 27th.

The people on the nominating committee were:  Scott Arbit, Laura Kreofsky, Eric 
Schramm, Bill Hauda and either Ken Bates or Dick Kendall (I honestly can’t 
remember now).  Jack Hirt was also in on the conference call.

Scott Arbit facilitated the interview.  He opened by informing me that the 
interview process would be 20 minutes in length.  Committee members would take 
turn asking questions for 15 minutes and I would be afforded about 5 minutes to 
ask questions at the end.

The conversation was cordial.  The first questions revolved around what skills 
or talents I felt I could bring to the Board.  I informed the committee of my 
long-standing personnel management skills including both direct supervision of 
staff and my work as a personnel officer in the military.  I also pointed out 
that I am a health professional and, as such, would be the only board member 
with a health science background.  I outlined my goal to enhance lines of 
communication between board, staff and members.  I stated a further goal would 
be to reactivate the “Creating active community environments” project as I feel 
infrastructure and environment play a huge role in promoting healthy lifestyle 
choices (ie biking).  A longer discussion of available resources via the Center 
for Disease Control ensued.

Bill Hauda asked what role bicycle industry members should play in the BFW.  I 
stated that their role should be minimal with regard to BFW policy.  They 
certainly can provide insight and work in an advisory function, however, any 
monetary donation should not come with strings attached.

Board members are aware that I have been openly critical of their actions of 
late, so, one individual asked what I thought of the ED’s termination.  I told 
him that I disagreed with the manner in which they carried out the action and 
that I felt they handled the aftermath poorly.  I can’t remember which 
committee member asked that question.

I believe we were about 17 minutes into the interview when I got a chance to 
ask a question.  I had heard that the board had been having troubles with 
attendance and come close to not making quorum at a few meetings.  So I asked 
if this board was an active working board and if all board members were 
contributing as expected.  I was informed that, perhaps a year ago, there were 
board members that weren’t fulfilling their obligations but that current 
members were all working hard.

I followed up with the question, “What is the role of the nominating committee? 
Are they endorsing a slate of candidates with all qualified applicants be on 
the ballot?”  The answer I received was affirmative.

By that time, the next candidate had logged in and was on the line.  My time 
was up and I signed off.

THE NEXT DAY I SENT A MESSAGE TO JACK HIRT (August 28th):
Jack, 
The interview process seemed a little short and I wasn't able to ask all of the 
questions that I had.  I think you can help answer them.  First, when does the 
election period start and end?  Second, the BFW web page lists four people with 
terms expiring in 2007.  Are two members planning to remain on the board?  If 
so, which two? 
Thanks for your time and effort! 

Please pass on the following message to the nominating committee: 
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak with all of you last night.  
Our discussion was enlightening for me and I hope, as well, for you.

I further hope that your statements hold true that the BFW board is becoming 
more of a working board.  The BFW has a fine staff.  They deserve a board that 
is supportive and provides hard work, mentorship and vision. 

I appreciate the clarification of the nominating process you provided toward 
the end of the interview.  I am pleased that all qualified applicant will be 
placed on the ballot and that these interviews serve as more of an 
"endorsement" mechanism for the board. 

At this point, I respectfully ask that my name remain on the ballot for the 
upcoming election but I will decline any endorsement by the board.  

Sincerely, 

Pam Barrett

JACK HIRT RESPONDED WITH THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE (August 28th):
Pam, 
I have forwarded your message on to the nominating committee. 
 
Currently there is one open seat on the board and Dick Kendall will not be 
running for re-election.  So that is where the two endorsed canidates come 
from.  Ken Bates, Eric Schram, and Chick Veenstra will be running for 
re-election. 
 
The election period is open for one month, ballots will be mailed to all 
members near the end of Sept and will be due back to the bike fed by the end of 
October.  Our process says that we need to have the election open for 30 days. 
 
Anything else let me know,  Jack

RESPONSE FROM SCOTT ARBIT (August 28th):
Pam,
I want to thank you for taking time to discuss your thoughts about bicycling, 
the health aspects of bicycling, and the BFW with us last night.  You had some 
excellent ideas for improving communications.  Following our conference call, 
the committee and Jack, our executive director, discussed your concern 
regarding the need for improving communication.  Jack is acutely aware of the 
communications issues you mentioned.  It seems that the biggest issue is a lack 
of funding and a lack of personnel.  For example, we have planned a member 
e-mail mail list, to help us share information more effectively with the 
members.  Unfortunately we had to put that project on hold.  We may have 
misspoken last night, regarding the election procedure.  I have requested 
clarification on the procedure, as defined in the bylaws, and one of the 
members of the nominating committee will let you know as soon as we have the 
information.   I will notify you as to the recommendation of the nominating 
committee, shortly after we report to the executive committee on 9-6-07.  Your 
request to have your name placed on the ballot without the committee’s 
endorsement has been noted. Thank you for your long term support of BFW!
Best regards,
Scott Arbit

THE NEXT COMMUNICATION WAS A MESSAGE FROM SCOTT (September 8th)

Dear Pam,
 
The BFW's Nominating Committee has completed its work in nominating candidates 
for this fall's Board of Director's election.  We had four strong new 
candidates, along with three incumbents who are seeking re-election.  We 
appreciated the interest of all of the candidates and their desire to serve 
cyclists statewide through working with the BFW. Our most difficult task was to 
determine the best skill and experience mix for the BFW at this point in time.  
I regret that you were not nominated for this round. The Nominating Committee 
has nominated the three incumbent Board members, along with Aaron Crandall of 
Madison and Joel Savilonis of Dodgeville. The candidates who were not 
nominated, along with anyone else who may choose to do so, have the option of 
running write-in campaigns. Thank you again for your past volunteer work, for 
your continued interest in the BFW,  and for your dedication to cycling.  I 
know you will make a significant contribution by promoting the physical as well 
as the mental health benefits of cycling. I personally look forward to the 
possibility of working with you in the future to help make Wisconsin a better 
place to bicycle.
 
Best wishes,
Scott Arbit
 
I SENT THIS MESSAGE TO JACK HIRT ON 9/8/7:
Hi Jack, 
I just received the forwarded email from Scott Arbit and would appreciate 
clarification.  After speaking to the nominating committee, I understood that 
the purpose of the telephone interviews was to establish a slate of candidates 
endorsed by the board.  However, I also understood that all qualified 
candidates that applied would be included in the ballot that will be sent to 
membership. 
 
>From Scott's email below, it now sounds as if my name will not be printed on 
>the ballot but that I would have to mount a write-in campaign. 
 
Please tell me, will my name be printed on the ballot that will be sent to 
membership? 
 
Thanks, 
Pam

RECEIVED FROM JACK HIRT ON 9/10/7:
Pam, 
 
Being new to these kind of activities at the Bike Fed, I honestly can not 
answer your question about your name on the ballot.  So I am going to forward 
your email to the nominating committee and Edith (board president) and request 
them to answer your question. 
 
Sorry I can not answer, this is my first experience with the whole election 
process as well. 
 
Thanks, Jack

FROM SCOTT ARBIT 9/11/7:
Dear Pam,
This note is in response to your question about the ballot for the upcoming 
election.  Three incumbent directors have been nominated to run for their spots 
on the board.  Two additional candidates have been nominated to run for two 
open spots on the board.  Therefore, there will be five names appearing on the 
ballot.  In addition, there will be five lines for write in candidates on the 
ballot.  This has been the way our elections have been conducted, for as long 
as I recall.  I hope this provides some clarification.
Best wishes,
Scott Arbit

**********
Given the above information, I was provided with the option of running a 
write-in campaign.  That is what I am doing.

That is what I know.  That is why I’m running a campaign to be on the Board of 
the BFW.  Now you know too.

Pam Barrett
PS – This is the longest email I have ever written.  My apologies!

_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies

Reply via email to