Hello all: By way of analogy, consider the possibility that I decide to seek re-election to the Dane County Board in this coming April's election, but decide to dispense with the process of getting on the ballot.
I would be able to communicate with the same voters, knowing the boundaries of the 11th district and having access to voter lists through the Clerk's office of the City of Madison and the Village of Shorewood Hills. I could publish campaign literature, and distribute it by mail or by human power. I could go door-to-door, and I could attend neighborhood forums. In essense, all I would lose would be that I would be inconveniencing those who wished to vote for me by requiring them to write my name. I don't suggest that this would be a rational decision on my part, or fair to the voters of the 11th district. However, I would know who the voters were, and be able to communicate with them. In the case of the Bike Fed, those controlling the process denied "dissident" candidates access to the ballot, and suggested they run as write-in candidates, although they had no access to membership rolls to determine to whom to communicate their campaign platform. Good luck! By way of analogy again, the Sierra Club is infested with a top-down mentality. However, in elections for the Board of Directors, there is a petition process for getting on the ballot if a candidate is not selected by the nominations committee. I thought that the Club had crossed a line when it included, with the ballot and statements by the candidates, a statement that there was an effort by outside forces to "take over" the Club. The expected result occurred, and the Soviet slate won overwhelmingly. Nonetheless, even in this extreme example, the dissident candidates had full access to the electoral process, were listed on the ballot, and their ballot statements were included with the ballot. Al Matano > I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all of you who voted for me. > > 76 votes really is a pretty good showing considering I didn't have access to the BFW membership as did the 5 candidates on the ballot. A fair number of people who were informed that there was a choice felt strongly enough to write-in candidates. Hopefully the board will realize that the BFW membership should be given the opportunity to vote for a variety of candidates and not just told who to vote for. > > BFW membership should be engaged and active participants in the effort to "make Wisconsin a better place to bicycle." > > Thanks again! > > Pam Barrett > > ---- Michael Rewey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There were a scattering of other write-ins. Most were only one vote. None had more than 2. > > > > Mike > > -- > > Michael Rewey > > Madison, WI > > cell 608.698.6673 > > home 608.249.6673 > > > > ---- Dar Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Oh...and Aaron and Joel were elected too...congrats! > > > -Dar > > > > > > Dar Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If this has already been posted, my apologies: > > > http://www.bfw.org/newsletters/BFWBoardofDirectorsElectionsResults.pdf > > > > > > Ken Bates, Eric Schramm, and Chick Veenstra have been re-elected to the BFW board. > > > > > > The following write-in candidates received the following votes: > > > Pam Barrett 76 votes > > > Tim Wong 50 votes > > > John Wagnitz 46 votes > > > > > > I do not know who else received write-in votes or how many, though I know that there were other write-in candidates who received votes. > > > -Dar > > _______________________________________________ > > Bikies mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
