Print

[Wheel Interested]

Taken from the IP Jerry Larson's letter of January 31, 2009

"Nominees nominated by the Nominating Committee
(Who are the Member’s representatives) screen and
evaluate the qualifications of each potential candidate
who followed the approved Member’s procedures in
the WBCCI Constitution."


"ARTICLE XIII - NOMINATING COMMITTEE of
the WBCCI CONSTITUTION (Page 7) is copied here
for your convenience and reference.
Sec. 1 The Nominating Committee shall consist of
three (3) members, the Chairman of which shall be
elected by the Board of Trustees at their first meeting.
The other two members shall be elected by the Delegates
at the annual Delegate's meeting."

So the IBT nominates the "members' representatives" to then nominate the members' representatives and now the un-nominated representatives from the members are getting in the way of this very skewed procedure?  Is that about it?  How can the other two nominees be elected by the delgates when the IBT only sends out their recommendations and instructions to the unit presidents to vote for their nominated choices without mentioning that others are running and could be voted for, as they did last year, and obstructs mission statements from volunteers to be published in members news publication the BB and removes statements from region web sites?

To balance the weight of power and give power to the delegates would seem to me to preclude the IBT telling the delegates which members to vote for.  That "courtesy" report that is a custom and not in the constitution is against the intent of the constitution and impedes the clubs free elections and prejudices heavily upon the current board's acceptance or private election and thereby in fact votes in all three members to the nominating committee who in turn continue the personal selection of power upward.

[Pahaska]

At my little protest meeting at the last rally, Jim Haddaway brought up an interesting point.  Nominating Committee members can nominate themselves.  Then, since our election process borders on the criminal, they are virtually assured of being elected.  In other words, they are a self-perpetuating cartel.  Of course, I am preaching to the choir.

We just received our written ballot.  I voted for Tom Collier, Myron Fischer, McKelvay, and Leo.  The other positions, I left blank,  Given the ballot I received, it was the only statement I could make as there is no option to vote against.  Several others in my unit are voting identically. 

[65GT]

I'm curious -- did my name appear on your ballot, or did you need to write it in?

I'm doing a bit of research on this, but it looks like I just found my first unit where Unit Leadership basically made the decision for their members, that there were no real choices for them to make.

They did not share my candidacy statements, or pages with their members.  They didn't even put my name on their ballot, but they were oh so gracious enough to leave a 'write-in' line.  I had sent that information to their entire unit leadership about a month ago, and their ballots just came out, hiding the truth in choice from their membership.

So, how are members supposed to seek changes in this club, when their own feckless unit leadership would intentionally hide the choices each and every member has?  Why, just follow the obstructionist and protectionist actions and stances taken by our IP, for he is solely responsible for this.

Blocking from-the-floor candidates from our long standing 'established custom' that allowed them to appear in the April Blue Beret.  Follow-up that by trying to intimidate those running from the floor by instituting a $390 charge for that same page, and then, when challenged by the candidate to pay for that page, balk and disallow the paid-for-page anyway.  The IP blinked, and lost in the process.

Or maybe you could just propaganda your way into making members believe from-the-floor candidates aren't sincere in their challenge against inept leadership?  You could throw things out there that may in fact not even be true.  Lead the membership to believe that some from-the-floor candidates would not serve this club if elected.

Hey BOYZ -- if you're looking for some more think-like, act-like, look-like protectionist, obstructionist leadership types, you know, the ones that could continue the 30+ year annual tradition of failing membership numbers, and continue on with our brand new 'established custom' of annual operating losses, I'm compiling a list for you.  You should be able to get this membership down to 2500 in no time at all, with this special pool of talent to draw from.

It's bad enough when you've got protectionist and obstructionist leaders at the top -- it's even worse when local leadership can't see the forest for the trees.  Those who would completely disrespect the rights of their own membership, their supposed friends, to CHOOSE FREELY...

Hey, sorry John -- but some things need to be put out there, and we can see clearly how the IP's actions have set the stage for all of this to happen at the local level.  If it happens at just one single unit, then it's our IP that is ultimately responsible for his failure to accurately represent the situation at hand.  I'm very happy that all of these events will ultimately be tagged to this administration.  Deserving, and fitting.  Flushing yet another administration, come this June...

Anyone up for a game of Pin the Tail on the Donkey?  I'm thinking we could get in a round or two in Madison...

[Pahaska]

The only names on our ballot were the "nominating committee blessed" names.  There were two write-in lines with provision for a name and a position.  What more could you expect from the Haddaways?

The situation should change next year and the year after, but we're stuck for this year with a couple in charge that stood up in our business meeting last year and told everyone that "bad persons" (paraphrasing) were trying to take over the club by taking over the nominating committee.  JH repeated that in my little meeting a couple of weeks ago, but it definitely fell on deaf ears that time.

[Bob280]

And another pillar of the Club falls, rightly so. Funny how that same person accused me of negative campaigning (in reference to my three strikes message whuch had nothing to do with the election). Well now one can see who is at the forefront of election  skulduggery, just another PIP.

Where has honor and ethics gone to?   

Time to bring the skeletons our of the closet. Watch for further developments. Time to send out the e-mails.

On this day, the Titanic sunk after hitting a little iceburg. Well the cartel has hit a big one.

[65GT]

Honor, ethics, and then add fairness, openness, and accountability.  Oh, let's not forget the little things like the TRUTH.

Pay no attention to our ~$43,000.00 being flushed on EC7 reimbursements.  Pay no attention to the $17K in officer reimbursements for a meaningless mid-winter gala.  The show will go on, down to the very last member, and the very last dime...

[Pahaska]

I sent this to my THLU member list:

The ballot that was mailed out has a line where you can write in a candidate running from the floor, but it fails to identify the persons that are running from the floor.  In past years, those running from the floor were given a page in the Blue Beret.  This year, that privilege was withdrawn unless the candidate paid  for the space.  As a result, members have not been fully informed of their choices.

The candidate running from the floor this year is Leo Garvey of the New York Unit who is running for a position on the Nominating Committee.

It may do some good.  I expect to catch hell when some folks wake up this morning.

[65GT]

Hell?  You're going to catch hell for doing what the Unit Leadership should have done in the first place.  If I were a member of your unit and discovered this morning that a ballot was sent to me without declaring who in fact was running for office, the first thing I'd be doing is transferring to another unit.

Who are these pompous asses that would keep pertinent information away from their own membership?  Are these supposed to be friends of your fellow members?  Thanks for nothing to that brand of leadership and friendship.

Some people are concerned about 'bad people' trying to take over the nominating committee - the club should be outraged that 'bad people' have been running this club into the ground over the last 30+ years, and I've got news for you -- our leadership hasn't gotten any better -- it's gotten worse!

[65GT]

Is there some top-down coaching going on here?

I've just witnessed another unit going forward, without mention that I have declared my candidacy for International Nominating Committee, and even though leaders in every single unit in this club have received that information, this would be the third, in just as many days, that has decided to not share that information with their membership, and to simply pretend my candidacy does not exist.

Is it even conceivable that unit leaders would, on their own, completely ignore that information, and instead send out mail ballots to their membership, leaving them completely devoid that there is another candidate that they can vote for?  Or is the 'ol BOYZ network at play here?

This is the very last year this BS is going to happen.  Feckless leaders cowering, that their little hierarchy, their little apple cart, could be overturned by somebody that will ask the hard questions.  Members expect more than mere travel and good times from their leadership, on our dime.  You should all be outraged that our dues goes to support this BS.

The clock is ticking BOYZ and YOUR time is running out...

[Mud Dog]

This is the very last year this bullshit is going to happen. 

Not to be cynical, but what do you expect to change next year that's going to make this assertion come true?

[65GT]

It's out with Daryl Ewles at the moment, but hopefully will be at a unit near you.   Caution -- the wording below is tentative until I hear back from Daryl.

By first renumbering the current section 4 as section 5, and renumbering the current section 5 as section 6, we create a brand new section 4 in the Nominating Committee section of the WBCCI Constitution, Page 7, Article XIII, that would read, “Any Unit President may nominate any Regular Member, for any International Office position, by submitting such nomination in writing, to headquarters by February 15th of each year.  Written consent from that nominated member must accompany the nomination.”

If you follow the Nominating Committee section, once a member is declared a nominee, sections 4 and 5 assure that member receives equal treatment.  If units pass this, all nominees will be treated equally, because whether they come from the Nominating Committee, or a Unit President, they will all be nominees.  It will required 2/3rds of units to pass, but I think enough is enough, don't you?

I mean, how many more years can this club afford the type of leaders that have brought this club to this sad state of affairs?

[Pahaska]

You ought to put that in in two forms.  In one, substitute "Region" for "Unit".  One or both versions should surely pass and they are not incompatible.  The "Region" version surely has a high probability of success.

I have been mulling an amendment that replaces the Nominating Committee with three Region Presidents drawn by lot.  If a drawn Region President can't serve or does not wish to serve, a replacement would be drawn.  That would certainly bring the nominating process closer to the members and break the cartel that we have now.

[Bob280]

Ok, there is another way which it is recommended that all pay attention too:

Amend the WBCCI Constitution to:

1. Change the number of Regions to six.
2. Delete Region officers and replace them with a Region Director. (A provision could be added that, if the Director is unable to do his/her duties, they can be replaced by a vote of the unit presidents of that region.
3. Reduce the International Vice Presidents to one.
4. Change the election process so that the members elect the Region Directors and they in turn elect the International President and Vice President among themselves.

By doing the above many problems are solved. First, every member would have a vote as to who is region director is. Second those elected directors would elect two of themselves to be the president and VP. Thus the membership plays a direct role in the elections and politics and eletist groups go out the door.

All of this can be accomplished by section 1 of the Amendments Article.

[size=14pt] ;HEY VIRIGINA, CHANGES ARE ACOMING, YES SIR REE CHANGES ARE A'COMING - HURAH HURAY[/size] [/size]

[66Overlander]

Bob & Leo,
   I think I've seen both of you endorse an idea where the Region Presidents (Representatives) select/elect the International President and mere members don't get a vote.  I don't see how you two would ever endorse taking choice away from the membership.  Even if you were relatively sure you would have confidence in who was selected/elected for your Region Prez, you cannot be sure who would come out of other Regions and then your hands would be tied to have any effect on who is International President.  Sometimes the Region President is selected by the "whoever agrees to run" process.  In that case, you don't have much control in who you get.

This is a BAD idea to take a choice that is currently up to the membership and put it in the hands of only 6 to 12 people.  The key is to improve the Nomination Process so that the membership has multiple Candidates to choose from that are running on issues and vision.

I could NEVER vote FOR the idea to have Region Presidents select the International President.

P.S.  In a recent Michigan Unit Newswletter, there was a story that talked about the "good old days" when candidates running for International Office would personally visit the Michigan Unit (which was 1800 members large at the time!) to campaign for office.  This proves that once upon a time, International offices were "competitive", not "hand picked".

OK, going back under my rock now.

[Wheel Interested]

Not me Joe, I see sense in the idea.  Interjecting new blood into the office and breaking up the existing machine, I would support!  I think any candidate wanting now to be in office and outside of the automatic march up would be a vast improvement merely on the basis that he or she would not be in collusion with the others for the special interests of the international club and their eletist and self serving status quo initiatives. I believe just infiltrating and dilluting the pool and lock jaw hold would mean positive change.  Real members for real leadership! 

I suppose this is putting the cart before the horse but isn't the idea for nominations and the unit delegates still to bring forth the members' votes?  Just the thought of many newcomers running for all offices and their statements and campaigning taking place all over WBCCI would be a breath of life and invigorate the club, then once into office change not stifled by existing coalitions and obstructionist tactics and personal agendas of the way we were might just move the club ahead at rapid speed! 

New officers will not be obligated or tempted to support the others as is the case of these lifelong friends that the club is now all about.  Remember, they split no hairs and came right out and campaigned that the WBCCI is all about friends and not about being an Airstream club.  Time to give these people their overdue retirement.