05-15-2018, 08:09 AM
Would our present Board balk at their participation? That would really be a WOW!
It's likely that the majority board would "balk" at this idea. They don't usually accept advice or suggestions from ANYONE. Their mantra for EVERYONE and EVERYTHING is, "you're just advisory, we make the final decisions". Most professional and bright people would understand that doesn't apply in every case when there's a conflict of interest issue at play...hence the Nominating Committee or the Bylaw Committee being a MEMBERSHIP committee NOT a BOARD committee. In fact they voted at the April board meeting to spend more of our $$$$ in hopes the attorney will tell them they have 100% control over ALL committees when our bylaws say the membership has authority over membership committees.
Voting to put Crelly on the Dist 6 ballot ILLEGALLY was worth it to them so they spent more of OUR money to accommodate that agenda and caused more mayhem and errors in the election process. If Crelly prevails, the membership could vote at the June membership meeting to have an investigation done by a membership committee formed at that meeting. Or Dist 6 could do a recall.
There are members who've already come forward wanting to be ballot count observers. The board has controlled who the observers are very tightly for the past 2 yrs. The Nominating Committee has already been advised that Nanawale can only accommodate 3 people. Why 3, not 4 or 5? The problem isn't in the observing per se, it's in what happens to the ballot count after it's been completed until the board announces it at the June board meeting....where's the control that the numbers won't change in between? Can the observers see the final ballot count in real time, perhaps photograph it? Some say yes.
And then add to it the issue of people in other districts getting ballots they shouldn't have gotten... if they're unaware and voting, that's extra numbers in the count. This mess could've been avoided had the board NOT meddled in the elections. The Nominating Committee was supposed to be the checks and balances FOR the members in the election, and when the board took that away, they took away our right to have a clean election. There are also candidates who are concerned about their rights to run in a clean election.
The Nominating Committee has already voiced their ethical opinion to the board that the GM should NOT be a ballot count observer for what would be the 3rd year in a row. He's an employee and his job is to focus on our roads, not meddle in membership business. If there's strict numbers on how many can observe, it should be members observing, NOT an employee on our dime.
It's likely that the majority board would "balk" at this idea. They don't usually accept advice or suggestions from ANYONE. Their mantra for EVERYONE and EVERYTHING is, "you're just advisory, we make the final decisions". Most professional and bright people would understand that doesn't apply in every case when there's a conflict of interest issue at play...hence the Nominating Committee or the Bylaw Committee being a MEMBERSHIP committee NOT a BOARD committee. In fact they voted at the April board meeting to spend more of our $$$$ in hopes the attorney will tell them they have 100% control over ALL committees when our bylaws say the membership has authority over membership committees.
Voting to put Crelly on the Dist 6 ballot ILLEGALLY was worth it to them so they spent more of OUR money to accommodate that agenda and caused more mayhem and errors in the election process. If Crelly prevails, the membership could vote at the June membership meeting to have an investigation done by a membership committee formed at that meeting. Or Dist 6 could do a recall.
There are members who've already come forward wanting to be ballot count observers. The board has controlled who the observers are very tightly for the past 2 yrs. The Nominating Committee has already been advised that Nanawale can only accommodate 3 people. Why 3, not 4 or 5? The problem isn't in the observing per se, it's in what happens to the ballot count after it's been completed until the board announces it at the June board meeting....where's the control that the numbers won't change in between? Can the observers see the final ballot count in real time, perhaps photograph it? Some say yes.
And then add to it the issue of people in other districts getting ballots they shouldn't have gotten... if they're unaware and voting, that's extra numbers in the count. This mess could've been avoided had the board NOT meddled in the elections. The Nominating Committee was supposed to be the checks and balances FOR the members in the election, and when the board took that away, they took away our right to have a clean election. There are also candidates who are concerned about their rights to run in a clean election.
The Nominating Committee has already voiced their ethical opinion to the board that the GM should NOT be a ballot count observer for what would be the 3rd year in a row. He's an employee and his job is to focus on our roads, not meddle in membership business. If there's strict numbers on how many can observe, it should be members observing, NOT an employee on our dime.