Transplant Athlete Blog

Transplant Athlete

Saturday, August 11, 2007

Seeking Input For UMCA Election Procedures

I recently agreed to serve on a committee to...well, you'll see. So, read it, and share your thoughts.

UltraMarathon Cycling Association
Charge to Committee on Board Elections
August 10, 2007

Committee members: Joe Jamison, chair, Nick Gerlich, Nancy Guth, Chris Hopkinson, John Hughes, Russ Loomis, Lou Lamoureux

Purpose: To define an annual electoral process that produces Boards of Directors capable of and committed to providing strategic leadership for the UMCA for the next five to ten years.

Principles: 1) Continue the UMCA’s governance structure as a representative democracy.

2) Solicit input from UMCA members

3) Consult with Committee to Increase Voter Turnout on recommended changes.

4) Provide a level playing field for all stakeholders. In every election there are multiple stakeholders: the candidates, the current officers and directors, the chairs and other volunteers and the general membership. The electoral process defined by this committee should provide a level playing field for all of the stakeholders. For example, if an officer cannot endorse a candidate, then no one in the UMCA can endorse a candidate.

Tasks:

1) UMCA Strategy: Review and discuss UMCA’s strategy and relationship to the Board and electoral process. — Complete by August 19, 2007

2) Election Commissioner: Discuss the position of a neutral Election Commissioner to manage the election process. — Complete by August 19, 2007

3) Election Schedule: Review and discuss the election schedule in the Bylaws and consider amending the schedule. — Complete by August 26, 2007

4) Nomination Process: Review and discuss the nomination process per the Bylaws and the 2007 election and consider amending. — Complete by September 2, 2007

5) Campaigning: Review and discuss the campaigning process per the Bylaws and the 2007 election and consider amending. — Complete by September 9, 2007

6) Voting: Review and discuss the voting and ballot-counting process per the Bylaws and the 2007 election and consider amending. — Complete by September 16, 2007

¶ 2:50 PM

Email This Article

Comments:

I have many comments on this committee, its goals, etc. However, I'll start with the one that jumped out at me.

"The electoral process defined by this committee should provide a level playing field for all of the stakeholders. For example, if an officer cannot endorse a candidate, then no one in the UMCA can endorse a candidate."

Again, John Hughes' tortured logic rears its ugly head. To keep a level playing field, I do not see how the "for example" conclusion can be drawn. Officers hold a position of "privledge", that is why they should not be allowed to endorse candidates, it is a conflict of interest. Rank-and-file members endorsing candidates (assuming the endorsement is actually from them, and not clandestinely from one/more of the officiers...as was the case with the infamous "Lee Letter") risk no such conflict of interest. Saying that UMCA rank-and-file members can't endorse candidates would just be John Hughes' way of silencing disent! Plain and simple!

Second, if John Hughes really wants a level playing field, then the UMCA should prohibit incumbents from running! Running as an incumbent is a huge advantage over "first timer" candidates. After all, we all know that is why John Hughes delayed the last election --- so that he could appoint his supporters to the board to fill the vacant seats and his supporters could run as incumbents!

Mind you, I'm not actually advocating that incumbents not run. I am just pointing out "principles" outlined for this committee are not well thoughtout and appear to more of a smoke screen than anything else.

More comments to follow.

pvb

# posted by

Unknown : 8:28 AM