No hijack - change of election date discussed here

[imsqueak]

So that we don't hi-jack the meeting thread, lets discuss a proposed change to our constitution here.

Point is, we are supposed to elect new officers so that the new officers would take office in June. Problem is, the summer is our "slow time" for participation. Another problem is it coincides with membership dues so it would be possible that someone would vote and not want to pay club dues the for the next year. Why should someone vote for officers if they wont be a member for the year which their vote counts? We'd like to change the date. What date should we change it to? My suggestion is the month after school starts back - but that just a suggestion and we welcome more suggestions.

What about Art's suggestion to reward officers by letting them skip the following year's dues? That may give someone the little extra motivation to serve on the BOD. It wouldn't have been a consideration for me to volunteer, but the gesture would have been appreciated.

And anything/everything else you want to discuss or suggest...

 

[ct_vol]

I think the president should get a bamboo cane for corporal punishment of anyone getting out of line...

Any date is fine by me for elections... Well, any date except now...

 

[imsqueak]

That was a major contribution to the discussion. Thanks for that.. shows that we cant afford to loose you as our PR person.:dance:

 

[EvilMel]

Well here's another useful contribution...I don't care when the elections are. They are usually held in May while everyone is in good standing and the terms start in June so the new officers can handle all the new membership forms and whatnot. The comment about summer being a slow time is correct, but the problem with that is that it's the people who keep going to the meetings during the summer that we want to be in charge of the club anyways. People who only come during the winter months aren't going to be very effective as leaders. But seriously...I don't think it matters either friggin' way when the elections are, so if you guys want to change it...change it. Fine with me!

 

[cee]

Since I was a proponent of all that is on the table, I'm all for it. I believe giving the BOD positions to "partial participants" is good, although Mel brings up good points. However, perhaps as a member of the BOD they would be more inclined to attend more meetings. Problem is, I can probably count the long-term active people on one hand, and I don't see that changing anytime soon without some new blood, and that may be like trying to get blood out of turnips

Dave