[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::dcu

Title:	DCU
Notice:	1996 BoD Election results in 1004
Moderator:	CPEEDY::BRADLEY

Created:	Sat Feb 07 1987
Last Modified:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	1041
Total number of notes:	18759

619.0. "1993 DCU BoD Election Discussion" by CVG::THOMPSON (Radical Centralist) Tue Oct 27 1992 12:37

    I was thinking we could have a separate note to discuss the 1993
    election and leave 618 for information - official and otherwise.

    I wonder if the last election hasn't changed things forever? Not
    just the current incumbents but the whole process. I expect Lisa
    to big a broad base for the nominating committee. I also pretty
    much expect that if a whole bunch of people want to run we'll see more
    names on the ballot than we might have in the past. I expect that
    if people want to run by petition that process has also become easier.
    If only because there are a lot of activists who will be willing to
    get signatures. More so than there were. People do not seem to have
    lost any interest in being involved.

    I also wonder if there will be campaigning going on. There wasn't 
    much before last year but I suspect that lots of people are looking
    for more than just what they get with their ballot. And they also
    want more time to study the candidates and ask questions. This would
    be a change from the way "it used to be."

    In the mean time, perhaps some of the current board can give us a
    snap shot of what's involved in being on the board. In terms of time
    taken, how important (or not) it is to be able to stop by HQ and how
    often, and other things that we may not be aware of. Last time people
    just wanted to change things. This time maybe they can decide based
    on their time and energy level and not just emotion. (Not that emotion
    alone is why anybody ran).

    		Alfred

    PS: I expect that when a nominating committee is named we'll learn
    about it here.

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
619.1		TOMK::KRUPINSKI	Repeal the 16th Amendment!	`Tue Oct 27 1992 12:51`	20
	Hopefully, the BOD won't make the same mistake of putting Chuck on the NC. No offense Chuck, but the CEO has no place on the BOD NC. I'll also go out on a limb, and say that I expect that there won't be any petition candidate this time around. Because the NC will place on the ballot, not only those candidates that the NC feels are "best qualified", but all of those candidates that the NC feels are qualified. One last point - the RC "reformers" currently have only a one vote majority on the Board, and based on some of the positions taken by some of them, one might call into question their commitment to the RC pledges. I have seen little, if anything to show that the non-RC Directors are committed to reform. Will Paul be standing for re-election? Are any of the candidates who missed last time around plan to run this time? Tom_K
619.2		AOSG::GILLETT	Bernoulli rules!	`Fri Oct 30 1992 08:58`	22
	re: .1 > Hopefully, the BOD won't make the same mistake of putting > Chuck on the NC. No offense Chuck, but the CEO has no > place on the BOD NC. I agree with you 100%. The nominating committee should consist of credit union members and DCU employees (not DCU top management). > One last point - the RC "reformers" currently have only a > one vote majority on the Board, and based on some of the > positions taken by some of them, one might call into question > their commitment to the RC pledges. I have seen little, > if anything to show that the non-RC Directors are committed > to reform. Will Paul be standing for re-election? Are any > of the candidates who missed last time around plan to > run this time? Well, I was one of the candidates who "missed last time around." I'm planning to call DCU Monday morning to request the application package. Guess it's safe to say I'm throwing my hat in the ring. ./chris
619.3		PATE::MACNEAL	ruck `n' roll	`Fri Oct 30 1992 10:57`	3
	I think it's a good idea to have Chuck interviewing BoD candidates and offering opinions on their qualifications. I've always welcomed the opportunity to be on the interview loop for potential "bosses".
619.4		COOKIE::EGGERS	Anybody can fly with an engine.	`Fri Oct 30 1992 13:31`	2
	Fine. Chuck can interview and offer opinions. He just can't have a nominating committee vote.
619.5		COMET::PERCIVAL	I'm the NRA, USPSA/IPSC, NROI-RO	`Fri Oct 30 1992 13:39`	9
	Could someone post just which two seats are "open" (as noted in the announcement). Are these two unamed (as far as I can tell) BOD members running for re-election? Thanks, Jim
619.6		CVG::THOMPSON	Radical Centralist	`Fri Oct 30 1992 13:48`	4
	As I recall the two one year spots were one by Tom Mceachin and Paul Kinzelman. I don't know if either is planning on running again. Alfred
619.7		COMET::PERCIVAL	I'm the NRA, USPSA/IPSC, NROI-RO	`Mon Nov 02 1992 12:50`	8
	<<< Note 619.6 by CVG::THOMPSON "Radical Centralist" >>> > As I recall the two one year spots were one by Tom Mceachin and Paul > Kinzelman. Thanks. Jim
619.8		TOMK::KRUPINSKI	A dark morning in America	`Tue Nov 24 1992 16:41`	5
	So, who is on the Nominating Committee this year? And more importantly, who is running? Tom_K
619.9		TOMK::KRUPINSKI	Slave of Congress	`Tue Jan 19 1993 12:39`	9
	How many people applied for candidacy? Of these, how many were accepted to be place on the ballot, how many were not selected, and how many withdrew? Hope these questions get a better response than the deafening silence my question in -.1 received. Tom_K
619.10		CVG::THOMPSON	Radical Centralist	`Tue Jan 19 1993 13:42`	8
	> Hope these questions get a better response than the deafening > silence my question in -.1 received. Answered more or less in 4.5 which was a Board Communication to the membership. Of course my request (630.1) for more information about the people on the committee wasn't answered anywhere I can find. Alfred
619.11	All 5	ESBLAB::KINZELMAN	Paul dtn223-2605	`Tue Jan 19 1993 16:24`	4
	Sorry, things have been a bit busy... My understanding is that all (5) who applied to the nomination committee were approved and will be on the ballot.
619.12		GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ		`Tue Jan 19 1993 17:25`	8
	RE: .10 Alfred, the people on the Nominating Comm. were selected by Lisa Demauro-Ross, Chairperson of the Board. She could probably tell you more about the people on the committee. Or of course, you could always send them mail yourself. Let us know what you hear.
619.13		PATE::MACNEAL	ruck `n' roll	`Wed Jan 20 1993 10:20`	5
	� Alfred, the people on the Nominating Comm. were selected by Lisa � Demauro-Ross, Chairperson of the Board. Wasn't this practice viewed as a big conflict of interest during the last elections?
619.14		CVG::THOMPSON	Radical Centralist	`Wed Jan 20 1993 10:42`	25
	>� Alfred, the people on the Nominating Comm. were selected by Lisa >� Demauro-Ross, Chairperson of the Board. > > Wasn't this practice viewed as a big conflict of interest during the > last elections? What was viewed as a conflict of interest what appointing the President of the CU to the Nominating Committee. The Chairperson appointing the Nominating committee is standard practice in most organizations. I don't see it as a big problem. Especially in years where the Chairperson is not up for re-election. RE: Asking Lisa about the members of the committee. I thought about it but didn't for a number of reasons. One is that I didn't have a lot of time at that time. Second, is that I trust her. I was mostly curious. I asked the question in notes in the first place mainly to get a public answer for those who don't know her. Even though I was disappointed that all the committee were in management I didn't have, what I considered to be, valid reasons not to trust Lisa's judgment. If I had I would have followed up. Based on the outcome, ie 5 of 5 getting nominated, I still don't have any reason to be suspicious of her choices. Alfred