Saturday, October 11, 2014
IS ONE-VOTE-PER-UNIT A GOOD IDEA?
A lot of the folk in the Village think “one vote per unit” would be a good idea, and that the UCO bylaws should be changed to include this. Some apparently think it would not be a good idea. Some of us, myself included, don’t exactly know what those favoring one-vote-per-unit MEAN by it. One vote per unit is clear enough, but one vote about what? Who gets to be UCO president? Who gets elected as an officer—and if so, what officers? All of them or only some? Would it extend to electing Executive Board members? Might it extend to voting on certain important ISSUES?
I’d like to get clear on this much first. Then, in the light of how far one-vote-per-unit applies, consider whether it’s a good idea.
If we do think it’s a good idea, then we need to think through the mechanics of administering one-vote-per-unit. Would it be workable? Can unit owners vote by mail? What controls would be needed? Would we need professional help? How expensive would this be?
Of course our one-vote-per-unit would have its parallel in the oft-cited suggestion of voting for US president (and vice president?) by popular vote. Many people favor such a change, but the founding fathers thought it wise to give the states more than zero say in this decision. They also questioned whether the average voter was sufficiently informed and possessed of good judgment to make a wise choice, and provided an “out” through the Electoral College. This would seem to parallel the question for us: Are unit owners (as contrasted with delegates) too out of touch with UCO operations to vote sensibly? Or, thanks perhaps to improved communications, are our owners now better educated in Village affairs?
Seems to me there is a lot to consider. I hope we don’t rush to judgment on this, but give it time to be thoroughly discussed. That takes time in a large group such as ours. Maybe the blog would be a good forum for hashing this out?