This Is our Village

Sunday, March 5, 2017

UCO ELECTION GRAND TOTAL TALLY SHEET - MARCH 3, 2017

-
Dave Israel
-

Posted by at

5 comments:

  1. Lanny HoweMarch 3, 2017 at 6:32 PM

    Can you explain why 12 names are highlighted for Executive Board when our instructions were to vote for only 10 (changed from 12 originally)?

    ReplyDelete
  2. UCO PresidentMarch 3, 2017 at 8:21 PM

    Hi Lanny,
    Certainly,
    two members of the EB passed. Both had a full year to serve on their term. These EB members were Jerry Karpf, and Ken Davis. According to our Bylaws, those two positions are to be filled by the 11th. and 12th. highest vote getter.

    When Stewart Richland is sworn in as VP, on Installation day, he will, according to our Bylaws, resign from the EB, and yet another slot must be filled.

    Dave Israel

    ReplyDelete
  3. Lanny HoweMarch 4, 2017 at 12:40 AM

    Hi Dave,
    Let me preface the following by saying I am not writing about this because of WHO WON the 11th and 12th positions on the Executive Board. They have my congratulations.

    I don't mean to be picayune, and of course the rules are the rules, but I don’t see why the procedure we were told to follow makes sense. Jerry Karpf and Ken Davis had passed before the election, so according to what you say it was a forgone conclusion the 11th and 12th top vote-getters would take their places. Yet as voters we had no say in who numbers 11 and 12 would be UNLESS one or more of the 10 we voted for didn't make the top ten. That seems a strange and unfair way to operate. Hypothesizing to make the point, assume that everyone voted for the same top ten. There would then BE no 11th or 12th, so what then? Would the UCO president then appoint the 11th and 12th? If so, that would be an entirely different means of their selection being forced upon us simply because we all voted for the same ten.

    Looked at another way, if all of us EXCEPT one person voted for the top 10, that one individual could wield enormous power in being able to dictate who among, say, six remaining contenders nos. 11 and 12 would be! I can imagine those who voted for the top 10 being REAL angry about this if they had preferred others among the remaining six.

    It seems the intent of the rule was to have our votes IN THE AGGREGATE count for selection of the 11th and 12th, but NOT OUR INDIVIDUAL VOTES! Am I not seeing this right, or is this something the Advisory Board should look at in recommending bylaw changes? (If your head should be spinning like mine right now, maybe Richard Handelsman could help us out with this!)

    ReplyDelete
  4. PlcruiseMarch 4, 2017 at 11:34 AM

    At least the worst of the worst did not make it in... again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UCO PresidentMarch 4, 2017 at 3:46 PM

      Hi Peter,
      Yes, I am once again pleased that the Delegates voted in my recommended slate. Reasonable people who do not sue, disrupt and attempt to ruin good projects for the Village.

      Dave Israel

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)