Forums: Archive: 2013-2015 USPA BOD Elections:
USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count!

 


3331  (D 3331)

Apr 14, 2011, 3:34 PM
Post #1 of 21 (2349 views)
Shortcut
USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! Can't Post

Within the next week, all eligible USPA members with valid e-mail addresses on file at USPA will be sent an e-mail requesting their participation in a proxy effort to make several changes to the way USPA currently runs elections for its board of directors.

At the USPA Board of Directors meeting this past February, the board voted to conduct a proxy effort that, if successful, will result in two changes to USPAís election process: 1) extending future terms of board members from two to three years; and 2) eliminating the need for non-incumbent regional director candidates to obtain signatures of 10 percent of the members in their region before they can appear on a ballot.

Details and instructions to cast your vote online will accompany the e-mail. For members who do not receive this e-mail, there will be information and a proxy on the USPA website and in the May issue of Parachutist. Properly executed paper proxies can be faxed or e-mailed to USPA.


Premier NWFlyer  (D 29960)

Apr 14, 2011, 6:15 PM
Post #2 of 21 (2321 views)
Shortcut
Re: [3331] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
and 2) eliminating the need for non-incumbent regional director candidates to obtain signatures of 10 percent of the members in their region before they can appear on a ballot.

This one is huge ... I think it would contribute to turnover in the Regional Director ranks as gives non-incumbents a sporting chance (especially in the larger regions where the 10% number for signatures is a pretty high threshold).


3331  (D 3331)

Apr 15, 2011, 3:34 PM
Post #3 of 21 (2274 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NWFlyer] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

Getting rid of the 10% signature requirement has been a long time coming. For decades Regional Directors have been staying on the BOD way too long.

Just say NO to extending the term from 2 years to 3. The attached picture says it all.
Attachments: For USPA BOD..jpg (79.4 KB)


riggerpaul  (D 28098)

Apr 16, 2011, 7:26 AM
Post #4 of 21 (2246 views)
Shortcut
Re: [3331] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Within the next week, all eligible USPA members with valid e-mail addresses on file at USPA will be sent an e-mail requesting their participation in a proxy effort to make several changes to the way USPA currently runs elections for its board of directors.

At the USPA Board of Directors meeting this past February, the board voted to conduct a proxy effort that, if successful, will result in two changes to USPAís election process: 1) extending future terms of board members from two to three years; and 2) eliminating the need for non-incumbent regional director candidates to obtain signatures of 10 percent of the members in their region before they can appear on a ballot.

Details and instructions to cast your vote online will accompany the e-mail. For members who do not receive this e-mail, there will be information and a proxy on the USPA website and in the May issue of Parachutist. Properly executed paper proxies can be faxed or e-mailed to USPA.

I don't understand why this is called a "proxy effort". Is it really a proxy situation?

If we can all vote online, aren't we directly casting our own votes?

My understanding of a "proxy effort" is that voters grant the privilege to exercise their vote to another person, the proxy, and that person casts the vote as he sees fit.

If we are really employing a proxy system here, why is that? Shouldn't we all be casting our own votes now?


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Apr 17, 2011, 1:29 PM
Post #5 of 21 (2222 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi paul,

Quote:
If we can all vote online, aren't we directly casting our own votes?

Something is wrong in River City. Shocked

I'm with you; I will never give a proxy of mine to anyone. IMO the whole idea of electronic voting was to get people to vote.

So let'm vote! Angelic

JerryBaumchen


riggerpaul  (D 28098)

Apr 18, 2011, 1:51 PM
Post #6 of 21 (2189 views)
Shortcut
Re: [3331] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

Can you tell me who to contact at USPA HQ so I can learn why this is a proxy matter?


SkydiveJack  (D 6486)

Apr 18, 2011, 4:26 PM
Post #7 of 21 (2177 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

Paul, as I understand it, changes to the USPA Constitution and By-Laws such as these require the approval of a majority of the membership. Proxy votes submitted by the membership in this manner are the normal way to go about this. Proxy forms are standard fare in other associations I am a member of, associations such as AOPA and EAA. I am glad to see that the USPA BOD has finally gotten off its ass and started using proxies. And you are only giving your proxy for these specific issues. Keep in mind that the BOD doesnít need your proxy or approval for all the regular business they conduct and approve. So relax about proxy votes. Itís a good thing, standard procedure for Constitution and By-Law changes such as these and itís no big deal.


The proposal to eliminate the requirement for non-incumbent Regional Director Candidates to obtain signatures from 10% of the members in their region is pretty much a no brainer. The membership has been wanting this change for decades. I hope everyone takes the time to approve this change. This proposal has been too long in coming.

However, the proposal to change the term of a BOD member from 2 years to 3 years is not something that I seem to recall being on the wish list of the membership in general. So it seems to be something on the Board of Directors wish list. I would appreciate some BOD members explaining the reason or reasons why this issue has come up for a proxy approval by the membership to change the USPA Constitution. How will this benefit our association?


riggerpaul  (D 28098)

Apr 18, 2011, 10:31 PM
Post #8 of 21 (2160 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SkydiveJack] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Paul, as I understand it, changes to the USPA Constitution and By-Laws such as these require the approval of a majority of the membership. Proxy votes submitted by the membership in this manner are the normal way to go about this. Proxy forms are standard fare in other associations I am a member of, associations such as AOPA and EAA. I am glad to see that the USPA BOD has finally gotten off its ass and started using proxies. And you are only giving your proxy for these specific issues. Keep in mind that the BOD doesnít need your proxy or approval for all the regular business they conduct and approve. So relax about proxy votes. Itís a good thing, standard procedure for Constitution and By-Law changes such as these and itís no big deal.


The proposal to eliminate the requirement for non-incumbent Regional Director Candidates to obtain signatures from 10% of the members in their region is pretty much a no brainer. The membership has been wanting this change for decades. I hope everyone takes the time to approve this change. This proposal has been too long in coming.

However, the proposal to change the term of a BOD member from 2 years to 3 years is not something that I seem to recall being on the wish list of the membership in general. So it seems to be something on the Board of Directors wish list. I would appreciate some BOD members explaining the reason or reasons why this issue has come up for a proxy approval by the membership to change the USPA Constitution. How will this benefit our association?


By your own admission, the question of the change from 2 to 3 years is not something the membership requested.

And yet, we are being asked to accept it on a proxy vote.

We recently accepted online voting. It is perfect to obtain a true count of the membership choice in any matter.

Proxy voting would seem to me not to be needed anymore.


SkydiveJack  (D 6486)

Apr 19, 2011, 7:57 AM
Post #9 of 21 (2146 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

By your own admission, the question of the change from 2 to 3 years is not something the membership requested.

And yet, we are being asked to accept it on a proxy vote.

We recently accepted online voting. It is perfect to obtain a true count of the membership choice in any matter.

Proxy voting would seem to me not to be needed anymore.
Well, first of all I am not admitting something; I am stating my opinion about the proposal. I am a member like you, not a BOD member.

We are not being asked to accept these proposals by a proxy vote. We are being asked to approve or reject these proposals by a proxy vote. If you look at the ballot you have the option to vote yes or no separately for each proposal. You proxy vote is only for these two issues, nothing else.

When we recently accepted online voting it was done by a proxy vote. You had the option to accept or reject the online voting proposal. And note that the proxies given by members for that issue are not, and can not, be used for these two new issues. Before USPA used the proxy procedure the only way to make a change to the Constitution and By-Laws was through a quorum of (I believe) 10% of the membership who had to be present at an annual membership meeting which is always held at the regular BOD meetings. So there would have to be over 3000 members present to make these changes. I donít think there has ever been even 1% of the membership at a meeting.

Proxy voting is the formal title given to the mechanism used by Robertís Rules (the governing rules and procedures for many association and company BOD business). A proxy is a power of attorney given by one person to another to vote in his stead. Since most members will not be present at the upcoming General Membership Meeting this allows their voice to be heard and a quorum to be reached. A proxy vote is needed because it is the normal, established procedure used in lieu of having 3000+ USPA members present in order to make a change to the Constitution and By-Laws.


MakeItHappen

Apr 19, 2011, 8:11 AM
Post #10 of 21 (2141 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SkydiveJack] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If you look at the ballot you have the option to vote yes or no separately for each proposal. You proxy vote is only for these two issues, nothing else.

Have you received an email directing you to the ballot thing?

.


SkydiveJack  (D 6486)

Apr 19, 2011, 8:35 AM
Post #11 of 21 (2144 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
If you look at the ballot you have the option to vote yes or no separately for each proposal. You proxy vote is only for these two issues, nothing else.

Have you received an email directing you to the ballot thing?

.

No I haven't received an e-mail from USPA yet. But I did find the ballot on the USPA website. This is the link where you can download and print out the ballot to either mail or fax to USPA HQ.

http://www.uspa.org/...Proxy%20Download.pdf

Do you have any input for us on the proposal to change a term from 2 to 3 years?


riggerpaul  (D 28098)

Apr 19, 2011, 9:11 AM
Post #12 of 21 (2139 views)
Shortcut
Re: [3331] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

Now I am really confused.

I just went to the Governance Manual (dated July 2010) to see what it says about these things.

Regarding amendment of the Constitution and By-Laws, I found that a 2/3 majority of the BOD present at a meeting is required to change the Constitution or By-Laws.

I found, in Article IX of the By-Laws -
A two-thirds majority of the Bod present may approve
any amendment to these By-Laws except sections
referring to size, composition, and election of the
USPA Board of directors.
I could not find anything more about the exception noted in Article IX, which I have underlined above.

I went to Section 3 of the Governance Manual, titled "Elections".

Section 3-1.2 of the Governance Manual, titled "Nominations & Elections", and in paragraph "A" I found -
Amendments to this section require a two-thirds
majority vote of the board members present at a full
meeting of the board.
There's no exception here, and again, changes are accomplished by the BOD, not a membership vote.

So, I don't understand why we need a membership vote for this at all.

Can someone find/explain the requirement for a membership vote on these changes?
Can someone find/explain anything more about the exception that I underlined in Article IX?

If we don't actually need a membership vote, it seems that it would be a waste of time and money to have one.

Thanks!

ETA - PS MakeItHappen - you are good at this stuff. Maybe you can explain it?


(This post was edited by riggerpaul on Apr 19, 2011, 9:27 AM)


MakeItHappen

Apr 19, 2011, 9:25 AM
Post #13 of 21 (2134 views)
Shortcut
Re: [SkydiveJack] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Do you have any input for us on the proposal to change a term from 2 to 3 years?

Quote:
Proposal 1: To change the by-laws to specify a three-year term for all board members, effective
with the board seated at the winter 2013 meeting.

PRO:
The most beneficial reason for this proposal is that it reduces the cost of elections that USPA members bear.
(After I get a reply from HQ, I'll post info on what the actual costs are.)
Another reason for this is that new board members are able to 'figure out how the system works' and become more effective over 6 meetings as opposed to only 4 meetings.

CON:
The most often cited reason against this is because members 'want to throw the bums out' sooner rather than later.
But if you look at the tenure of many BOD members, turnover really does not happen that often and the same people get re-elected.
Another drawback is that someone that does get elected may not fully understand the amount of work involved and want out before their term is up. This is a minor and infrequent issue.

My recommendation is to vote YES on this proposal.

Quote:
Proposal 2: To change the by-laws to eliminate the requirement for non-incumbent regional
director candidates to submit a petition signed by at least 10 percent of the members in their region.

PRO:
The task of obtaining signatures from 10% of the membership in your region is fraught with obstacles.
- members have to be USPA members as of June 1 of the election year. If a RD candidate gets a signature from someone that became a member in Aug of the election year that would not count as a valid signature.
- members may end up signing a petition when they do not live in the region the candidate is running for. That would be another invalid signature.
- the disparity of the population of each region makes it more difficult to get on the ballot in the regions with a greater population
- an incumbent RD does not have to obtain signatures to get on the ballot. This makes the 'getting on the ballot' part decidedly in favor of incumbents.

There is also a cost savings by eliminating the petitions. No one at HQ has to read the petition signatures and check whether or not the signature is valid.

Eliminating the signatures would put the non incumbent RD candidates at a equal position (hoops, hurdles whatever) that the incumbent RD candidates and ND candidates (incumbent or not) have. Anyone that wishes to get on the ballot would do the same thing: send in a letter of intent, fill out the form, send in a picture and $50.00.

CON:
The most often cited objection to this proposal is that there could be a plethora of candidates running in each region.
This perspective may be ameliorated by realizing that when the 22 candidate limit on ND candidates was lifted, there was not a bizillon candidates running for ND.

My recommendation is to vote YES on this proposal.

.


(This post was edited by MakeItHappen on Apr 19, 2011, 9:27 AM)


MakeItHappen

Apr 19, 2011, 9:39 AM
Post #14 of 21 (2126 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
-
A two-thirds majority of the Bod present may approve
any amendment to these By-Laws except sections
referring to size, composition, and election of the
USPA Board of directors.


The two proposals are directly related to the 'election of the USPA Board of Directors'.
It requires a 2/3 affirmative vote from the membership. The BOD cannot make these changes.

In reply to:
Section 3-1.2 of the Governance Manual, titled "Nominations & Elections", and in paragraph "A" I found -
Amendments to this section require a two-thirds
majority vote of the board members present at a full
meeting of the board.
There's no exception here, and again, changes are accomplished by the BOD, not a membership vote.

Section 3 changes can be made by the BOD, provided that previous notice is given and there is a 2/3 majority.
But the Constitution and Bylaws take precedence over standing rules (the rest of the Gov. Man).
So the parts of Sec 3 that deal with "size, composition, and election of the USPA Board of directors" must have a vote of the membership.

.


sundevil777  (D License)

Apr 20, 2011, 2:55 PM
Post #15 of 21 (2071 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
If you look at the ballot you have the option to vote yes or no separately for each proposal. You proxy vote is only for these two issues, nothing else.

Have you received an email directing you to the ballot thing?

.

I got the email today. It was very easy to vote, well done.


EDYDO  (D 1521)

Apr 21, 2011, 2:40 AM
Post #16 of 21 (2039 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

Actually a number of members of the board were opposed to the three year term proxy. It was not because they opposed the three year term, but because of how members may perceive it. The request to the membership for proxies is primarily a cost saving issue. USPA will save 1/3 of election costs. You will likely have pretty much the same group of board members either way.

One case that can be made for approving the 3 year term is that that presently a board has 4 meetings over the two year term. The first meeting is primarily organizational. The second, work begins, the third is where things happen and the fourth is closing up shop. There is little to no continuity from board to board. Having 3 years would give the board time to actually get something done.

We have no choice concerning direct votes vs proxy votes, that is written into the Constitution and By-Laws. Jan has it right, see her posts.


riggerpaul  (D 28098)

Apr 21, 2011, 5:46 AM
Post #17 of 21 (2028 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EDYDO] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Actually a number of members of the board were opposed to the three year term proxy. It was not because they opposed the three year term, but because of how members may perceive it. The request to the membership for proxies is primarily a cost saving issue. USPA will save 1/3 of election costs. You will likely have pretty much the same group of board members either way.

One case that can be made for approving the 3 year term is that that presently a board has 4 meetings over the two year term. The first meeting is primarily organizational. The second, work begins, the third is where things happen and the fourth is closing up shop. There is little to no continuity from board to board. Having 3 years would give the board time to actually get something done.

We have no choice concerning direct votes vs proxy votes, that is written into the Constitution and By-Laws. Jan has it right, see her posts.

I have looked and looked at the Governance manual (July 2010), and while I found the exception in Article IX, I never found anything that said how to act when the exception is triggered.

I am happy to be wrong on this. Just please tell me where to find it.

I searched the document for "two-thirds", "2/3", "two thirds" and anything else I could think of, and I didn't find the rule you and Jan mention.

Is the rule explicitly in there somewhere I did not find?

If it is not explicitly in the Governance Manual, is there some other document that has the rule?

I am okay with doing it this way if it is required. Right now I only worry that the rule isn't actually in there, perhaps having been inadvertently deleted some time in the past, and needs to be added.


EDYDO  (D 1521)

Apr 21, 2011, 6:12 AM
Post #18 of 21 (2022 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

As Jan has stated, Article IX A1 is the controlling document. It specifically calls for a "meeting". As far as I know, there is nothing anywhere that allows for members to vote without a "meeting", other than election of the board.

Article II gives information about those meetings, including the 10% requirement. It further states, "Regular members are entitled to vote either in person or by proxy at the meeting." This is where the proxy requirement is found.

It may not be the best system, but it is indeed our system. I am in favor of the 3 year term and somewhat on the fence concerning the petition requirement for Regionl Directors.


MakeItHappen

Apr 21, 2011, 6:30 AM
Post #19 of 21 (2019 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

I searched the document for "two-thirds", "2/3", "two thirds" and anything else I could think of, and I didn't find the rule you and Jan mention.

This rule comes from the parliamentary procedures adopted by USPA, which is Robert's Rules of Order.

.


Premier faulknerwn  (D 17441)
Moderator
May 6, 2011, 7:33 AM
Post #20 of 21 (1876 views)
Shortcut
Re: [3331] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

Is there any way to get another electronic ballot email? I never received one (though had no problem voting in the previous election electronically).

W


Premier PhreeZone  (D License)
Moderator
May 6, 2011, 8:57 AM
Post #21 of 21 (1867 views)
Shortcut
Re: [faulknerwn] USPA Proxy Effort Coming Up! Make Your Vote Count! [In reply to] Can't Post

Email the USPA and they can resend on to you.



Forums : Archive : 2013-2015 USPA BOD Elections

 


Search for (options)