*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
jim gilmore wrote:
>
> *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
>
> Last week I replied to several members questions regarding the status
> of write-in votes in the recent MVPA elections. After my posting, I
> received a phone call from the MVPA president correcting my statement.
> According to him, it was neither the MVPA president nor the MVPA board that
> made the decision that the write-in votes were not to be counted. He
> stated that since the MVPA bylaws do not specifically ALLOW write-in votes
> they were then invalid and no decision was needed. I countered that since
> the bylaws do not specifically PROHIBIT write-in votes that they should be
> valid. A lengthy (and lively) discussion ensued and in the end we agreed to
> disagree on the subject. After his call, I sent a letter to my friend and
> MVPA board member Garrick Smith to get his input on the subject.
>
> >Garrick Smith wrote back:
> > Quote: The decision not to count the votes was not taken unilaterally
> by Lee. The Board concurred that write-in ballots would not be valid or
> counted. I do not agree that the By-laws do not specifically prohibit
> write-in votes. According to the By-laws, only qualified nominees approved
> by the Board can run for election. So if a name was written in and that
> name was not approved by the Board, then it was an invalid vote that was
> not to be counted. Remember on the ballots that had write-in votes, only
> the write-in name was not counted. If other names were marked on the
> ballot they were counted.
> >End quote.
>
> So, I stand corrected. It seems to be a case of "Catch 22". Even
> if a Candidate has all the qualifications required to run for the board,
> he/she must be "approved" by the current board to be put on the ballet. A
> qualified Candidate who is not "approved" by the board (they don't have to
> give a reason) can run on a write in campaign, however the write in votes
> will only be counted if they are for an "approved" Candidate.
> Of course if you were "approved", you would be on the ballot in the
> first place.............
>
> The sitting board has complete control over the decision of who the
> members will be "allowed" to vote for and the prospect of a "reform" slate
> of Candidates is an impossibility under the current bylaws.
>
> Perhaps some changes in the bylaws might be in order here to insure a
> fair and equitable nonination process and give the members the decision of
> who shall, and shall not, sit on the board..........
>
> Jim Gilmore MVPA # 5843
>
> Member Ist Michigan AOD Chapter MVPA
> Great Lakes Chapter MVPA
> Ohio Motor Pool Chapter MVPA
> Red Ball Chapter MVPA
> Ontario Military Vehicle Association
> Midwest Military Vehicle Assocation
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> 2656 Wiethoff, Inkster, Mi. 48141
> 313-561-8826 voice 313-730-1652 fax
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@uller.skylee.com>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@uller.skylee.com>
> Send administrative queries to <mil-veh-request@uller.skylee.com>
Jim, this is exactly what I've been addressing earlier when I got a
similar call from Pres HOLLAND. We, too, had to agree to disagree about
a nmuber of things. But it certainly seems, especially since THREE
members of the Board are MVPA employees and thus owe their job security
to the Board, that the whole process is "stacked" to keep any outsiders
away.
I am writing a letter proposing some By-Laws changes since that is what
Pres HOLLAND suggested. We already know what will happen with THAT
letter but at least I can then later say I followed protocal before I
proceed to rabble rouse....
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 21 2000 - 18:15:15 PST