Board Candidates Positions

[kip055]

I got my August Journal today. Another good issue that I know I will enjoy and probably learn a few thing from. But I think that it is incumbent on the candidates for the board of directors to ASAP post their position on the behavior of the current administration in the recent messy dismissal of the Executive Director. How they view the events of the recent past would be a factor in my, and I suspect many members, decision on who to vote (or not vote) for.

Kip Powers
Member No 111 (damn, am I old!)

 

[dbonertz]

Kip,

I have stayed away from the whole debate about Mary and the boards action. I must say that I hope the candidates don't reveal at all where they stand on the debate. It really has no bearing on what they view the AAW can become or what they would like to offer the AAW. I hope this issue does not become a Democrat/Republican type campaign. In other words I hope our members don't start voting for a candidate because they are Pro Mag or Pro Board like our government elections are Pro Democrat are Pro Republican. Just my two cents.

Dale

 

[john lucas]

Several months ago when I asked if there was a better way to get to know the candidates. One suggestion was to simply call or e-mail the person. At this particular time as was stated above it would probably not be a good idea to post their stance on this forum due to the nature of the ongoing problem. I certainly understand what you are saying about needing to know more about the person.

 

[Stuart Johnson]

Going Forward

I don't know if their stand on the current trouble is as important as how they feel the rift can be healed. Whatever will happen will happen at the meeting but the AAW will not end in August. As members we need to know how they see the future and how they can help us get there. If we don't like their idea of the future or their plans we can try to influence the direction by casting our votes for those who have a vision similar to ours.

I think we have all seen it is time to take an interest in the candidates.

 

[Ken Fitzgerald]

I fail to see how anyone can reasonably argue that not knowing how each candidate stands on this recent issue isn't germane prior to the election.


Regardless of which side of the fence you stand on this recent issue, unless you have some personal inside information, you would, in fact, be an ignorant voter voting for any of the candidates.

Ignorance means someone isn't knowledgeable....not that they are stupid.

This recent issue was of such a great importance that the current BOD called a special election to stop the clamor.

So......regardless of which side of the fence you are on......you deserve to have the knowledge to make an informed vote.

 

[Mark Mandell]

Where any individual candidate may "stand" with respect to the particulars of the Mary Lacer issue is not, in my view, germane to their candidacy for two primary reasons.

1. The issue will be mooted either by settlement or the results of the Special Meeting on 8/28. Demanding that the candidates "take sides" at this point really only tends to polarize members further, and may serve to obscure proper consideration of each person's strengths for Board membership.

2. After the election there will, to one extent or another, be a new Board in place, and hence a new dynamic for problem solving. There may also be amended By-Laws and internal rule changes which might change the way such matters are handled. Any answer by a candidate at this point in time might well not apply after the election if a similar situation were to arise "on their watch" under a different set of rules.

I'd suggest that if questions are asked of the candidates, that they be channeled to the future of the AAW and their view, ideas, and plans for growing and improving the Association in material ways.

 

[jaxman]

Here we go again!

 

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Mark,

I won't post again on this subject or this thread again... but............

I would suggest since the future of the AAW is impacted by the BOD and the future BOD to be elected shortly, it is the right of the voters to know how the current candidates stand on this issue before casting their votes.

Unless someone has something to hide or a hidden agenda, why should the voters be kept in the dark?

 

[Steve Worcester]

Here we go again!

Oh no we don't.

The subject of the current Mary Lacer and BOD issue is off topic and currently not allowed. All of those posts will be deleted without warning.

 

[Owen Lowe]

Mark,

I won't post again on this subject or this thread again... but............

I would suggest since the future of the AAW is impacted by the BOD and the future BOD to be elected shortly, it is the right of the voters to know how the current candidates stand on this issue before casting their votes.

Unless someone has something to hide or a hidden agenda, why should the voters be kept in the dark?

The only answer I could respect from a non-incumbent candidate would be:

"I am unable to give a definitive answer. I wasn't there during the lead up to termination nor was I in the room during the vote. Any agree or disagree answer without first-hand knowledge within the context of the situation would only be reckless speculation."

 

[Garmar]

I am most concerned about how each candidate views the AAW as a "corporation"; how they see the future of the AAW in respect to direction or focus of the organization; and what type of governing should/must be persued. I for one feel that with the present BOD's the focus/direction was not properly or orderly conducted or discussed with the membership as a whole. Each candidate should be honest and clear about their positions. Given those/my criteria I don't see how a candidate could avoid addressing the current issue(s).

 

[Mark Mandell]

Mark,

I won't post again on this subject or this thread again... but............

I would suggest since the future of the AAW is impacted by the BOD and the future BOD to be elected shortly, it is the right of the voters to know how the current candidates stand on this issue before casting their votes.

Unless someone has something to hide or a hidden agenda, why should the voters be kept in the dark?

Ken,
Don't misunderstand me, you, and everyone else are free to ask these folks anything you want. I'm not trying to cut off discourse. Merely noting that any answer you get right now might not be worth much in a "bottom line" sense.

Now after the August meeting, your questions might very well have more value to voting members. I haven't spoken to any of the candidates or anyone else on the subject so I wouldn't be in any position to judge whether anyone's "hiding" anything.

Does that translate?

 

[Dave Roller]

I'll be voting for board members whom I think are focused on the future of the AAW, not on this recent debacle. Somehow we have to get all this behind us.

 

[KellyDunn]

It has been stated that very few of the 13,000 members of the AAW vote in any given election. I was the one who stated call or email the person running for office and try to get to know them better. Each election I get emails and calls asking who they should vote for. Why? Because I tend to know many running for office and have an opinion. Not on how good of a board member they might be. No One knows that. Even the person running. But what i know of their character. And folks I do not know I can offer nothing as I also do not know any more than what they write. But most people dont care. They want to stand at the lathe and be fed info about turning. Not politics. So if you want to know a person better you yourself have to make the effort.

 

[nicktodd]

It would not be fair to ask the candidates to state where they stand on the July 21st issues. It may make it difficult to deal with the sitting BOD. I would be surprised if some of them don't withdraw

 

[Mark Pruitt]

The only answer I could respect from a non-incumbent candidate would be:

"I am unable to give a definitive answer. I wasn't there during the lead up to termination nor was I in the room during the vote. Any agree or disagree answer without first-hand knowledge within the context of the situation would only be reckless speculation."

A very well thought-out and intelligent answer. Thank you Owen. We truly need to rise above the immaturity shown in emotion-driven knee-jerk responses that lift things out of context.

 

[George Guadiane]

I don't know if their stand on the current trouble is as important as how they feel the rift can be healed. Whatever will happen will happen at the meeting but the AAW will not end in August. As members we need to know how they see the future and how they can help us get there. If we don't like their idea of the future or their plans we can try to influence the direction by casting our votes for those who have a vision similar to ours.

I think we have all seen it is time to take an interest in the candidates.

Your point should not be overlooked Stuart,
In spite of my (STRONG) personal feelings, the more important thing now is to know how they would govern going forward, how they would take us through the healing process and into our next iteration as an organization.
Especially in light of the recent development suggesting resolve and closure between the sitting BoD and Mary.

 

[Royce Wallace]

AAW future

Careful reading of the BOD canidate statements clearly shows how careful the selection/vetting process has been done by the BOD. I am informed that John Ellis has withdrawn--unverified. If you wonder about the future direction of AAW--pay attention! The August issue if full of evidence. What I label the pro/art group is in full control--they have successfully seized full control of AAW--us little guys/hobby types ----?
AAW is now to be a "big" corporation where anything goes politically. The high moral, honest, open and ethical grounds I expect are moot/not important. Ethics committee? Forget it. Meaningful amendment of the bylaws?Forget it.
Settlement is welcome news, of course. We just don't honestly know if any lesson has been learned by those involved. It would seem not.

 

[Betty Scarpino]

Careful reading of the BOD canidate statements clearly shows how careful the selection/vetting process has been done by the BOD. I am informed that John Ellis has withdrawn--unverified. If you wonder about the future direction of AAW--pay attention! The August issue if full of evidence. What I label the pro/art group is in full control--they have successfully seized full control of AAW--us little guys/hobby types ----?
AAW is now to be a "big" corporation where anything goes politically. The high moral, honest, open and ethical grounds I expect are moot/not important. Ethics committee? Forget it. Meaningful amendment of the bylaws?Forget it.
Settlement is welcome news, of course. We just don't honestly know if any lesson has been learned by those involved. It would seem not.

An email from Tom Wirsing this morning stated that John Ellis has withdrawn his candidacy. A statement will be posted to the AAW website (or maybe already has been posted?)

The AAW bylaws, Article 10, state:

The Journal shall be a chronicle of issues and events related to
the traditional and contemporary art and craft of woodturning. The
Journal shall include commentary, reviews of techniques and
designs, advertising, and a broad range of articles associated with
woodturning technique and design.

I take the bylaws seriously, so I have actually expanded content to include woodturners who have a variety of interests in woodturning (from "traditional to contemporary"). My background includes teaching beginners and writing a column on woodturning techniques for three years for Woodworkers Journal. I have a degree in industrial arts -- qualified to teach shop class. I also have my woodturned work in many museums. So, I will continue to include in the journal, "a broad range of articles associated with woodturning technique and design."

It is my firm belief that there is room for everyone in this organization and within the pages of the journal. My intention is to be inclusive of everyone's interest within the pages of American Woodturner.

I actually find this issue of inclusiveness quite fascinating, perhaps because I sincerely believe that the AAW can include everyone under its umbrella in a way that will help us all succeed and have fun with our woodturning endeavors.


Betty Scarpino, Editor, American Woodturner, member since 1986

 

[Curtis Thompson]

Goals and Vision

This is an excerpt from Tom Wirsing's article in the latest Journal titled "Looking Ahead: A New Future" .

Task # 4

“AAW is not in crises, but changes are needed to support the organization’s growth beyond the founding member’s initial goals and visionsâ€.

What changes beyond those original goals is he talking about?

Curtis Thompson

 

[wnnelson]

This is an excerpt from Tom Wirsing's article in the latest Journal titled "Looking Ahead: A New Future" .

Quote:
Task # 4

“AAW is not in crises, but changes are needed to support the organization’s growth beyond the founding member’s initial goals and visionsâ€.

What changes beyond those original goals is he talking about?

Curtis Thompson

Was not the vision of the founders to promote woodturning with the goal of growth of the AAW? How could these ideas be changed for the good of the AAW, and why do we need to go beyond them?

"To infinity and beyond" Buzz Lightyear

 

[KellyDunn]

Royce, I am a founding member of two AAW chapters. What is an ongoing thing with new turners showing up is basics. So our chapter demos try to focus on that. Again and again. And I tend to be the one standing at the lathe. and its very nice when others do so. So this boy is thrilled when a more artistic turner shows up in one of our paid demos. And disappointed if the skill level is out there enough that few show up and not enough interest is there to fill a hands on class. Those tend to be folks who do lots of carving or embelishment. I hope that is changing as Jacque Vesery filled the place when he was here not long back. The journal is now online so all back issues can be seen at anytime. But my point being the local level is where most of the nuts and bolts of basic everything to do with turning should take place. But the symposiums across the world will have basic to Avant-garde out there concepts. If you are tired of seeing a person show you how to make clean cuts with a gouge do not come to one of my classes.

 

[hockenbery]

Royce,

You seem to have a lot to offer.

Consider writing an article for the journal?
AAW members write the articles for the Journal

consider applying to be a candidate for director?
AAW members volunteer to run for the board.

I'm not sure where you are coming from with the "pro/art" comment.
Most Board members have been turning long enough to get somewhat good at it. Very few make their living from woodturning.

What has always been the strength of the AAW is the mix of skills of members from beginner to expert and the breadth of work done by members.

The professional and artistic members of AAW are an important part.
These are the folks we want to see demonstrate at the symposium.
They tend to write some good how to articles.

Hobbyists write many of the journal articles and get quite a few demonstrator spots in the symposium.
AAW has a whole lot more hobbyists than professionals.
AAW also has folks who do no turning at all they just appreciate turning.

regards
Al

 

[Erik Hebert]

Nevermind, not worth the waste of energy.

 

[Royce Wallace]

Task 2

Betty, Al, I really don't disagree with most of your comments--what I do disagree with is what I consider an under-representation of the average "little" guy member. Others above have made quite valid points/observations.
I do not desire to point to certain activities, or, individuals as "outside" of woodturning areas, or beyound woodturning inspiration.
However, certain "enhanced" items primarily display other crafts, or skills, which are clearly outside the limits of woodturning. I am not trying to detract from the quality, or beauty, of those pieces. I am contending that AAW is not the place to promote, or advocate, sculpting, painting, metal work, etc. Those crafts had best be learned else where. If the new AAW identity is to depart from the basic subject of woodturning, expanding into other crafts advocacy/teaching, it will overload, I believe.
Quite correct that the "novice" is served/taught at the local chapter level. I often am in charge of the "novice" lathe. Be that as it may, much can be learned by reading--The Jim Echter article is a good teaching article, touching on the basics--some of which we all need reminding of. AAW can best serve its membership by directing its energies toward the local chapters and regional symposiums, (in a number of ways beyound the EOG program), I believe.
Al, I desire to contribute to the extent I am welcome-right now I sense my recent activity has resulted in a certain type of question in the powers that be concerning my "political" qualifications. So, I have tried to use this forum to provoke just this type of dialogue, with the hope it will be productive/instructive--see page 6, Aug. issue American Woodturner, Task 2.

 

[rjones]

If the bod selects the candidates, we know were the candidates stand

 

[davidwalser]

If the bod selects the candidates, we know were the candidates stand

That would be true IF the board selects the candidates. It doesn't (the nominating committee reviews the applications of those who wish to run for the board). Therefore, there is no truth in your statement.

 

[Ed Davidson]

If the bod selects the candidates, we know were the candidates stand

Rather than cast a shadow on the integrity of people you probably don’t know, why don’t you work for positive change by trying to influence the Bylaws review committee, addressing your underlying concerns...

 

[Russ Fairfield]

rjones,

No you don't know that to be true. Assuming you know all about a candidate just because they are a candidate is taking the cowards way out of the election. Read their introductions and send them questions via e-mail. You might be surprized.

 

[davidwalser]

...
I do not desire to point to certain activities, or, individuals as "outside" of woodturning areas, or beyound woodturning inspiration.
However, certain "enhanced" items primarily display other crafts, or skills, which are clearly outside the limits of woodturning. I am not trying to detract from the quality, or beauty, of those pieces. I am contending that AAW is not the place to promote, or advocate, sculpting, painting, metal work, etc. Those crafts had best be learned else where. If the new AAW identity is to depart from the basic subject of woodturning, expanding into other crafts advocacy/teaching, it will overload, I believe.
...

Royce,

Please allow me to try to drill down a little deeper so I can get a better handle on where you're coming from.

• The current issue of the journal's cover article is about the Making of Kilkea. It's clearly an "art piece" as opposed to something utilitarian. However, virtually all the work was done on the lathe with very little non-lathe embellishments. Is this kind of thing too far out there for the journal and the AAW?
• John Jordan is well known for his hollow forms. Most of his work involves a significant amount of carving. Is this type of work too far out there for the journal and the AAW?
• Malcolm Tibbetts does some mind-blowing work. I suspect most of his time in the shop is spent someplace other than the lathe (as is true for most segmented turned items). Much of Malcolm's current work involves cutting up turned items and reassembling them into shapes that simply could not be turned on the lathe. Is this type of work too far out there for the journal and the AAW?

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you or anyone else. I've already said elsewhere that a lot of the "artsy" things are not my bag. I wouldn't turn many of them if I had the time and talent to do so. I'm just trying to understand where you, Royce (or anyone else who'd like to chime in), would draw the line. Personally, I would draw the line at those items that clearly came from the lathe -- that whatever embellishments that were done didn't destroy the character of the item as a turning. I just don't know how to define that concept such that it's understandable to anyone but me. All the items discussed in the three bullet points above fall well within where I'd draw the line. I think we'd be a poorer association without the likes of Malcolm Tibbetts, John Jordan, and Brendan Stemp.

 

[Betty Scarpino]

Betty, Al, I really don't disagree with most of your comments--what I do disagree with is what I consider an under-representation of the average "little" guy member. Others above have made quite valid points/observations.
. . . .
So, I have tried to use this forum to provoke just this type of dialogue, with the hope it will be productive/instructive--see page 6, Aug. issue American Woodturner, Task 2.

Royce,
I actually don't view anyone as a "little guy member" as far as the journal is concerned. One of my goals as editor is to use language that is not hierarchal or judgmental or divisive. So, not only do I try to offer a balance of articles, within those articles I try to keep the language such that its inclusive of everyone. Additionally, I have opened up authorship to a wider variety of AAW members than previously was happening.

I'm not sure what you read into Task 2 on page 6 that is disturbing to you, although I (painfully) understand that whatever is written can be interpreted a zillion different ways, most of which were not originally intended -- universal meaning is always a challenge to achieve (and rarely is achieved -- George is a testimony to that! ). So, for me, what I read from Task 2 is simply that the new ED won't have much of a previous job description to go by. I will grant you that I could see where saying that the new ED will not rely on the ways of the past might be interpreted to mean that the future of the AAW won't even include the friendliness from the past. (In other words, get rid of everything from the past.) I think that even if the new ED tried to "professionalize" the AAW in a way that was totally different from what it has been, he or she would not last long. I'm fairly certain that the AAW (and woodturning in general) will remain open, welcoming, and friendly to anyone who is like-minded.

What I can say for sure is that the journal will remain inclusive of everyone's interest in woodturning, as long as I'm editor, anyway.

Betty Scarpino, editor, AW

 

[Royce Wallace]

Betty, I refer to the last full sentence of Task 2 as an invitation with the phrase "Drawing on your feedback, instead,....." I realize the meaning of the sentence is to look forward, not back--Being a history major, I respect the past as a major influence concerning the right decisions as one goes forward, even if the path followed is viewed as a new begining. Simply stated I suggest a reordering of priorities toward supporting chapters and average members. The August issue is fairly balanced, Betty, sorry if I led you to believe I though otherwise.
David, the various 'high end' turnings such as the Kilkea are clearly woodturning projects. Segmented activity is mostly design, table or chop saw activity which in the end is finished by turning. I have done plenty of that, even taught the basics on occasion. If he wood turned shape is not right, even segmented products will fail to attract. Turned and reconstructed pieces, such as the last piece of Malcolms' work diplayed on the AAW site, still retain their woodturned character, convoluted they may be, but the natural beauty of the material remains.
I thought I had make it clear that air bush, painting, metal working, carving, etc., are not part of the woodturning craft. Most often those other craft applications to a piece started on the lathe, in the end, are the feature attraction--as opposed to a woodturning piece such as Kilkea.
AAW can provide so much to its members beyound that which has been provided in the past. Suggestion input from the members can lead the way, if only they are encouraged to speak up and are listened to. Personally, I believe the professional/artist types should hold their own without funding by AAW members, or any othe type of AAW support. Bit sorry about that.

 

[Betty Scarpino]

AAW can provide so much to its members beyound that which has been provided in the past. Suggestion input from the members can lead the way, if only they are encouraged to speak up and are listened to. Personally, I believe the professional/artist types should hold their own without funding by AAW members, or any othe type of AAW support. Bit sorry about that.

I can certainly agree with you that the AAW can provide so much more to its members beyond what has been provided in the past! Board member, Jean LeGwin's, efforts at getting the back issues of the journal onto AAW's website this year is an example of things to come.

Another example is the local chapters' involvement (or lack thereof) in the chapter collaborative challenge at each year's symposium. Participation in that event has sadly dwindled. At the Hartford symposium, however, the entries for this event were placed front and center by Board member, Dale Larson, so that they would get a wider viewing (and that move was successful). Additionally, there will be a significant article in the October issue about how the winning chapter came to make their entry. It's a compelling story.

As for the professionals/artists. They are part of the AAW, too, and in fact, that's the group who started the organization. They don't take funds away from the AAW, rather their donations to the EOG auction raise thousands of dollars for grants -- grants that primarily go to local chapters and regular individuals. Binh Pho donates his pieces outright because he's a Board member. Bonnie Klein and Jacques Vesery's collaborative pieces have raised thousands of dollars. The POP committee raises its own money to fund its grants and to award prizes at the Instant Gallery. They do so through their own exhibit and auction. And anyone who wants to can join the POP. Having the professionals involved enriches the mix.

I hope you do speak up, Royce, with specific interests and needs by sending an email to the proper Board representative, so that your concerns can be heard. And I mean that, most sincerely.

Betty Scarpino, editor, AW

 

[George Clark]

That would be true IF the board selects the candidates. It doesn't (the nominating committee reviews the applications of those who wish to run for the board). Therefore, there is no truth in your statement.

David,

Sometimes you remind me of the proverbial Christmas goose. I suggest you review the bylaws, sections 5.18(b)i and 5.18(d)iiii.

The board selects the nominating committee and then reviews the selections from the nominating committee. There is no way, under the current bylaws, that a candidate not approved by the current board can run for a position on a future board.

George Clark
0032620

 

[Marvin Hasenak]

David,

Sometimes you remind me of the proverbial Christmas goose. I suggest you review the bylaws, sections 5.18(b)i and 5.18(d)iiii.

The board selects the nominating committee and then reviews the selections from the nominating committee. There is no way, under the current bylaws, that a candidate not approved by the current board can run for a position on a future board.

George Clark
0032620

Bingo, we have a winner! Thank you very much for that excellent explanation of why some bylaws need to be changed.

 

[Joe Fleming]

I'm not a historian of the AAW, but I will reflect on my rather short tenure (11 years). I think we have to view the AAW with an evolving sense of the craft and art, and the people who participate in it.

I started turning at about the same time as Andi Wolfe, Molly Winton, Art Liestman and Mike Jackofsky. All of these people have worked diligently to define, improve and refine their work with the intent to make a partial or total living doing art pieces that are partly or wholly turned on the lathe. I believe their motivations were not the money, however, but the thrill of accomplishment and the pride of success. In other words, they enjoy it. I purchased early pieces from some of these peopleand I really like to see how they have evolved over time.

Others, like Christian Burchard, Michael Holasuk and Michael Petersen have evolved from woodturning to wood art with little or no turning. I have a couple of their turned pieces too.

What I find interesting about all of these people and what they do is that they established their roots in woodturning, and then explored from there. I think all of their stories and efforts are worth a woodturner's time to read, view and learn because they add a richness to what we do that would be absent without them.

I also think that the AAW needs to nourish these people too, because if we "cut them off", we risk cutting off links to our history, we lose their teaching and coaching, and we lose linkage to other craft media that can inspire us and improve our work.

I think if we try too hard to box what we do into a distinct craft technique, we risk losing a great deal of inspiration. I would rather have an AAW tent that is more inclusive than less.

Having said all that, I have to be honest to say that, initially, I was not happy with the change in Journal editors back a few years ago. The previous editor, Carl Voss, was a friend of mine and I liked what he was doing with the Journal. I also have to be honest and say that I like what the Journal has become and where it seems to be going. I give that credit to Betty Scarpino. It offers a lot to all levels or accomplishment, skill, and technique.

I also think, as someone else said on the forum here, that we need to view the journal as a piece of the woodturning experience in which members can participate. Included in the total AAW package is the Journal, AAW member services, local chapters, and regional/national symposia. If the AAW can focus on creating a multi-layer experience for our members, then each layer contributes in both overlapping and distinct ways providing the widest range of education, information and camaraderie. The AAW has to attempt to provide what members need AND it has to attempt to get members to give back with time and talent to enrich others' experiences.

Time for me to think about how to do just that. I've been "sitting on the sidelines" for a couple of years. Time for me to get back into the game

 

[Owen Lowe]

I suggest you review the bylaws, sections 5.18(b)i and 5.18(d)iiii.

The board selects the nominating committee and then reviews the selections from the nominating committee. There is no way, under the current bylaws, that a candidate not approved by the current board can run for a position on a future board.

George Clark
0032620

I disagree with part of what you say. The board does not approve or disapprove of the candidates.

(d) Candidate Application Procedures

• i. Prepare a statement of intent, including qualifications and reasons for applying.
• ii. Submit two letters of recommendation from individuals who can affirm the candidate’s organizational and leadership abilities.
• iii. The candidate’s statement of intent and letters of recommendation shall be received by the principle office of the AAW no later than May 1st of the year of the election.
• iiii. The Executive Director will give the list of candidate names to the Board of Directors, who will review the candidates' credentials and qualifications before passing the list of candidates to the Chair of the Nominating Committee.

As I read the section, the board is to ensure those interested, are in fact, eligible candidates by meeting the requirements and then passing the names to the nominating committee. I might argue that this seems to be micro-managing the nominating chair, but there doesn't appear to be any culling of applicants other than to state to the nominating committee that they meet or do not meet the basic requirements.

What's more, there is nothing in the bylaws about the board taking any role in the process (either approving or disapproving of a candidate) after the nominating committee has selected the pool.

As to your first point of the board selecting the nominating committee, it appears to be set up that way. However, instead of jumping to conspiracy accusations, I challenge myself to wonder why it is structured as such. If I can come up with reasons then I can more clearly assess the merits of the control. Can you think of sensible reasons as to why it was done that way?

(e) Election Schedule

• ii. Each member of the Nominating Committee will interview each candidate and the committee will then select two candidates for each open position and provide candidates with guidelines.

On a separate note, there have been comments that we should have a whole bunch of choices to vote for. The sub-section above limits the number of candidates to 2 for each open spot; normally 3 spots per year.

 

[Russ Fairfield]

Getting more candidates will be a problem because the AAW has always had a problem getting the candidates they have every year. How could they ever get more of them?

There has also been a continuing problem with Directors quitting before serving the full term they were elected for. Some quit because the job takes more time and personal cost than they were willing to give, others quit to take an opportunity that was offered because they were a director, and others quit because of their health and personal problems.

 

[Royce Wallace]

I hope the readership of this tread is wide. The discussion is exactly what I was hoping for.
Betty you touched on contribution by the pros for the EOG grant. I have heard some things about that which cause me concern. Like many things one hears, verification is important. The touchstone is your comment Ben Pho contributes outright, implying others may not. If the latter do not and part of the auction proceeds are paid to them without public disclosure at the beginning of the auction--a problem exists--serious problem. In any event do not assume my comments directed toward the pros is to depreciate their contributions in years past, or, into the future. Rather it is an attempt to increase AAW focus on chapter successes, idividual hobby member successes, mentoring successes (you have done that), continuing encouragement for the beginner/novice.
I believe the pro/art type is able to make their own way while the lesser of us struggle to find our way in the world of woodturning. The former do not need help--the latter do. We can do more for the average AAW member, I suggest. The collective wisdom of AAW membership is awesome, we just need to tap it.
Insofar as selecting members willing to serve on the BOD, I am suspect that is not much different than searcing out chapter leaders. I do believe proper amendments of the bylaws would make the task easier. That subject, however, has been directed away from this forum, I believe.

 

[Steve Worcester]

Nevermind, not worth the waste of energy.

Well then sit back and accept whatever has or will happen. Your choice is to sit on the sidelines or get into the game. And I hate sports references, but it is very applicable here.