🚀 go-pugleaf

As a regular member and a member of past and present conference
committees, it just seems to me that the board and Mr. Gallinger should
learn to live with the fact that his vision is different than that of
the current board. Having said this, perhaps it would be best for CIPS
in general if all parties learn to live with the current decisions, Mr
Gallinger can seek election as National President next year, and the
board can get on with the business of running CIPS. If this issue ends
up causing CIPS to break apart, then it must be a very frigile society
indeed.

Jody Burgess
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olson, Mark [SMTP:olsonm@cadvision.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 23 February, 1999 2:19 PM
> To:   CIPS-L@LISTSERV.UNB.CA
> Subject:      Fwd: Board incumbents letter (was: Resent mail....)
>
> -- [ From: Mark Olson * EMC.Ver #3.0 ] --
>
> To all:
>
> To take the other position on this issue, I would suggest that it is
> entirely correct that these executive explicitly state their
> intentions
> before the SGM.
>
> That these executive should take this position falls directly from
> executive declaring the passing of Motion 1 to be a vote of non-
> confidence in the board, which I would also suggest was appropriate
> for
> the board to do.
>
> To be blunt, it would be facile to expect that passing Motion 1 will
> allow Mr. Gallinger to simply re-join the board and have things carry
> on
> as if nothing had happened.  Achieving this would require a capacity
> of
> forgiveness beyond most mortals.
>
> This issue has been pursued beyond the October 17th board meeting
> because Mr. Gallinger is, I believe, sincere in feeling that he has a
> particular vision of CIPS which he wishes to pursue, and which,
> obviously, the current executive did not support him in executing.  I
> would suggest that Mr. Gallinger, given the approval of Motion 1, will
> have confirmed the confidence of the membership to pursue his agenda
> for
> CIPS which supported his election as vice-president in 1998.  To be
> effective in pursuing this agenda, given what has taken place, a new
> board will have to be assembled.  Setting this expectation now can
> only
> be considered positive for Mr. Gallinger and for CIPS.
>
> But in the same way, given the defeat of Motion 1, Mr. Dhariwal and
> the
> current board will have earned closure of this issue and the
> opportunity
> to complete their mandate, having confirmed the confidence of the
> membership to move forward with their agenda.
>
> The big loser in this whole affair has been the CIPS membership, in
> that
> the energies and resources of the society have been distracted from
> the
> many important tasks which need to be completed.  It needs to be clear
> that the important item to come out of the SGM is resolution of this
> issue so that the society can move forward.  The actions of the board
> and these executive has helped to set the stage so that this can
> occur.
>
> It has been suggested that making Motion 1 a motion of confidence in
> the
> board diminishes the chances of it passing.  This is true.  However, I
> would suggest for the sake of the society that it is better that the
> decision be made in the light of all the factors and implications,
> even
> though, unfortunately, such factors in this case favor the status quo.
>
> Mark Olson, I.S.P.
>
> ------- FORWARD, Original message follows -------
>
> Date: Tuesday, 23-Feb-99 09:40 AM
>
> From: Dennis Miller            \ Internet:    (dennis.miller@home.com)
> To:   CIPS-L@hermes.csd.unb.ca \ Internet:
> (cips-l@hermes.csd.unb.ca)
>
> Subject: Resent mail....
>
> Below is copied from the CIPS web site.  I have never encountered
> anything so ridiculous.  Resign if you must after the vote, but to
> threaten before hand is unforgiveable.  Does this leave 12 directors
> of
> 19 after the vote?  Other letters are dated.  What's the date of this
> communication?
>
>
>
>
> "In the event that the first motion at the SGM is passed I believe I
> have little choice but to resign:
>
>      The passing of this motion would be a plain statement that the
> membership did not support the actions of its Board and therefore in
>      my opinion the membership should have the opportunity to replace
> that Board.
>
>      Mr. Gallinger's actions and statements indicate that he has no
> trust in other Board members as he believes them to be a part of a
>      conspiracy against him.  Personally I have little trust in Mr.
> Gallinger because of his behaviour, both before and since October
> last.
> In
>      consequence I feel that it will be next to impossible for Mr.
> Gallinger to achieve any sort of consensus with the existing Board.
>      Remember that every member of that Board sincerely believes they
> are representing the best interests of their constituency.  In my
>      opinion, the resolution to this problem is for the membership to
> have the opportunity to re-elect or replace the Board and send the
>      appropriate message as to what they really want.
>
>      Richard Thompson, I.S.P.
>      Kewal Dhariwal, I.S.P.
>      Paul Rodier
>      Faye West, I.S.P.
>      Ken Metcalfe, I.S.P.
>      Robert Langlois, I.S.P.
>      Louis Lambert"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dennis Miller
> dennis.miller@home.com or
> dennis.miller@cgi.ca or
> dmiller@cips.ca
> WEB: http://members.home.net/dennis.miller/
>
>
> ------- FORWARD, End of original message -------