🚀 go-pugleaf

My comments are inserted below.

Gerry Howlett
gerry@howlett.ca
Howlett Innovations Inc.
www.howlett.ca

> -----Original Message-----
> From: CIPS General Discussion List [mailto:CIPS-L@hermes.csd.unb.ca]On
> Behalf Of Bill Ross
> Sent: February 24, 1999 5:45 AM
> To: CIPS-L@hermes.csd.unb.ca
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Board incumbents letter (was: Resent mail....)
>
>
>
>
> In response to Mark Olson's comments...
>
> Mark, I think you are right that a lot of energies have been diverted from
> more worthwhile activities over this whole issue.
>

I agree that a lot of energies have been diverted to this issue, but I
disagree vigorously that this is not a worthwhile issue.  Ever since 1990,
when I started being involved as a volunteer, I have heard repeated reports
from several national directors: of stupid petty bickering, backroom deals
and West-vs-East battles on the National Board.  When people say "ENOUGH!" I
think they're referring to all the stupidity that has gone before as much as
to our current situation.  I also say ENOUGH!

I could never figure out the rationale behind such behaviour until someone
recently suggested to me that post-position perks have some tangible value.
Is that what it's all about?  It makes me sick.

This issue is worthwhile if only to expose and remove the cancer that's been
eating the society for such a long time.  Too many good volunteers with good
intentions end up wasting their time because of the nonsense that happens at
the National level.  ENOUGH!

> At the recent national board meetings, Bob Klay, (CIPS Calgary President)
> told me that he and Steve Gallinger had a conversation in which Steve
> reportedly said, "I don't want to be re-instated, I just want a review".
>
> You make the observation that passing motion 1 would simply reinstate an
> untenable position, and you are correct. My conversations with nat. bd.
> members leads me to the conclusion that Steve G. brought no policy
> proposals or vision to the position. My personal belief (which I've stated
> publicly in the past) is that Steve was not prepared for the job, and no
> understanding of how a board operates. He's done good volunteer work, but
> he's not a board member, and certainly not a  leader. You can't be a loner
> in a world where consensus is everything.
>

After several years on the Toronto and National boards in association with
many past and then-current National and Section directors, to suggest that
Steve doesn't know how a board operates is quite simply ludicrous.  How do
you expect to get off saying stuff like this?

> I have sympathy for those board members who, having experienced several
> months of the VP's behaviour which led us all to this point, declare that
> they have no intention of sticking around for more if he is reinstated.
>
> Bill Ross
>

I welcome the departure of most of those who have announced their
intentions, in the hopes that the pettiness and secretiveness leave with
them.

Like you, I also have sympathy.
I have sympathy for the I.S.P. holders in Ontario who must suffer having you
as their president: to  contradict the consensus built at the board in a
letter to the press is unworthy of your office!  And you have the nerve to
preach "in a world where consensus is everything"!  Where is your sense of
propriety?  Such mockery of the members is intolerable.