🚀 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 10:16 PM
> To: CIPS-L@hermes.csd.unb.ca
> Subject: Re: Board incumbents letter (was: Resent mail....)
>
>
>
>
> Re Jody Burgess' comments...
>
> Jody, if you talk to any of the board members who were driven to the point
> of having to remove their VP, I think you'll find that it wasn't a matter
> of different visions. It was a matter of the behaviour of someone who had
> no understanding of how a board  works, and who rebuffed every effort to
> help them learn. All the national board members that I have asked
> about the
> situation have indicated that Steve Gallinger brought no vision or policy
> proposals to the position.

Are you sure you mean to say "how A board works"? or "how THIS board works"
In the second meaning, I might behave the way Steve is being accused of
behaving in the same situation.  The National board has worked contrary to
expectations for many years, and that's why Steve was elected: to turn
things around.

No vision & policy?  It was his vision and policy proposals that got him
elected!

>
> Steve has done a lot of good volunteer work, and perhaps that's where his
> talents lie. Being on a board is not the same as doing  volunteer work;
> boards (especially at the national level) deal in policy, and they move
> slowly and deliberately because that's what they are supposed to do. And
> above all, being on a board requires that each member earns the trust and
> respect of the other members.
>

If OUR (CIPS National) board dealt in policy, then why did I hear so much
about petty bickering and backroom deals for the past nine years?  Such talk
speaks very loudly of the board dealing in operational issues... like
releasing two national-office staff from their employment recently - a
decision reportedly made by the slow-moving policy-making board.

And publishing an editorial in a national public newspaper which contradicts
the decisions of your own board certainly builds a lot of trust and respect.
I see your point.  right.

Cut the double-standards.  Do honesty and integrity have no value any more?

> If he ran for VP again I believe that the scenario would play itself out
> exactly as it did this time.
>

It's precisely that kind of smugness that I'm railing against here.  Don't
prejudge me!  I'm a member, and I'll make my own choices thank you very
much, including calling for an SGM next time the board thinks they can
reverse a decision of a majority of members.

<mega-snip>