|
Post by Sharon Faulkner on Oct 5, 2005 18:15:07 GMT -5
Quoted from the "NSS Discussion Board Down" thread. I'd meant to respond to this at the time Floyd posted, but everything got busy right around then.As I recall, the Society's Board of Governors had two candidates from which to choose a new OVP this year. There were originally three candidates for the 2005 Operations Vice President position. Unfortunately, Phil Winkler removed his name from consideration a month or so before Convention. I know that you are already informed on this Rick, but in case others aren't aware of it. The Directors elect the officers each year; Secretary-Treasurer at the Fall BOG meeting, President at the Spring BOG meeting, and all three Vice-Presidents during the Summer Convention meeting. I'm sure Gary Moss and the Executive Search Committee would be ecstatic to be able to offer multiple candidates for each position. If you or someone you know of may be interested in running I'd urge you to contact someone from the search committee or visit their webpage www.caves.org/info/execsearch/ for details.
|
|
|
Post by Rick Rhinehart on Oct 5, 2005 23:34:20 GMT -5
I agree that more NSS members should put forth the time and effort to serve their Society during the course of their membership. Unfortunately, owing to economics, many cavers cannot afford the frequent travel necessary to serve as a director or officer of the Society.
It's been debated before, but the Society would undoubtedly find many additional candidates if some sort of fund was available to cover plane tickets to the various meetings; many non-profit organizations routinely cover such costs for their officers and directors.
Since we see the same group of cavers serving on the board and as officers year after year, I guess there is a "ruling class" to the Society based upon who can afford the expenses!
|
|
|
Post by Sharon Faulkner on Oct 12, 2005 18:03:02 GMT -5
Had to think on this a few days. I have heard many folks, who have considered volunteering to become director or officer candidates, mention that travel expense is a factor in their decision not to seek such a position. So I'd have to agree that a fund that would at least partially offset travel expenses would more than likely create increased participation in the Society's volunteer pool.
As I recall, there was a brief debate vaguely related to this issue on NSS DB # 3 shortly before the 2005 Convention. Based on the comments I remember from that discussion, I believe it was pretty evenly divided between those for and those against the creation of any type of travel expense fund. Maybe this is a topic that can/should be revisited in the future.
Once again, this quote from Tom Lera (2004 Convention AVP report) rather sums up my thoughts in a nutshell:
|
|