[Durham INC] nominating Dick Ford / Voting Issues

[TheOcean1 at aol.com]

Dick
 
Sorry you won't be around for the Oct meeting, partly because I was going  
to nominate you for the INC board vacancy created when OWD removed their 
name  from the slate.
 
Would you be willing to serve?
 
eeeeeBill Anderson



In a message dated 10/4/2011 5:42:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
rbford at aim.com writes:

All,  



I am writing, as I believe I will miss the October meeting  due to business 
travel. 
There was concern expressed at the September meeting about  the roadblock 
creating by attending but abstaining members to INC taking  positions on 
public issues.  A  suggestion was made to examine changing the super majority 
voting to only  count those present and voting.   The abstainers would not be 
counted, as they are not voting.  
In my short (2 meetings) history with INC, we have had  abstentions for 
several different reasons.  In August, a number of associations  abstained 
because they felt the resolutions being presented went beyond the  scope of INC. 
 If the voting rules  are changed, I think they should/would vote No in the 
future as they actually  do object to the resolution. So they are not the 
issue. 
Then in Sept we had several associations abstain because  they had not had 
time to get approval of their associations.  As we have considered 5 
resolutions in  the last two meetings, with various revisions and time frames, it 
is not  surprising that some associations need more time.  As I recall on at 
least two  resolutions, (open spaces and the 1/4 cent tax) we have not 
actually had a  presentation on them.   These  associations are willing to vote, 
but need more time.  So we don’t need to change the rules  for voting for 
them, as much as we need a timetable to present  resolutions. 
My association Downing Creek is in this position.  Our board wants to vote 
and we are  developing mechanisms to let our owners tell what they thinking, 
but this will  take us some time, both to develop interest in our owners 
generally and to  present them with information for their consideration each 
tim 
Finally we had two, I think, associations who do not feel  they can vote on 
any public policy issues for their owners.  If they represented a large 
number of  member associations, that might justify a voting change, but it does 
not seem  to me they are the crux of the problem. 
Looking at the Transit resolution, we only have 7  associations our of our 
entire  40? members showing up and voting for  it.  That is the problem.  If 
associations are not engaged, then  we can end up with a dedicated minority 
pushing thru  resolutions.  I don’t think that is how to influence  public 
debate, nor how to keep INC a vital public institution in Durham. 7  
associations out of 40 is less than 20%. 
So I would recommend against a voting change until we  understanding the 
lack of engagement   by members of INC and what steps we need to take. I think 
we all need  to take a step back from our passions for this or that 
resolution to  understand our institutional issues and to strengthen INC> 
I have a final request, as a new rep from an association  that wants to be 
more involved, I would appreciate any information on how  other members 
inform their owners, find out their views and how these boards  act to vote. I 
am very interested in helping Downing Creek to find its voice  in INC and to 
help INC become even more vital to Durham’s neighborhoods. 


Dick

=

_______________________________________________
Durham  INC Mailing  List
list at durham-inc.org
http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111006/17c6ca5a/attachment.html>