Additional Material for the Election and Proposition of 11 Dec 2008

Information about Nominees provided by Lu Giddings:

I know that there have been questions about a few of the candidates and I wanted to share what I've learned or pass along to others.

Robert Bond:
"Bob has been an active birder all his life.   He is a founding member of the Utah Ornithological Society.    His careful observation help document the first record of several species in Utah including Black-tailed Gnatcatcher and  Red-breasted Sapsucker.  Bob has also documented several rare species in Northern Idaho such as Black-legged Kittiwake and Baltimore Oriole.

"Bob is not only very familiar with the species that occur in Utah but has birded throughout the United States on a regular basis.  He performs several breeding surveys each spring in Utah and Idaho.

"Bob is a retired Nephrologist and now spends more time pursuing his hobbies of birding and photograpy.

"I have known Bob for more than twenty years and have birded with him on a regular basis.  I have sought advice from him on some difficult IDs because I respect his knowledge of birds."

Robert Bond:
"I haven't seen Bob in many, many years, but I remember him as a very classy, kind individual--one of the nicest people in the birding community who I've had the pleasure to meet.  He used to be on Terry Sadler's Big Day team."


Jack Skalicky:
"Jack works at the University of Utah as a research scientist. I think there are others on the committee who know him better than I. We've crossed paths on a number of occasions. I know he spends a lot of time out at Fish Springs and that he helps with banding studies out there. He strikes me as an extremely solid, competent, reliable, and conservative birder."

  

Proposal to change nomination process:

Problems these changes are intended to solve:

- The time it takes to get all of the nominations in, has extended the process several weeks. (The time it has taken for Committee Members to remember to contact the potential nominees and have them respond has been unexpectedly long).

- The number of nominees has been relatively low in recent elections.

- The nominees who are not elected have had to be contacted to let them know they didn’t make it, which no matter how well it is presented sounds like "they have been rejected." (It can be awkward to break the news to someone you’ve ask if they are willing to serve especially if they’ve been asked several times before).

  
Section III. C. Elections – in its present form:

1. Any Member of the Committee may nominate individuals to open positions

a. It is the responsibility of the nominating Member to check with nominees and determine willingness to server prior to submitting the name

b. Each Member may nominate up to three individuals

c. If there are four or more nominees, above the number of open positions to be filled, there shall be a preliminary vote to determine the finalists reducing the number of nominees to two more than the number of open positions.

2. Nominees will be voted on as follows

a. Voting Members will rank nominees from 1 to 3.

b. Points will be assigned in reverse x to 1, so with 3 nominees a vote of 1 would equate to 3 points

c. Votes will be compiled by the Secretary and the nominee with the most points will be asked to serve

d. If there are two open positions, the top two vote takers will be asked to serve

  
(Proposed changes: (Changed text is in bold italics)

1.a. Qualified people will be nominated without determining their willingness to serve. Willingness will be determined by the Secretary after the voting is completed.

1. b. Each Member may nominate up to two more individuals than the number of positions that need to be filled in any particular category (example: Secretary, Voting Member) .

1. c. (This would remain the same)

2. a. Voting Members will rank nominees from 1 to the number of position to be filled plus two extra.

2. b. Points will be assigned in reverse rank order so that a first choice will receive the most points and the last choice will receive 1 point. (Example: In an election to fill two positions, a Voting Member would rank his or her top four choices. The first choice would receive 4 points, the second 3, the third 2 and the fourth would receive 1 point).

2. c. Votes will be compiled by the Secretary who will contact the nominees in the order of the highest point total first to determine willingness to serve. If a nominee declines to serve then the nominee with the next highest point total will be asked. The Secretary will proceed down the list in this manner until positions in question are filled.

2. d. (This section would be unnecessary and will be deleted if this proposal is accepted)