USPSA election results...

[Flexmoney]

The result have been released.

I won Area 5.

Phil Strader won President.

Huge thanks to Gary and Michael for all their years of service! And, thanks to Tom, Frank and all of the candidates that threw their hat into the ring.

[legacy]

Go Phil!

[Pezco]

Congrats, Kyle!

[Sarge]

Very nice Kyle! Way to go.

[bobmysterious]

I see good things in our future. Congrats y'all!

[Jim Norman]

Congrats to both Phil and Kyle. We are fortunate that we have people of this caliber to represent us.

[mhop]

congrats

Edited December 4, 2011 by mhop

[Paul Santiago]

The result have been released.

I won Area 5.

Phil Strader won President.

Huge thanks to Gary and Michael for all their years of service! And, thanks to Tom, Frank and all of the candidates that threw their hat into the ring.

Congrats to you both!!!

Edited December 5, 2011 by Paul Santiago

[P.E. Kelley]

Well Mr. Farris...you asked for it and now you got it. Congratulations mister!

Patrick

[atbarr]

Congratulations to both Phil and Kyle.

[jualdeaux]

The result have been released.

I won Area 5.

Phil Strader won President.

Huge thanks to Gary and Michael for all their years of service! And, thanks to Tom, Frank and all of the candidates that threw their hat into the ring.

Congrats Kyle!

Congrats to Phil also!

[The Antichrome]

Congrats to Phil and Flex.

That one invalid ballot was probably a write-in vote (for Ben)

[Rob Boudrie]

Congrats to Phil and Flex.

That one invalid ballot was probably a write-in vote (for Ben)

It is also possible that one individual voted in the Area 5 runoff, but did not cast a vote in the presidential runoff.

[Rob Boudrie]

The following motion was passed at the BOD meeting this morning. Current bylaws require advance notice of the inclusion of any amendment to the bylaws, hence the nature of this motion.

I will be working with rest of the board to generate the exact bylaws change we will vote on in January, however, some of the key points that I expect to see based on the board discussion:

- The election will remain independent, and not under control of USPSA. The contract will state that USPSA does not have access to the voting record of any individual member.

- It will allow internet voting, but also allow members to cast their ballot via US Mail. Internet voting will be conducted on a server under the control of the election firm; not USPSA staff, officers or volunteers.

- No fundamental changes to the election (nomination procedures, runoff if there is no majority after initial voting, etc.) is expected.

- There will probably be some minor changes to the deadlines specified for the election.

The motion:

The board is issuing notice pursuant to bylaw 15.1 that we will take up a motion to amend the bylaws to modify the election process at our next regular meeting, which we expect to be an on-line meeting held in January, 2012.

The modifications are intended to enable the use of an independent professional election firm rather than a CPA firm to conduct the election, and to permit internet as well as postal voting.

Board members are authorized to discuss this motion prior to the official publications of minutes for the December, 2011 meeting

[rgkeller]

Changes to election procedure should not take place until the newly elected officers take office.

And no discussions either.

There's no hurry.

[Rob Boudrie]

Changes to election procedure should not take place until the newly elected officers take office.

And no discussions either.

There's no hurry.

The meeting at which we will follow up on the election issue will be in January after the new officers take place. What is under discussion is the mechanics of how an election is conducted, not procedures like "rules and runoffs", how one petitions to become a candidate, etc.

The most important thing is that no procedural changes be made when there are "votes in play", particularly if the changes have ANY chance of influencing the election. One reason I felt this was an appropriate time is the amount of time it takes to move from "starting discussions" to "done deal" - advance notice of any bylaw change meeting is required; once any bylaw changes are made, a contract has to be negotiated with an election company; and the new procedures published. If we let things slip into the spring, USPSA may already have "declared candidates", individuals circulating nominating petitions, etc. - and that opens up the can of worms like "how does this change impact XYZ's chances relative to the other candidate".

[rgkeller]

The discussions are taking place WITHOUT the newly elected officers in place, officers who will vote on the changes.

A fact more important than any perceived future "problem."

IMO, inappropriate.

Edited December 4, 2011 by rgkeller

[pbosik]

Congrats to both of you. I look foward to seeing any changes taking place.

[Rob Boudrie]

The discussions are taking place WITHOUT the newly elected officers in place, officers who will vote on the changes.

A fact more important than any perceived future "problem."

IMO, inappropriate.

Both newly elected officers were present for all discussions - Phil Strader in his capacity as Area 4 Director and Kyle as member who was invited to participate in discussions due to his director-elect status.

[CAB33]

The future looks bright!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Chuck Anderson]

The discussions are taking place WITHOUT the newly elected officers in place, officers who will vote on the changes.

A fact more important than any perceived future "problem."

IMO, inappropriate.

I would add to Rob's statement that any vote on a bylaw change would take place in January, after the officer will be in place. USPSA has an election cycle that has two to three elections a year. If we waited on every issue we'd never get anything done. That said, both Kyle and Phil were there, and are fully in the loop on any potential change. But thank you for your opinion on the appropriateness of this action. Did you have a better option?

[rgkeller]

The discussions are taking place WITHOUT the newly elected officers in place, officers who will vote on the changes.

A fact more important than any perceived future "problem."

IMO, inappropriate.

I would add to Rob's statement that any vote on a bylaw change would take place in January, after the officer will be in place. USPSA has an election cycle that has two to three elections a year. If we waited on every issue we'd never get anything done. That said, both Kyle and Phil were there, and are fully in the loop on any potential change. But thank you for your opinion on the appropriateness of this action. Did you have a better option?

Yes, wait until January to start the process. That way, the new folks would be in place and the old folks would be gone.

But what is done, is done.

[mhop]

those officers are elected till December 31st of this year and have every right to serve their position till that point and when the new officers are on the board Jan 1st they get to do their thing at that time. Robert why are you so concerned about this issue?

[Chuck Anderson]

The discussions are taking place WITHOUT the newly elected officers in place, officers who will vote on the changes.

A fact more important than any perceived future "problem."

IMO, inappropriate.

I would add to Rob's statement that any vote on a bylaw change would take place in January, after the officer will be in place. USPSA has an election cycle that has two to three elections a year. If we waited on every issue we'd never get anything done. That said, both Kyle and Phil were there, and are fully in the loop on any potential change. But thank you for your opinion on the appropriateness of this action. Did you have a better option?

Yes, wait until January to start the process. That way, the new folks would be in place and the old folks would be gone.

But what is done, is done.

The new folks were there and involved in the discussion. So unless your argument is that somehow having two of the most experienced BOD members there was somehow a detriment I really don't understand your concern. We have four AD's up for election in 2012 and no more in person meetings scheduled for several months. I guess we could make the decision by email. I just thought the membership deserved as much consideration and discussion as possible. That happens best in person.

[MarkCO]

Congrats to Phil and Kyle!!!