It's easy to take the "Vote The Bums Out" position, but do all current board members deser
Longacre
Posts: 16,717 ✭✭✭
I am really racking my brain trying to decide who to vote for in the upcoming ANA election. I could very easily grab my pitchfork and torch, get whipped up into a mob mentality, and take the easy road of VTBO ("Vote The Bums Out").
However, then the reasonable side of me comes out
I think that it may not be fair to the current incumbents who are running to lump them all into the collective group called BUMS. Although there might be some Bums in the current administration, I am not sure if it is fair to really make such generalizations.
Is anyone going to take a reasoned approach to the upcoming election, and read each candidates' platform and vote for the best person? Or are there so many broken pieces of the ANA that it is just easier to wipe the slate clean, and summarily tag all current members as not worthy of a second bite at the apple? I'm just curious.
However, then the reasonable side of me comes out
I think that it may not be fair to the current incumbents who are running to lump them all into the collective group called BUMS. Although there might be some Bums in the current administration, I am not sure if it is fair to really make such generalizations. Is anyone going to take a reasoned approach to the upcoming election, and read each candidates' platform and vote for the best person? Or are there so many broken pieces of the ANA that it is just easier to wipe the slate clean, and summarily tag all current members as not worthy of a second bite at the apple? I'm just curious.
Always took candy from strangers
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
0
Comments
People are frustrated with the way things are going at the ANA (including me) but I don't see any of the candidates offering up specific, concrete plans as to what they will do differently to lead the ANA over the next few years or their term. I want specifics, and not platitudes like, "I want to give the ANA back to the collectors (or dealers, or exhibitors, or whatever...)". Or: "Everything will be out in the open if I'm elected". Those aren't plans.
Plans are things like:
1. Will they put in place an Audit Committee?
2. If they want to get rid of the current executive director, what specific qualities will they be looking for in a replacement? A CPA? A CPA with an MBA? With experience running an organization of similar or larger size? Experience running a non-profit?
I guess the same questions could be asked of the qualifications of being a board member too...
Coin Rarities Online
<< <i>I am really racking my brain trying to decide who to vote for in the upcoming ANA election. I could very easily grab my pitchfork and torch, get whipped up into a mob mentality, and take the easy road of VTBO ("Vote The Bums Out").
However, then the reasonable side of me comes out
Is anyone going to take a reasoned approach to the upcoming election, and read each candidates' platform and vote for the best person? Or are there so many broken pieces of the ANA that it is just easier to wipe the slate clean, and summarily tag all current members as not worthy of a second bite at the apple? I'm just curious. >>
Ordinarily, I would look for a good combination of incumbents and new people. However, IMHO, this election is a unique situation, given everything that has occurred in the past two years; depending on each individual views the past two years.
I've decided to vote for no incumbent or anyone running who has previously served but is not in office at the present time. Since President and VP are unopposed and both are incumbents, I will not vote for either office. My thinking is that if Barry and Patty get fewer votes than some new folks running for the Board, they will, more likely, understand that a message was sent in their elections as well.
I would not call this "Voting the Bums Out". I respect what several Board members and officers have done in their service careers for the ANA. Rather, I'd say that this is a "message sending" election where the best way to say that "business as usual" is unacceptable is to only vote for those who have not held office before and withhold votes for President and VP so as to really bring that point home in the two uncontested elections.
The proceeding is just one person's opinions.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Those are excellent points. I hope your letters are printed, but they may be bumped by all of the letters complaining about the Mint.
I am a big fan of concrete plans and action items (although people accuse me of being an ultra left wing liberal democrat, even I chuckle when I remember John Kerry saying "I have a plan" when discussing Iraq, but he never gave any specifics). If an ANA candidate puts out some specific items that he will implement, then that will go a long way toward getting my vote.
As for the type of person who should run the ANA, I think the organization needs someone with business skills who has run an organization before (whether that business was a profit or a not for profit entity). The idea of an indepentent audit committee is a great one, so long as it is truly independent.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>Pardon my ignorance on the issue, but are there any pure collectors on the board? >>
Very good question.
Should there be an open, hopefully objective, discussion of each person that is running?
I would like the ANA address issues important to the collector community in writing, like the Q&A forum here. Third-world slabbers come up a lot. The anecdotal evidence is that the ANA approves, or does not disapprove, of these organizations. I think it would be better for collectors if the ANA had an official, public response.
That said, there are as many as 10 candidates that I could vote for. I wish that there were only 7!!
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
--------------
Dear Mr. Harper:
The upcoming election makes for good copy in articles. Dissent is always much more entertaining to read about than harmony.
In all of the coverage and statements made by the candidates, I read almost nothing about specific plans of what they would do once elected. It is all well and good to run on a "Throw-The-Bums-Out," platform, but what are their plans from their second day of office until their terms expire?
<DIV>
I don't want to hear general statements like, "I will put the ANA back in the hands of the collectors," but specific, concrete plans on how they will accomplish what they want to do. If they really have a better way to run the organization, let's hear those plans before the election, so we may evaluate them.
I would also like to hear about the background and financial qualifications of the candidates. Are they CPA's? Attorneys? Have they run large organizations, or sat on active boards of businesses or non-profits the size of the ANA or larger?
For example, I co-manage a coin business that sells millions of dollars worth of coins each year. But it is a 3 person firm, and it in no way qualifies me to sit on the board of governors of the ANA. Maybe it would have been good enough for the ANA 30 years ago, but not now.
The ANA is of a size where we need professional managers on our board. I don't want my ANA Governors to be learning on the job. I want them to come to the job with a track record of successfully running similarly large organizations in a professional manner.
I have heard almost nothing from the candidates about their specific plans. I have heard almost nothing about what professional qualifications they bring to manage this large organization. Let's hear it!
Sincerely,
Dave Wnuck
----------------</DIV>
Coin Rarities Online
Great letter and I hope it gets printed. Remember you are competing for space with Mint Complainers, so there is no guarantee. But thanks for putting it up here for all of us to see.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Jonathan
<< <i>
Ordinarily, I would look for a good combination of incumbents and new people. However, IMHO, this election is a unique situation, given everything that has occurred in the past two years; depending on each individual views the past two years.
I've decided to vote for no incumbent or anyone running who has previously served but is not in office at the present time. Since President and VP are unopposed and both are incumbents, I will not vote for either office. My thinking is that if Barry and Patty get fewer votes than some new folks running for the Board, they will, more likely, understand that a message was sent in their elections as well.
>>
I plan to do the same thing this year. I think that THIS YEAR'S election is a referendum on the members' opinion of how the current board acted on a number of issues. There is no doubt in my mind that some actions taken by this board were correct, but there were a number of decisions that I feel were wrong. A lot of the problems were the result of lack of fast communication with the members directly. The changes in the Bylaws can have a major negative effect if they are passed in August as currently proposed. Seven NEW board members would have some effect in sorting out what bylaws should change and what ones should not. If the four incumbants get reelected, then that tells the leadership that current actions are supported by the membership. Wouldn't it be great if 10,000 members took the time to vote this year. Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
I certainly do not wish my vote to endorse all of this board's actions, but I do not think that all need to be voted out.
I have very comfortable relationships with current members of the board and appreciate that I can speak to them frankly.
I also have good relationships with many others on the current ballot, so I will continue to be in a bit of a quandry unless something unusual happens between now and the end of the voting period.
I am anxiously awaiting continued statements and advertising from all the candidates.
There are many excellent and qualified candidates.
I urge all members to vote.
I also urge all non-members to join now. I believe that there is a program in place sponsored by Rare Coin Wholesalers giving you 2 years for the price of one. That is a real bargain.
JOIN and VOTE!!!!
I firmly believe in numismatics as the world's greatest hobby, but recognize that this is a luxury and without collectors, we can all spend/melt our collections/inventories.
eBaystore
I can fully appreciate those members who personally know an incumbent board member who they want to vote for. I, like the vast majority of members DON'T personally know members of the board. We normally vote for them based on reputation and recognition of their names. This time I must assume that every incumbent board member who is running for reelection was in agreement with certain board actions like the removal of Walt Ostromoski for the reasons stated and the lack of comments during the Rochette naming despute. Fortunatly I believe there are at least seven new candidates for the board who will provide some new direction. I do want to hear more about these people and their platforms.
Steve
My Complete PROOF Lincoln Cent with Major Varieties(1909-2015)Set Registry
If some incumbents will go on record as opposing some of the worst to come from the Cipoletti regime, I will strongly consider giving them my vote.
I for one am withholding my vote for unopposed candidates, as I always do -- whether a club election or a political one.
<< <i>Are there any incumbents who will go on record as opposing the way the Ostromecki situation was handled? >>
The vote in favor of removing Mr. Ostromecki was 7 - 0. Kagin was not there and therefore did not vote. So I believe all of the incumbents, except Kagin, have stated their position on the matter by their votes on Mr. Ostromecki's removal.
Let's also remember what the situation was. A newly elected board member was removed because someone emailed him and said the ANA should look into the Museum naming situation. He emailed back and said basically, "Yes, the ANA Board should look into this."
WOW.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
<< <i>The vote in favor of removing Mr. Ostromecki was 7 - 0. Kagin was not there and therefore did not vote. So I believe all of the incumbents, except Kagin, have stated their position on the matter by their votes on Mr. Ostromecki's removal. >>
I know that part; I'm not referring so much to the vote itself but the secrecy and lack of transparency under which it was conducted. (Which is why I said "how it was handled" rather than how they voted. That was intentional.)
Normally I think personnel decisions and discipline and stuff should be covered by "executive session" under parliamentary rules, but in this case I'm not sure that should have been the case -- not if the penalty would be expulsion from the board. If it was a reprimand or a slap on the wrist, fine -- deal with it in executive session. But something as extreme as kicking someone off the board should not be done lightly, and not done in the secrecy of an executive session, IMO.
<< <i>I will not eliminate incumbents from consideration for the BOG.
That said, there are as many as 10 candidates that I could vote for. I wish that there were only 7!! >>
With all due respect to the good dealers, of which you are one, Julian....
I'm unsure that this election, in addition to avoiding all incumbents, shouldn't do the same with regards to dealers.
Nothing personal intended. Please remember how high a regard I hold you from our discussions during Baltimore shows and in your shop as well.
I just think that the problems, as I see them, with the ANA, really need to result in collectors making up the majority of the next board with, hopefully, no present incumbents or anyone that has served within the past six years (arbitrary) on it.
This time, a clear message, I believe, needs to be sent.
Edited to state that I think Walter, as an "incumbent", should be, IMHO, the number 1 vote getter among everyone up for any office. That WOULD send a statement, loud and clear.
Heck, right now, you can't even resign from the board, it appears, without a board vote. Can things get any crazier, IMHO?
<< <i>
<< <i>I will not eliminate incumbents from consideration for the BOG.
That said, there are as many as 10 candidates that I could vote for. I wish that there were only 7!! >>
With all due respect to the good dealers, of which you are one, Julian....
I'm unsure that this election, in addition to avoiding all incumbents, shouldn't do the same with regards to dealers.
Nothing personal intended. Please remember how high a regard I hold you from our discussions during Baltimore shows and in your shop as well.
I just think that the problems, as I see them, with the ANA, really need to result in collectors making up the majority of the next board with, hopefully, no present incumbents or anyone that has served within the past six years (arbitrary) on it.
This time, a clear message, I believe, needs to be sent.
Edited to state that I think Walter, as an "incumbent", should be, IMHO, the number 1 vote getter among everyone up for any office. That WOULD send a statement, loud and clear.
Heck, right now, you can't even resign from the board, it appears, without a board vote. Can things get any crazier, IMHO? >>
And wouldn't it be even more hilarious if a regular from this board who resides in the Land of Lincoln gets in on his first attempt........oh, wait a minute - I'm talking about ME!
<< <i>
<< <i>The vote in favor of removing Mr. Ostromecki was 7 - 0. Kagin was not there and therefore did not vote. So I believe all of the incumbents, except Kagin, have stated their position on the matter by their votes on Mr. Ostromecki's removal. >>
I know that part; I'm not referring so much to the vote itself but the secrecy and lack of transparency under which it was conducted. (Which is why I said "how it was handled" rather than how they voted. That was intentional.)
Normally I think personnel decisions and discipline and stuff should be covered by "executive session" under parliamentary rules, but in this case I'm not sure that should have been the case -- not if the penalty would be expulsion from the board. If it was a reprimand or a slap on the wrist, fine -- deal with it in executive session. But something as extreme as kicking someone off the board should not be done lightly, and not done in the secrecy of an executive session, IMO. >>
And why was Dr. Kagin not present when the regime gave Mr. Walt the boot back in 2005? Because he was observing the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur.