Re: Members-at-large

I have been active in four different councils, and they all did it pretty
much the same way as Drew mentioned. However, there are a few things that he
did not mention:

1. The Members at Large must be fewer in number than the Chartered Partner
Representatives (or whatever they are called at the moment).

2. Both the Members at Large and the chartered Partner Representatives are
voting members.

3. You can always discuss individual cases prior to the vote (I have).

4. Nominees are usually people from the district that most of the active
committee members already know.

I agree that you should have some information available on each individual.
At the very least the nominating committee should be represented at the
meeting for questioning. I would not accept their report for a vote without
the presence of at least one member. In my experience the Members at Large
are better known that the Chartered Partner Representatives, who are seldom
active on the committee.

If there is an individual on the list that you think is unsuitable, you can
always state your reason, and move that they be stricken from the list before
the vote is taken. This is more than you can do at a corporation annual
meeting.

Dave Hills, Fort Pitt District Member at Large, Greater Pittsburgh Council

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message
• Previous message
• Maybe in reply to
• Next in thread