05-05-2015, 10:37 PM
A new ballot will be created and all previous votes are nulm & void. Wow, people listened and acted accordingly. Well done by all, including the alumni board.
05-05-2015, 10:37 PM
05-05-2015, 10:39 PM
What are the changes to the process? anything else come out of it?
05-05-2015, 10:41 PM
The UAB National Alumni Society Board of Directors Listens to the Voices of the Members of the May 5, 2015 Called Meeting
A group of seventy-five members met with the current NAS Board to discuss three issues related to bringing football, rifle and bowling back to UAB. However, the discussion turned quickly and passionately to a bigger issue of recent bylaw changes of the NAS. Although the current Board was not obligated to add the topic to the agenda, the board took a brief fifteen minute break and chose to do so.
After hearing from the members, the NAS Board of Directors took into consideration all of the comments and discussion to the formerly approved Bylaws on April 13, 2015. The following amendments were made:
1) Article VI, Section 2, Elections - will now read. "Elections on the proposed slate presented by the Nominating Committee shall be held through a mailed ballot which will include the opportunity for two write-in candidates, sent out at least thirty days prior to the meeting to all active alumni eligible to vote according to the Bylaws, to be returned to the Alumni Affairs Office at least ten days prior to the Annual Meeting. The candidates with the majority of votes for the number of vacant Director positions will be elected, as long as all meet the criteria required to serve. Officers will not have a write-in candidate option due to the criteria required in this capacity." Candidate Bios and Life Members will be available on the website at http://www.uab.edu/alumni.
NOTE: For the 2015-16 Elections, a new ballot will be issued and all previously received votes will be null and void.
2) Article VII, Section 2. Special Meeting - will return to its original form stating, " A special meeting shall be held on the request of the Board or the Executive Committee or on petition of fifty active members. The Board shall decide the exact time and place of the meeting and shall allow the Executive Director sufficient time to send a notice to each active member at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting. No business other than that stated in the call for the special meeting shall be conducted at such meeting."
A group of seventy-five members met with the current NAS Board to discuss three issues related to bringing football, rifle and bowling back to UAB. However, the discussion turned quickly and passionately to a bigger issue of recent bylaw changes of the NAS. Although the current Board was not obligated to add the topic to the agenda, the board took a brief fifteen minute break and chose to do so.
After hearing from the members, the NAS Board of Directors took into consideration all of the comments and discussion to the formerly approved Bylaws on April 13, 2015. The following amendments were made:
1) Article VI, Section 2, Elections - will now read. "Elections on the proposed slate presented by the Nominating Committee shall be held through a mailed ballot which will include the opportunity for two write-in candidates, sent out at least thirty days prior to the meeting to all active alumni eligible to vote according to the Bylaws, to be returned to the Alumni Affairs Office at least ten days prior to the Annual Meeting. The candidates with the majority of votes for the number of vacant Director positions will be elected, as long as all meet the criteria required to serve. Officers will not have a write-in candidate option due to the criteria required in this capacity." Candidate Bios and Life Members will be available on the website at http://www.uab.edu/alumni.
NOTE: For the 2015-16 Elections, a new ballot will be issued and all previously received votes will be null and void.
2) Article VII, Section 2. Special Meeting - will return to its original form stating, " A special meeting shall be held on the request of the Board or the Executive Committee or on petition of fifty active members. The Board shall decide the exact time and place of the meeting and shall allow the Executive Director sufficient time to send a notice to each active member at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting. No business other than that stated in the call for the special meeting shall be conducted at such meeting."
05-05-2015, 10:56 PM
Well, it got off to a bad start when Wes responded to a question about the change of the bylaws with a response that the topic would not be added to the agenda and would not be addressed at the meeting. However, they apparently had a change of heart when they went into executive session. And they listened after all.
Thanks to everyone who spoke out passionately tonight; I was proud of you guys and gals.
Thanks to everyone who spoke out passionately tonight; I was proud of you guys and gals.
05-05-2015, 10:56 PM
I am thoroughly impressed. This is much better than before. It isn't a complete take-over of the NAS by the alumni-at-large but it allows us to firmly establish that the alumni will have a constant voice and people to observe and report. If they were trying to suppress the alumni popular opinion, they wouldn't do this.
05-06-2015, 09:29 PM
Congratulations to you folks who made your voices heard and for having enough support to get things turned around.
05-17-2015, 05:55 AM
So what does all this mean?
When will the vote be held?
When will the vote be held?
05-17-2015, 08:27 AM
We should get new ballots this week since they are to be sent 30 days before the annual meeting which is set for June 19th.
05-17-2015, 09:42 AM
It means that there will be a new ballot sent to the entire NAS with the same slate as before. None of the #FreeUAB people were on that list, although to be fair I know for a fact that there are a number of people who were who are true UAB people who agree and are not Watzis.
The only way that the FreeUAB group gets someone elected is through the write-in slots. That will require that the seven or eight who were nominated decide who the strongest candidates are and then campaign to get people to write them in. That's a very steep uphill climb, but they'll take a shot at it. Stay tuned, I imagine you'll hear something soon on that front.
The only way that the FreeUAB group gets someone elected is through the write-in slots. That will require that the seven or eight who were nominated decide who the strongest candidates are and then campaign to get people to write them in. That's a very steep uphill climb, but they'll take a shot at it. Stay tuned, I imagine you'll hear something soon on that front.
05-17-2015, 10:01 AM
Band Dad there were 9 that were nominated, but there were an additional 8 that were going to run as 10 signature candidates since they didn't believe the NAS nominating committee would pick any freeuab people. So there were 17 freeuab people willing and ready to serve. Hopefully there will be an informal vote to determine our candidate. Last thing we need is a committee to choose our write ins. That style of elections has to end. It needs to end in the NAS and the BOT also. That style of election is actually the root of all our troubles.
05-17-2015, 01:20 PM
I think that most of us kind of took the NAS for granted. We didn't really know, understand, or care what they did as long as there were tailgates at away games and we got a t-shirt or two. Recent events pushed the NAS to the front, and we started paying attention.
I understand what you are saying about a committee, but the fact is that the ballot is going to be sent to thousands of people. Most of them are not aware of what has gone on, what the controversy is, and they will do one of two things: they will drop the ballot in the trash with the junk mail and not bother, or they will check the elect the ballot as it stands box. As a result, a write in candidate is more than likely doomed from the start.
If what write in votes are cast get split seventeen ways, you might as well not even have a write in slot. You can bet that the NAS board understood this when they allowed it on the ballot in the first place. You might want to think about your stance a little, because that's reality.
*edit* I've said this before, but it bears repeating... the NAS board and officers are composed of the people who cared enough about it, for whatever reason, to put their time, money, and effort into making the NAS run. They did not start at the top, they worked, hustled donations, volunteered at events, put in their sweat and paid their dues. They got to know the other people who made the NAS go. Eventually they knew enough people involved to get nominated by an officer and get elected. I can understand why the people who have done their time look at bit skeptically at the #FreeUAB people who showed up after Dec. 2nd and demanded to tell people involved what to do when and how to go about it, and demanding to be put into leadership positions. I know for a fact that the few of them I have a bit of acquaintance with are not shills for Watts and the BoT, and I suspect that some of the comments to that effect have also put them off. I'm not defending the bylaws changes, hell, I was at the meeting demanding that they be rolled back, but I have some empathy for their position in this.
You can point a finger at a couple of people in particular and question their connections, actions, and motives, but as a whole I think the NAS wants basically what the rest of us want. The fact is that the NAS is an arm of UAB, it is not an outside entity that can say and do what it wants completely freely. They have to be cautious in the same way that many UAB employees are about what they say and how they say it.
I understand what you are saying about a committee, but the fact is that the ballot is going to be sent to thousands of people. Most of them are not aware of what has gone on, what the controversy is, and they will do one of two things: they will drop the ballot in the trash with the junk mail and not bother, or they will check the elect the ballot as it stands box. As a result, a write in candidate is more than likely doomed from the start.
If what write in votes are cast get split seventeen ways, you might as well not even have a write in slot. You can bet that the NAS board understood this when they allowed it on the ballot in the first place. You might want to think about your stance a little, because that's reality.
*edit* I've said this before, but it bears repeating... the NAS board and officers are composed of the people who cared enough about it, for whatever reason, to put their time, money, and effort into making the NAS run. They did not start at the top, they worked, hustled donations, volunteered at events, put in their sweat and paid their dues. They got to know the other people who made the NAS go. Eventually they knew enough people involved to get nominated by an officer and get elected. I can understand why the people who have done their time look at bit skeptically at the #FreeUAB people who showed up after Dec. 2nd and demanded to tell people involved what to do when and how to go about it, and demanding to be put into leadership positions. I know for a fact that the few of them I have a bit of acquaintance with are not shills for Watts and the BoT, and I suspect that some of the comments to that effect have also put them off. I'm not defending the bylaws changes, hell, I was at the meeting demanding that they be rolled back, but I have some empathy for their position in this.
You can point a finger at a couple of people in particular and question their connections, actions, and motives, but as a whole I think the NAS wants basically what the rest of us want. The fact is that the NAS is an arm of UAB, it is not an outside entity that can say and do what it wants completely freely. They have to be cautious in the same way that many UAB employees are about what they say and how they say it.
05-17-2015, 01:25 PM
No I just wasn't clear. The 2 write in candidates should be 2 individuals that everyone writes in. It is how those 2 are determined that should be by a vote of as many people as we can find and not a committee. A committee appointment of these 2 individuals was being proposed.
05-17-2015, 01:33 PM
And essentially that is what I was nudging toward. It looks like we are in agreement, basically.
05-17-2015, 01:52 PM
(05-17-2015 01:33 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]And essentially that is what I was nudging toward. It looks like we are in agreement, basically.
I think the committee thing was nipped in the bud. Frankly if we get the bills modified to put the BOT nominees in the faculty senates hands the importance of the NAS takes a dive and I am going to join the alternate group anyway. I am from the wrong side of the mountain to hang with the NAS.
05-17-2015, 01:54 PM
I think that's moot. It does not look like Jabo's bill is going to ever get out of committee, this session anyhow.
05-17-2015, 02:13 PM
I am talking about next year and the next and the next how ever long it takes. You never know even this year if you know who does the unthinkable you know what.
05-17-2015, 02:24 PM
(05-17-2015 01:20 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]I think that most of us kind of took the NAS for granted. We didn't really know, understand, or care what they did as long as there were tailgates at away games and we got a t-shirt or two. Recent events pushed the NAS to the front, and we started paying attention.
I understand what you are saying about a committee, but the fact is that the ballot is going to be sent to thousands of people. Most of them are not aware of what has gone on, what the controversy is, and they will do one of two things: they will drop the ballot in the trash with the junk mail and not bother, or they will check the elect the ballot as it stands box. As a result, a write in candidate is more than likely doomed from the start.
If what write in votes are cast get split seventeen ways, you might as well not even have a write in slot. You can bet that the NAS board understood this when they allowed it on the ballot in the first place. You might want to think about your stance a little, because that's reality.
*edit* I've said this before, but it bears repeating... the NAS board and officers are composed of the people who cared enough about it, for whatever reason, to put their time, money, and effort into making the NAS run. They did not start at the top, they worked, hustled donations, volunteered at events, put in their sweat and paid their dues. They got to know the other people who made the NAS go. Eventually they knew enough people involved to get nominated by an officer and get elected. I can understand why the people who have done their time look at bit skeptically at the #FreeUAB people who showed up after Dec. 2nd and demanded to tell people involved what to do when and how to go about it, and demanding to be put into leadership positions. I know for a fact that the few of them I have a bit of acquaintance with are not shills for Watts and the BoT, and I suspect that some of the comments to that effect have also put them off. I'm not defending the bylaws changes, hell, I was at the meeting demanding that they be rolled back, but I have some empathy for their position in this.
You can point a finger at a couple of people in particular and question their connections, actions, and motives, but as a whole I think the NAS wants basically what the rest of us want. The fact is that the NAS is an arm of UAB, it is not an outside entity that can say and do what it wants completely freely. They have to be cautious in the same way that many UAB employees are about what they say and how they say it.
Very well said, sir, as was your comment on Carr Consulting. You are a voice of reason in a sea of discord. Thank you for your insight and input.
05-17-2015, 10:16 PM
(05-17-2015 01:20 PM)UAB Band Dad Wrote: [ -> ]I can understand why the people who have done their time look at bit skeptically at the #FreeUAB people who showed up after Dec. 2nd and demanded to tell people involved what to do when and how to go about it, and demanding to be put into leadership positions. I know for a fact that the few of them I have a bit of acquaintance with are not shills for Watts and the BoT, and I suspect that some of the comments to that effect have also put them off. I'm not defending the bylaws changes, hell, I was at the meeting demanding that they be rolled back, but I have some empathy for their position in this.
This can be applied to many instances in this fight. I know many of the band students that have been turned off by comments made in that facebook group and by people contacting them telling them how to fight and where to be. Many instances where I've had students come to me and say "Jess, do you see what these idiots are saying about us?" and I have to calm them down.
I know many of the band alumni who ask "Who the heck are these people and where have they been for the last *insert number* years?"
People see who the true leaders and the true Blazers are. Hopefully, when this is all said and done, it won't just be those leaders and Blazers at games like it used to be. Hopefully, we will never have a game as poorly attended as say the La Tech game this year.
Go Blazers.