[22634] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] Consistent Sectional chair start date?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Finder)
Tue May 21 11:58:25 2002
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
"Reply-To: "
Message-ID: <Pine.PMDF.3.95.1020521114715.538995005E-100000@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 11:57:06 -0400
Reply-To: Randy Finder <naraht@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>
From: Randy Finder <naraht@DRYCAS.CLUB.CC.CMU.EDU>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <F96bdVJWrGW6Ex3Akwt00001489@hotmail.com>
On Tue, 21 May 2002, Ken Hunter wrote:
> A few thoughts to add:
>
> 2. The issue of whether or not to provide SC's with consistent terms really
> comes down to which interest you are interested in serving. As a (former)
> regional staff member and current alumni, I would probably like to see some
> order on a broad scale and an end to the "silly season" of changing SC's
> during the spring conferences. However, if I were an Active, I would
> probably look at it in small scale and desire to see the transfer of power
> as soon as possible after the election. In other words, I would want for
> the new SC that my chapter had a chance to vote on be installed at the
> conference.
And if the section chairs did change on June 1 (for example), who would be
doing the oath of office?
> 3. Speaking on the matter of terms for SC's. What about term limits? I do
> think that they would be good for National Board Members, but what about for
> SC's?
Well, our bylaws used to reward long term board members by making them
eligible to be Life members, which is the exact opposite thrust than term
limits.
Longest time as a section chair (in a single section) that I specifically
remember is 9 years for Theresa Klier in Section 64, but I think that
there was one brother who was section 92 chair for much longer than that
(he also was Region II director from '74-'76, I think)
OTOH, Section 84 hasn't seen a chair serve more than 2 terms since
1987-1990 and averages about 1 a year...
YiLFS
Randolph Finder
>
> In L, F, and S,
> Ken Hunter
>
>
> >From: Mark Stratton <mark_stratton@YAHOO.COM>
> >Reply-To: Mark Stratton <mark_stratton@YAHOO.COM>
> >To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
> >Subject: Re: [APO-L] Consistent Sectional chair start date?
> >Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 08:09:39 -0500
> >
> >Brother Joel Natt wrote:
> >
> > >I agree and disagree (yes I am on both sides). I believe that as Randy
> >points out to have a consentient start date will benefit the fraternity and
> > >the students. It would create for a clear period of both transition and
> >closer; additionally it would allow the both the National Office and the
> > >students time to not only finish the year with the same person, but
> >address any final concerns that the out-going Section Chair was dealing
> >with >thus ensuring for a clear transition.
> >
> >I don't see how this is any benefit to the students (I don't think it's any
> >more detrimental than having the SC take over immediately after election),
> >though I suppose it would be (administratively speaking) easier for the
> >National Office.
> >
> >Here is my concern, however. While many sections have their elections in
> >the spring, some (I believe) may do them, say, in the fall. If you have a
> >uniform date (June or July 1, for example), you'l have a significant period
> >of time where the incoming chair won't take office and the outgoing chair
> >is a completely lame duck. And there's no guarantee the outgoing chair
> >will "deal with any final concerns."
> >
> >Sections should be able, I think, to choose the manner that is best for
> >them - students in one section may neither need nor want such a time frame,
> >while others may very well need it.
> >
> >Frankly, I don't see a *need* to establish a uniform date for section
> >chairs to take office (and the notes earlier about the difficulty that
> >waiting presents in selecting staff cannot be ignored). It might be a good
> >thing, but I'm not convinced it will be a good thing, nor am I convinced it
> >makes things better. Given that, I'd be hard-pressed to support it (not
> >that my support is necessary, mind you.)
> >
> >I don't find any positive benefit to the students or sections; I only find
> >a benefit to the National Office, and it's only a marginal one at that.
> >I'd have to say this isn't a particularly necessary change.
> >
> > >Furthermore it would allow the in-coming SC to get to know both the
> >students and existing staff to better help them assemble a Staff that will
> > >support the Section better.
> >
> >By and large, the students and staff already know this person (it happens
> >sometimes that isn't the case, but I suspect that's pretty rare.)
> >
> > >Think of it like the Presidential or Congressional Elections, they have a
> >period of transition and everything works for them still.
> >
> >Alright, the political scientist in me (and the student of American
> >government, I might add) wants to pull what's left of my hair out. There's
> >a reason there is a waiting period - there must be time to investigate
> >contested elections, people (congresspersons, for example) have to find new
> >residences in Washington, hire a staff, etc. NONE of these (except maybe
> >finding a staff, and even then,it's not nearly the same) exists in the
> >situation we're talking about. It's easy to want to always make parallels
> >to American government, but frankly, it's of very little use. They NEED
> >the transition time; we do not.
> >
> >But this is certainly an interesting discussion. I love these types of
> >philosophical debates.
> >:-)
> >
> >Fraternally,
> >
> >Mark Stratton
> >Region VI Parliamentarian
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
>
--
Leadership, Friendship and Service - Alpha Phi Omega
