Question #2: Regional Representation

[zuma]

What is your position on developing regional representaion on the WGA Board of Directors?

[greyhounder]

I am interested in pursuing regional representation. Someone had earlier mentioned something along the lines of the different regions acting as “sub-committees”. This would be a great way to spread the word about geocaching to some of our farther reaches through events (geocaching and/or community based).

I think, in a way, we already have strong “leaders” in some of our state regions. Perhaps these people would be interested in taking on some responsibility in organizing amongst themselves in whatever manner best meets the needs of the region.

But perhaps you were thinking more along the lines of having one board representative per region of the state. Ideally, this would be great. I’d like to see more people from more regions of the state nominated — and more people from other regions interested in running for the board. That might help in getting more regional representation on the board.

Bec

[K0rpl]

I Beleive that Regional Representation, is a great idea, and one that I feel very strongly about. I have talked about this to several board members in the past. Face it, right now, there are areas of the state with active cachers, and great active caches that do not have representation at the State association level. I agree that this should be a elected position, with eache region selecting there own representative.

Justin

[Lostby7]

[Jeremy]

[Team Deejay]

I’m strongly in favor of regional representation. For a BOD to be effective as a democratic institution, the population must believe that those elected are representing their interests. If people feel they are not represented, you will start to see “regional” groups springing up. Both Indiana and Illinois ended up with many small organizations, which are much less effective in dealing with the government entities which affect our sport.

The difficulty will be in the details, of course. The questions will be :

• How do we divide up the state?
• How many “at large” members and regional members on the board?
• What if there are no nominees from a particular region?

This will all have to be sorted out by the incoming board and then presented to the membership as possible changes to the by laws.

[Buy_The_Tie]

Although in theory this sounds like a good idea, I see that it could be fraught with many pitfalls.

The current way of electing BOD members will tend to lead to geocacher-rich areas having a chance at more representation on the BOD. I, for one, don’t see this as such a bad thing. The issues facing geocachers throughout the state aren’t all that different.

Imposing (somewhat) arbitrary geographical zones may artificially eliminate the individuals willing to devote the most time and effort to the WGA.

The biggest problem I’ve experienced on the WGA BOD is lethargy, not regional bias. We need energetic people willing to consistently devote a reasonable effort towards the WGA.

More important than geographical location:
– Willingness to consistently devote effort to the WGA.
– Willingness to consider input from throughout the state.

[AuntieNae]

[Author]

Posts