BOD Musical Chairs

So why did the president and vice president step down after one meeting?

 

What happened?

 

What? Is this true? Are they still going to continue on the Board?

 

I just read the email blast from RCSC. Thanks to Kat Fimmel and Karen McAdam to step up to take their places. So glad to hear that Mr. Collins and Mr. Nowakowski will continue on as Directors! Let's support them all!

 

Well, we all know this process most probably took place in an Executive Session so there's a very good possibility/probability that we will never learn why this happened!

 

WHAT THE HECK??
RCSC Board President & Vice President Change Announced
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

RCSC Members are advised that the President and Vice President for the 2023 RCSC Board of Directors have changed due to personal reasons. These positions are now held by Kat Fimmel (President) and Karen McAdam (Vice President).

John Nowakowski and Steve Collins will retain their seats as Board Directors.

The next meeting of the RCSC Board (The Exchange) is scheduled for Monday, February 13, 2023 at 9am in the Sundial Auditorium.

 

H’mmm…. stepped down voluntarily?
Or volun-TOLD?

 

I think a reasonable assumption could be that John wanted/needed to step down and Steve simply didn't want to serve as president?

 

I'm thinking we shouldn't have to assume anything. Maybe they could have taken a minute to compose a sufficiently respectful but sufficiently explanatory statement. I hope me and Pete are wrong, but:
I'll tip my hat to the new Constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no
Yeah
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

 

I hope you're right FYI.

 

I would hate to see John or Steve resign. It seems that the BOD turnover has been high. Bill would know if it has been high or not. I think I remember Bill saying that way back when board member terms were only one year. A two year term is about right in my opinion.

Also, should the replacement for director Wilson been selected from the recent candidate pool? Bill, would you have agreed to replace a board member opening, if asked? Just asking.

 

Who would have told them to step down? They are in control. That's one theory I don't buy.

 

Agree, effective communication by the 2023 RCSC board is essential to building trust with the membership. Much needed after the historical lack of and often mixed messaging by past boards.
An Executive Session not so long ago dismissed a director, with no public explanation. As information and misinformation filled social media sites and Sun City Independent’s Letters to the Editor section, the community rallied to champion on behalf of the dismissed director successfully being re-elected. Now she’s our vice-president.
So far, at least, details of the Nowakowski/Collins privileged decisions to vacate their board officer positions have not been leaked. I honor that, but can’t help but wonder….
Detours can often be the best part of the journey.

 

I've stayed away from commenting, simply because we know so little about why? It's not a good look and frankly i'm disappointed. That said, i always functioned under the principle that if whatever i wasn't giving my time to wasn't enjoyable, i quit. The good news is, the guys didn't quit, they simply stepped aside. Until we know more, i will leave it at that.

The other side of the equation is one i have written at least a couple of times as a tutorial. Here it is again: When i was elected to be a president of a local union i immediately felt obligated to have every answer. It was folly on my part. Within a scant month or two, i came to understand my role was to listen to the membership and then find ways to accomplish what they wanted. Duh, it's the simple.

Hopefully the new majority of board members come to grips with their first responsibility, listening to the membership. The tragedy is this $56k survey could have been the perfect starting point...except is was so poorly done it won't provide much in the way of a path forward.

 

If this is the board and management’s idea of transparency, someone needs to call them out.

 

I'm sure it was all done in executive session and if the reasons are of a personal nature I have no problem and respect their privacy.

The only thing we need to know is that the positions changed hands.

 

I don’t agree at all. One stepping down is one thing but not two plus a resignation all in a month?

 

I disagree too. It's about process. It's about transparency. Litmus test: if two people you most always agree with just got replaced by two people you don't - would you be asking for an explanation? If we ask Directors for transparency, then we should ask it of all of them at all times. Vacating the two highest positions on the Board simply looks strange and deserves an explanation of some sort.

 

Maybe changing from a Title 10 to a Title 33 wouldn't be such a bad thing after all! So far, we don't know how they filled Sue Wilson's seat, how many Members expressed interest in serving, and why they decided to choose who they did, nor how the original officers were chosen and now, how their replacements were chosen. I certainly didn't foresee a coup coming soon after the election! Is that what we are experiencing?

On the Ad Hoc Committee, I was against the election of officers being held in closed session because it isn't listed in the Executive Session bylaw section. I was told that it was so they could ask questions of each other about their time/ability/commitment to serve in that capacity. I think it was the last compromise I made on the committee.

If people put themselves on the ballot to be a Director, they should be prepared to do business in open session. That's the way it is done in the public sector. Every vote I made during eight years on the school board was done in public, with the public and press sitting there. Not easy, but at least my constituents knew how I voted. I realize this RCSC isn't a government entity, but I think hiding behind Title 10 is not helping things.

 

It seems some want to believe that there was some nefarious deed that forced the two directors to resign as officers.

I think a very reasonable explanation is that perhaps the President has some personal and or family matters that would require he devote most of his time towards that rather serving as board president. And as far as Steve stepping down as VP, he probably didn't want to serve as president so he stepped down as well.

The good part is they both will continue to serve on the board.

Other than that, if there was a personal reason John stepped aside, then his personal issues are none of my business.

As a side note, I suspect Sue Wilson resigned because she was no longer in the majority. So much for being a team player.

Just my opinion.