2024 Resolution Feedback

Resolution  – to Amend the CALLERLAB Bylaws to Establish the Number of Governors at Twenty-One

This resolution was presented by the Board of Governors for consideration by the membership.

Click here to read the resolution – to Amend the CALLERLAB Bylaws to Establish the Number of Governors at Twenty-One.

If you have any questions, please contact the Home Office.

The most recent comments are at the top of each section.

Pro Comments

Vernon Jones – Springtown, TX, USA

I am in favor of this. Frankly, I don’t think the Board should have been reduced at all. It serves no purpose as it costs nothing to CALLERLAB. The BOG members pay dues and convention costs just like everyone else. Reducing the number will only lead to less  Of a chance of more representation. Less members will only lead to the “most popular” names being elected. Serving on the Board has taught me that sometimes the “most popular” names are not the best BOG members. We need more representation, thoughts, opinions and ideas. Now,‘although I would rather have it back at 25, I am in favor of 21 as compared to 18 so I will be voting in favor of this resolution.

Dottie Welch – Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

I support the resolution to revise the Bylaws to say: “The aim shall be to elect sufficient candidates each year to maintain a twenty-one-member Board of Governors”. This is a good compromise between our desire for diverse representation and our need for sufficient candidates to give the membership some voting choices. Twenty-one members is also a convenient number for avoiding ties and equalizing the openings at 7 members per year. It should be noted that we currently have four women on the Board, and also four Canadians, so we are improving our diversity.

Kenneth Diesburg  – Murfresboro, TN, USA

Sounds good to me

Terry A Headlee – Martinsburg, West Virginia, USA

No response

Jerry Gilbreath – Albuquerque, NM, USA

I believe that 21 is a good number and it would be a good tie breaker.

Harlan G Kerr – San Francisco, CA, United States

I support the proposed change and like many others realize that the reduction to 18 was a not as positive in retrospect as it seemed it would be. Having more BOG members broadens the representation provided to members, I could also support a return to 25 members. I believe that the lack of support for remaining with 18, indicates the membership desires to have more representation, not less.

Gloria Jean Vivier – Granby, MA, United States

The proposal to maintain  the number of delegates at 21 is reasonable.      This would eliminate the tie vote possibilty .  We have fewer callers at this  time so it does still allow for a representation of all levels of calling and  years of experience.    Having international callers should be suggested as part of the selection.    Being a woman caller it would also be nice to have a woman delegate.

Betsy Gotta – North Brunswick, New Jersey, USA

The Board functioned with 25 members successfully for many years. I did serve on the Board when it was 25 members.  I do not believe that a smaller number will help the Board to function better.  More members allows for the election of Board members who represent more different aspects of the square dance community such as overseas members, Advanced and Challenge callers, Women callers and traditional and community dance callers.  If the membership is smaller, more members will vote for well known callers instead of looking for people to represent all aspects of the square dance calling community. Bring the Board Membership to 21 at least!

charles trapp – halifax, Massachusetts, United States

Sound like a plan

Chet Miles – Driftwood, TX, United States

I think 21 is an adequate number and serves all purposes.

Barbara MacDonald – Cranberry Twp, PA, USA

It sounds very reasonable to represent more folks while avoiding the chance of a tie.  There is no cost to this proposal.

Roger Schappell – Fort Collins, CO, USA

All good points.

Ted Lizotte – Manchester, NH, USA

The membership already voted to approve a reduction to 18 BOG members a number of years ago.  We realized that we let thru an even number – causing possible future issues with tie votes.  We were reducing to 21 this year and felt it was easier to just leave it there.  It’s an odd number which is better, and it allows 7 per year, which is also fair.    As the BOG is a non-paid position and has minimal effect on CALLERLAB’s bottom line, I would have prefered to leave it at 25, but I lost that vote and I see no reason to rehash it – we’ve got bigger fish to fry, as it were.  Let’s leave it at the current 21 and move on.

Dave Vieira – Ocala, Fl, USA

I agree with the current proposal at this time. I would totally agree if one of the additions was for a European BOG and one for Aisapac BOG. We are an international organization.

Patty Greene – Monroe, NC, USA

I support this reduction stop at 21 – I think that it is a good number, and if we reduce further there will not be as many opportunities to have a diverse board, which I feel is important. I liked 25, but will be ok with 21. I like being able to have 7 open positions each cycle. Hopefully more people will consider running if they feel their chances are better.

Dick Otis – Reston, VA, United States

It makes sense to have an odd number. It makes sense to have an odd number that divisible by three. Therefore I support changing the number to 21. I will note that the larger a group, the harder it is to form a consensus.

Jerry Reed – Melbourne, FL, USA

Based on current Membership numbers, I believe this is a good proposal. I FULLY support an ODD number of Board Members this make a tie vote less likely.

Clark Baker – Belmont, MA, US

The next chairman, vice chairman, and 3 members of the executive committee are chosen from the board every convention.  Not every board member is willing to run for these important positions.  Having a larger board gives us a larger slate and likely a better executive committee.    Having sat on Callerlab’s 25 member board for more than a few years, I never felt it was too large.  Not all members speak on each issue.  We need opinions from local callers, traveling callers, overseas, mainly CDP/traditional, challenge, newer, long-time, male, female, gay, calling in schools, caller coaches, etc.  Having more than 18 will help obtain these varying viewpoints.

Richard Maurer – Ypsilanti, MI, United States

I’m fine with the resolution.  I agree, if you have too many members on the board it gets unwieldly.  18 could be better, but 21 is okay.

Curt Braffet – Carlock, Illinois, USA

21 sounds like a reasonable number. It will not allow for a tie which I believe is a very positive decision.

Mel Wilkerson – Jindera, NSW, Australia

I think 21 would be a good number and should be fixed there.   It works well  with the structure of the board, where each serves a 3-year term and 1/3 or 7 will stand for re-election on rotation each year.    They meet and do overwatch on policy, finance and the “big picture stuff” while the executive does the Business-as-Usual Day-to-day management of the organisations activities as required.    I am in favour of fixing the number at 21

Piet Walhout – Apeldoorn, nl, Netherlands

Maybe CALLERLAB can add that at least 1 member of the BOG must be an “overseas” (Europe, Asia, Australia) member.

Vern Vernazzaro – Las Vegas, NV, United States

I do not have a positive or negative position. I just would like to know why we need twenty one? What are the additional three going to be doing?     I have been at the head of a non-profit organization with 11,000 members since 2005 and the board has 30 members. This is down from the original 40 and I am looking at possibly lowering it to 25 in the near future. I have found that unless you have sufficient need for the higher number it isn’t always a good thing. Over the years I have learned that the more folks you put on a committee, the less organized they become.     Having said all this, I am not against this resolution , just not overly enthused wiith it.    This survey should have had a third option besides the Pro or Con. Something along the line of not ready to support or reject the resolution. I had to pick one and neither quite fit the bill.

Masaharu Hiraga – Honjo, Saitama, Japan

Let us go as planned.

Steve Turner – Bridgetown, WA, Australia

My experience with organisations is that the smaller the committee the more productive they can be.

Mike Sikorsky – Apache Junction, Arizona, United States

I fully or number of boarding governors had a 21. Bylaws currently says 18 and I want to change to 21. I would prefer stay at 25 if that’s not part of this resolution. More we have on the board, the more chance European and Asian members can be elected

Tom Crisp – Tucson, AZ, US

Why we need so many BOG is unclear.  If 21 works better than 18 (only to avoide a tie) I would be infavor.   Our leadership is most important.   Tom Crisp

Jeffrey L Palmer – COLORADO SPRINGS, CO, United States

The resolution as submitted seems to make sense.

Kazuya Tsujimura – Kawaguchi, Saitama Pref., Japan

It would be good if board members could be elected from a wider area

F. Gene Turner – Knaresborough, N. Yorkshire, England

I believe that the Resolution Proposing  to Amend the CALLERLAB Bylaws to Establish the Number of Governors at Twenty-One is in the best interest of the CALLERLAB members and future governance of CALLERLAB.

Detlev Junker – Worms, Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany

Con Comments

Glenn Wilson – Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

I do see the need for an odd number of Board members. To me 21 seems high and arbitrary. Why so many? Do they all have jobs within the board? As far as I’m concerned, I’d be happy with the number at 17. It allows for all the attributes the board needs, but also streamlines the board.  Glenn Wilson, Brisbane, Australia.

Ron Giuliana – Irwin, PA, USA

I think it should be lower. An odd number would be better. If we lower it to 15, we can elect 5 each every 3 years, then it is an odd number. Smaller is more productive as others have stated. As for requiring an overseas spot on the BOG, that is an interesting proposal. The logistics of which would require additional discussion.  I was on a non profit board. Our budget was $63 million and we had 9 voting members plus support staff. I think leaner is better.

Jon Jones – Arlington, TX, United States

I believe the number should stay at 25.  This gives more room for Governors to serve the membership.  More members will be represented if we leave it at 25*.  Jon Jones


*Note – the current number of Board of Governors is at 21 as of the 2024 CALLERLAB Convention.