1. Welcome to Taxidermy.net, Guest!
    We have put together a brief tutorial to help you with the site, click here to access it.

NTA having regional directors

Discussion in 'The Taxidermy Industry' started by John C, Aug 1, 2013.

  1. jim tucker

    jim tucker Active Member

    3,042
    20
    Why don't we beat prospective candidates until they break and tell all their secrets. JEEZUS it's starting to sound like the GESTAPO not the NTA. :(

    We act like the tools to STOP WHAT HAPPENED were NOT already there, it just took someone with big enough balls to use them. Why does everybody seem to forget that simple fact? I suspect that:

    1. The CRAINS or any other past Director would pass a "background check"
    2. They all had many years of service
    3. They were all well know/respected individuals in taxidermy

    In the future this kind of thing needs STOPPED IMMEDIATELY instead of letting it get CLAWS. No amount of "vetting" can stop it. It takes a vigilant membership that makes its wishes known

    Everyone is looking to make things WORSE with all this crazy talk about background checks and 3 years consecutive membership. We sound like the gun lobby not taxidermists.

    Just for the record is the current board all up for "background checks" and do they all have 3 years of un-broken NTA service? I have to say all this talk sounds insane or worse.
     
  2. antlerman

    antlerman NTA Life Member #0118

    12,573
    3
    Sure leaves me out, but thats ok. You MUST do what's right for the best interest of the NTA and it's membership.

    In fact, I was asked if I would except a nomination to fill a vacated board position. Although my heart says yes, my common sense says no. There would be those who would find fault in the NTA over it and I shall do nothing to hurt our recent positive gains. I'll always be here to help from the cheap seats, but lets not give the nay sayers any ammunition. However, I do think background checks is a little much. Might want to check to see what prescription drugs one takes too. Some can have lasting effects on ones ability to make wise decisions and choices. Just saying.....


    and for the record........are we trying to run a taxidermy organization, or the Secret Service? I'm starting to get confused.
     

  3. Old Fart

    Old Fart Active Member

    Jim Tucker and antlerman are right, background checks are NOT the answer to the problems that have plagued the NTA. Past problems, as I see it, were cause by BOD members concentrated from one region and officers and BOD members without any kind of term restrictions. Regionally elected Directors could solve the first problem, but the officers would also need to be from different regions, to some degree. Term limits are a whole different "can of worms", it can keep fresh blood coming in, but can also squeeze out really good people who are doing a great job.

    John, this is a good place to throw out the ideas and questions for discussion. Keep it up.
     
  4. I am trying to get that input!!

    I just hope people understand this is my doing research, nothing has even been thought about being taken to the board. Once I get the ideas outlined I will post it here for additional input.

    The NTA is about the members, without the members there is no NTA!! My whole objective on the forums is to keep the line of communication open and us talking!!!
     
  5. antlerman

    antlerman NTA Life Member #0118

    12,573
    3

    and you are doing a good job with that John.
     
  6. EA

    EA Well-Known Member

    Dare I say it, but model it after a Union.

    Your State has their officers. Then each State elects delegates to represent them at a meeting with your Regional Directors. They take that States wishes/concerns to the Regional. The Regional then takes the message to the Board.

    The number of delegates is based on the number of members in the State Assc. Bigger States earn more delegates, but each gets a least 1. .

    Information passes from Board to Region Director to the Delegates and they take it back to their State and vise versa. Travel and meeting expenses would be cut because you only need to send a couple people or less. Everyone is still represented and heard and it's less confusion and more efficient than a meeting with 150 people with 150 ideas.

    Just a thought. I will now shut up. LOL
     
  7. Kind the plans but the state president with be the rep. Like I said in another post the. One state one vote, its hard enough keeping stuff straight now, add 300 more people and Katy bar the door.

    The state Presidents will be the reps. More like the senate for now. Maybe down the road in years, but firs things first plug the holes in the boat. Just another thought without each state being represented equally, the assoc. could fall back into the status as it was just a few moths ago with a bunch of people from one regional controlling the whole sheeebang!
     
  8. taxi_grl_ga

    taxi_grl_ga Active Member

    Overall I say yes to this idea. Here are my thoughts:

    Keep the three year rule as a base standard, but allow members an opportunity to qualify for the position early if they so desire.

    If someone would like to enter a position before being a member for 3 years, give them a way to prove they can hack it to avoid handing it away to someone that may not fully understand the responsibility they're signing up for. My suggestions on how to do that:

    *I agree with whomever suggested a local membership vote on the individual, this could be a viable option to allow a member to try for a board position before the three year requirement is satisfied. The con of this is that it's basically a popularity contest. It CAN reflect time involvement and positive impact within the industry, but I can also see an easy path to poor politics beginning this way.
    *An exam or interview could possibly be developed that touches on the bylaws, requirements of the position, etc. I would suggest a verbal one that could be completed via telephone, online boardroom, or in person. The con of this is that it's knowledge-based only and does not reflect a person's level of dedication to said position.....or lack thereof.
    *Shadowing with another board member or state association representative for a set amount of time may also be workable. Completed hours = an opportunity to run for the position but any personal opinions formed by the person being shadowed of the person shadowing will have to be considered null and void. I personally feel that the members should always decide who is serving the board properly and who is not via vote. I don't feel the opinion of one person should exclude anyone from anything, that's why it MUST rely on completion of hours alone as opposed to approval vs non approval of shadowee. This method may showcase dedication, but will reflect neither receipt nor retention of information offered during said hours.

    There isn't a foolproof plan for this kind of thing that I can see. There will always be overachievers, middle roaders, and bad apples...no matter what you do, there will be someone somewhere that wants test the checks and balances looking for a loophole through which to force their personal agenda. Conversely, there will always be someone somewhere with nothing but positive energy and good intent to pour in as well. To me, the bad apple risk is simply the nature of the beast when a large number of people are trying to organize themselves. The only REAL thing I feel we can do to guard against the negatives is PAY ATTENTION as members. GO to the meetings when we can, SEE how our board members interact with one another and conduct business. HEAR what they have to say and how they say it. SPEAK up to gain understanding for items which raise questions for us and VOTE out what isn't working.
     
  9. jim tucker

    jim tucker Active Member

    3,042
    20
    Man alive!

    This isn't that complicated. People do their duties as instructed or are fired. That would have stopped this whole ball of wax. Period.

    Sorry to say but if you are an employee of the NTA and they tell you to give the whole treasury to PETA you go do it.

    All this talk about qualifications and stopping fraud is making me dizzy. This crap is NOT the #1 priority of the BOD IMO.

    Guidelines for ELECTED MEMBERS after they are on the board are much more effective...IF and ONLY if they are adhered to and enforced.

    Treasury Control and ethics are what needs to be straightened out for the future.

    You would have to be INSANE to join the BOD with all the HOOPS that are being asked to jump through.

    You people realize this is all VOLUNTEER with little to ZERO upside.
     
  10. Nancy C

    Nancy C Well-Known Member

    If it were purely volunteer work it would be one thing, but it goes far beyond that. It actually costs an NTA member to be on the board of directors. Cross-continental travel is mandatory.
    And that's only the first hoop.
    I'm not saying that's a bad thing at all. Ideally, anybody who cares about the NTA enough to want to be on the BOD should already be traveling to the annual conventions, but it could still be a factor for some members, especially in the event of unforeseen expenses.
     
  11. Old Fart

    Old Fart Active Member

    I might suggest this.......Have the State Presidents serve as that state's representative, IF they wish. But make it optional for the state to designate their representative if they(the officers and state BOD) so choose. Sometimes the office of President is a pretty "full plate".
     
  12. 3bears

    3bears Well-Known Member

    5,589
    976
    MN
    Requiring the state president to be the NTA rep. is no different than the failed affiliate program. Regional is just that, regional. For the most part, a state doesn't make up an entire region. If any particular regions have too many organizations for one person to handle than have more reps, but still only one unified voice going into board meetings.
     
  13. It is different, the state President would be the rep for that state assoc, they State Pries, could hand it off.

    Jim, its going to fixed!!!!!
     
  14. 3bears

    3bears Well-Known Member

    5,589
    976
    MN
    John, by that being the case you require every NTA member to also be a member of their state association, to be represented in the NTA. To me, this seems like an affiliate requirement.

     
  15. Kerby Ross

    Kerby Ross KSU - Class of '83; U.S. Army - Infantry (83-92)

    ...

    ...
     
  16.  
  17. Kerby, you are way out on a limb on this and are reading onto it the idea.

    The State rep, i.e. the state pres. would be a like the the city councilmen, should there be a need for the NTA to help out on the state level, they would be the main point of contact. I think there is a lot of people reading into this and making up rules in their minds. All it would be is a quicker way to reach out for help to the state.

    Like when the stuff happened in Missouri a few years back. The NTA would not tell the state you have to do anything.

    The state Assoc. members could bring things to the NTA as a group,like places to hold the future convention, or a NTA sanctioned regional convention out west. Its a way to get all the state members to input to the NTA with the state Pres. of the state association rep being a point of contact.
     
  18. Old Fart

    Old Fart Active Member

    I have seen nothing to indicate that the NTA has, or is planning, any kind of "membership" requirements. The only thing I've "read into" this is that every state would have a representative or "go to" person to deal with the NTA. Working with the states was a hallmark of the NTA back in the 80's when the state organizations were coming into being. And there were NO membership requirements then. Actually there were "some" in the NTA leadership at that time, who had to be dragged "kicking and screaming" into helping the state associations form. But that's another story. I am 100% against any kind of mandatory affiliation, of any kind, but I don't see that here.
     
  19. Kerby Ross

    Kerby Ross KSU - Class of '83; U.S. Army - Infantry (83-92)

    ...

    ....
     
  20. Kirby you just want to play games with this. Want to talk circles. then talk circles. We are simply trying to make sure everyone has a voice. members, nonmembers too. By dreaming up things like you are doing the debate goes nowhere. You keep reading things into the simple way I represented a POSSIBLE way for everyone to have a contact and the NTA have a contact with everyone NONMEMBERS included.

    You are the typical infantry officer, lol. making a big deal out of nothing lol.