Erik Olson wrote:
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004, Cheryl Rogers wrote:I actually don't have a problem with Premium Club Members having a "say" in AGA matters. Having a "say" doesn't mean they get a vote. Didn't AGA used to have something called a "Management" committee or something?Right, the management committee is the larger group than the boad that actually runs the various things that the AGA does, like, uh, "education". Originally the TAG editor was also on the MC because she wasn't on the board. I think you were as well for the 2 days you hadn't been on the board, right? The problem with that list right now is that it's basically the board plus Diana.I seriously equate the whole "have a say" with "do" here. They are one and the same. Otherwise, you get into some kind of "advisory panel" that more often than not doesn't have a clue what they're saying.
Well, then why don't we ressurrect the MC? The MC can be Diana, Mike Hellwig, and an appointed representative from each Premium Club (or any club--I don't care). Each representative must be on the MC for a year, and must be willing make themselves or their membership available for tasks.
I am still mulling this over. I think I am going to stick to my guns regarding the number of memberships. SFBAAPS is nickle-and-diming me here. They want me to provide x number of memberships, no more and no less. They are just going to have to get over it. BUT we might be able to pacify them with an additional "prong" of the program, i.e. involvement in the AGA on a management level.
-- Cheryl Rogers, Membership Aquatic Gardeners Association http://www.aquatic-gardeners.org _______________________________________________ AGA-sc mailing list AGA-sc@thekrib.com http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-sc