Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2016 21:19:04 GMT -6
There will also be a fifth choice, which is leave it like it is.
Whichever of the 5 choices gets the most votes will win. Mr Bonine decided to do it this way because he knew none of the proposals would get over 50% on their own. Is this legal? Well the parliamentarian will claim it is...
Also, have the four new plans been approved by the executive committee? As Mr Bonine insisted they must before the January meeting...
Interesting tactics by slick Eddie.
|
|
|
Post by publicgradprivatedad on Jun 3, 2016 6:50:03 GMT -6
There will also be a fifth choice, which is leave it like it is. Whichever of the 5 choices gets the most votes will win. Mr Bonine decided to do it this way because he knew none of the proposals would get over 50% on their own. Is this legal? Well the parliamentarian will claim it is... Also, have the four new plans been approved by the executive committee? As Mr Bonine insisted they must before the January meeting... Interesting tactics by slick Eddie. Where did you hear about the "5th choice"? I would guess the reason the proposals had to be in by a specific date and the agenda wasn't released until about a week later that the executive committee at least had a chance to look at them and approve, even if by email or conference call. It will be interesting to see which one if any of the other 4 plans gets the most votes, at least then we will start to see how the Principals feel about the split.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2016 6:58:57 GMT -6
There will also be a fifth choice, which is leave it like it is. Whichever of the 5 choices gets the most votes will win. Mr Bonine decided to do it this way because he knew none of the proposals would get over 50% on their own. Is this legal? Well the parliamentarian will claim it is... Also, have the four new plans been approved by the executive committee? As Mr Bonine insisted they must before the January meeting... Interesting tactics by slick Eddie. Where did you hear about the "5th choice"? I would guess the reason the proposals had to be in by a specific date and the agenda wasn't released until about a week later that the executive committee at least had a chance to look at them and approve, even if by email or conference call. It will be interesting to see which one if any of the other 4 plans gets the most votes, at least then we will start to see how the Principals feel about the split. It was on the letter Mr Bonine sent out on Wednesday.
|
|
|
Post by chalmetteowl on Jun 3, 2016 7:20:35 GMT -6
There will also be a fifth choice, which is leave it like it is. Whichever of the 5 choices gets the most votes will win. Mr Bonine decided to do it this way because he knew none of the proposals would get over 50% on their own. Is this legal? Well the parliamentarian will claim it is... Also, have the four new plans been approved by the executive committee? As Mr Bonine insisted they must before the January meeting... Interesting tactics by slick Eddie. bye private schools... the ones who want to leave it like it is have been united through this process, but now the anti-split vote is potentially split four ways? i think the spineless exec committee is on your side...
|
|
|
Post by publicgradprivatedad on Jun 3, 2016 7:53:26 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jun 3, 2016 8:41:55 GMT -6
I agree, but does anyone have any thoughts on a potential FAIR proposal that would have passed if things were done absolutely correct? I personally think no.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2016 8:48:08 GMT -6
I agree, but does anyone have any thoughts on a potential FAIR proposal that would have passed if things were done absolutely correct? I personally think no. I like the JV championships followed by the real championships. Lol
|
|
|
Post by eag on Jun 3, 2016 9:26:14 GMT -6
I agree, but does anyone have any thoughts on a potential FAIR proposal that would have passed if things were done absolutely correct? I personally think no. I thinking something like the Indiana plan or even the Ruston principals plan were submitted INITIALLY it probably could have passed. Split supporters who weren't just anti-private would have got what they needed and I think most smaller privates would have had no reason to oppose it and would be able to be convinced to support simply to avoid a split. But it would have to have been sold to the split proposers as an alternative before they proposed, and we didn't have the leaders to do it. I'm still incredulous that we couldn't come up with a better plan to solve the problem at hand. It's not like it would have taken geniuses. It just would have taken a few leaders willing and able to diffuse the anger with reasonable alternatives
|
|
|
Post by indy on Jun 3, 2016 10:12:50 GMT -6
I agree, but does anyone have any thoughts on a potential FAIR proposal that would have passed if things were done absolutely correct? I personally think no. I thinking something like the Indiana plan or even the Ruston principals plan were submitted INITIALLY it probably could have passed. Split supporters who weren't just anti-private would have got what they needed and I think most smaller privates would have had no reason to oppose it and would be able to be convinced to support simply to avoid a split. But it would have to have been sold to the split proposers as an alternative before they proposed, and we didn't have the leaders to do it. I'm still incredulous that we couldn't come up with a better plan to solve the problem at hand. It's not like it would have taken geniuses. It just would have taken a few leaders willing and able to diffuse the anger with reasonable alternatives I would have liked to have seen the coaches association come up with something and insist the principals accept it. I would like to believe they could have put aside their differences for the betterment of the LHSAA
|
|
|
Post by iknownuthing on Jun 3, 2016 10:37:58 GMT -6
I thinking something like the Indiana plan or even the Ruston principals plan were submitted INITIALLY it probably could have passed. Split supporters who weren't just anti-private would have got what they needed and I think most smaller privates would have had no reason to oppose it and would be able to be convinced to support simply to avoid a split. But it would have to have been sold to the split proposers as an alternative before they proposed, and we didn't have the leaders to do it. I'm still incredulous that we couldn't come up with a better plan to solve the problem at hand. It's not like it would have taken geniuses. It just would have taken a few leaders willing and able to diffuse the anger with reasonable alternatives I would have liked to have seen the coaches association come up with something and insist the principals accept it. I would like to believe they could have put aside their differences for the betterment of the LHSAA I am convinced that this is not a "plan" problem but a "people" problem.
|
|