At least three other candidates are running for 2nd VP next year, as Mike mentioned in his Saturday lunchtime entry during the convention.  Whether you plan on supporting Mike or not (I’m not supporting or endorsing anyone yet), his website will provide very useful information for anyone who wants to learn more about how Toastmasters International works.

• Location – Probably the most important issue TI needs to look at.  This year’s location at Foxwoods is not near a major city or an airport, in fact attendees had to choose between flying to and from Hartford, Providence, Boston, New York or Newark.  The convention site is not within walking distance and has no public transportation to allow attendees to visit other places to go sightseeing, to eat or to stay over in another hotel (for those who were unable to reserve a room at the site or want to find a cheaper alternative).  I hope TI doesn’t bring the convention back to Foxwoods or other remote locations where the attendees are basically stuck at and make sure future conventions are at places where public transportation as well as alternative accommodations and places to go are easily accessible.
• Venue and fees – TI wants to place their conventions at a five-star hotel to show others what a world-class organization it is.  But is that what the average member wants?  Having the convention in a five-star venue cost lots of money that is passed on to the attendees resulting in exorbitant fees that many can’t afford.  Only 13 from District 30 attended this year’s convention, far less than the average.  And I’m sure most in D30 who would’ve loved to attend this year’s convention couldn’t because they either couldn’t afford it or was not worth the convention, lodging and transportation fees to go.  Many districts however are finding ways to cut costs at their conferences and are willing to hold them at places that are beneath the quality of a hotel, such as a college, in return for more attendance due to the lower price to attend.  Perhaps TI should look at what the member values at an International Convention and ask them how much they are willing to afford to go to one and what venue standards they are willing to accept.
• Voting at the Annual Business Meeting – In the aftermath of the vote on Proposal A, many are calling for electronic voting to at least be an option for Club Presidents to directly vote on such proposals and candidates for International Office, especially as most can’t attend a convention for reasons above or may not trust their District Governor with their vote.  Many organizations such as IEEE and just about every public company allows the member/shareholder that option.  For LinkedIn users, there is a great discussion on electronic voting in The Official Toastmasters International Members Group.  Hopefully there will be a solution soon that would both enable the Club Presidents to directly have a say on the issues and candidates while continue the tradition of allowing the candidates for face-to-face presentation and discussion that showcases their Toastmaster skills.

If Toastmasters International thinks the hard work is done by the passage of Proposal A, they should think again.  It’s only the beginning and they have a long way to go to make the proposal a success, especially as they’re giving the International Convention much more importance than ever.

However, I also mentioned to my friend that I don’t think Dietmar is going to win, in fact it would not surprise me if he lost big in the 3rd VP race.  Why would I say that about someone from District 30?  Someone who I think highly of?  Someone who made great contributions to District 30 and to Toastmasters?  The person who named me District 30 Toastmaster of the Year?

It has nothing to do with Dietmar.  It has nothing to do with Ralph Wallace, the other nominated candidate for 3rd VP.  It has to do with John Lau and the way the nomination process was handled by Toastmasters International.

John Lau wanted to run again for 3rd Vice President for the 2009-2010 year.  This past winter, Toastmasters International sent out the International Officer Candidate Survey for the Board of
Directors, past Board members for the last two years, Past International Presidents, current District
Governors, and Immediate Past District Governors.  The respondents list preferences for each of the four International offices, with the 3rd VP position being the lowest and the most contested.  John Lau reportedly received more than 70% of the votes for 3rd VP, the next candidate received less than half of that vote.  Dietmar Wagenknecht came in 4th place with less than a third of John Lau’s votes.  Ralph Wallace, based on a blog that has since shut down, came in 6th, though Past International Director Jenny Pagano claimed that he was not campaigning for the office when the survey took place.  And John Lau was not nominated, neither the 2nd vote-getter Margaret Wan nor 3rd vote-getter Kathy Miles.  It was Dietmar the 4th place candidate and Ralph the 6th place candidate.

Nobody outside of the Toastmasters International Nominating Committee knows why they made these selections.  And virtually everyone outside of District 30 and 23 (Ralph Wallace’s district) finds this hard to comprehend.  How come someone who nearly won the 3rd VP race last year and received overwhelming support from past and current Board and District officers not get nominated this year?  With the Nominating Committee prohibited from unveiling the decisions behind the nominations, we can only speculate.  Jenny Pagano thinks race and gender played a part in the process.  She also wrote a letter recently that mentioned some past indiscretions supposedly made by the committee.

Understandably there is an uproar over the selections.  What is the point of these surveys if Toastmasters International seems to ignore them?  Are they listening to the will of the members or are they only care about their own interests?

Well John Lau is running from the floor for 3rd VP.  And among those who were surveyed and give John 70% of the vote are current District Governors who will be carrying most of the votes for their districts.  While John won’t be part of the candidate program distributed at the International Convention, he will have his own candidate table and take part of candidate interviews.  And since most of the current District Governors were at last year’s convention in Calgary, especially as they were part of Top 3 training that TI started that year for International Conventions, they already are familiar with John Lau’s candidacy when he came close to winning that year.

One other thing to consider and it may be the pivotal factor in the 3rd VP race is Proposal A, especially with the International Leadership Committee.  The ILC is basically expanding the nomination process of the Top 4 International Officers to International Directors.  Many, including myself, fear that the supposed bungling of the 3rd VP nomination process this year could be compounded if similar situations take place with International Director races, perhaps several in one year.  With many prominent Toastmasters opposed to Proposal A, those who will be delegates next Friday can send a huge “eff you” (thank you Bill Simmons of ESPN.com) message to Toastmasters International by voting for John Lau and disregarding the nominated candidates because TI disregarded their views and wishes, in addition to voting down Proposal A which can cause further disenfranchisement.

As a District 30 member and a good friend to Dietmar Wagenknecht and his wife Heidi, it would be great to see him get elected 3rd Vice President of Toastmasters International.  But if I was one of the more than 70% who was surveyed that preferred John Lau for 3rd VP, I’d be steamed as well and take it out on the ballot box.  It would be impossible for me to keep an open mind if my opinion and with those of the huge majority are ignored.

I admit that part of what got me interested in this discussion is that the tactics Toastmasters International and its board used in promoting Proposal A reminded me of a set of tactics a past District 30 Governor and Lt. Governor of Education and Training have imposed on other District 30 officers in which there was no transparency, no input from the rank-and-file, and a possibility of a large schism between the leaders and the members.  I was going to write an entry about this as a reason to oppose Proposal A, but now I think I’m better off directly addressing the issues I have with this:

1. Best and worst case scenarios – While TI has mentioned what is great about implementing the proposed changes and claimed they used their own figures to justify them, there is always a possibility that things may not go well as planned.  As a software engineer, whenever I have to add new code or fix bugs, I have to look at not just the ideal or expected way to input and interface with the code but also look at how the code handles an error or an improper input so the program would not crash or cause problems.  TI has done very little in addressing what could go wrong with what they are proposing and whether the potential problems can keep the proposed system better than the current system.
2. Consolidating all District Top 3 training – In the past at least those who belong to a Region could attend a different Regional Conference if they are unable to attend their own Regional Conference for their training.  Now that it is all in one week in August, what would happen if a Top 3 officer is unable to attend?  I remember in 2006, the District 30 LGET couldn’t attend the International Convention in DC due to work demands, so it could happen very easily.
3. Costs – TI has not unveiled the costs of keeping the current Regional and International conventions vs. the new plan of consolidating speech contests and training to International – especially with paying all or some of the costs the speech contestants and the Top 3 District officers.  What if transportation costs, especially gasoline, skyrocket?  What if we have another 9/11 in which airline service can be suspended during the conventions?  Can the convention site adequately house all the 70+ contestants and the 200+ Top 3 officers along with thousands of other attendees, and are there neighboring hotels that can be used?
4. Interational Leadership Committee (ILC) candidate survey – This year, many considered the candidate survey to be a complete joke – one 3rd VP candidate, John Lau, received more than 70% of the survey vote and was not nominated for that position, while the 4th and 6th vote getter were.  Will the ILC take the candidate surveys seriously, or the scenario that apparently took place this year could happen again?
5. ILC candidate search – What if the ILC cannot find candidates?  Is it possible they can resort to “bullying” tactics if they were desperate to find someone?  That could be embarrassing to TI as the ILC was formed to find candidates to fill the officer roles, especially International Director.
6. ILC recommendations – Can the ILC set up recommendations or have any authority to make it easier for candidates to run?  What appears not to be addressed by TI is why there are so few candidates for each of the International Director spots and try to remove barriers that may prevent a potential candidate from running for office.
7. Region Advisor Marketing (RA) – If the RA conflicts with districts or the Board, what steps can be taken to resolve them?  TI can’t just assume that the RA can easily work with each of the Districts in a Region as each District and its leadership can be different.  Even neighboring districts can be radically different.
8. RA selection – Can the Districts in a Region have input on who should be selected as their RA?  It does not say in their FAQ.  Plus for the RAs to work well with their Districts, they should visit them at their conferences and other events prior to their selection, which can cost them plenty of money with no assurance that they will be selected.

I am not convinced that Proposal A can address the problems regarding costs of running their events, recruiting candidates for International office and serving the needs of the Districts as well as the members.  The way the Board of Directors unveiled this proposal is abysmal – they never publicize any sessions or any way for members to give input on how to fix what’s wrong, then when they unveiled this proposal they should have given more details as to why they came up with their decision.  They should have unveiled comparison of costs between the current system and the proposed changes as well as how the ILC is better at recruiting candidates than the current process, in an ideal situation and especially in some worst-case scenarios.  They also should have explained alternatives that they considered and why they were not used.  TI has done a poor job in addressing the complaints regarding Proposal A and have not given adequate examples of why this proposal can address these concerns.

With that I recommend a NO vote.

• Haven’t done much with publicity since taking over as VP PR.  Started to add files in the Arlington Heights club website and contacting nearby VP PRs to break the ice and see what they need.  Probably is going to be hard to get together until September due to summer vacation for several folks, including myself.   I’ll try to get a few things going the next couple of weeks.
• Will be at the Toastmasters International Convention at Foxwoods on Saturday morning to watch the World Champion of Public Speaking.  As I indicated in an entry last year, my 20th high school reunion will take place that evening on Long Island and will be in the area most of that week.  For those outside of Chicago that are reading this blog and will be at Foxwoods, I look forward to meeting you.
• Will try to get at least a couple of entries within the next couple of weeks, in particular regarding the upcoming changes and elections coming up for vote at Foxwoods.
• I recently joined Facebook due to my high school class reunion and have been checking their Toastmasters International Members group occasionally and mentioned some of my experiences and views on my page.  Already have several members outside of Chicago connected as friends.  Feel free to send me a friend request here if you have a Facebook account.

One Toastmaster blog that I’ve been checking often is one created by Lynn Thomas, the new District 30 Public Relations Officer.  It has some press release examples and she’s planning bigger and better ways to promote Toastmasters here in Chicago.

This is going to be an interesting year in Toastmasters, both at the International and local levels.  Looking forward to seeing what will happen.

Susan Ellsworth, one of the loudest critics of the proposed changes, recently put in her website a letter from Jenny Pagano, a Past International Director, expressing her concerns and stated her opposition to many of the changes:  http://www.pequodsystems.com/toastmasters/pagano.pdf.

I already notified a few District 30 officers I’ve contacted on a regular basis and ask them to forward this link to others.  Unfortunately this is going to fall on deaf ears on the Top 3 and the Immediate Past District Governor as the letter mentioned her take on the nomination process for 3rd Vice President and may give an unfavorable view of Dietmar Wagenknecht as someone who benefited from what was considered a poorly handled process.  The Top 3 and the IPDG have had a tendency to avoid controversial and challenging issues and would rather not hear such concerns or anything that they consider unfavorable.  Too bad for them they cannot prevent District 30 members from accessing such information online.  I’d go as far as to say that Dietmar will be far more receptive to Jenny’s concerns than the current District 30 leadership as he’s been willing to listen and address many controversial and challenging issues over the years.

I have my own concerns regarding the proposed changes, which I may present later on before the International Convention.  I may not agree with everything that Jenny wrote but I think everyone in the leadership part of Toastmasters needs to know what is going on with Toastmasters International and hear all views and from all sides.

Well next year the convention will be held at Foxwoods in Connecticut, just across the Long Island Sound from where I grew up in Suffolk County on Long Island.  And I just found out that my 20th high school reunion will take place on August 15th – the same day as the final day of the International Convention!  Assuming the reunion will take place in the evening, I could actually drive from my mom’s place on the Island, take the ferry across the Sound to Foxwoods early in the morning, watch the finals of the International Speech Contest, then return across the Sound with enough time to make it to the reunion.

So if the District 30 speech winner next year wins the Region V contest in June (which I will not be attending), or someone I know from one of the other Districts wins, perhaps that will tempt me to purchase a ticket for the contest and make the extra trip across Long Island Sound.  We’ll see….