Member-owned museums (always non-profits) ought to have board members
elected by the membership at large, at perhaps an annual meeting.  However,
as a practical matter the nominees themselves always have to be picked by
the board's nominating committee and it's not always easy to find the
committed people who are willing to serve.   Sometimes the CEO helps,
sometimes the board itself, sometimes people ask to be nominated.....no
matter how it's done, the CEO needs to step back and let the board do its
job.    As a matter of law, at least in member-owned non-profits, nominees
must be allowed to come from the floor at the annual meeting or written in,
if there is a mail ballot.

Ross Weeks Jr.
Historic Crab Orchard Museum
Tazewell VA

----------
> From: Indianapolis Art Center <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Ethics question on election of Board of Directors
> Date: Friday, March 21, 1997 9:12 AM
>
> At 12:09 AM 3/21/97 GMT, you wrote:
> >Our museum has a BOD elected by the BOD.  Cantidates are suggested by
> >the general membership.   I see this as an attempt by the Director to
> >excercize totalitarian control.  I have never encountered this before,
> >all groups I have worked with before have a BOD elected by the general
> >membership.
> >Is this ethical?
>
>
> Most boards have a Nominating Committee who interviews candidates
suggested
> by the Board, Executive Director, or itself.  Candidates are then
generally
> voted in by the entire board based on these interviews and/or
> recommendations and possibly later confirmed by the general membership.
I
> don't see it as totalitarian control, because one would assume that the
> board will do what is best for the institution as a whole rather than
> according to self-interest.   I don't see how a membership of, say, 3000
> could possibly agree on *the* best candidates for the board otherwise.
>
> Julia Moore
> Indianapolis Art Center