On Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:26:47 GMT, you wrote:

>It is one of those things that I don't think makes a whale of a lot of
> difference.  Typically, at least in fairly large historical societies, the
> board proposes a slate and just the folks who attend the annual meeting vote.
> They, the membership, have very little chance to really make a difference.
>Early in my career, I worked for a society that had a fair sized endowment
> fund.  The 'young turks" used to dream we could round up a thousand or so new
> members (at $25 a pop) and stuff the annual meeting with our folks and grab
> control of a $20 million dollar fund for our own evil,  but history related,
> purposes.
>

        Hodcary, I think you are wrong to say it doesn't matter.   I
just  responded to this inquiry by telling of how we lost our 78 year
old art museum, aided in part by the packing of the board by the "in"
group.  They then used corporate hard ball hostile takeover tactics to
wisk the museum, its collection and endowment away while the
membership slept.   During the fight (successful) to get the museum
back they pulled the very thing you jokingly refer to by buying up to
500 votes to use against us.  We have our museum back, but we paid a
heavy ransom to do so.  We vow never to become complacent about  the
museum or the trustees again.  Full member voting rights does matter.

John Bing
Member of the Board
--
John A. Bing
[log in to unmask]