MTFCA Forum

In the last week or two you should have received your Vintage Ford magazine for September / October 2023. In this issue is your ballot for new Directors on the MTFCA Board of Directors to serve for three years: 2024 through 2026.

I hereby endorse two of those candidates: Noel Chicoine and Rod Barrett. I know and have toured with both of these men. They are both enthusiastic Model T guys and strong supporters of the MTFCA. Very important is that they both have substantial business experience: Rod recently retired from his own business and Noel previously had his own medical practice. That experience is important in making management decisions as needed by our Board of Directors members.

I do not know the other two candidates and offer no opinion for them, however, you MUST vote for 3 candidates, not more and not less, or else your votes will not be counted.

Keith Gumbinger

What was the logic behind "must vote for three". It makes no sense, it not logical. If I must vote for those I don't know or feel not the better candidate I chose not to cast my vote.

Hi Jack, I can't explain the logic behind the "must vote for 3" rule as it's been that way for as long as I can remember and I've been a member of the MTFCA since about 1967.

Do any of you readers know why?

Keith

I met Rod Barrett through a mutual friend a year or so ago, and got a private tour of his collection. I was quite impressed with him as a person, businessman, and antique car collector. He will definitely be getting my vote. The other two I’m deciding based on what is published in the magazine.

Voting for three candidates, to replace upcoming expiring terms, has always been the rule. After all these years there are complaints? I agree that voting encourages new participation and leadership.

It's always been a slate of 3 candidates. Keeps the club new and vibrant, PLUS it gives people interested in leadership positions in the club a change to get their feet wet.

We have an excellent slate of candidates again this year, and I will vote for 3 of them. However, I'm with Jack on the 'must vote for 3' rule, I wish the MTFCA would revisit this requirement, I believe it actually discourages some of us from voting. I cannot think of an example of present day governance where a ballot is disqualified because the voter did not vote for a candidate in every contested position/office. (Local school board elections come to mind.) jb

I too (1) have wondered what the reasoning is for making me vote for someone I perhaps know and also at random for someone I don't know, and (2) have never seen an explanation of the reasoning behind it. I have occasionally seen people ask why, but have never seen an answer. Kind of like the old story about cutting the end off the roast before cooking it.

Let's NOT politicize any of the candidates , pro or con . After all is said and done, it's the voting MTFCA membership's decision . The percentage of members who personally know a candidate IMHO is very low . If any member is interested in running for Board positions, throw your hat into the ring !

Back to the top.

Every year we elect three board members. They serve a three-year term and are allowed three consecutive terms. We’d like to see board candidates from all over the country, not just from one area. The probability of you knowing each and every candidate is nearly zero.

If there was one of these candidates that was very well known, nationwide, and everyone voted for just this one candidate, and no one voted for anyone else, then we would have elected only one board member. Thus the vote for three candidate rule came into affect. This forces The voters to research all of the candidates, and then to vote for the best three in their opinion

Why not just vote for one to erase?

Thank you Farmer J. for explaining what we've been doing for quite a few years to elect members to serve. I don't quite understand why there's so many questions on what has been accepted and we've been doing for years.

At a long ago MTFCA National Tour I asked a club founding member just why we have to vote for three, no more, no less, candidates and his answer was similar to Farmer J’s answer above. I said to him in practice wouldn’t all the other candidates , besides the one big winner, all vote for their selfs, resulting in a tie of one vote each, requiring a tiebreaker card draw or something ? If so then what difference would a tie of zero votes each make ? I didn’t get an answer, so over the years I just read the candidates statements and pick to me the best three candidates. I think that is the point of the pick three, no more, no less rule.