What is the PSIA-NW Board Doing for You???
by RJ Nichoalds PSIA NW Tech Team Member

It is Saturday morning September 18, 2004 at 8:00 AM. Where am I??? Sitting in a chair in the back of a conference room at the Best Western Hotel in Kent, WA, listening to the assembly of one of the two annual PSIA-NW Board Meetings. Why am I here??? That is the same question I am asking myself.

As a member of the NW Tech Team, we are required (strongly encouraged) to attend at least one of the two annual Board Meetings. Since I missed the Spring meeting, I figured I better get to this one. Believe me, there are several other things I would rather be doing on a Saturday morning.

After all the officer’s reports, several proposals were brought before the board. Some I wasn’t terribly concerned with, others I found quite interesting. One proposal in particular inspired me to write this article.

Jack Burns the Administrative VP, by the direction of the Board President Ed Younglove, put a proposal before the board to reduce the physical size of our board in half to 14 members. This also included realigning and reducing the regions from 10 to 7. The argument I thought was pretty sound. This proposal was designed to do the following:

• Bring our board size in alignment with other divisions as it relates to board size per region’s membership.
• To have a more responsive efficient Board
• This would shift some of the Board workload to Amy Zahm, the newly hired Education Program Director
• Be responsive to the membership survey
• Ultimately, show an annual cost savings in excess of $8,000
• This proposal also suggested it be done in one full swoop, starting fresh with a newly elected Board.

I am thinking, “This is great!! Let’s clean up this board and get some fresh ideas, eliminating a lot of self serving individuals who have held these board seats forever.”

So, now this board is faced with eliminating their positions as board members and changing the alignment of the regions within the NW Division. The floor was then open to discussion. I am thinking, “What’s to discuss??” (Remember, I am just an observer and have no “official” say in these meetings.) Well, here are some excerpts from the Board Meeting Minutes, in italic type, that helped change my mind – followed by my thoughts at the time, in bold print.

• First, in downsizing the Board we need to be aware of maintaining expertise. Financial, insurance and legal talents (that) are important to this board. – Good point!
• We need to do a better job of calling on people who will share their talents. – Oh crap, I am going to be recruited for more volunteer work.
• The perceptions used to formulate the idea of reducing the board are a bit erroneous. Using the combination that we have 28 and other divisions have 12, we are the only division that is represented by concession schools that aren’t represented by resident schools. You don’t have the consistency of the representation by membership to one voice that you would have at a mountain – you have multiple voices across the mountain. – Another good point.
• One to two percent of the budget is not critical when it comes to giving membership access to the board and organization, even if it is only a perceptive access. – Good point!! Is the $$ savings really enough to justify the changes??
• We are mandated by policy to revisit this issue every five years. – It needed to happen to satisfy the bylaws of the organization. Good for Ed & Jack to spear head this unpopular task.
• Unless we couple this with a direct benefit to the membership, they will not see anything. If we would say that the $8000 reduction in expense could go toward reducing dues. We need something tangible to show them. A free clinic is also a good idea. – Good point! What is going to be given back to the membership with this savings? Hmmmm, $2.58 reduction in annual dues?? It would cost more to reprint the membership renewal forms.
• We need to reach out more to membership and get them involved. Invite members to come to a board meeting to see what’s going on. – You are all invited…the whole membership.

After hearing this discussion, I decided that I think our board is doing a pretty good job representing our entire division. We are one of the most diverse divisions because of our concession ski school programs and our board should reflect that diversity.

More importantly, I was thinking along the lines of a little self preservation. “If the board gets smaller, I get volunteered for more administrative tasks. My heart is on the snow, not in the board room.” With the board remaining the size it is, I will have more time to do what I want to do; ski and run clinics.

So, maybe you are thinking you should check out the PSIA-NW Board and what they do. Well, check out our website (www.psia-nw.org). To find out which board members are up for reelection this year, check out page 15 in this newsletter. Get your plan together and run against them. I for one will NOT be running for a board seat this year. I am quite happy stopping in once or twice a year making sure that the board is on track. For the most part, I think they are.