COL Reports 4 to 6 - by PDG Douglas W. Vincent
.jpg)
COL Report 4, from Chicago, Wedensday, April 24th
I want to thank all of you who have taken the time to provide positive feedback and thanks for the work I have been doing to inform you of COL proceedings. Your kind comments give me the energy to share my late night ramblings and I am pleased that you find the information useful.
Today started with a proposal from the RI Board to raise dues. With little discussion it was approved to increase dues to $25.50 per half year in 2013-14, $27.00 per half year in 2014-15, $27.50 per half year in 2015-16 and $28.00 per half year in 2016-17. It is also important to note the minimum dues assessed per club is for 10 members, since there is an upcoming proposal to increase that minimum number.
Next was a controversial proposal to change the name of our 5th Avenue of Service to "Youth Service" from Next Generations, which was inserted at the 2010 COL. Some felt that the New Generations term is well defined in the MOP, but others felt a need for clarity and a better understanding of what it means to outsiders. They also felt that there is no need to define the term "Youth" and since it is youth we are serving, why not call it that. In a 308 to 205 vote it was decided to make the change which will make our D7080 committee happy. So as of July 1, 2013 it is Youth Service.
Another enactment to create a perpetual single RI theme caused much discussion with RI Board members and Presidents speaking against the concept. Others thought a single theme and logo would simplify things and help focus better on the branding of Rotary. Senior leaders expressed that team building is an element of successful leadership and the annual President's theme is a central part of this. They felt it energizes, inspires and helps motivate the team each year as well as drawing membership attention to RI's areas of focus.
RI indicted that the annual licensing income of over $500,000. would be at risk but others reminded us that most of the licensing fees, plus more for the purchases, is coming from Rotarian pockets. So this change might actually have the affect of saving more funds than that amount, overall.
It was stated that Rotary already has the motto of "Service Above Self" to be used externally for public branding while an annual Presidential theme has the purpose of internally emphasizing and promoting the goals of each President during their year. The motion eventually failed by a large majority so we will continue to see annual themes in the foreseeable future.
The suggestion of increasing the TRF Trustee Chair's term to 4 years and Trustee's term to 6 years had much debate but in the end did not garner much support. The proposers felt better funding and relationships could be established with partner NGOs/Foundations if a Chair was in the position longer. Personally I feel we should give more consideration to how a Chairman and Trustees are appointed before we worry about the length of their term. It has been a tradition for the RI Past President to become Chair but it is not a requirement and in the past a Non-PP Chair has worked quite well.
Today in proposal 13-86 the District Governors were given an additional duty to ensure the constitution and bylaws of their clubs comply with the RI constitutional documents, especially following COLs. It was noted that many clubs do not even know where their constitution and bylaw documents are located, let alone have them up-to-date according to RI requirements. It was brought to the attention of the assembly that there is no party shown as responsible for this activity in our bylaws and this enactment has corrected that concern.
It has been an exhausting 2 ½ days so far and this afternoon we were allowed some time off to take a break. However we are not making the progress or keeping the pace as anticipated, so it was decided our meeting will start one hour early tomorrow morning. Also presenters/speakers will have their time allotment reduced in order to shorten the length of time required to deal with issues.
This afternoon we had a delightful visit with a vacationing Rotary friend from Russia. I first met Irina Dogadina when I spoke her at District's Conference in Vladivostok, Russia a couple of years ago. We became friends and have kept in touch since then. As an Assistant Governor she has been a very active Rotarian and we have kept in touch. So when she learned of me being here in Chicago at the same time she was here, we arranged to meet. In the hotel lobby is was great to be together again and she had the unexpected opportunity of meeting some additional Rotary leaders she has met previously during their travels to her country.
This evening, thanks to coordination by PRIVP Monty, some of our Canadian delegates gathered together for a group dinner and the associated fellowship. While most of us have seen each other at Conventions or Zone Institutes there are always new friends to meet and the renewal of existing friendships as well.
We have an early morning tomorrow, so I'm taking advantage of an early evening turn in. Keep your eyes open for more, coming tomorrow.
COL Report 5, from Chicago, Thursday, April 25th
Even though we began an hour earlier, it was easier this morning with only brief discussions on the duplication and confusion caused by lack of a recognized title for newly nominated Governors. We have the DG, DGE, DGN but nothing to identify the newest member of the G-Team. So now our newest title added to the string will be DGND "District Governor Nominee Designate".
There was debate on a proposal to allow candidates for DG nominations to make presentations and circulate profile information to clubs during the selection process. Some felt that they do not know all of the candidates well, so an authorized process to do this would be helpful. This is especially the case in large districts or where voting is done at the District Conference. But the majority felt it would risk opening the door to campaigning which until now has been discouraged and is against our guidelines. So the request was defeated.
In some cases districts have had challenges when a DG was injured or passed away and could not complete their term. In such cases there has been a scramble to fill the leadership void. To prevent similar instances in the future it was decided that the District Nominating committee will select at "Vice-Governor" to replace a Governor in a case of temporary or permanent inability to complete their term. This would be done at the same time as DG nominations. The person has to be a PDG since they have attended a previous International Assembly which is mandatory for a DG to take office.
With regard to pilot projects and clubs, it was requested by the RI Board to increase the allowed sample of clubs up from 200 to 1000. This would allow a higher number of clubs to participate in pilot studies and provide more feedback and experience in trying new ideas and concepts. This will now be possible and the trials can extend up to six years.
Another discussion concerned determination of the locality of eClubs. Currently it shows as "worldwide or otherwise as determined by the board" which is deemed to be the RI Board. The proposer was seeking clarification by amending the wording to "club board". This was approved since it makes the policy more consistent with regular clubs.
There was discussion on enactment 13-105 to describe club autonomy, which is a generally recognized part of Rotary. It was suggested that clubs shall have autonomy as long as they do not act in a manner inconsistent with RI Constitution, RI Bylaws and the Standard RC Constitution, and followed the basic principles of RI. This is generally the way things have been in the past and just a desire to document.
Do not ask me why a common sense enactment like this failed 204 to 310, other than perhaps inadequate discussion took place due to time constraints. Some are starting to worry that we will not get through all of the issues and so there is a push to move on. My observation is that there has been little appetite for any drastic changes by many of the delegates and it frustrates others with a more visionary viewpoint.
In addition, I think that sometimes the wording used in a proposal or the way it is presented by the proposer, can have a huge influence on the success or failure of a motion. On top of this, when people get tired, are anxious to get done, or take it as a minor issue, possibly we do not give items the consideration they deserve. And I cannot explain how we sometimes seem to accept or reject a proposal then do the opposite on a similar item later in the day.
There was concern expressed regarding sustaining small clubs of less than 15 members with a proposal to merge them with another local club if they remained under 15 for two years. Some strongly felt that a club's service to their community is more important than the number of members and they need to be encouraged and helped to increase membership.
It was mentioned that RI is operating in a deficit position trying to serve the smaller clubs. It was noted that it can be hard for clubs to increase their membership, especially in small communities or rural areas. There were examples of little 8-9 member clubs having the determination to survive and an example given of one that is now over 50 members and going strong. The vote failed 100 to 420.
There was an attempt to change the Rotaract and Interact standing committee to New Generations and include all of the youth related programs. It failed 234 to 272. There is no appetite by RI for additional standing committees due to cost and I felt debate was voted closed without complete discussion. At the bottom of our fourth day many are tired and just want to get finished.
RIPE Ron Burton advised that there are already regular (not standing) committees for each of the Youth Programs. The chairs of these will form a RING Committee in his term. As a matter of interest a Standing Committee is one that is permanent, mandated by our bylaws with an operating budget. A regular committee sits at the discretion of the RI President so they may come and go each year, usually without much budget.
The suggestion to raise the minimum annual dues paid to RI up to 15 club members from 10 was defeated 133 to 385. While RI operates at a deficit serving smaller clubs the majority felt we should not penalize them, especially if they are doing good work in their communities. Rather we need additional resources and support to help them improve their membership numbers.
Following this same train of thought enactment 13-128 was voted to accept removal of the minimum entirely, so that a minimum will no longer be payable to RI by clubs under 10 members.
A proposal to give a 30% dues discount to new members under 35 yrs of age failed 92 to 423. Proposers suggested it would help recruit desired and younger members who may be concerned with membership costs. But RI reported the impact would be lost revenue of $4 million plus administrative costs required record keeping. The discount would be under $20 so I cannot see that it would influence anyone to join.
There was a suggestion that larger districts be provided with additional votes at COL. This concept of weighting for larger clubs and districts is not uncommon in other types of voting. Currently a member in a large district might have only 1/10th the influence of a member in a smaller district. Opposers quoted the United Nations policy where all countries have only one vote each. Further, that the COL should be based on equality which is not the same as equal and we should not let big districts impose on the smaller ones. After much debate the proposal failed 122 to 388.
A resolution was passed 284 to 219 asking the RI Board to consider introducing a category for Associate Members at the next COL and end the current pilot in June 2016. It is strange that another similar request to consider Friends of Rotary failed in a flipped vote of 218 to 293. Many felt the Friends concept would contribute to our Public Image and Awareness.
It has been a long day. We started 1 hour earlier than usual and ran 1 hour later than normal so people are tired. Tonight we had a wonderful reunion dinner with our DG classmates from 2005-06 and everyone was pleased that PRIP Stenhammar joined us. It was a late night and I ran out of steam, thus the reason this report is being later than usual. More tomorrow.
COL Report 6, from Chicago, Friday, April 26th
With travel plans made to depart tonight, many are anxious to work our way through the remaining proposals in a speedy fashion. Somewhere there must be a balance between giving fair consideration to the resolutions and raising the blue card to move debate be closed.
In a desire to streamline the process some delegates have withdrawn their District motions since they have predicted the assembly is not in a mood to accept many new ideas at this stage. The RI Board also had agreed in advance to consider some of the topics and so a few of those could be withdrawn as well, since they are already handled.
A resolution some were opposed to, including our District, was the request for RI to formally consider Rotex clubs. At first it seemed the proposers wanted another program but in reality they explained the intent was to recognize a Youth Exchange Alumni group. One district already has a group of 3000 established with the strategy to feed Rotaract clubs and plant the seeds for eventual Rotary membership. After discussion, it seemed to me that we should encourage this in the same way we do for TRF Alumni. But the motion lost 229 to 283.
There was a request for RI to consider establishing a "New Generations (or Youth) Service Day" at some time during the year. On that day youth could all be active doing something of service in their community. Some felt that we already have too many special days, while others felt it would be a great Public Image opportunity to promote. Motion passed with a small margin 254 to 251.
A big one was the resolution asking the board to make RLI (Rotary Leadership Institute) an RI affiliate or structured program of RI. Until now, it has been developed and delivered as a stand-alone initiative by a group of district and world leaders. I know that many will be celebrating the huge 332 to 181 approval.
In some Districts there are child programs for those between 5 and 12 years of age. A proposal was made for RI to consider recognizing "EarlyAct" clubs. The debate on this got very complex since other names used for similar activities are JuniorAct, KidsAct, RotaKids, etc. And the following resolution was similar except for proposing the name "KidsAct".
I believe that if proposers had combined their resolutions to suggest the concept without a specific name, that may have made the process simpler and increased chances of acceptance. With a close working relationship with Boy Scouts, some did not want to compete with that program while others felt we should take advantage of schools desiring this program. Many felt we could use this to start kids off on a pathway to Rotary ideals of service but both resolutions failed.
ElderAct was another suggestion which failed, keeping with the assembly's seemingly lack of desire to encourage consideration of new ideas and possibilities. Please note all these resolutions were not to develop the new program, but just asking the RI Board to consider them as future program opportunities.
Some expressed concern that we are not supporting any innovation by rejecting consideration of the new ideas proposed. Often the wording or the way it is presented makes things more complicated than they need to be. Most acknowledge there are some good program proposals but there is little appetite even to consider investigation or recognition of them by RI. I am one who gets frustrated at times with our lack of forward thinking and those suggesting new initiatives are also.
One example is regarding a controversial TRF policy limiting Rotarians and direct descendents from participating in TRF programs. In the past it was thought that this was due to US tax law restrictions, however the RI lawyer indicated that upon investigation this is not the case. So the only other reasoning is the fear of perception by the public, if Rotary relatives get to participate on GSE, Scholarships, etc. Yet we allow Rotary children to go on Youth Exchange.
With this background, a the resolution to allow a Rotarian and descendants to be exempt from this restriction was rejected. However on a later resolution a similar motion to allow grand children to participate in TRF Scholarships was referred to the board for consideration in a 313 to 184 vote. This inconsistency is what I cannot understand or explain, and I am sure this is in the minds of many delegates. It is hard to imagine what some are thinking or what influences decisions in the voting process.
So this brings us to the end of the formal COL process, except to celebrate the wonderful recognition that our Rotary Foundation received last evening from the Thomas Edison Foundation. This is is a very prestigious award which is presented annually to organizations that show innovation. Our Future Vision process was seen as an innovative and new way to deliver our services to those in need. It will also go a long way toward enhancing Rotary's public image and awareness with the media.
Doug Vincent
D7080 COL Representative
RC Woodstock-Oxford, ON Canada
www.DougVincent.com
I want to thank all of you who have taken the time to provide positive feedback and thanks for the work I have been doing to inform you of COL proceedings. Your kind comments give me the energy to share my late night ramblings and I am pleased that you find the information useful.
Today started with a proposal from the RI Board to raise dues. With little discussion it was approved to increase dues to $25.50 per half year in 2013-14, $27.00 per half year in 2014-15, $27.50 per half year in 2015-16 and $28.00 per half year in 2016-17. It is also important to note the minimum dues assessed per club is for 10 members, since there is an upcoming proposal to increase that minimum number.
Next was a controversial proposal to change the name of our 5th Avenue of Service to "Youth Service" from Next Generations, which was inserted at the 2010 COL. Some felt that the New Generations term is well defined in the MOP, but others felt a need for clarity and a better understanding of what it means to outsiders. They also felt that there is no need to define the term "Youth" and since it is youth we are serving, why not call it that. In a 308 to 205 vote it was decided to make the change which will make our D7080 committee happy. So as of July 1, 2013 it is Youth Service.
Another enactment to create a perpetual single RI theme caused much discussion with RI Board members and Presidents speaking against the concept. Others thought a single theme and logo would simplify things and help focus better on the branding of Rotary. Senior leaders expressed that team building is an element of successful leadership and the annual President's theme is a central part of this. They felt it energizes, inspires and helps motivate the team each year as well as drawing membership attention to RI's areas of focus.
RI indicted that the annual licensing income of over $500,000. would be at risk but others reminded us that most of the licensing fees, plus more for the purchases, is coming from Rotarian pockets. So this change might actually have the affect of saving more funds than that amount, overall.
It was stated that Rotary already has the motto of "Service Above Self" to be used externally for public branding while an annual Presidential theme has the purpose of internally emphasizing and promoting the goals of each President during their year. The motion eventually failed by a large majority so we will continue to see annual themes in the foreseeable future.
The suggestion of increasing the TRF Trustee Chair's term to 4 years and Trustee's term to 6 years had much debate but in the end did not garner much support. The proposers felt better funding and relationships could be established with partner NGOs/Foundations if a Chair was in the position longer. Personally I feel we should give more consideration to how a Chairman and Trustees are appointed before we worry about the length of their term. It has been a tradition for the RI Past President to become Chair but it is not a requirement and in the past a Non-PP Chair has worked quite well.
Today in proposal 13-86 the District Governors were given an additional duty to ensure the constitution and bylaws of their clubs comply with the RI constitutional documents, especially following COLs. It was noted that many clubs do not even know where their constitution and bylaw documents are located, let alone have them up-to-date according to RI requirements. It was brought to the attention of the assembly that there is no party shown as responsible for this activity in our bylaws and this enactment has corrected that concern.
It has been an exhausting 2 ½ days so far and this afternoon we were allowed some time off to take a break. However we are not making the progress or keeping the pace as anticipated, so it was decided our meeting will start one hour early tomorrow morning. Also presenters/speakers will have their time allotment reduced in order to shorten the length of time required to deal with issues.
This afternoon we had a delightful visit with a vacationing Rotary friend from Russia. I first met Irina Dogadina when I spoke her at District's Conference in Vladivostok, Russia a couple of years ago. We became friends and have kept in touch since then. As an Assistant Governor she has been a very active Rotarian and we have kept in touch. So when she learned of me being here in Chicago at the same time she was here, we arranged to meet. In the hotel lobby is was great to be together again and she had the unexpected opportunity of meeting some additional Rotary leaders she has met previously during their travels to her country.
This evening, thanks to coordination by PRIVP Monty, some of our Canadian delegates gathered together for a group dinner and the associated fellowship. While most of us have seen each other at Conventions or Zone Institutes there are always new friends to meet and the renewal of existing friendships as well.
We have an early morning tomorrow, so I'm taking advantage of an early evening turn in. Keep your eyes open for more, coming tomorrow.
COL Report 5, from Chicago, Thursday, April 25th
Even though we began an hour earlier, it was easier this morning with only brief discussions on the duplication and confusion caused by lack of a recognized title for newly nominated Governors. We have the DG, DGE, DGN but nothing to identify the newest member of the G-Team. So now our newest title added to the string will be DGND "District Governor Nominee Designate".
There was debate on a proposal to allow candidates for DG nominations to make presentations and circulate profile information to clubs during the selection process. Some felt that they do not know all of the candidates well, so an authorized process to do this would be helpful. This is especially the case in large districts or where voting is done at the District Conference. But the majority felt it would risk opening the door to campaigning which until now has been discouraged and is against our guidelines. So the request was defeated.
In some cases districts have had challenges when a DG was injured or passed away and could not complete their term. In such cases there has been a scramble to fill the leadership void. To prevent similar instances in the future it was decided that the District Nominating committee will select at "Vice-Governor" to replace a Governor in a case of temporary or permanent inability to complete their term. This would be done at the same time as DG nominations. The person has to be a PDG since they have attended a previous International Assembly which is mandatory for a DG to take office.
With regard to pilot projects and clubs, it was requested by the RI Board to increase the allowed sample of clubs up from 200 to 1000. This would allow a higher number of clubs to participate in pilot studies and provide more feedback and experience in trying new ideas and concepts. This will now be possible and the trials can extend up to six years.
Another discussion concerned determination of the locality of eClubs. Currently it shows as "worldwide or otherwise as determined by the board" which is deemed to be the RI Board. The proposer was seeking clarification by amending the wording to "club board". This was approved since it makes the policy more consistent with regular clubs.
There was discussion on enactment 13-105 to describe club autonomy, which is a generally recognized part of Rotary. It was suggested that clubs shall have autonomy as long as they do not act in a manner inconsistent with RI Constitution, RI Bylaws and the Standard RC Constitution, and followed the basic principles of RI. This is generally the way things have been in the past and just a desire to document.
Do not ask me why a common sense enactment like this failed 204 to 310, other than perhaps inadequate discussion took place due to time constraints. Some are starting to worry that we will not get through all of the issues and so there is a push to move on. My observation is that there has been little appetite for any drastic changes by many of the delegates and it frustrates others with a more visionary viewpoint.
In addition, I think that sometimes the wording used in a proposal or the way it is presented by the proposer, can have a huge influence on the success or failure of a motion. On top of this, when people get tired, are anxious to get done, or take it as a minor issue, possibly we do not give items the consideration they deserve. And I cannot explain how we sometimes seem to accept or reject a proposal then do the opposite on a similar item later in the day.
There was concern expressed regarding sustaining small clubs of less than 15 members with a proposal to merge them with another local club if they remained under 15 for two years. Some strongly felt that a club's service to their community is more important than the number of members and they need to be encouraged and helped to increase membership.
It was mentioned that RI is operating in a deficit position trying to serve the smaller clubs. It was noted that it can be hard for clubs to increase their membership, especially in small communities or rural areas. There were examples of little 8-9 member clubs having the determination to survive and an example given of one that is now over 50 members and going strong. The vote failed 100 to 420.
There was an attempt to change the Rotaract and Interact standing committee to New Generations and include all of the youth related programs. It failed 234 to 272. There is no appetite by RI for additional standing committees due to cost and I felt debate was voted closed without complete discussion. At the bottom of our fourth day many are tired and just want to get finished.
RIPE Ron Burton advised that there are already regular (not standing) committees for each of the Youth Programs. The chairs of these will form a RING Committee in his term. As a matter of interest a Standing Committee is one that is permanent, mandated by our bylaws with an operating budget. A regular committee sits at the discretion of the RI President so they may come and go each year, usually without much budget.
The suggestion to raise the minimum annual dues paid to RI up to 15 club members from 10 was defeated 133 to 385. While RI operates at a deficit serving smaller clubs the majority felt we should not penalize them, especially if they are doing good work in their communities. Rather we need additional resources and support to help them improve their membership numbers.
Following this same train of thought enactment 13-128 was voted to accept removal of the minimum entirely, so that a minimum will no longer be payable to RI by clubs under 10 members.
A proposal to give a 30% dues discount to new members under 35 yrs of age failed 92 to 423. Proposers suggested it would help recruit desired and younger members who may be concerned with membership costs. But RI reported the impact would be lost revenue of $4 million plus administrative costs required record keeping. The discount would be under $20 so I cannot see that it would influence anyone to join.
There was a suggestion that larger districts be provided with additional votes at COL. This concept of weighting for larger clubs and districts is not uncommon in other types of voting. Currently a member in a large district might have only 1/10th the influence of a member in a smaller district. Opposers quoted the United Nations policy where all countries have only one vote each. Further, that the COL should be based on equality which is not the same as equal and we should not let big districts impose on the smaller ones. After much debate the proposal failed 122 to 388.
A resolution was passed 284 to 219 asking the RI Board to consider introducing a category for Associate Members at the next COL and end the current pilot in June 2016. It is strange that another similar request to consider Friends of Rotary failed in a flipped vote of 218 to 293. Many felt the Friends concept would contribute to our Public Image and Awareness.
It has been a long day. We started 1 hour earlier than usual and ran 1 hour later than normal so people are tired. Tonight we had a wonderful reunion dinner with our DG classmates from 2005-06 and everyone was pleased that PRIP Stenhammar joined us. It was a late night and I ran out of steam, thus the reason this report is being later than usual. More tomorrow.
COL Report 6, from Chicago, Friday, April 26th
With travel plans made to depart tonight, many are anxious to work our way through the remaining proposals in a speedy fashion. Somewhere there must be a balance between giving fair consideration to the resolutions and raising the blue card to move debate be closed.
In a desire to streamline the process some delegates have withdrawn their District motions since they have predicted the assembly is not in a mood to accept many new ideas at this stage. The RI Board also had agreed in advance to consider some of the topics and so a few of those could be withdrawn as well, since they are already handled.
A resolution some were opposed to, including our District, was the request for RI to formally consider Rotex clubs. At first it seemed the proposers wanted another program but in reality they explained the intent was to recognize a Youth Exchange Alumni group. One district already has a group of 3000 established with the strategy to feed Rotaract clubs and plant the seeds for eventual Rotary membership. After discussion, it seemed to me that we should encourage this in the same way we do for TRF Alumni. But the motion lost 229 to 283.
There was a request for RI to consider establishing a "New Generations (or Youth) Service Day" at some time during the year. On that day youth could all be active doing something of service in their community. Some felt that we already have too many special days, while others felt it would be a great Public Image opportunity to promote. Motion passed with a small margin 254 to 251.
A big one was the resolution asking the board to make RLI (Rotary Leadership Institute) an RI affiliate or structured program of RI. Until now, it has been developed and delivered as a stand-alone initiative by a group of district and world leaders. I know that many will be celebrating the huge 332 to 181 approval.
In some Districts there are child programs for those between 5 and 12 years of age. A proposal was made for RI to consider recognizing "EarlyAct" clubs. The debate on this got very complex since other names used for similar activities are JuniorAct, KidsAct, RotaKids, etc. And the following resolution was similar except for proposing the name "KidsAct".
I believe that if proposers had combined their resolutions to suggest the concept without a specific name, that may have made the process simpler and increased chances of acceptance. With a close working relationship with Boy Scouts, some did not want to compete with that program while others felt we should take advantage of schools desiring this program. Many felt we could use this to start kids off on a pathway to Rotary ideals of service but both resolutions failed.
ElderAct was another suggestion which failed, keeping with the assembly's seemingly lack of desire to encourage consideration of new ideas and possibilities. Please note all these resolutions were not to develop the new program, but just asking the RI Board to consider them as future program opportunities.
Some expressed concern that we are not supporting any innovation by rejecting consideration of the new ideas proposed. Often the wording or the way it is presented makes things more complicated than they need to be. Most acknowledge there are some good program proposals but there is little appetite even to consider investigation or recognition of them by RI. I am one who gets frustrated at times with our lack of forward thinking and those suggesting new initiatives are also.
One example is regarding a controversial TRF policy limiting Rotarians and direct descendents from participating in TRF programs. In the past it was thought that this was due to US tax law restrictions, however the RI lawyer indicated that upon investigation this is not the case. So the only other reasoning is the fear of perception by the public, if Rotary relatives get to participate on GSE, Scholarships, etc. Yet we allow Rotary children to go on Youth Exchange.
With this background, a the resolution to allow a Rotarian and descendants to be exempt from this restriction was rejected. However on a later resolution a similar motion to allow grand children to participate in TRF Scholarships was referred to the board for consideration in a 313 to 184 vote. This inconsistency is what I cannot understand or explain, and I am sure this is in the minds of many delegates. It is hard to imagine what some are thinking or what influences decisions in the voting process.
So this brings us to the end of the formal COL process, except to celebrate the wonderful recognition that our Rotary Foundation received last evening from the Thomas Edison Foundation. This is is a very prestigious award which is presented annually to organizations that show innovation. Our Future Vision process was seen as an innovative and new way to deliver our services to those in need. It will also go a long way toward enhancing Rotary's public image and awareness with the media.
Doug Vincent
D7080 COL Representative
RC Woodstock-Oxford, ON Canada
www.DougVincent.com