The Governance Committee Report

My name is in Appendix 2 because I submitted recommendations to the Committee.

I have sent an e-mail to the Board requesting that my name be removed from the report. I consider the report to be an embarrassment and I do not want my name associated with it.

I made two types of recommendations to the Committee:

1) recommendations to correct embarrassing practices that were out-dated even 30 years ago

2) recommendations that would allow the College to demonstrate leadership and vision in both the UWC Movement and the field of governance.

The Committee accepted the first group of recommendations and ignored the second group.

I am pleased that the Governance Committee has agreed that certain practices are out-of-date and should be changed. But I am embarrassed because the tone of the report suggests that the College wants people to believe that it is doing something radical, demonstrating leadership and vision. In reality, the recommendations bring the College into line only with good practice that has been around for the last 30 years. That can hardly be called visionary leadership.

My second group of recommendations involved changes to allow more people to have a full voice in the governance of the College. I suggested that any individual who met the membership criteria for the Corporation and wished to join should be admitted as a member. I suggested that members who are unable to attend the Annual General Meeting (perhaps due to schedule conflicts, ill-health, financial difficulties, etc) should be allowed to vote by mail in trustee elections. Both recommendations gave voting power to more people. The College rejected these recommendations rather than rise to the challenges presented by them.

When I was a student, the College taught me to value inclusiveness, to embrace the democratic process, and to trust that both would protect the values and principles of the community. What I see in this Governance Report is a Board that fears the democratic process and does not want any inclusiveness except on terms that do not threaten its existing power. Beneath that fear there can be only a lack of trust and faith in the affection and good will that people have toward the College.

The failure to adopt any of my second group of recommendations means that at present, the Board has no intention of making any significant changes to the status quo. Rather than bold visionary leadership, I see a Board desperately clinging to power.

Living the values and principles of UWC takes faith and courage. The community looks to the Board for inspiration and example but now it sees a Board that offers no example and no inspiration. Sour grapes from me because my recommendations didn't get accepted? No. Disappointment, sadness and embarrassment because the Board has no faith and no courage.

Sarah E. Blackwell
Year 3