None of the following should be construed as an endorsement of any particular candidate. It’s merely a look at various candidates’ supplied literature and may or may not be a true indication of the quality of the actual candidate. Please make your own determinations of the fitness of a particular candidate before voting.
*** DISCLAIMER: ***
So I was alerted that the Biographical Sketches for CKI Board candidates were up (here)… so I decided to have a look. As I expected, most of the candidates are thoroughly unimpressive. There are a few people who will definitely do a good job, and there are others who are nothing short of complete and total morons.
What’s that? Which is which? I’m SO glad you asked. Why don’t we have a look at the presidential candidates? (Warning: LONG!)
UPDATE: A little birdy has told me that a lot of info compiled by CKI was not printed in the packet, which may explain why certain candidates did not put their platform points on their literature… so I hereby rescind any criticism of such behavior. (Gotta be fair, you know)
Troy Dibley (Capital)
All of the so-called candidates for IP have a decent Circle K resume, and Troy’s doesn’t stick out too much — he has elected leadership experience on all levels, including some positions that indicate respect amongst his peers. Aside from that, his platform is fairly solid, if a bit predictable. Speaking of platform…
• Unite the organization by fulfilling the Worldwide Service Project: eliminating IDD
Well, as far as I know the correct amount has been pledged, all that’s left is collecting it and then using it — both of those things have nothing to do with CKI. (Unless something has changed)
• Readjust the resources of Circle K International to provide more services to clubs.
Good thought — this is something I’m sure he’ll flesh-out in caucus.
• Establish a file-sharing database where clubs and districts can share resources.
Hmmm… where have I seen something like that before… oh yeah! UCKI had something like that. Go figure.
• Refine the role of International Vice President to focus on the International Expansion of our organization.
Not a fan of this point — International Expansion is going to have to be done by Kiwanis Clubs abroad (mainly) and those relationships are best fostered by the IP. Besides, the IVP has a lot to do without wasting a lot of energy trying to spread the organization more.
• Increase Kiwanis Family Inter-promotion…
This is on everyone’s platform damn near every year. Still very little progress made. He mentioned the KCC program… which is currently nothing more than a folder on the Kiwanis-Family forums — yet it took months to accomplish the feat of clicking a few buttons… it might be better than it was, maybe, but it’s still not worth using.
• Market the Tomorrow Fund…
We’ll be hearing a lot about this, I think a delegate’s duty will be to ask the “how” question, because it’s easy to say that we should market it… any fool can do that. Give credit to people who have ideas.
• Fulfill the mission of the Millennium Plan by improving the efficiency of the International Board.
By eliminating half of the trustees? That’s probably not what he means, but that would be a step in the right direction.
• Explore alternate options to increase CKI membership benefits.
If I recall correctly, when I was on the board, this type of thing was shot down right away by the staff… just about anything proposed by the board members was immediately dismissed.
• Perform at least 175 service hours.
Good idea. Should be a tough thing to do with all the traveling he’ll be doing.
Good candidate, really… and his literature looks good.
Stacey Feasel (PNW)
Current trustee, but has no elected district experience. Weakest candidate in terms of experience, hands down. The platform? Nothing special at all, it probably required no more than 10 minutes of thought to come up with, but let’s have a look anyway.
• I expect to be held accountable for my actions and duties…
No shit? You’re going to do your job? Gee, thanks for putting that on your platform. She did also mention holding her board members accountable, also her job, but certain past presidents didn’t do such a good job with that.
• Communication is the very key to success. I plan on encouraging clear and frequent communication amongst Board members and between all Board members and their districts. I also plan to be more than a face in the magazine. I will be accessible to all members and will be personally contacting governors.
Yeah, that’s her job again. Nice work, Stacey.
• …It is my goal to earn your trust.
Fluff. Looks like Stacey ran out of job requirements and needed some filler.
• My platform is achievable, not idealistic. You can count on me to accomplish what I set out to do. I am one who does what she says and says what she means.
Is that maybe because she has no ideas and just listed job requirements? I think so. So what she’s saying is: “I’m the most unoriginal candidate in at least three years.” (and she means it)
• I will not push my personal opinion upon CKI as President. It is the President’s job to push for the views of the membership, not their own.
Here we have an example of the #1 misconception about the int’l level. We elect officers and have a complex set of rules for them not so that they can just do what the members want. We elect them to think, to lead, and to make decisions because they have more information than we do as members. If you don’t have an opinion, you’re nothing special.
• Action must be taken now. Having served on the International Board this year, I already understand the complicated details at the International level. I now am fully prepared to jump into the upcoming year and begin the year at full speed.
Yet another insistence that she’ll do her job. She also said it damn near 20 different ways in one platform point. Let’s also take note that she’s unique because she understands the “complicated details” yet she doesn’t want to have an opinion. Makes perfect sense, Stacey.
…but wait… that wasn’t her platform! What was it? Who the hell knows. It was, apparently, just a gigantic waste of space. Thank god. I thought she just had no ideas. Let’s look at her ACTUAL platform now.
• Make sure the International Board is visible to Districts
By… not taking the invisibility potion? What the hell does this even mean? Honestly. Sounds like feel-good fluff bullshit to me.
• Assure that everything done at the International level is presented to the membership in a timely fashion.
In other words: I’ll make sure the VP does his/her job.
• Personally read and respond to every Governor’s report.
Been there. Done that. Waste of time.
• Continue the promotion and education about service through the best practices database.
Nothing special here.
• Continue Tomorrow Fund promotion and education.
I think I’m going to fall asleep.
• Hold online office hours for the members of CKI.
More feel-good fluff bullshit. These are seldom used and really not worthy of a platform point. (Unless you’ve got no better ideas)
• Establish a clear line between the duties of the International staff and the International Board.
Good luck. The missing phrase is “if the staff lets me.” This is a great idea, but it’ll have to come from the top down.
• Hold monthly online discussions for the International Board.
If they’re needed they’ll happen anyway, if they’re not this is a waste of time. Why doesn’t that surprise me?
• Continually review all of the directives of CKI.
What does this mean? Does she even know? What “directives”? The ones that she and exec will set? Or does she mean the Millennium Plan… looks like filler to me.
• Establish a “buddy system” between KCI Board and the CKI Board.
Wow. This should be a nominee for the “most worthless platform point” award at ICON.
So, in two pages worth of “platform” she was unable to come up with a single decent idea to improve CKI aside from just doing her job. Of course, that’d be a step up from Rupert last year, but I don’t think she’ll have anything on Dan in that regard. I expected a little more, really, as a current trustee.
Doug Smith (Ohio)
Experience at all three levels, but it looks like he put his literature together in about 3 minutes, while in a drunken stupor, and with the monitor off. He couldn’t even get his picture to the correct dimensions so as not to look like a cartoon character. Oh well, maybe the squished-head look is in this summer. Let’s also not forget that he’s a John Kerry campaign worker. That’s ok, I’m sure there are SOME Kerry supporters who aren’t complete idiots. Maybe. What about his platform?
• Put Circle K magazine fully online with interactive potential.
Great idea. Good luck convincing staff to do it. Once it’s online, let’s eliminate the print version. Good luck getting staff to do that, too.
• Continue LSSP Ad Hoc Committee.
Ooooh… more “let’s keep doing good stuff!” platform points. Nice work.
• Service grants straight to clubs.
Wait… you mean like the Tomorrow Fund will once it’s fully endowed?
• Foster relationships with Kiwanis.
More great ideas from Doug Smith!
• Foster International relationships with existing clubs.
ZZZzzzzz…..
• Form a service think-tank with other service/member based organizations.
What are they going to think about, exactly?
• Contact governors and International Board on a regular basis.
Everybody… “That’s your job, Doug!”
• Lobby Kiwanis International Board to approve what the Circle K Board and HOD approve.
Good luck. Casey isn’t likely to give up her power to squash CKI amendments with impunity. Good thought, though.
• Perform more than 300 hours of service.
With such a weak platform, this shouldn’t be hard to do.
Honestly, if I were CKI President Dan, I’d be embarrassed that he and Stacey put out such steaming piles of shit as campaign materials. This is a disgrace.
Armando Velazquez (Cal-Nev-Ha)
Ah yes, our good friend Womando… Jaba the Gov if you recall correctly. The entire first page of his literature is this narcicistic, “look how great I am” self-love fest featuring everything he’s done and/or won in CKI since the dawn of time. Did you know he was member of the month TWICE!? I didn’t. Now I’m really impressed. I wonder if he has a platform or if we’re just supposed to vote for him because he has spikey hair and loves himself… oh, there it is!
• Create and Improve CKI Literature
Why? How? Most of the currently “literature,” of which there’s already too much, is pretty good after getting a redesign a few years back.
• Research and increase member benefits
See above.
• Make the CKI Fun and Business reflectors more accessible
More accessible? What the hell does that mean? They’re PUBLIC… how much more accessible do they need to be?
• Heavy promotion of the Tomorrow Fund to reach endowment
Key Club members and Kiwanians
If he promotes the Tomorrow Fund as actively as he promotes himself, it’ll be endowed by September.
• Corporate sponsorships
We’ve been trying to do this for years. Guess what? Nobody wants to sponsor us.
• More direct communication to the members through personal and media resources
Maybe I’m just sufficiently evolved, but what the HELL does this mean? “personal and media resources” — WTF?
• Survey the membership on Key Issues
Note the caps. “Key Issues” — whatever those are. Nevermind how long this takes. Hopefully these “Key Issues” don’t need quick responses.
• More member involvement on International Ad Hoc Committees
Seems to me there’s plenty of that already.
• Strong Representation to Kiwanis Int’l Board on behalf of the interest of CKI
The interest — you know, that ONE interest CKI has. I wonder if he’ll rant, rave, and then command them to do things like he’s been known to do to other CKI Members.
• Increase role/decision making to International Council for more diverse representation of the members
The idea, suprisingly, is good. The grammar is not.
• Development of a CKI Alumni Association
Not a bad idea, not anything terribly useful. Oh, and Kiwanis hates this idea because they see it stepping on the toes of KI.
• Better representation at Key Club International Conventions for Key to K
What does this mean? It’s probably a good idea, but I fail to see how it’s anything special. Shouldn’t we always be getting the best representation possible at KCI for this so-called “Key to K”?
• Encourage Co-Sponsorship of Builders and K-Kids Clubs
Well what do you know, more non-quantitative goals. So much for specific and measurable.
• Develop relationships with other national/international service groups for multiple and diverse service opportunities.
Right, because the Int’l level really creates service opportunities for the clubs. Maybe he just needs more people over whom to exert imaginary power.
Nothing special to see here, except a small poor-wording circus. It caused me lots of confusement.
The Verdict
The verdict is that there’s really only one IP candidate who has put any sort of thought into his platform, only one candidate who has used his experience to come up with good ideas, and only one candidate whose platform/literature is worth the electrons it’s made of. The rest are poster-children for a “No Confidence Vote” amendment.
Damn…I thought you were going to go through all the candidates for everythign!
C’mon Pete, there are so many more people here who deserve to be made fun of.
Patience is a virtue.
Nice job Pete…and CK Alumni Association…we’ve done the research and presented it…Kiwanis says no
So I was trying to figure out what CKI was all about and I found out a few things.
1) They have umbrella insurance for members at meetings.
2) Their mission statement isn’t very concise (in my opinion).
3) Key Club and CKI are both sponsored by Kiwanis, Key being the high school program and CKI being the collge. Key Club has a membership of 215,000. CKI has a membership 11,000. Those numbers are a little confusing/disturbing. That’s a ratio nearly 20 to 1. Yet the national average of high school students who go on to college is about 58%. So either:
A) Key Clubbers aren’t very bright.
B) CKI is under-represented in colleges (570 I think)
C) Key clubbers weren’t thrilled by their experience.
or D) CKI doesn’t appeal to Key Clubbers for some reason.
If I were running for office, I would probably address issues 2 and 3, with a focus on #3. Just my 2 cents, because I have to agree that those platforms have a serious lack of substantative ideas and goals.
B) is supposed to be B followed by )
I suppose E) could be Key Club has had a massive swell in population over the last few years, but that seems unlikely (to the degree necessary).
Well… now that you’ve stated the obvious…
That’s the point - it’s obvious to me and I found out what CKI is about 10 minutes ago. Why aren’t the candidates addressing it?
I was wondering about that matt.
Well I see some highly trained HR personnel here in this post. Very good at writing job requirements while not actually knowing what the job is.
I would definitely go for a vote of no confidence ability but then I would also go for a better staff who hmmmm SHOULD BE MEMBERS OF THE ORGANIZATION.
Well thats ok I will fix it when I get up there. You just wait and see. Kiwanis International President Eric Stoltz. Yeah I like the sound of that. Benevolant dictator would be nice too.
To be honest, I don’t think there’s not a whole lot that can be done about the KC/CK attrition rate until CK sees a dramatic membership increase. KCers see CK the way they do (in large part) because of the size difference. So it’s something of a vicious cycle.
See, now that’s a good platform: We’re screwed, vicious cycle, any questions?
Candidates (at least some) do address it every year. Everyone addresses it every year. This is something talked about all the time, but one of those things where nothing is ever really done. Or what is done doesn’t have any affect.
There are a lot more reasons that just A,B,C,and D.
I’m sure everything you said is true Real Amy, but I don’t see any real attention being paid to it in the platforms Pete posted. Perhaps other candidates focus more on it, perhaps these candidates address it in other places, perhaps the club as a whole just isn’t too concerned about it - I don’t know. However, Pete made this post and complained about a lack of substance. If I were running I would make it an issue, set a goal, and lay out a plan. That doesn’t mean I’d win, but at least I would have a platform.
The other sad truth here is that most people don’t really care about the substance of a platform as long as it sounds good. Nobody really thinks about them as much as they should.
If you were running, set a goal, and laid out a plan, it would be viewed as one of 20 other things everyone talks about but never makes happen.
Talking about getting Key Clubbers to join CKI and Circle K’ers to join Kiwanis has been done to death. It’s nothing that would make your platform special.
And to be honest, I really don’t see one international board member changing the mindset of 215,000 high school kids. There are deep rooted issues with Circle K (Pete mentioned size) that need to be changed before Key Clubbers start hopping on board.
My club has recently started raking in the Key Clubbers and it’s really a self-perpetuating thing. But there’s no magic plan that could cause this to happen across the country.
So Real Amy. What did your club do to get the key clubbers coming in?
You wouldn’t need to change the minds of 215,000 Key Clubbers, just changing 0.5% of them could increase CKI by 10%.
Your club has increased membership. Probably not through magic, but rather through hard work and good ideas. I see no reason that can not be duplicated in other places, with no magic necessary.
As far as deep rooted issues go, it is precisely those things that would need to be addressed.
And as far as my hypothetical platform not being special, or being similar to other things people talk about, but don’t do - I just don’t see how that is inferior to having no platform, or a platform of wishy-washy feel good BS that adds up to nothing. I’d rather support someone who has a good idea, but with a slim shot to pull it off than vote for someone who proposes to accomplish nothing.
And finally, while 1 board member may not be able to do a whole lot, that doesn’t mean they should forsake attempting to accomplish anything - even if it was as minor as creating 10 new chapters and increasing memberhsip by 800 people within 2 years.
Well, this is just me, but I prefer people who have platforms that they can reasonably accomplish.
Someone who has a “great idea” for getting Key Clubbers into CKI, but doesn’t come from a club and a district where their plan is working well would raise a great deal of suspicion from me.
Further, if a district DID have a method that was working well, it would QUICKLY be adopted by everyone else without a candidate making it happen.
Contrary to popular belief, the KCI->CKI transition has to be done on a low level, not a high level. Only once it’s been successfully executed all over the place by lots of clubs, divisions, and districts will we see an Int’l shift.
It would certainly have to be done at a low level, but if a school like Amy’s had a program that worked real well I think it would behoove the higher ups to look at how it succeeded and try to pass that down to the lower levels at other scjhools, for them to implement as well. In addition, I think expanding the number of schools that have CKI is something would be initiated at a higher level.
My original point, however, is that with a platform you at least have something to discuss, rather than the vapid non-positions illustrated by the majority of the candidated whose ‘platforms’ you outlined. I think that point has been made well enough. And seeing how I’m not only in CKI, but I’m not even in college, I think I’ll let it go at that, as your success in these endeavors is your own concern, not mine.
edit: make that: not only NOT in CKI
In the words of Walter Sobchak: You’re out of your element, matt.
There are a lot of things that a cursory bit of research and common sense can be applied to in order to give one firm footing in a discussion. CKI politics is not one of them. If there were easy answers, I can assure you that they’d have been taken care of by now.
So, yes, it’s nice to put all of those things out that you’re saying, but I’m not so sure it’d really improve any of these people’s platforms. Cliched campaign promises are no better than “vapid non-positions” because they are, in fact, vapid non-positions.
Nothing personal, of course… it’s just that there are a lot of people who comment on my CKI entries who have years upon years of CKI leadership experience, so there’s a lot that goes unsaid because it’s just understood.
Basically, if it’s so basic that someone with no CKI experience can come up with it an hour after learning their first thing about CKI, just go ahead and assume that virtually everyone who comments here has already come up with the same thing.
All fine and well, and I realize I’m out of my element - I stated so myself. My point wasn’t that I could come up with some grand plan to turn CKI into a 100,000 member overnight - I can’t, nor am I interested in doing so. The point was to comment on your post (shouldn’t that be the point?).
My basic comment was that these candidates have no platform, and as an outsider I am wondering why they don’t address such glaring issues, that’s all. If they do address them - that’s fine, I just didn’t see them do so. If everyone knows why there not being addressed - that’s cool too. But from your reaction to the platforms it doesn’t seemed your exactly thrilled with the substance they have, as an outsider I could see why - they have no substance.
I just mentioned a few things I thought could be substanative. If someone were part of the group, had a good understanding of its politics, and put some work and thought into the issues I don’t see why they couldn’t put together a good platform based on them. I still think it would be superior to those listed in your post. I have no such plan, but I don’t see why someone familiar with the group couldn’t come up with a half-way descent attempt. Obviously, there could be many other issues to run on, but the point is they should at least have *one*.
Those of us who understand the politics are out of the organization for one reason or another…for some reason people in the organization are somewhat blind to the politics. Those of us out, and who have served on the IBoard, realize that at this point Kiwanis and Staff are taking a heavy hand in the organization and no longer allowing the students to run it. In addition, all the politics had clouded the organization and makes it very difficult for any change to occur and for anyone to be really effective…the organization has taken a sad turn as far as I’m concerned on both a district and International level from when I was a part of it from 1993-1999.
“My basic comment was that these candidates have no platform, and as an outsider I am wondering why they don’t address such glaring issues, that’s all.”
Again, as mentioned above. This is a local issue. The CKI Board is pretty much limited to talking about it, which is why it’s no better than any of the platform points listed.
“I still think it would be superior to those listed in your post.”
You might think that, but you’d be wrong. It’s very much akin to a candidate for CK office running on ending the war in Iraq. They can’t do it, so what’s the point?
A more thorough discussion of why this is the case would take much more than I feel like getting into at the moment.
Hmmm, I’m starting to get an idea of the inernal strife and apathy at CKI based on some of these comments. I suppose it makes no difference at all what someone runs on if they’ll be incpable of affecting an organization with those types of issues. Altough the umbrella insurance for members at meetings must be nice.
I’m sure it is… but I don’t know that it’s ever been used. Going to meetings isn’t a very perilous endeavor.
If the conversations go like the comments on this post it might be
Well, the organization would be a LOT better if people were allowed to drink while at the events. People get a little uptight about it at times.
Very few organizations wouldn’t be better off with mandatory boozin’ (AA might be an exception, although AAA might find it interesting).
Just another day I’m glad my CKI days are over since the past two years the majority of people running for International Office gets scarier and scarier in my humble opinion. Hope life is going well with you Pete
Damn that is a lot of comments…
The problem is the “platforms” are the same damn thing every year with a different name attached to it. I think the problem is that the issues that are addressed every year are either things that won’t change or can’t change on an international level.
Matt… here is an analogy that might help you. Think of the international board in the same way of a campaign central committee (like the national Bush or Kerry campaigns). The committees exist to help the grass roots volunteers get out their message, which hopefully will turn into voters. The head people are just resources, who try to set national guidelines to assist the local people. But the head people don’t actually go out and get votes. The CKI I Board is the same way. International Board members can’t go out and recruit members, build clubs, etc. But… they can set policies and develop programs that hopefully can be implemented by the local people that will help growth. Too many people who run for the I Board don’t get that.
The other thing is the veto power of Kiwanis Intl. The Kiwanis Intl Board can veto anything the CKI Intl Board passes. And right now… imagine a congress that is way leaning to one side of the aisle (CKI) and a president who leans way to the other side (Kiwanis). The vast majority of good ideas CKI has gets vetoed by Kiwanis. But unlike politics, CKI can’t override a Kiwanis veto, and CKI can’t elect the Kiwanis officers. And the problem spins on…
Maybe someone should run on seceding from the union
Bobby - great comment…very true.
The other big catch is that the organization doesn’t seem to retain waht has been done from year to year and each year reinvents the wheel from the start…amazing…
Spot on, Bobby… let’s add to the veto analogy that there’s NO “press coverage” of the veto, so there’s really no pressure exerted to NOT veto the stuff.
Kim — that’s SO true, and worse still is when a board leaves many times the things that DO live on are not perpetuated by the next board, but by the staff who take the work and then do with it what they please — sometimes it turns out well, sometimes it doesn’t…
I just want to ditto what pete said… if you haven’t been involved in the organization to a certain degree… you really just can’t know what the hell you’re talking about.
And to respond to Matt… you said if something is working in my club, we could just apply it all over the place. This is not the case at all, as every club is very different in the way they are run, the leadership, the resources.
For us, we have a very large club that makes up somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4 of the whole district… a couple of Key Club district officers who were graduating took note of our success and decided they would like to get involved. They took on leadership roles right from the start, really got involved and loved it. Other Key clubbers then see that their friends and leaders are joining, so they join too. In a way, we really just got lucky with timing. This is a very surface level explanation, but what I’m saying is that no, you can’t just take something that worked in one place and apply it universally because every situation is different.