Statement from the Exec. Director on AGWA Board Voting
I’d like to provide a short voting guide to you, the AGWA members. And I need to begin with a heartfelt apology to you and to the candidates.
When AGWA started in 2010, we had roughly 25 members — most of whom are still involved and active in AGWA in one way or another. This email is now going out to more than 100 times that number and to dozens of countries around the world. Back then, AGWA was all volunteers and “staff” or secretariat. We have built something powerful and effective that we can all be proud of.
The profile and stature of AGWA has grown very quickly in the past three years. Our regular staff and associates now number about 20, scattered widely, along with both a board and an advisory committee. And with the increasing recognition of the importance of water and climate issues, AGWA itself has become much more visible (and vocal) in this space.
A little to my embarrassment, sometimes I still think of us as more of the smaller, less formal, and niche organization that we were for so long. A friend recently said, “AGWA is the most important organization in water you’ve never heard of.” Perhaps I thought we were more invisible than we really were.
Before last August, we had never had more than two or three applicants for open board seats. This year, we had 24, most of whom applied in the final hours. We had another dozen who applied after the cutoff time! More than half of the names were unknown to us in the secretariat, which is exciting (and a little overwhelming).
Our systems were not set up to handle this, and our bylaws didn’t make sense for voting as we had in the past. On careful consideration and advice, we’ve decided to proceed with an external voting service, which opens the process to all members, not just those who attended the Annual General Meeting in August in person.
I am truly apologetic to both the board applicants and to the AGWA membership for a process has taken about two months longer than we had anticipated, and in a way that does not match the ambition or my hopes for the institution. I am personally very sorry. We have grown through this process, and I believe will be in a better position with future openings.
Who should you vote for?
My personal advice is to vote with the needs of the core organization as well as the larger network in mind, and along these lines I would like to identify a few specific issues:
- An ideal candidate is someone who has a demonstrated awareness of and, ideally, existing relationship with AGWA already. They understand something of our systems and how the network functions, and they perhaps have worked on AGWA projects in the past. They will be ready for their three year term when they are elected.
- The work of the board itself is growing, and we are hoping that new board members will be active in how they volunteer and promote AGWA as well as lend their skills to the building and strengthening AGWA as an institution. The board is not a paid position, so presumably such candidates will have a personal and professional alignment with the goals of AGWA overall.
- Previous Board experience is a major asset as we look to diversify experience and look for people to fulfill specific board functions such as treasurer and partnerships roles. Candidates with this type of experience will be an asset to the AGWA.
- We actively support and encourage the diversity of candidates — by national origin, discipline and area of work, gender, and age.
- Thought leaders are important, but so are individuals who can help through key institutional connections — ambassadors to new audiences, resources, and opportunities.
I believe we are becoming more than water institution that works on climate. I sense we are transforming into a resilience institution that works through water. Who are the candidates prepared to capture and catalyze that opportunity?
John Matthews
Corvallis, Oregon, USA