Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.Name *FirstLastName is requested to confirm membership. All survey results will be anonymized.Email *Email is requested to allow sending of confirmation emails.Training RegionsWe are aware that regional representation is important, and there needs to be a continued voice from regions around the province and an understanding of member needs and concerns in considering options and making decisions. At the same time, there are a lot of differences in the size of current regions and the number of instructors in each region. 1. Are you in favour of reducing the number of existing regions? *YesNo2. Are you in favour of eliminating teaching regions and recognizing FSESO members as one overall team? *YesNo3. What are the reasons that you value FSESO having a regional structure (check all that apply): *Ensuring all regions are represented on the boardBeing able to elect a director that represents me regionallyParticipation in workshops that are geographically close to meHaving a director I can contact when I have issues or concernsBeing able to connect with other instructors in my areaI’m not concerned whether we continue to have regionsOtherWhy else do you value FSESO having a regional structure? *4. Should there continue to be a preference for a regional structure, how many regions should exist within FSESO? *TwoThreeFourFiveSixSeven (our current number)Do you have any additional comments regarding the structure and role of training regions?Board of Directors5. Putting aside considerations regarding the number or existence of regions, what do you view as the optimal number of directors for an organization the size of FSESO (our current size is approximately 295 members)? *FiveSevenNineElevenThirteen (the current expected size according to our by-laws)6. One of the challenges of electing a director from each region has been finding members that are willing to serve on the board. If provisions are still made in how FSESO operates (and the way that the board of directors makes decisions) to ensure regioanl voices are heard, are you in favour of having at least some directors be elected at large (from the membership as a whole), rather than a particular region? *YesNo7. Currently, the President, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer are elected by the board of directors at the start of each year, once they start their term. A different model is where prospective directors run for a particular position, and these positions are elected directly by the membership. Are you in favour of: *Having positions elected by the board members (our current approach)Members directly electing candidates into each positionI have no preference8. The new Not-for-profit Corporations Act no longer requires appointments to the position of President and Secretary. Instead, it allows for a structure where there is a chair that guides meetings, and where every director (including the chair) carries only one vote. Are you in favour of: *Keeping the named positions of President, Vice President, Secretary and TreasurerMoving to a structure where there is only a board chairI have no preference9. The Ontario Not-for-profit Corporations Act allows for the appointment of non-members as directors. It is also an expectation of the CFO that there be independent representation on the board of FSESO. In your view, what is the optimal number of independent directors, based on a current board size of 13? *OneTwoThreeFourFiveSix (the current number of independent directors that our by-laws identify)10. In our current by-laws, directors are appointed for two-year terms. Under the new Not-for-profit Corporations Act, terms can be set for a period up to four years. What do you believe is the optimal number of years for a director term? *One yearTwo yearsThree yearsFour years11. Currently, directors can serve no more than three consecutive two-year terms before they are required to leave the board for at least a one-year period. The new Not-for-profit Corporations Act allows for the removal of term limits completely. What do you believe is the optimal number of terms a director can serve consecutively before needing to step down, at least for a period: *One TermTwo TermsThree TermsFour TermsFive TermsNo LimitDo you have any additional comments on the composition of the board?Other Issues12. The new Not-for-profit Corporations Act allows for holding meetings strictly through electronic meetings (telephone, online, or some combination) without having an in-person meeting component, as we currently require. Holding electronic-only meetings needs to be specifically allowed for in the by-laws in order to be conducted. Are you in favour of holding electronic-only meetings for any of the following (check all that apply): *For the AGMFor special member meetingsFor regional meetingsOccasionally (not for all meetings)Never13. The new Not-for-profit Corporations Act requires that for proxy voting to occur at a meeting of members, it needs to be specifically allowed in the by-laws. Our current by-laws allow for proxy votes, but limit the number of proxies held by one person to a maximum of five. Are you in support of allowing proxy votes: *Yes, with no restrictions on the number of proxies one person can holdYes, with a higher restriction on the number of proxies than currently existsYes, with no more than five proxies held by one person (what we currently require)No, proxies should not be allowed and members should be required to vote directly14. The new Not-for-profit Corporations Act allows for any person to be a proxyholder (they do not need to be a member) unless the by-laws require membership Our by-laws currently specifically state that proxyholders do not need to be a member. Are you in favour of: *Continuing to allow anyone to be a proxyolder (our current approach)Limiting proxyholders to members onlyI have no preference15. The new Ontario Not-for-Profit Corporations Act allows for borrowing powers and issuing of debt by default, unless limited in the by-laws of the corporation. Our current by-laws limit borrowing to that secured by real or personal property (buildings and large assets), and otherwise limit that to borrowing required for current operating costs. Members are never liable for the debts of the corporation. There may be investments in the future as system and operations improvements are made, where it could be more desirable to borrow than to pay out of current revenues. Are you in favour of the corporation borrowing where it would be appropriate to address long-term investment opportunities. *Yes, with a limit on non-capital borrowing of no more than one year’s revenueYes, with a limit on non-capital borrowing of no more than six month’s revenueNo, we should not borrow for non-capital purposesDo you have any additional comments on the other issues identified?Submit
