GPSCCU Annual Report 2013
Supervisory Committee:
This Committee had one vacancy thus:
Sis. Merryl Sylvester was the only member completing her first three-year term
Credit Committee:
This Committee had two vacancies as follows:
1.
Bro. Adrian Joseph was completing his first three-year term
2.
Bro. Maximus Lazarus was completing his first three-year term
Nominations
The nominating Committee considered six (6) nominations (in addition to the incumbents) as follows:
Board:
Sis. Maria Charles-Viechweg
Sis. Ann Isaac
Bro. Francis Ruffin
Bro. Wayne Williams
Supervisory:
Bro. Brendon La Touche
Bro. Jerome Romain
There were no nominations for the two available positions on the Credit Committee.
Deliberations
(1) The Committee in considering the incumbents and the submitted nominations took the following into consideration:
•
•
•
•
•
•
44
•
The skill sets advised for the Board of Directors including the areas of law, marketing and public
relations, banking and investment management, accounting, and real estate development
Individual qualities including commitment, available time to attend to the business of the Credit Union,
ability and willingness to represent the interest of the Credit Union at various levels locally and abroad
Representation from Carriacou/Petite Martinique
Representation of the older members of the Credit Union
Opportunities for involving younger members of the Credit Union
In particular relation to the Supervisory Committee, the ability to command the respect of members,
regulators and competitors; and seized with the highest level of propriety and confidentiality
Relating to the Credit Committee being seized with the ability to analyze the financial viability of
projects and appreciating a risk-based approach to lending strategies; and an ability to contribute to
the development of new products and strategies.
(2) The Committee noted that there was one ‘self’ nomination. The Committee noted that there appeared to be nothing
in the By-Laws that precluded self-nomination. However the Committee unanimously concluded that self-nomination
was contrary to the norms and practices of the democratic process, and, further, that self-nomination did not reflect the
spirit and principles of good governance. While the Committee commended and welcomed members’ willingness to
serve, the Committee also opinioned that some measure of support from constituents – by way of being nominated by
others - the “dēmos” – was desirable, as well as being evidence of good governance practice.