Convention training motion

Mike Coogan

SLEC Member
I move that the Credentials Committee develop and deliver training to county affiliates for the 2026 convention cycle. Co-sponsor?
 
Last edited:
Moving discussion here, per our VC.

I put up the motion as the Executive Director noted it was a gap. This should be a no-brainer. I don't think it was a gap before (I don't believe we did it, but I am old, and sometimes forget things). This is simply putting it where it should have been all along, per Carter. Didn't expect any drama at all...
 
So I just thought of something interesting. Not to stir the pot but….. this comment in the vote thread was this: “Credentials Committee has had this responsibility going back as far as 2020, as far as I know, and I personally developed and delivered this training in 2022 and 2024.”

If I recall correctly John Wilford was called out directly by many as the reason for the affiliate drop off this last convention cycle… so was it his fault as former affiliate director or was it the credentials committee? 🤔

I think the affiliate dept needs to be fully involved because from what I’ve seen over this last year and some change we’ve had a strong team there.
I’m glad people like Scott is both on affiliate and cred committee. He’s solid.
 
Post in thread 'VOTE: Motion that the Credentials Committee develop and deliver training to county affiliates' http://forum.lptexas.org/index.php?threads/983/post-10515

@Jessi Cowart is any of that different than last term?
@Anastasia Wilford I wouldn’t say that it’s any different than what was intended, but I don’t think we were as in sync in 2024 as we were in 2022.

For example, in 2022, we had the best county affiliate retention…ever maybe? And I think we can credit much of that to the fact that we had Nathan Watts both chairing the cred comm AND leading what’s now known as Affiliate Support.

So for 2026, the committee has a renewed focus on working with the Affiliate Support department to be almost annoying in how much we’re communicating training opportunities and expectations — early and often.
 
So I just thought of something interesting. Not to stir the pot but….. this comment in the vote thread was this: “Credentials Committee has had this responsibility going back as far as 2020, as far as I know, and I personally developed and delivered this training in 2022 and 2024.”

If I recall correctly John Wilford was called out directly by many as the reason for the affiliate drop off this last convention cycle… so was it his fault as former affiliate director or was it the credentials committee? 🤔

I think the affiliate dept needs to be fully involved because from what I’ve seen over this last year and some change we’ve had a strong team there.
I’m glad people like Scott is both on affiliate and cred committee. He’s solid.
Yeah, I’m not touching that. I’ve got nothing but respect for John.

But I do think my response to Anastasia a moment ago speak to what you’re driving at.
 
@Anastasia Wilford I wouldn’t say that it’s any different than what was intended, but I don’t think we were as in sync in 2024 as we were in 2022.

For example, in 2022, we had the best county affiliate retention…ever maybe? And I think we can credit much of that to the fact that we had Nathan Watts both chairing the cred comm AND leading what’s now known as Affiliate Support.

So for 2026, the committee has a renewed focus on working with the Affiliate Support department to be almost annoying in how much we’re communicating training opportunities and expectations — early and often.
So it sounds like you're saying a good connection between the credentials committee and the affiliate department is a critical aspect of the success of affiliate retention, is that right?
 
Last edited:
As someone who was on-staff in the Affiliate Department in both 2022 and 2024, there was a very big difference in the way that the way that the outreach to counties was handled, and I am convinced that it was the main factor in why we had such attrition last time.

It wasn't the training itself. To put it bluntly, a lot of county chairs only start thinking about the Election Code requirements and our bylaws once every two years. Why we only lost two counties in 2022 (and knew in advance that they were going to go dark) was because the Affiliate Department followed up relentlessly to make sure that every chair was aware of their duties and of the deadlines and what constituted a properly-held convention and the consequences of not following the laws. We did not just announce something and leave it up to them to check their emails and to show up for the training and to turn everything in without follow-up.

One could argue that this kind of "hand-holding" shouldn't be necessary, but we lost two counties with memberships at least large enough to fill their delegations to state. In my opinion, those members should not have had to pay the price for their chair's lack of awareness of their responsibilities, even if that lack was on that chair.

Whoever runs the show on precinct and convention training next year needs to do the necessary clarification and follow-up with each county chair if we want to avoid a repeat of last convention cycle.
 
Like a lot of things, this is an issue where the yin/yang dynamic needs balance and harmony. On the spectrum from 'hold their hand and wipe their nose for them' to 'throw em all in the deep end and we'll find out who can swim', there's room for some nuance and finding that sweet spot where no legit county gets left behind, but we're not expending scarce resources propping up too many people who just don't want to do the work.

That's a judgment call, not an algorithm (#resistthealgorithm). We can all be looking at this matter differently at different times, and we don't necessarily need to resolve that into One Perspective to Rule Them All.

Meanwhile, I have complete confidence in Jessi, Jacob, and the rest of the Credentials Committee and Affiliate Support Department, and am very much looking forward to an outstanding convention in 2026!
 
Back
Top