FAQ - ACC Governance Change
FAQ - ACC Governance Change
The Alpine Club of Canada Board has approved to move away from elections for selecting Boards members. Read more about why and the methodology below.
Following a review and recommendation from the Governance Committee, The Alpine Club of Canada Board has approved moving away from elections for selecting Board members. Beginning with the 2026–2027 nomination and recruitment cycle, directors are appointed by the Board on the recommendation of the Nominations Committee, which assesses every candidate through the same competency-based process.
The election process had been in place since 2013. Despite refinements over the years, it did not deliver governance value beyond the previous model, and it came with real practical problems: voter turnout was consistently very low (4 to 7% of eligible members in the past two cycles), it was difficult to recruit enough well-qualified candidates within the compressed annual timeline, and it was a challenge to match candidates to the specific skills the Board needs in a given year.
A multi-year review examined the election process, its benefits, risks and alternatives. The Governance Committee looked at how comparable member-based organizations select their boards, evaluated several models, and discussed accountability extensively with the Board and with Section representatives.
The Governance Committee is preparing the bylaw amendments and supporting governance policies. The questions below explain the new process and the thinking behind it, including answers to questions members have raised since the change was announced. Practical information on this year’s recruitment cycle, including how to nominate someone or apply, is on the Join the Board page.
Questions, comments or feedback: [email protected]
The Board has approved a significant change to how directors are chosen: beginning with the 2026–2027 cycle, directors are appointed by the Board on the recommendation of the Nominations Committee, rather than elected by the membership at the Annual General Meeting.
Over the past several years, the Governance Committee has been working through a broad modernization of how the club governs itself. It started with the move to Directors-at-Large in summer 2025 and the Section Administration and Section Requirements policies introduced at the Fall 2025 Forum. This next piece concerns how the club’s national directors are chosen.
Going forward, the Nominations Committee recruits and evaluates candidates independently from the board, through a formal, competency-based process. The Committee’s recommended slate is presented to the Board for appointment, rather than to the membership for election. The first appointments under this process will be made at the 2027 Annual General Meeting.
The Governance Committee and Board believe this approach will strengthen the club’s governance by supporting a more deliberate and transparent recruitment process, improving succession planning, and ensuring the Board continues to recruit directors with the skills and experience needed to govern a national organization.
This change is about ensuring members influence the organization in ways that are more meaningful, more representative, and more effective than a voting process in which only a small percentage of members have historically participated (in the past two cycles between 4 and 7% of eligible members voted).
In reaching this decision, the Governance Committee reviewed how comparable member-based and nonprofit organizations select their boards, weighed several possible models with their advantages and drawbacks, and brought its analysis and proposed safeguards to the Board for discussion. The approach, and in particular how the Board stays accountable to members, was also extensively discussed before any decision was taken.
This change is part of a broader governance modernization initiative that also includes updating the ACC’s bylaws to better reflect contemporary nonprofit governance practices. For a fuller account of what we tried and why it didn’t work, see question 3.
We tried. The club began a series of governance improvements several years ago, and elections were not on the list at the start. As those improvements went in, the problems with elections became clearer, and in some cases elections started to get in the way of the changes that were needed. The main ones:
- The process put off strong candidates. It ran about nine months, and it asked a lot of people who had no assurance of a seat at the end. We tried to shorten it and couldn’t. In more than one cycle we lost well-qualified applicants mid-way to other non-profits that could seat them in a fraction of the time.
- Good directors wouldn’t run again. Several recent Board members who came through an election and served well have said they would not go through it a second time. That costs the Board experience and institutional memory exactly when it has built some.
- Too few candidates. Despite considerably more outreach, recent cycles saw positions filled by acclamation because there were not enough applicants to hold a contest.
- The vote was rarely an informed one. Members told us so. One wrote that candidates “all sound great and qualified but beyond that I just go with my gut.” A “get to know the candidates” session last spring drew three members. Many of those we spoke to voted because they had been asked, not because they felt they had enough to go on. Under election rules we were also limited in how clearly we could tell members what the Board actually needed that year.
- Staff time. Running an election is a significant demand on a small staff, over and above the recruitment and vetting work that still has to happen under any model.
Taken together, these led the Board to conclude that a well-informed group - the Nominations Committee, with Section executives and existing volunteers putting names forward - is better placed to identify and bring on the directors the club needs than a vote in which few participate and fewer feel informed. We are aware that reasoning can sound arrogant, and that it carries a real risk of an insular Board. The safeguards described in questions 6 to 8 exist because we take that risk seriously.
The Board made this decision under its authority in the bylaws, after a multi-year review by the Governance Committee.
A referendum on this question would have faced the same difficulty the elections did: a small share of members voting, most with little information on which to decide. That is not an argument against members having a say; it is the reason we have put more weight on the channels where member input has made the most difference, through Sections, national committees led by volunteers and the bi-annual Section Forum.
No.
Members remain at the heart of the Alpine Club of Canada. The Board recognizes that members shape the club in many ways: through Sections, volunteer leadership, committees, forums, surveys, consultations, and the Annual General Meeting. Volunteering with a Section or on a committee are some of the most direct and accessible of these: members contribute their skills to the club’s work at both the Section and national levels, and committee involvement is often where future leaders and directors first get involved.
The objective of this change is not to reduce member involvement. It is to strengthen Board recruitment while continuing to expand meaningful opportunities for members to help shape the future of the club throughout the year.
The Board remains fully accountable to the membership.
Directors continue to owe fiduciary duties to the ACC and remain accountable through the club’s governing legislation, its bylaws, the Annual General Meeting, audited financial reporting, and regular engagement with members.
This is a significant change to the club’s governance, and the Governance Committee has analyzed the risks and benefits, particularly the concerns of insularity and accountability. To address these concerns, the change comes with safeguards. The Board is also strengthening governance policies and modernizing the bylaws to improve transparency and accountability.
In practice this includes term limits, conflict-of-interest policies, mandatory governance training, a regular review of Board performance including individual director evaluation, and continued opportunities for Sections and members to suggest candidates.
No.
Appointments begin with the Nominations Committee, not the Board. Candidates come from an open call to all members, from nominations by Sections and individual members, and from the committee’s own year-round outreach; no one is pre-selected.
Recruitment is guided by an annual assessment of the skills and experience the Board needs (a competency matrix) and standardized role descriptions, and all directors complete mandatory governance training with ongoing evaluation and support.
The Nominations Committee recruits broadly, encourages qualified members to apply, assesses candidates against objective criteria, and recommends a slate based on the skills and experience needed by the Board. The Board’s role is to consider those recommendations and make the final appointments. The goal is a Board that reflects the skills, experience, diversity of perspectives, and leadership needed by the ACC.
As an example, the experiences and perspectives sought this cycle, are candidates who could strengthen one or more of the following areas:
- Member and Section engagement, including demonstrated experience increasing participation, improving communication, strengthening connections, and building a stronger sense of belonging. We are particularly interested in people who have successfully 'moved the needle' on engagement in a workplace, community, association, or ACC Section;
- Mountain culture and the broader mountain community, including a meaningful connection to climbing, mountaineering, backcountry skiing, hiking, alpine adventure, mountain safety, stewardship, ACC history and traditions, and/or networks beyond the ACC that can help inform the Club's future relevance;
- Environment, public lands, conservation, stewardship, or climate adaptation as they relate to mountain communities and the ACC's future;
- Youth engagement, competitive climbing, sport governance, or other pathways that can help the ACC connect with the next generation of mountain participants;
- French-language governance and engagement, including connections with Francophone members and communities; and
- Geographic and Section diversity, particularly perspectives not currently well represented on the Board. We are especially interested in candidates from outside Alberta, including Montreal/Quebec, Atlantic Canada, the territories, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, northern and rural communities, and smaller sections.
No candidate is expected to bring all these capabilities. We are building a complementary Board, not searching for one person who can fill every need.
This was an important consideration during the Board’s discussions.
The Governance Committee is also developing additional accountability measures that will be incorporated into the updated bylaws. These provisions are intended to ensure members continue to have appropriate protections and meaningful avenues of recourse should a future Board fail to fulfill its responsibilities.
Good governance requires not only a strong Board today, but safeguards for the future.
No.
The Board values the ACC’s strong volunteer culture and wants to strengthen, not weaken, the pathway to Board service. Most directors arrive by way of a Section executive or a national committee, and the Nominations Committee looks there first when it recruits.
Members continue to be encouraged to express interest in serving as directors, and the Nominations Committee recruits broadly from across the ACC community. The Governance Committee is also considering additional ways to strengthen the pipeline of future directors through volunteer and committee leadership.
No.
This decision relates only to the final step in the Board appointment process. It does not change members’ rights under the club’s governing legislation or bylaws, nor does it affect the many ways members participate in the governance and life of the ACC.
Members who wish to get involved in the governance of the ACC are encouraged to reach out to their Section leadership or get involved in a national committee. Committee vacancies will be surfaced on the Committee page in the coming weeks, and how to nominate someone or apply for the Board, are on the Join the Board page.
Yes. One of the primary goals of this initiative is to increase transparency.
The Governance Committee is developing supporting governance policies that clearly describe how directors are recruited, evaluated, recommended, and appointed. Together with the updated bylaws, these policies will give members a clearer understanding of how Board appointments are made and the principles that guide those decisions.
The Board believes the result will be a governance framework that is more transparent, more structured, and more accountable than the previous model.
The change applies now. The 2026–2027 recruitment cycle is under way: nominations and applications close November 15, 2026, the Nominations Committee reviews candidates over the winter, and appointments are made in spring 2027. There will not be a Board election this cycle. How to nominate someone, or apply yourself, is on the Join the Board page.
The Governance Committee is preparing the necessary bylaw amendments and supporting governance policies to implement the Board’s decision and complete the broader bylaws modernization project. Members will continue to receive updates as this work progresses.
