[Eg-oversight-board] Proposal: reduce the size of the EOB

[Kathy Lussier]

+1 from me to leaner Board. I had been thinking 9 might be a good number 
so that we would have an equal number of people up for reelection every 
year, but I don't feel strongly about that number.

I lean towards gradually reducing the Board over two years. We have 
several Board members who have only been on the Board for a year. In my 
personal experience, I found that the first year was necessary to get up 
to speed with how the Board works and how I could make a contribution. 
I'm must concerned it's a very short period for them to serve before 
being put on a ballot again.

Kathy

Kathy Lussier
Project Coordinator
Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative
(508) 343-0128
klussier at masslnc.org
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier

On 1/16/2014 9:38 AM, Chauncey Montgomery wrote:
> Galen,
> What you have outlined seems reasonable. I agree with the smaller 
> group being more agile. There are several other boards I serve on (or 
> work with) and it seems that the smaller groups are more efficient and 
> also more engaged.
> Chauncey
>
>
> On 01/15/2014 08:09 PM, Galen Charlton wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As we have elections coming up during the Evergreen conference, I
>> would like to float a proposal to reduce the size of the EOB to
>> streamline decision-making and encourage broader ground-up
>> participation in project activities.
>>
>> The EOB has certain direct functions that do not require that there be
>> eleven members.  For example, liaising with Conservancy on trademark
>> matters does not require the direct involvement of many people.
>>
>> There are some activities where the board authorizes expenditure and
>> receipt of funds held in trust for the project, and those of course
>> must remain in its remit.  However, both the conference committee and
>> the merchandising committee take most of their membership from outside
>> the board.  Other groups, such as the developers, DIG, and the web
>> team, have board members that participate, but to date those groups
>> have not requested significant draws on project funds, nor have they
>> required EOB supervision in order to perform their functions.
>>
>> Besides working with Conservancy on the oversight of project funds,
>> where I see a major role for the board is as a (though not /the/)
>> nexus for identifying and obtaining resources to further community
>> goals.  However, I believe that a smaller group would be able to serve
>> that function more nimbly.
>>
>> I propose that the EOB be reduced to seven members via attrition.
>> There are four EOB positions that are coming vacant; we could choose
>> to amend the rules of governance to not fill them (although if we do
>> it in fell swoop, we should give thought to having some of the
>> remaining positions be made open for election so that the overall
>> community does not end up waiting two years to elect new
>> representatives).  We could also take two years at this, reducing the
>> board to 9 for the upcoming year and to 7 in 2015.
>>
>> I welcome feedback on this proposal.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Galen
>>
> _______________________________________________
> eg-oversight-board mailing list
> eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
> http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board