[Eg-oversight-board] Election process, officer elections, and executive sessions

[Andrea Buntz Neiman]

Remarks inline.

> I'd like to suggest something a little more structured, such as:
> Election processes should begin 6 weeks prior to the annual conference 
> or April 1st, whichever comes first.
> Nominations and voter registration shall be managed in weeks 1-3.
> Week 4 shall be set aside for voting and Weeks five and six shall be 
> for new member notification and officer elections.
> Newly elected officers will take office at the end of the Evergreen 
> Conference for that calendar year. If no Evergreen Conference is held 
> during a calendar year, office terms will begin and end at midnight 
> EDT on April 30.

I'm fine with this general outline, though given the occasional 
cat-herding-like-ness of the group it may be better to have a full month 
for nominations & voter registration.

> Does anyone have any thoughts positive or negative on election of 
> officers prior to the conference?  If no objections, do you have 
> thoughts on how we should structure voting for the chair, vice-chair, 
> secretary, and representative?  I would assume we would nominate and 
> vote on each position separately. Maybe take nominations for Chair 
> Monday am, vote Monday pm - take nominations for Vice-Chair Tuesday 
> am, vote Tuesday pm, and so on?  That would allow someone who ran for 
> a position to run for another position if they weren't elected to the 
> first.  Or we could do all nominations and then handle it via STV 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote>, RCV, or 
> Approval voting.  Thoughts?

I'm in favor of electing officers on this day-by-day basis.  Like Ruth 
pointed out, since this is outside of the scheduled EOB meeting the 
days/times/process of nominations and voting should be very explicit.

In the past we've always voted for officers openly, this would be my 
preference going forward (as opposed to secret ballot) though of course 
I'm rotating off, so I'll defer more to those Board Members who are 
continuing.

> I would also like to toss out a few ideas that I'd like to hear 
> feedback on.
>
> How do you all feel about a proposal that members newly elected to the 
> EOB (e.g. in their first ever EOB term) may not be nominated to core 
> roles of Chair, Vice-chair, Secretary, or Conservancy Representative?  
> They can, however, be nominated to serve as committee chairs.

+1 to this.  Worth spending a year figuring things out.

> Also, the Board has been called upon to appoint several new members 
> when elected members have resigned.  Personally, I find the Board 
> appointment process to be an issue as it has the potential to change 
> the dynamic of our elected board. Would there be any interest in 
> proposing a change to the rules of governance to require special 
> elections when a Board member leaves with more than 6 months left in 
> their term?
>
> This would require some additional language around the structure and 
> terms of special elections, but I wanted to see if the idea was 
> compelling before writing further language.

+1 to this as well.  We've been fortunate to have willing & able members 
step up to fill vacancies but in the interest of representation I agree 
that calling for special elections is better for vacancies of 6+ months.

> Lastly, I do think we need to add some language to the Rules of 
> Governance about how to manage the occasional executive session.

Yes, definitely.  I recommend that this language include the following:  
the general reason for going into executive session (to discuss an issue 
with counsel, to discuss an issue of a sensitive nature, to discuss a 
Board Member's Code of Conduct violation, etc.) , the names of Board 
Members who voted in approval of having an executive session, and the 
date/time of the session.  I think it's also worth stressing that in the 
name of openness, Executive Session will only be used in rare and 
extenuating circumstances.


There's one additional elections-related issue:  The cohorts have become 
wonky.

Chris was appointed to fill Shauna's vacancy, and she would have been 
rotating off this year with Yamil, Chauncey, and myself as the last 
4-person cohort (3/2014 is when the Board voted to reduce to 9 members 
and our cohort was elected in 2013).

However, there was discussion here
http://evergreen-ils.org/meetings/evergreen/2015/evergreen.2015-01-15-14.01.log.html#l-81
about grouping Chris in the cohort with Grace and Ben (rotating off in 
2017) but I'm not finding where/if that was officially voted on.

Amy was appointed for the rest of Ben's term here
http://evergreen-ils.org/meetings/evergreen/2016/evergreen.2016-01-21-14.00.log.html#l-372

But governance page has Amy listed as rotating off in 2016 as well, 
which must be an error; furthermore, within the EOB Rules of Governance, 
Ben is still listed instead of Amy.

Election communications have gone out with the language of "four board 
vacancies" though, so, I'm not sure how to address this -- do we want to 
have a quick email vote to confirm that Chris is part of the Grace/Amy 
(Ben) cohort, and issue a correction to the community about open spots?  
Or do we allow the cohorts to remain wonkified? Or a third way?

I realize this is a little ticky-tacky but I think since we're hammering 
out a lot of other details about elections, now would be the time to 
straighten this out too.


Andrea




Andrea Buntz Neiman, MLS
Librarian II, Public Services
Kent County Public Library
408 High Street
Chestertown, MD 21620
410-778-3636 x2115
www.kentcountylibrary.org

On 3/21/2016 2:01 PM, Grace Dunbar wrote:
> Hi,
> I promised to send out an email regarding EOB elections.
> For starters, I want to provide a quick review of the voting process.
> We are currently accepting nominations for the Board. The deadline is 
> this Friday.
> Like in years past, folks have to register to vote. The deadline for 
> registration is this Friday and the link to the registration form is 
> here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/EOB2016 . That list will capture 
> the email addresses we need to send the link to the election on OpaVote.
>
> This year, as it was last year, voting process is approval style 
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting). You should vote for 
> the four candidates that you feel will best represent the community 
> and the project's interests.
>
> Last month I sent out an email that proposed we adopt an election 
> timeline that is something that has a little more specificity than can 
> be used year-to-year.  Right now the wording is, "Each year, the Board 
> shall promulgate procedures for nominating and electing new Board 
> members." (2.4d)
>
> I'd like to suggest something a little more structured, such as:
> Election processes should begin 6 weeks prior to the annual conference 
> or April 1st, whichever comes first.
> Nominations and voter registration shall be managed in weeks 1-3.
> Week 4 shall be set aside for voting and Weeks five and six shall be 
> for new member notification and officer elections.
> Newly elected officers will take office at the end of the Evergreen 
> Conference for that calendar year. If no Evergreen Conference is held 
> during a calendar year, office terms will begin and end at midnight 
> EDT on April 30.
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts positive or negative on election of 
> officers prior to the conference?  If no objections, do you have 
> thoughts on how we should structure voting for the chair, vice-chair, 
> secretary, and representative?  I would assume we would nominate and 
> vote on each position separately.  Maybe take nominations for Chair 
> Monday am, vote Monday pm - take nominations for Vice-Chair Tuesday 
> am, vote Tuesday pm, and so on?  That would allow someone who ran for 
> a position to run for another position if they weren't elected to the 
> first.  Or we could do all nominations and then handle it via STV 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote>, RCV, or 
> Approval voting.  Thoughts?
>
> I would also like to toss out a few ideas that I'd like to hear 
> feedback on.
>
> How do you all feel about a proposal that members newly elected to the 
> EOB (e.g. in their first ever EOB term) may not be nominated to core 
> roles of Chair, Vice-chair, Secretary, or Conservancy Representative?  
> They can, however, be nominated to serve as committee chairs.
>
> Also, the Board has been called upon to appoint several new members 
> when elected members have resigned. Personally, I find the Board 
> appointment process to be an issue as it has the potential to change 
> the dynamic of our elected board.  Would there be any interest in 
> proposing a change to the rules of governance to require special 
> elections when a Board member leaves with more than 6 months left in 
> their term?
>
> This would require some additional language around the structure and 
> terms of special elections, but I wanted to see if the idea was 
> compelling before writing further language.
>
> Lastly, I do think we need to add some language to the Rules of 
> Governance about how to manage the occasional executive session.
>
> I know I've tossed out a lot of ideas; I'd love to hear your thoughts 
> on any and all of them.
>
> Cheers!
> Grace
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Grace Dunbar, Vice President
> Equinox - Open Your Library
> gdunbar at esilibrary.com <mailto:gdunbar at esilibrary.com>
> 1-877-OPEN-ILS  | www.esilibrary.com <http://www.esilibrary.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/eg-oversight-board/attachments/20160323/fd49ced7/attachment.html>