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

Andrea Buntz Neiman aneiman at kent.lib.md.us
Wed Mar 23 15:04:34 EDT 2016


Oh, I'm sorry if I missed that somewhere -- I was mostly looking at 
discussions from last year about that, not recently.

Thanks for clarifying Chris!

A.


On 3/23/2016 2:59 PM, Chris Sharp wrote:
> Andrea,
>
> Thank you for thinking of me here.  I'm actually planning to end my 
> term on the EOB next month as scheduled.  Aside from the problem of 
> finding four candidates, I don't see it as a problem to leave things 
> as they are.
>
> Just my two cents.
>
> Chris
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Andrea Buntz Neiman 
> <aneiman at kent.lib.md.us <mailto:aneiman at kent.lib.md.us>> wrote:
>
>     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 <tel:410-778-3636%20x2115>
>     www.kentcountylibrary.org <http://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
>>     <mailto:eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org>
>>     http://list.evergreen-ils.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/eg-oversight-board
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     eg-oversight-board mailing list
>     eg-oversight-board at list.evergreen-ils.org
>     <mailto: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/20160323/8a9eed14/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the eg-oversight-board mailing list