[Eg-oversight-board] Office election codification

[Terran McCanna]

+1 to Dan's comments

Terran McCanna
PINES Program Manager
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Suite 150
Atlanta, GA 30345
404-235-7138
tmccanna at georgialibraries.org


On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Dan Scott <dan at coffeecode.net> wrote:

> Thanks for raising this, Grace. Just to respond to one small piece:
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Grace Dunbar <gdunbar at esilibrary.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Specific parts to replace/modify/add:
>> 2.4 d. [current wording] Each year, the Board shall *promulgate* procedures
>> for nominating and electing new Board members. Nominations may be made by
>> any individual who has contributed to Evergreen or who is employed by an
>> institution that runs Evergreen.
>> 2.4 d. [proposed wording] Each year, the Board shall *review* procedures
>> for nominating and electing new Board members. *If no changes to the
>> procedures are to be made, the Board shall follow the procedure established
>> the previous calendar year.* Nominations may be made by any individual
>> who has contributed to Evergreen or who is employed by an institution that
>> runs Evergreen.
>>
>
> The change from "promulgate" to "review" is significant; the intent of
> "promulgate" is to ensure that the procedures are widely known, whereas
> "review" makes it very inward-facing and doesn't charge the Oversight Board
> with promoting the elections to try and ensure a broad slate of candidates.
> Maybe drop the high-falutin' "promulgate" for "promote widely" or
> "publicize widely"?
>
> It also seems strange to bake an annual review of this one process into
> the rules of governance, as well as the additional sentence about
> "...follow the procedure established...". Perhaps the nomination and
> election process that is already documented in 2.4(d) and 2.4(e) could be
> enhanced slightly, at least to the extent of specifying "Approval Style".
> 2.4(e) already mentions electronic voting; I don't think it's desirable to
> mention any specific supplier here.
>
> Looking at it just a bit more, 2.4(d) and 2.4(e) should probably be
> separated out from "2.4 Term" to a new "2.5 Elections"; this would provide
> the opportunity to also document the "Members of the community must
> register to vote via an online survey. Submissions shall be vetted by the
> Board for eligibility." steps. I think this would strengthen the Rule of
> Governance, without delving too far into specifics of the tools and
> processes, and the elections piece would continue to be subject to review
> on an as-needed basis as any other part of the Rules of Governance are.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161114/da7d32fd/attachment.html>