[Eg-oversight-board] Office election codification

[Timothy Spindler]

I think codifying things is a good idea.  I feel the size of the board is
about right at this time.

Tim

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Mike Rylander <mrylander at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:51 AM, Grace Dunbar <gdunbar at esilibrary.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Back in the spring we all agreed that the modification of some aspects of
> > our election processes were working well.  I'm going to detail them all
> here
> > again for discussion purposes; however, I'd like to be able to codify any
> > changes necessary for the ROG by next month's meeting and (hopefully)
> update
> > the wiki with the new information.
> >
>
> [snip]
>
> See my comments elsewhere on this thread.  TL;DR: I support Grace's
> suggested language with a modification offered, and I think Dan has
> some good input on other areas.
>
> Now, on to the other questions!
>
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Outstanding questions:
> >
> > 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.
> >
>
> I support this.
>
> > 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?
> >
>
> I support this as well.  The board should give the community the
> opportunity to replace their choice via secret ballot.
>
> > And, lastly, is there any strong opinion on the size of the Board? A few
> > years back there was an effort to reduce the Board size and we did make
> > headway on that over the years by simply reducing the number of seats at
> > each election.  How does everyone feel about the current size?  FWIW, I
> > think we're at a good size now, especially considering how much work we
> have
> > on our plates for the next few years.  But I'd like to hear your
> opinions.
> >
>
> I agree that the current size works fine, and is probably not too big
> by much, but I will encourage future Boards to reconsider this
> question.  There are benefits to a smaller Board; it is sometimes
> easier to see the unbalanced plate load, if you will, when there are
> fewer plates on the table. (He said, stretching the analogy nearly
> beyond utility... :) )
>
> Thanks, Grace!
>
> --Mike
>
> > Thanks!
> > Grace
> >
> > --
> > Grace Dunbar, Vice President
> > Equinox - Open Your Library
> > gdunbar at esilibrary.com
> > 1-877-OPEN-ILS  |  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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
Tim Spindler | Executive Director
tspindler at cwmars.org | 508-755-3721 x120

C/W MARS | http://www.cwmars.org
67 Millbrook St., Ste. 201
Worcester, MA 01605
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.evergreen-ils.org/pipermail/eg-oversight-board/attachments/20161115/36389ff3/attachment.html>