BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2001-09 > 0999781696


From: Betsy Mills <>
Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] SUGGESTED motion for SW/SC vacancy
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2001 08:08:16 -0500


I just think this is unnecessary. The board members have all indicated
that they WANT to hear and follow the wishes of the CCs in the SW/SC
region. What is the fear, Teresa?

It will take 2/3 of the board members to confirm an appointment. IF it
were to happen that 2/3 of the board members choose to ignore the wishes of
the CCs and vote for a lesser choice, then you would also already have the
2/3 necessary to reverse a decision. I just can't imagine why you are so
worried about this.

Betsy


At 07:41 AM 9/6/2001, you wrote:

>On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Bremer,Robert wrote:
>
> > If so, please elaborate on the specifics. Comments thus far have
> focused on
> > the mechanics and on alternate approaches to make an appointment, but
> > nothing seems to be workable that takes into account the wishes of the CCs
> > of the region while not conducting an actual election contrary to the
> > bylaws.
>
>Is the Board willing to compromise on this and approve, in advance, a
>policy to accept the winner of the poll, subject to reversal by 2/3 of the
>board? This should ensure a pretty compelling reason to overturn the
>poll results.
>
>-Teresa
> not my idea, I shamelessly stole it from a constituent ;)

This thread: