BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2002-05 > 1020448201


From: "Jana Black" <>
Subject: RE: [BOARD-L] Voting
Date: Fri, 3 May 2002 10:50:01 -0700


OK, I agree and I disagree. Yes, we are talking about absentee voting
here, as that was the situation presented (even though the NC termed it
proxy) regarding Robert Bremer's vote on the last motion. I agree, no
one has to explain why they are away, either. And, yes, we will need to
clearly differentiate between situations that call for absentee voting
and proxy voting if we make a Standing Rule. Reading Sturgis (p. 147):
"The "term" proxy may mean *either* the statement authorizing a member
to cast the vote of the member signing it *or* the member who casts the
vote." My "take" is that while Tim's definition is certainly one way a
proxy is used, proxies are not only a designated vote cast by another
person, but can also be another person actually casting the vote in the
name of a voter who has signed over that right.

On the other hand, I believe EXEC-L is there *exactly* to prevent the
scenario Teresa suggested in which anyone could be "blowing in the wind"
about facts. Using EXEC to inform our AB colleagues that will be gone
and to post an absentee vote not only informs everyone but is common
courtesy shown to colleagues. Let's be clear about EXEC! The argument
Teresa used about "not choosing to sub" is absurd as *every* elected AB
member is automatically subbed to EXEC as the result of being elected!
Teresa is and has been subbed since the very beginning, whether she
chooses to post there or not. Anyone who is removed from EXEC would only
be removed because they broke list rules - their choice, their
consequence. In that case, they still can post to BOARD-L. Should that
circumstance arioso, I suspect we will find a way to deal with it -
K.I.S.S. is still the best way! To be blunt, in fact, we are *only*
talking about Teresa here as everyone else has used EXEC. Even Teresa
has stated publicly that she (paraphrasing) *would* use EXEC if she
thought she had a good reason to use it. Seems to me that the ability to
vote in absentia would be an excellent reason for her to choose to use
EXEC were she going to be out of town.... If a member chooses *not* to
use EXEC, they deny themselves the choice to vote, that's all. No one is
"denying" anyone an opportunity to vote. In the occurrence of
"disasters" like Phyllis described (in CA it is called an "act of God"),
we are again talking about Absentee Voting, not Proxy Voting. I have no
problem with a telephone request to a fellow AB member cast a vote in
absentia, verified by the AB member themselves as soon as computer
access is available.

I do not think it is a good idea to write a Standing Rule for all ABs
that will exist, in the present and in the future (assuming the AB
continues to exist) designed to fit the chosen prejudices of just one
person right now. We are all adults here. When we are elected, our
constituents are in effect, making us *their* proxies, and expecting us
to represent them. Given the implied trust of elected office, using
Executive Session to accomplish something of a sensitive changes
nothing. Those same voters are also trusting us to use our best judgment
in representing them even in closed session.

On the other hand, regarding proxies, I agree with Teresa and Phyllis
that any AB member should be able to designate whichever proxy voter
they choose to cast their vote. Again, EXEC can be used (or even
Board-L) to announce whom we choose to use to deliver our proxy vote, so
there is no question about that person having our authority, should the
need arise. The NC and the Secretary will receive the votes and can
record and announce them that way.

Jana

-----Original Message-----
From: Phyllis Rippee [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 8:29 AM
To:
Subject: [BOARD-L] Voting


So, if we come up with a Standing Rule, we want to make it very clear
that we are talking about an "absentee" vote.

I agree with Teresa. If an AB member does not choose to use Board-Exec
and all AB members are aware of this fact, to make the use of Board-Exec
necessary to vote, that member is being denied the opportunity to vote.
Until a provision is written into the bylaws making the use of
Board-Exec one of the qualifications for becoming an AB member, I do not
see how we can "FORCE" any AB member to use that list....and we
definitely DO NOT have the right to deny any AB member the opportunity
to vote. Of course, any AB member who does not "want" or "choose" to
use Board-Exec, should not be subbed to it either, which compounds the
denial of opportunity.

I agree with Teresa. An AB member should have the right to choose which
AB member he/she wishes to forward his/her vote to Board-L.

It may be difficult to "fathom" the possibility that one could be
without access to a computer, have a computer down, have a server down,
be hit by a tornado, be snow or flood bound at home with computer in
office, be hospitalized for emergency surgery, or any other disaster and
still be interested enough in Project business that IF telepone service
is available, an AB member would call another AB member and ask "Whaz
Up?" But, it does happen and if a vote were in progress, the contacted
AB member should be allowed to cast the handicapped AB member's
vote......to be verified as soon as computer access is available.

I would hope that under the aforementioned circumstance, the AB member
would not be denied the opportunity to vote on an issue.

Phyllis

This thread: