Members - a board decision from this last meeting was brought up and I wanted to start a separate thread for it so it’s not lost.
Per the bylaws:
In the case of a vacancy on the board, the remainder of the board has the right to appoint an interim member or to hold a special election to elect an interim member to fill the position for the remainder of the term.
Last month Jeremiah resigned from his at large director position. Since the election just happened, we decided to appoint an interim director at large instead of hold another election. We also decided to use the June election results to inform our decision and ask the person who would have been elected if Jeremiah had not run. That person was Rustin Atkeisson. He accepted our appointment and is now interim at-large director. We intend for his term to be until next June’s regular election in 2019. We also decided that this term should “count” as one of the three consecutive terms allowed in the bylaws.
One huge reason we did this is that an election requires a 25% quorum to sign in and vote, and we have a hard time getting 100+ people to check their email and click a link. We were barely there for the annual election. The election itself had issues that we are still working to iron out - like people didn’t like ranked preference because the scoring is so complicated. If there’s no quorum the bylaws are unclear about what happens. We’re working on a bylaws revision that would make this easier.
Another issue is area lead and committee lead vacancies. We debate this one a little more. Again we could go to the membership, call for volunteers, get applicants. Or we could just appoint someone in the interim who’s the next logical choice, recommended by the area lead, an assistant, someone very involved in the area.
When I was a regular member I did not want to be pulled into board decisions all year, I wanted my leaders to take care of administrative stuff so I could just MAKE things. But I know not everyone feels that way, that’s why board meetings are open, the board agenda and minutes always public, anyone can join the admin list and talk policy with us.
I do want to know how people feel about this so here’s a poll - what should we do with vacancies?
The poll in my post was about board vacancies but I can ask about area leads too.
In a way area leads are easier because they’re all appointed, but it’s also complicated because they are more needed than board members. The board is 8-9 people who can all back each other up, the area lead has a near daily task to do things like have safety classes scheduled and fix a tool that’s broken, it’s tough to say “no lead until a board meeting”
I did not like the way the question is stated. It is not an either or issue. It should be 3 options. If there was an active assistant that is willing and able to do what is needed then I would say appoint them to the lead. If there is not I would say opening things up and getting member interests is a good way to go.
I don’t think just appointing someone is the way to go. It is always better to have a interested passionate people involved, and we have lots of new members around, so it would be good to open it up.
Ultimately it is up to the leadership to pick someone.
I never think you get a representative result from a poll where people can see partial or complete results before casting their vote. I think that you are even less likely to get a fair, unbiased, representative result when how each individual votes is visible.
Even if this were anonymous, and the partial results (including, I would add, how many have voted so far) were not visible; to be able to be used by the board to make the decision, the board members should all abstain from this poll. I mean to say that if board members are voting here, in the poll, then the results are not useful as an indication of how the rest of the membership feels. In this case, since I can see how some of the board feels, it seems pointless to be participate in this straw poll unless I want my name attached as agreeing or disagreeing with a predetermined outcome.
In the future, only polls that do not disclose partial results, and only if voters are not identified make any sense. And especially, if the results are to be used by any of the board in making a decision, the members of the board should abstain.
Then there is the fact, I voted because I like clicking things and then got confused and tried to unvote and then just gave up. I checked vote just now, and was like “hmmm that was not what I thought I did”.
When I vote in one of these I vote as maker LaDeana and not as board member LaDeana. I tend to vote for things as a board member that I think the makers would want, rather than what I would want. I hope that makes sense. I would like to think I would still count as a regular member… although I find in many places being a board member restricts you more than being a regular member.
(This is why I say that when you join the board, you have less power to effect change… )
