Kay Mason wrote:
That announcement of Tim Stowell's came as a surprise to the Board too folks.
I'm sure that he will explain it to you, however,
Thanks,
Kay
Tim said: "I feel it my duty to let you know that the Board
has decided to settle the census issue first before appointing a
replacement from the Tombstone or Archives projects."
Tim will probably explain, but is the Board actually considering not
allowing reps of two of the three special projects take part in the
discussion that involves special projects? Or did he imagine that? Is
that the surprise?
Is the Board discussing this in executive session? If so, did they
announce they were going into executive session and the reason? Or is
that required? Do the appointments of the special project reps hinge on
the census issue?
I was removed as the Tombstone Project rep on March 22, and I understood
there would be an executive session to discuss that appointment. Back in
February, the Board received a recommendation from the Tombstone Project
volunteers as their choice of a representative. On March 21, the
Archives volunteers sent a recommendation for their choice to represent
them.
I'm sorry folks.... there are just too many secrets going on around
here. I commend Tim for at least letting the two special project reps
know why they still don't have a representative on the Board. They are
starting to ask more often. We can't ask Board members anything
anymore, because they fear reprimands from other Board members.
The Board has received recommendations from the special projects. They
either need to accept those recommendations, or appoint someone else.
Each special project has only one rep position. It's not fair to them to
not be represented.
Thanks,
Linda