While both proposals are of benefit to the County Coordinators and
will provide additional representative to the CCs than our bylaws now
provide, there are several areas where they differ significantly.
However, our bylaws require a 2/3 majority of those voting in an
election to approve the passage of an amendment. With two amendments,
addressing basically the same subject, it is unlikely that either
would garner enough favorable votes to pass. If both fail we would
remain as we are today, over represented for State Coordinators and
underrepresented for County Coordinators. For that reason alone I
believe we should sponsor or co-sponsor only one proposal.
I would make these observations. Ellen's proposal indicates
positional representation is bad and states it does away with
positional representation. It does not. It does away only with the
positions of State Coordinator representative. The proposal still
retains the positions of NC, RAL, SP and CC representation that are
now in place.
I would also note that Ellen's proposal has not been sponsored by any
other state so we would be the sponsor of that amendment. For lack of
a better way to differentiate the two, <grin> Don's amendment has
been sponsored by Kansas and co-sponsored by Tennessee so we would be
a co-sponsor for that amendment.
The differences I spoke of earlier are these. Ellen's proposal
eliminates all representation for the position of State Coordinators
which I believe is unfair to them. Don's amendment retains a State
Coordinator to represent them on the board in proportion to their numbers.
Ellen's proposal gives the CCs of one region just one extra vote for
representation on the Advisory board. Don's amendment retains the
regional representation we now have and gives the CCs of one region
three extra votes for representation on the Advisory board.
Once elected, the votes of all Advisory Board members affect all
remembers of the Project so I believe the majority membership, the
CCs, should help elect as many of the Advisory Board as possible.
My perusal of the state's County Coordinator lists has found that 75%
of the membership hold counties in only one region. That means that
under Ellen's proposal 75% of the membership would help elect one
more regional representative. Under Don's amendment that same 75% of
the membership would help elect three additional RALs.
That is, a vote for Ellen's proposal will let us help elect only five
members of the board, one more than we elect now. A vote for Don's
amendment will allow us to help elect seven members of the board,
three more than we now elect.
Because I believe if both are sponsored, both would fail, and that
Don's amendment better serves the membership of CCs and also
preserves the rights of representation for the State Coordinators I vote only
Yes for #1, Don's amendment.
Don Tharp
Humboldt County CC
detict(a)cox.net
At 01:08 PM 4/14/2007, you wrote:
Hello NVGenWeb CCs:
Don Tharp has requested that NVGenWeb consider sponsorship of the
amendment to the USGenWeb Bylaws which he authored concerning
representation on the USGenWeb Advisory Board. Joy Fisher has
requested that NVGenWeb consider sponsorship of an amendment to the
USGenWeb Bylaws which was authored by Ellen Pack of MSGenWeb also
concerning representation on the USGenWeb Advisory Board.
To that end, we can do a quick poll directly on this list to see
what the preferences of NVGenWeb CCs might be. The two amendments
contain conflicting provisions, but the purpose of this poll and
potential sponsorhip is to potentially put the issues on the ballot
for the USGenWeb annual election. Therefore, it is possible to for
NVGenWeb to sponsor both, neither, or one or the other of the two amendments.
This poll will conclude this Wedneday April 18 at midnight Pacific
time. We will go with the preferences of the majority of NVGenWeb
CCs responding to the poll. You can express your preference as yes
or no on both or any one of the issues as you wish. Please respond
directly to this list. Here are the two issues:
1) Yes/No - NVGenWeb should sponsor the amendment to the USGenWeb
Bylaws written by Don Tharp posted at
http://www.usgenweb.org/volunteers/notice.shtml dated Feb. 20, 2007
as altered Mar. 27, 2007.
2) Yes/No - NVGenWeb should sponsor the amendment to the USGenWeb
Bylaws written by Ellen Pack posted at
http://www.natchezbelle.org/amendment/amendment.html
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
NVGEN-request(a)rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message