#01: Election of board members by SPI membership

Nathanael Nerode neroden at twcny.rr.com
Wed Mar 12 04:32:32 UTC 2003

I'm opposed to staggered elections; they have a tendency to prevent 'renewal' 
of the sort which is happening right now, when the old board isn't working.

I think this issue breaks down into several pieces:

* Staggered elections or not?

* How long do board members serve for, before re-election?
One year sounds good to me.  Longer (2 years?  5 years?) is fine if there are 
good recall, resignation, and by-election (aka special election) procedures.

* How do officers relate to the board?
I think either the 'parliamentary' system (board chooses officers) or the 
'presidential' system (officers are separately elected) would be fine; both 
have their advantages.  

One advantage of the 'presidential' system is that it guarantees that 
*someone* is willing to do each of the officer jobs; in the 'parliamentary' 
system it is possible for all the elected board members to expect that they 
won't be treasurer, and to have nobody suitable.  The existing by-laws, in 
which officers are members of the board by 'virtue of their office', seem to 
have been written with separate election of officers in mine.

An advantage of the 'parliamentary' system is simplicity in voting.  It also 
allows officers to change without changing the board composition, which can 
smooth out some situations (such as when the President decides he isn't up to 
being President, but is still up to being a board member).

--Nathanael Nerode

More information about the Spi-bylaws mailing list