#02: Recall of Board Members

[David Graham]

On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, John Goerzen wrote:

> [chairman hat on]
> Again, we need to move fast.  Since there have been no other proposals on
> this one either, but there has been more discussion than on #01, I'll set
> the deadline for disagreement at 72 hours from now.
> [chairman hat off]
>
> I propose the following amendment:
>
> The paragraph in Article 7 beginning with "Vacancies in the Board" shall be
> removed.
>
> The paragraph in Article 7 beginning with "A director may be removed" shall
> be removed.
>
> In its place, the following shall be inserted:
>
>   Any Board member, including officers, may be removed from the board upon
>   the vote of 2/3 of the membership.  No individual vote or call for votes
>   may apply to more than one person.  No personl may be the subject of more
>   than one recall vote within any given 90-day period.

of the +contributing+ membership. 2/3 may be a bit of a high bar without a
strict mandate to the membership committee to purge inactive contributing
members, which is a hopelessly difficult task. If we ask 2/3 of the
membership to throw out a member of the board because the board is having
the trouble it had in the last few months, it's unlikely it'll happen. If
the board is an activist board, it won't be necessary. The clause becomes
more or less self-defeating with the bar set that high. I would be for a
"vote of 2/3 of the contributing membership who cast ballots" subject to
the normal quorum, announcement, and duration requirements.

>   Subject to the above, the membership may call for a recall vote if 10
>   members publically identify themselves as supporting such a vote.  This
>   shall constitute a call for votes, and an vote among the membership shall
>   then be held immediately.  All contributing members are eligible to vote.
>   A ballot shall have only two options: recall the Board member, or leave
>   the member in place.  The vote is tallied with a simple count.

s/an vote/a vote/ and I think "shall then be held immediately" would be
better served it is held "according to standard vote procedures" which
would then need to provide time limits, annoucement requirements, etc.

>   If the vote to remove the Board member passes, the member is immediately
>   removed from the Board and any position as officer.
>
>   The member that is the subject of a removal vote may vote on that
>   question.  The removal of a Board member does not render that person
>   un-eligible to run for re-election.

Would it be appropriate to mention that this (to run in the byelection) is
how a board member can appeal such a decision?

>   When a vacancy occurs on the board for any reason, whether or not a
>   result of a removal vote, if the next regular election for that particular
>   seat is 40 days or less away, the seat will be unfilled until the regular
>   election, at which point it will be filled using the regular procedures
>   laid out in this Article.  If the next regular election for the empty seat
>   is more than 40 days away, a special election will be called immediately
>   for that particular seat only.  The winner of that election will serve out
>   the balance of the term, and the seat will be subject to re-election at
>   the normal time.

Ok. so ignore my comment about that being the appropriate place for
by-elections from my previous email. This one works. :)

=--------------------------------------------------=
David "cdlu" Graham 			cdlu at pkl.net
Guelph, Ontario			SMS: +1 519 760 1409