[Wpfw-lsb] Thought on full LSB participation in GM recommendations

[Jane Gatewood]

Esteemed board members:

I came away from last week's meeting intrigued and appalled by the 
results of Mark Robert's proposal concerning the protocol for full LSB 
involvement in the recommendations for GM.

I will say, upfront, that I agree 100% with the position that Mark 
articulated, although I was not confident that he had identified the 
most appropriate way to handle the issue. Perhaps others felt this way 
and this was the reason his proposal was defeated. My sense was that the 
majority placed a higher priority on the integrity of the GM search 
committee than they did on full LSB involvement in the decision.

This suggests to me that there was wisdom in Acie's proposal to table 
the decision for an executive session. Whether this would have helped, I 
cannot say, but clearly the format for last week's meeting and the 
ensuing "discussion" did not permit any opportunities for clear thinking 
to find the most appropriate solution.

I would like to offer these thoughts for your consideration on this matter:

(1)    The full LSB will need to approve the recommendations of the MASC 
before their recommendations become official. What will be the basis of 
the full board's decision? How will they be informed/ educated? Please, 
deal with these questions now, before the decision is upon you.

      Call upon your chair and vice-chair to establish a task force made 
up of two MASC members and two non-MASC members to work out a proposal 
for the full board to vote on at the November meeting. If you would be 
willing to serve on this task force, let them know.

(2)    Regardless of the results of the task force I am recommending, 
any LSB member who desires to participate in the remaining activities of 
the MASC can and should become members of the MASC at this time. This 
way, they could "officially" bring themselves up to speed on committee 
processes and decisions, if they have not already done so in their 
capacity as board members. They could also commit to any protocols that 
have been established concerning privacy of candidates, etc.

I'm not sure if the steps I have suggested are the most appropriate, but 
I hope you will give them consideration and perhaps refine and improve 
upon them.

But please, do so quickly so that a well-articulated proposal on this 
topic can be submitted for full board consideration in November.

Thank you,

Jane Gatewood

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mutualaid.org/pipermail/wpfw-lsb/attachments/20041025/e0230a63/attachment.html