<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Agree,<div><br><div>Mark</div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On Jul 23, 2013, at 9:38 AM, "Michael P. Gerlek" <<a href="mailto:mpg@flaxen.com">mpg@flaxen.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">Do we as the board need to make a motion saying we will resolve this via voting, or can we just proceed?<br><br>* Let us please keep the NA event location and issue separate from this vote.<br><br>* I think 1-2 days to review the proposals, then a short by-email voting window.<br><br>* Normally I'd say we should have a discussion period, with a chance to debate the pros and cons of each city, but I'm not sure that is appropriate - I know I'd really like a chance to lobby for my city choice, but I'm a little uncomfortable with that although I'm not really sure why. Maybe because I see this as a tie-breaking exercise, not a chance to reopen the whole selection process?<br><br>* Given that, then, votes should go to Paul as a CRO, instead of the mailing list, to avoid early board voters influencing later voters. (The votes should not be secret, though- Paul should announce who voted for what after vote period closes.)<br><br>* In the event of a board tie vote, I suggest Jeff, as president, decides the winner.<br><br>.mpg<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Board mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></body></html>