[OSGeo Oceania] Fwd: Call for Feedback Due 23rd Sept - Board Election Process & Timeline

Tue Sep 15 00:36:18 PDT 2020

Hi Edwin, I'm not sure what happened, someone else might be in a better
position to figure that out, but I'm absolutely sure no harm was intended
and there'd be no reason not to approve your application. I think what it
shows is that the system is not perfect, and we should be working together
as a community to break down barriers, rather than build them up.

>From my perspective, your contribution is very much needed by the members
of this chapter.

Cheers!
John

On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 15:26, Edwin Liava'a <etuini.liavaa at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> I submitted my application to be a member of the Oceania Chapter
> during FOSS4G in Wellington 2019.
>
> Apparently it didn't happen or it was not approved? We were all there
> at the AGM but I don't know what happened and I've never received a
> single email from the list until I subscribed to the mailing list last
> week :)
>
> Anyway, it's not a big deal for me since we are all volunteers and if
> my contribution is not needed by the members of this chapter then I'll
> move on and keep doing what I do best in promoting FOSS in my own way,
> as I used to.
>
> cheers,
>
> Edwin
>
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 12:27, John Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, I agree that directors should have "skin in the game" as well,
> but a simple 12 month membership requirement would probably disqualify some
> people who'd be great. Martin's suggested modifications could perhaps help
> address this. But I still think it would need to be addressed in the
> constitution, and not by board-level decision.
> >
> > Cheers
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 09:59, Alex Leith <alexgleith at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey John
> >>
> >> I'm not sure about the 12 month qualifying period either, but I do
> think that having 'skin in the game' as Adam has said many times is
> important. If someone wants to be on the Board, the smallest hurdle is
> being a member and having the foresight to be a member, and presumably
> involved, for at least 12 months is not really a big deal.
> >>
> >> That said though, you are right that we cannot override the
> constitution in our election process... So while we may 'define a process'
> in clause 79.1, I don't think we can further constrain eligibility, as per
> clause 74.
> >>
> >> So I think we need to remove this qualifier from the election process
> and refer to the constitution.
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 09:46, Martin Tomko <tomkom at unimelb.edu.au>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi John, Adam, all
> >>>
> >>> I agree with your second point, John, that this should be covered by
> the constitution. I awas myself uneasy with the decision that the board
> decides this.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I am not in agreement with the first point. I believe that we are now
> past the ”storming and forming” stage of the organisation, and our initial
> days.
> >>>
> >>> I believe that to stand as a director, members need to demonstrate
> that a member has been active for a period of time, in good faith. The
> issues OSM had in the last year are a testament. The organisation is now
> managing substantial funds, and carries responsibility.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This could be addressed in a number of ways, in my eyes:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> A candidate could have the backing of a number of members that have
> been members for at least 12 months ( I suggest 3), if the candidate
> themself were not a member for that period;
> >>> A backing of a SIG could be equivalent.
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, I do not see a problem for people to wait for 12 month before
> being  nominated for a director.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Martin
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> From: Oceania <oceania-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of John
> Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com>
> >>> Date: Sunday, 13 September 2020 at 10:38 pm
> >>> To: Adam Steer <adam.d.steer at gmail.com>, "oceania at lists.osgeo.org" <
> oceania at lists.osgeo.org>
> >>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo Oceania] Call for Feedback Due 23rd Sept - Board
> Election Process & Timeline
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Yes! We want the board to be made up of engaged and motivated people
> with the community's best interests at heart. Our community is full of
> people like this! I reckon our best bet is to articulate that vision,
> create the conditions for those people to step forward and participate, and
> make sure the members who elect the board have enough visibility into it
> all to make informed decisions.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>> John
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2020, 3:48 pm Adam Steer, <adam.d.steer at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hey John, all
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> That clause was aimed at preventing people whos only interest is to
> get on boards getting on the board, and has been a topic of debate. Based
> on your input about the constitution its probably a good idea to just
> replace it with ’nominees shall be nominated in accordance with clause 74
> and 19.3 of the constitution [link])
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> It is worth remembering we all just kinda nominated ourselves at the
> start.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Adam
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, 13 Sep 2020 at 05:43, John Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Great work, and thanks for the opportunity to discuss the election
> process. I've added a couple of comments to the Google doc, but I have a
> specific concern that may need a little more room for discussion.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> In the proposed process, there is a section called "Minimum term of
> membership", which says:
> >>>
> >>> To be nominated as a Director, you must have been a Member for a
> minimum of 12 months (calculated from closing date of elections). This
> ensures that potential Directors have had the opportunity to participate in
> OSGeo Oceania business, and gives the Board an opportunity to mentor those
> who would like to take up leadership positions in the future.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I think there are a couple of issues with this:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 1) It's not an effective way to assess someone's capability to act as
> a director.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> For example, I want to nominate Edwin Liava'a to stand in the next
> election. Edwin was a keynote speaker at last year's conference in
> Wellington, and has been a highly engaged leader in the Pacific open
> geospatial community for many years. He's volunteered on a number of
> committees that would count as OSGeo Oceania business. He's done plenty to
> prove his dedication to this community, would be an asset to the
> organisation, and would be an effective voice from the Pacific, which to
> date has been missing from the board.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> But (as far as I can tell) Edwin's not currently a formal member, so
> by this clause he wouldn't be qualified to serve as a director, even if he
> became a member now.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> My point is, there are likely many people in our community who would
> be excellent additions to the board, and the length of their membership
> doesn't seem to be a relevant measure of their potential for contribution.
> If someone has a valuable contribution to make, why would we want to put
> this up as an obstacle?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2) It may not be within the board's scope to decide who is qualified
> to serve as a future director.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Required qualifications to serve as a director are already defined in
> the constitution (section 74: simply, "Each Director must be a Member").
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Members' rights to nominate are also defined there, subject to this
> qualification (section 79.3: "Any Member may nominate a person who is
> eligible for appointment under clause 74 to serve as a Director.").
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure that it's appropriate to use the election process to
> create additional eligibility hurdles, it seems this might be impacting on
> members' rights.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> If a nomination were declared ineligible based on this section in the
> election process, could a constitutional challenge be made? If the election
> process were found to be in conflict with the constitution, could this
> potentially render the election invalid? Obviously it's a hypothetical,
> unlikely scenario, but maybe not impossible.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> My feeling is the election process would be better without this
> section. If there are new director eligibility requirements to add, it
> seems a lot safer to stick to using constitution amendments, which would
> require formal assent by the membership through a statutory process.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>> John
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 at 17:58, Hamish Campbell <hn.campbell at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Dear OSGeo Oceania Members,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Our proposed November 2020 election process and timeline for
> appointing directors to the board requires your review and feedback.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> You can review and comment directly on the Google Doc. We also welcome
> feedback on the OSGeo Oceania mailing list by replying to this email.
> Feedback to the board must be received by midnight on Wednesday, September
> 23rd.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The board will review the feedback and finalize the election process
> and timeline in early October.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thank you for your contribution!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On behalf of the OSGeo Oceania Election Group
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Oceania mailing list
> >>> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
> >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Oceania mailing list
> >>> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
> >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Oceania mailing list
> >>> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
> >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Alex Leith
> >> m: 0419189050
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Oceania mailing list
> > Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
> _______________________________________________
> Oceania mailing list
> Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/oceania
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/oceania/attachments/20200915/19c2cb6f/attachment.html>