[Board] vice president discussion

Wed Oct 26 04:02:05 PDT 2016

Hi all,

I can remember some years back that once a new board was elected, the 
first meeting always included the election/selection of all 4 officers.
According to our bylaws, this is how we have to proceed on our next 
meeting. Even if the bylaws do not explicitly mention the same for the 
vice-president(s), the spirit of the bylaws is the same in my opinion.

Best,
Angelos

On 10/26/2016 01:40 PM, Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl) wrote:
> Maxi, Dirk, Cameron,
>
>
> The formal part:
>
> Our bylaws [1] (see article V) state that we have a Board of Directors 
> and besides that four Officers (chair of the board, president (the 
> "CEO"), treasurer, secretary).
> These Officers don't have to be members of the Board. They are 
> appointed by the Board.
>
> A bit surprising to me: this appointment is just for one year (see 
> section 5.2)
> Even more suprising to me: an individual can hold more than one office 
> (so anybody can be the chair of the board, as well as president, as 
> well as treasurer, as well as secretary at the same time
>
> Generally the relationship between the Board of Directors and the 
> Officers is that the Board sets up the strategy (the way to go), and 
> that the Officers are in charge of making this happen (which is: 
> actually running the daily business).
>
>
> An example in our case is the role of secretary, which is still 
> fulfilled by Jackym (not being a member of the Board)
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/incorporation/bylaws.html
> [2] http://delcode.delaware.gov/title8/c001/sc04/index.shtml
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
> Gert-Jan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Massimiliano Cannata schreef op 25-10-2016 22:31:
>> Dear all
>> This discussion to me is not on the right direction.
>> When the current president was elected taking the Jeff vacancies, we
>> agreed that two other board members from other continents will be
>> selected as vice-president to support locally the work of the
>> president.
>>
>> Now a new board is in place and fill the Dirk position with another
>> European director.
>>
>> That's all to me.
>>
>> Nothing to do with satisfaction, enthusiasm and nothing personal.
>>
>> Have we ever had a president which was not a director? I don't think
>> but maybe I'm wrong.
>>
>> Best wishes.
>>
>> Il 25 ott 2016 10:21 PM, "Cameron Shorter" <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
>> ha scritto:
>>
>>> Dirk, others,
>>>
>>> I'd suggest there might be a 3rd reason for selecting a new
>>> president or vice-president. It might just be that a new person
>>> happens to be more enthusiastic, have some more time, be more
>>> practical, be better known, ... It doesn't always mean a person will
>>> be better at the role.
>>>
>>> I suggest that the most successful open source communities work as a
>>> bottom-up organisation, rather than top-down. Successful Open Source
>>> projects are usually based on the principles of Do-ocracy,
>>> Merit-ocracy and rough consensus. Anyone and everyone is encouraged
>>> to contribute on their own terms, and any official officer is more a
>>> facilitator than a decision maker. We limit ourselves as a community
>>> of we over-emphasise the importance of specific roles.
>>>
>>> So yes, we should be mindful of people's feelings, but we should
>>> also make the space for anyone to contribute to whatever level they
>>> wish, rather than focusing on specific positions of power.
>>>
>>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>>
>>> On 25/10/2016 8:11 PM, Dirk Frigne wrote:
>>> Venka,
>>> Jody,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the clarification.
>>> I think no matter what decision the board takes, it is good to take
>>> into
>>> account that people 'invest' in their role and continuity gives the
>>> opportunity to get a better result /investment for that role.
>>>
>>> imho their can be 2 reasons for the board to change an officer:
>>>
>>> 1. the officer is resigning, and I think we always should accept
>>> that.
>>> In that case it is the responsibility of the board to find another
>>> voluntair.
>>>
>>> 2. the board is not satisfied with the way the officer is doing his
>>> Job
>>> for any reason.
>>> In that case I think the board should discuss this with the officer
>>> and
>>> try to find an elegant way to proceed.
>>>
>>> If we respect these rules I think we can help OSGeo grow further in
>>> a
>>> good way.
>>>
>>> just my 2c.
>>>
>>> Dirk
>>>
>>> On 25/10/2016 04:03, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:
>>> Dear Dirk and Board,
>>>
>>> I am sorry for the confusion inadvertently caused due to
>>> insufficient understanding and recollection of the earlier
>>> board decision on my part.
>>>
>>> I was under the impression that the board decision at f2f in Jan
>>> 2016
>>> was for having term of present President and Vice President same as
>>> the tenure they will be serving on the board. As per the notes that
>>> Jody
>>> has quoted below, my understanding was incorrect and the board
>>> needed to
>>> select our President and Vice Presidents at our last meeting held on
>>> 20 Oct. 2016.
>>>
>>> The selection needs to be made urgently as there are several matters
>>> to be taken up by our President and Vice-President. I suggest that
>>> we take this up at our next board meeting scheduled for  3 November
>>> 2016.
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Venka
>>>
>>> P.S. I have also responded to Dirk's mail on related topic
>>> privately, as
>>> per his request.
>>>
>>> On 2016/10/25 9:36, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>> Dirk I was able to get some answers by digging into notes for
>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Face_to_Face_Meeting_2016 [1]
>>>
>>> *President and Vice President Election*
>>>
>>> - *HM nominated VR as president*
>>> - *VR accepted nomination*
>>> - *All in favour*
>>> - *VR elected as OSGeo President*
>>> - *HM and DF nominated as Vice President*
>>> - *All in favour*
>>> - *Term of this President/VP:Until the next board initial
>>> meeting
>>> after new board election.*
>>> - *DF(Suggestion): need to change board members 2 yrs term to
>>> 3 yrs.
>>> This is a part of strategic plan of OSGeo.(JG)*
>>>
>>> It looks like the term for the President and Vice Presidents has
>>> elapsed,
>>> and this meeting on Oct 20th was the intended time to choose new
>>> officers.... and since I was away those present pushed this
>>> conversation
>>> off to an email discussion.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> On 24 October 2016 at 17:33, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> aside: taking this into a seperate thread, since it is a change of
>>> topic.
>>>
>>> Looking into this Dirk, sorry I was working and could not attend the
>>> meeting:
>>>
>>> *14:26:06 venka: Agenda 6: Selecting OSGeo Vice-President*
>>> *14:26:55 helena_: it would be good to have somebody with industry
>>> contacts for the second vice-president*
>>> *14:26:56 vcraciunescu: this should also be postponed for a meeting
>>> when
>>> all board members will attend*
>>> *14:27:06 kalxas: vcraciunescu, +1*
>>> *14:27:09 maria: +1*
>>> *14:27:11 helena_: yes, I think it would be good to have Jody*
>>> *14:27:16 venka: I suggest we start a thread on loomio and select
>>> our new
>>> VP*
>>>
>>> Checking Loomio there is indeed a discussion / motion
>>>
>>> *https://www.loomio.org/d/jWiY2zLA/vice-president [2]
>>> <https://www.loomio.org/d/jWiY2zLA/vice-president [2]>*
>>>
>>> So yeah I confess myself confused on this one, we have no
>>> requirement for
>>> our officers to be board members - and I feel you are fulfilling
>>> your role
>>> very well (and had some activities scheduled as our vice-president
>>> that I
>>> would hate to interrupt).
>>>
>>> Let us assume that this was an assumption each vice-president had to
>>> be a
>>> board member; rather than any reflection on your capabilities or
>>> commitment.
>>>
>>> While our organization does not have a director we tend to lean on
>>> the
>>> office of president to pick up activities. Backing Venka up with two
>>> vice-presidents is one way of picking up the strain (since we would
>>> like
>>> Venka to remain cheerful).
>>> -- 
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> On 24 October 2016 at 00:03, Dirk Frigne <dirk.frigne at geosparc.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Venka,
>>>
>>> I see on the committees page that my Offices role as Vice president
>>> is
>>> erased, and today I see on loomino a nomination for a new Vice
>>> President.
>>> I didn't see a motion in the board to dismiss me as an OSGeo
>>> Officer.
>>> If you did, and of course the board has the right to do this, it is
>>> polite to let me know. Maybe in advance if possible.
>>>
>>> In an organisation where these positions are paid, this is
>>> obligated. I
>>> think it hows at least some respect when the position was executed
>>> voluntarly to act in the same way.
>>>
>>> Can I also knwo (in private please) the reason why I was dismissed
>>> from
>>> my function?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>
>>> Dirk Frigne
>>> Vice president OSGeo
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board [3]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board [3]
>>
>> -- 
>> Cameron Shorter
>> M +61 419 142 254
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board [3]
>>
>> Links:
>> ------
>> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Face_to_Face_Meeting_2016
>> [2] https://www.loomio.org/d/jWiY2zLA/vice-president
>> [3] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

-- 
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
OSGeo Charter Member
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos