Colleagues:
We discussed
possible changes on term limits at a prior EC meeting, though I doubt
that all requirements of 7.1.6.1 were fulfilled. Out of fairness to all,
if we are going to change this, it should be resolved by November 2005 at the
latest.
I want to try to
determine the preferences of the EC on this matter before advocating any
specific change in March.
At present, the
specific text within 7.2.2 reads:
"An individual who
has served as Chair or Vice Chair of a given Working Group for a total of more
than eight years in that office may not be elected to that office
again."
One common
rationale would be the desire to retain the services of a willing and capable
officer rather than that officer being arbitrarily forced out. There is less
than universal agreement on what approach to take for this, but I remember
four clear alternatives:
1. Leave
term limits as is.
Rationale:
Term limits do open up leadership opportunities for people. It is too
difficult to overcome the power/influence of incumbency without term
limits.
2. Strike
the entire paragraph.
Rationale:
The rules allow replacement of WG officers at any plenary meeting
(7.2.2). Working Groups in the past would have liked to have kept a
term-limited Chair.
3. Change to
read: "An
individual who has served as Chair of a given Working Group for a total of
more than eight years in that office may not be elected to that office
again."
Rationale: Term limiting the Chair only still
opens up leadership opportunities at the top, allowing either a Vice Chair to
move up or someone new to take the Chair position. A Vice Chair may with
to continue in his/her role rather than take the Chair position. WGs
with multiple Vice Chairs arbitrarily limit those people by term limits even
though they may be changing responsibilities within the WG (Moving from 2nd
Vice Chair to 1st Vice Chair).
4. Change to read: "An individual who has served
as Chair or Vice Chair of a given Working Group for a total of more than eight
years in that office may only be eligible for election to that office again as
the result of a motion passed by 75% of the voting members
present."
Rationale: Just
as we currently grant the WG the ability to elect a new Chair at any plenary
session by 75% vote, the WG should have similar latitude to retain a Chair
independent of term limits.
My preferences lean
toward options 4 or 3. (Just to be clear, I find it inconceivable
that I personally will ever test the term
limits.)
Comments and
preferences appreciated.
--Bob
Grow
---------- This email is sent from the
802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.