On-Line Governors' Meetings Proposed

[Bob Armstrong]

The Governor's Voting Modernization Subcommittee ( myself as chair; Chris Mallon; Lyle Craver ) has now filed its interim report with the Procedures' Committee. It proposes on-line governors' meetings quarterly, spread over 1 week, using the Governors' Discussion Board for discussion and voting. If anyone would like to see the full set of procedures proposed, just e-mail me ( bobarm@sympatico.ca ).

We have proposed a " trial " governors' meeting for April 1 - 7 to test out the procedures.

We are currently awaiting the OK for this from Eric. Here is our letter to him, filing our " interim " report:

Hi Eric:

The Governors’ Voting Modernization Subcommittee is composed of myself ( chair ), Lyle Craver, and Chris Mallon. The subcommittee has worked well together and reviewed the interim report we are submitting to the Procedures’ Committee ( myself as chair, you as member ).

Our interim report is in the form of a draft motion, attached. It amends the CFC Handbook to include Procedures for On-line Governors’ Meetings.

As part of our process, we did seek public input on the motion by posting it on the Governors’ Discussion Board and the members’ CFC Chess Forum. There was significant interest, as after 1 1/3 days, there were 16 views on the Governors’ board ( because of the duplicate posting, I believe a number of governors viewed this on the members’ board, where a number regularly attend now ) and 65 views on the members’ board. There were no objections, amendments nor negative comments – there was a good technical improvement suggestion, which we have incorporated. I take this response to confirm that the motion is considered acceptable to the governors and members.

However, our report is described as “ interim “ because before finalizing it, we wish to conduct a “ trial “ Governors’ Meeting under the outlined procedures. We suggest it be held from April 1 – 7. It will be in all aspects a regular Governors’ Meeting, except that any motions passed at it will have to be resubmitted to the governors in an acceptable voting fashion, since there is currently no legislation authorizing voting by on-line meeting. We would work with you to set this up, to designate a Posting Secretary, to assist you in preparing to chair the meeting, etc.. This will allow us to see if the system works, whether any amendments to the motion are required and it will familiarize the governors with the new procedures before actual meetings start, assuming the final motion is adopted and passed by the governors..

Please review the draft motion, and I would be pleased to receive any comments. Also, would you advise whether we can go ahead and start making arrangements for the “ trial “ governors’ meeting.

Thanks.

Bob ( & Lyle & Chris )

[Bob Gillanders]

Good luck with the trial meeting. Perhaps you can get the budget approved!

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Bob:

Got Maurice working on it! - he's to get back to me as soon as he thinks he can commit to a self-imposed ( at the request of the governors ) deadline of March 31 for the 2010-11 budget. Hope he can get it presented by then. Then the governors' have the task of examining, questioning, and hopefully approving. All sounds great doesn't it - we must dream in technicolour !!

Bob

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

Just posted on the Governors' Discussion Board:

Today, 08:41 AM
Bob Armstrong
CFC Governor

" Trial " On-line Governors' Meeting - One Month Without Decision

Chris Mallon, Lyle Craver ( CFC Secretary ) and I filed our request for an April 1-7 " trial " governors' on-line meeting on Feb. 3. Since then:

1. Feb. 14 - I sent a follow-up letter to Eric asking for authorization to hold the meeting, because I had had no response to the Feb. 3 request:

" we need your OK to go ahead and start setting up our “ trial “ on-line governors’ meeting for April 1 – 7. We need lead time to get all the governors up to speed, and prepare you and assign the new “ Posting Secretary “ envisaged by the Procedures. "


2. Feb. 14 - Stijn, V-P, whom I had copied with both e-mails, sent a notice to Eric that this matter needed his attention.

3. Feb. 17 - Eric wrote Lyle asking for his opinion:

" I am all for online meetings.

I noticed you were cc'ed for these messages. Please let me know if have any objections to online meetings as described in the above ".

4. Feb. 19 - having received no confirmation that Lyle had responded to Eric, and also no authorization from Eric, I wrote again asking that the " trial meeting " be authorized:

" While you are waiting for Lyle to respond, I can advise that he is a member of the subcommittee and has approved the procedures. His only condition is that a “ trial “ governors’ on-line meeting be held to test the procedures.

We are asking for the trial meeting to be held Thursday April 1 to Wednesday, April 7.

Can you please authorize us now to go ahead and organize and hold it. It will take some lead time to get everything set up, and to get the governors up to speed, and answer their questions. It is now a somewhat “ urgent “ matter. "

5. Feb. 27 ( today ) - I have nothing to show that Lyle has yet responded to Eric. I have had no response from Eric.

The proposed on-line " trial " governors' meeting will take some preparation, and governors will have to be brought up to speed if we want them to participate. There is now only a month before the proposed " trial meeting ".

A response from Eric is now necessary.

Bob