CFC Constitutional Coalition - Governor Activity Rule

[Ken Craft]

Unless this motion can be simple and clear, I think it is bound to fail. If we want to measure voting participation then, the motion needs to recognize there are multiple ways to vote ie. GL's, emergency email votes, Governors Board votes.

Other than some motions that have quorum requirements, what is the point of this venture?

[Valer Eugen Demian]

Unless this motion can be simple and clear, I think it is bound to fail. If we want to measure voting participation then, the motion needs to recognize there are multiple ways to vote ie. GL's, emergency email votes, Governors Board votes.

Other than some motions that have quorum requirements, what is the point of this venture?

I have voted on all motions prior to the AGM and emailed my votes to Lyle and the CFC office. Still do not know if my votes were taken into consideration at the said AGM...

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Valer:

When the results of a vote on a motion are published in a GL, the secretary lists all those who voted. So you can tell by checking the relevant motion in the GL whether your name is there, and whether your vote made it in.

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Ken:

It is true there may be numbers of ways of voting - in the GL, by e-mail, maybe even sometime by post on the Governors' Discussion Board ( has this ever been done yet? ).

Our motion assumes that we should not be begging the governors' to do their job. They should be voting on all motions, even if they abstain.

So we have set a minimum criteria that they have to meet - not miss 2 consecutive GL votes. What ever else they may also do - eg. e-mail votes, Governors' Discussion Board votes - is all to the good - it's what they're supposed to be doing; but that does not mean they don't have to still do the minimum required by the rule.

So this rule is simple and easy to enforce because it is all printed up in the GL - monitoring it is simple; all governors treated the same.

And I'm still waiting for more opinions on your suggestion that the second part of our motion ( that the Provincial Association can't replace an expelled governor ) is illegal. If that is shown to be the case, we will amend the motion to delete it. But I need to get a few more opinions in addition to yours to try to sort the issue out.

Bob

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

monitoring it is simple

Who would do that? Don't you think that an additional clause is required to assigned this task to somebody (Secretary?)?

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Egis:

I think that is just a bureaucratic implementation question that can be assigned by the Executive. Don't think an implementation detail like that needs to be actually in the motion - but yes, I think the Secretary should likely be the one to monitor, since he puts out the GL's ( though I guess anyone could read the GL and keep a list up to date - maybe that's why it is best left to the Executive to decide who does it ).

Bob

[Ken Craft]

The more I consider it the more likely I am to vote against this motion even if amended. I see the not allowed to replace your Governor clause as a back door attempt to reduce the number of Governors and fundamentally undemocratic. The two consecutive GL clause does not recognize how busy has been done in the last several years and the trend towards the eventual abolition of GLs as clunky anachronisms.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Ken:

If it turns out that motions eventually are never done by GL, then it will be time to update any " governor activity rule " to keep up with the times. But currently only emergency votes are by e-mail, and I'm not aware of any Governors' Discussion Board vote yet. Nearly all votes are still by GL. So, for the current situation, the 2 consecutive GL motions makes sense and is in tune with what is still being done today.

Once the governors update procedures, then update the activity rule. But we need an activity rule now. Don't vote it down and leave it just status quo, with no activity rule in place going forward.

Bob

[Bob Armstrong]

Here again is the section the Coalition seeks to add to the CFC Handbook:

“ 23. Governor Inactivity Rule

Any governor, no matter whether provincial representative governor, or governor at large, including the Executive, appointees, etc., who does not vote, or make a comment, in two consecutive Governors’ Letters, shall be removed from office, and shall no longer be part of a quorum, and the respective Provincial Association or appointing body shall not be entitled to replace him/her until the next AGM. “

Who agrees with Governor Ken Craft that the bolded second part of the motion is illegal? Who believes it is legal?

Bob

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

"Today the CFC Constitutional Coalition filed with the CFC Secretary a motion to impose a " Governor Activity Rule "

Bob, does is mean it will be in the GL's 1?