[Businessmtg] SC Eligibility
Lynne
lynne at asp-afg.org
Sun Mar 12 13:47:28 PDT 2023
Hi everyone,
This has been a great discussion so far. I would encourage everyone attending the Business Meeting to share your thoughts - all opinions are valued!!
My thoughts: I would be ok with making this a temporary measure and as Anne suggested making it for 6 months. By which time the Business Meeting will hopefully have sorted out new eligibility rules for the Steering Committee. And the SC can request that the BM extend this authority or not at that time.
However, the issue of requiring unanimous or 2/3rds approval of the steering committee to bring an applicant who does not meet the current eligibility to the Business Meeting for consideration is tougher for me. The Business Meeting would still be reviewing the applicant and would vote on their application with the 2/3rds majority required to pass. But we have 3 people on the Steering Committee right now. And we are all working very well together, in my opinion, as we have had to work closely to keep ASP running. Are there disagreements? Of course. But they are settled in a pretty straightforward way through talking things out and without acrimony. So all the things we’ve been doing to keep ASP running - switching roles, updating parts of the website, coming up with suggestions to the BM like this measure we are discussing now, etc - are already being done with unanimity between the 3 of us. So I personally would feel uncomfortable recommending an applicant to the Business Meeting if all 3 of us were not in agreement.
That being said, maybe I would feel differently if we had 5 or 6 members of the steering committee. Which would hopefully mean this kind of measure would no longer be needed as it would mean more SC positions have been filled!! But if we are making this a temporary measure to allow us to meet an urgent need and that would have to be renewed in 6 months, then I think we need to consider where the steering committee is right now - and that is with only 3 people and I feel unanimity is appropriate in this case.
Hugs,
Lynne
More information about the Businessmtg
mailing list