Hearings
Russ & Dan had long motion about Hearings revisions. Dahl & Norris amendment is long and complex about appeals. Lots of discussion. Jean and Guy made some really good points against the amendment. Too hard to listen, ponder, and transcribe, so I opted to listen and ponder. Sorry. Vote on amendment Marc. Mel, Lori for. Amendment fails.
Original motion—Dan proposed tweaking the composition of the review panel to comprise hearings chair and two people drawn at random from the pool of potential hearings committee members. Bob spoke against including the hearings chair on the review panel. Dan was cool with that. Nick: Why put something already turned down by the membership again? Dan: It’s a good proposal and it failed because there was a competing proposal at the time. This time there won’t be a competing proposal and we tweaked it to improve it since then. Jean spoke against the motion and made good points, primarily about needing to simplify the process and the fewer members involved better. Straw poll before Dan does a bit of editing: 11 in favor. 8 opposed. Guy pointed out that for a bylaws proposal it needs to pass by 2/3.
Break time!
No comments:
Post a Comment