Structure Group Report 2011-11-30

STRUCTURE GROUP REPORT

November 2011

http://freegle.it/Structure

This is a summary of discussions since our last report of 30th October 2011, covering messages 9436 to 9588. Our membership stands at 68 (the same as last month).

The topics we have discussed this month are below.

Task 66 - Reps Co-opting Powers

In the event of an early Rep vacancy we are discussing whether, instead of auto-promoting the first loser, Reps should be given the power to use their own judgement to co-opt someone for the remaining part of any election year for elected posts. A Start-of-Topic notice was posted on Central on 18th October 2011.

Opinion on this has been divided with a wide range of thoughts being expressed. We ran some polls on Structure in an attempt to clarify further:

Poll 1

If an elected post becomes vacant in the period between the end of the auto-promotion period and the next scheduled election for that post (not the end of term for the post holder that is being replaced), should the Reps be able to co-opt someone into that position if they wish to, subject to provisions to be agreed in further polls?

CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, 16 votes, 76.19% - No, 5 votes, 23.81% - Abstain (please explain on group), 0 votes, 0.00%

Poll 2

Q1: Should Reps be able to co-opt someone for any elected post (currently Reps, Ombudsmen and Returning Officers) or only for Reps posts, in the period between auto-promotion and the next scheduled election for the post?

CHOICES AND RESULTS - All elected posts, 7 votes, 41.18% - Reps posts only, 10 votes, 58.82% - Abstain, 0 votes, 0.00%

Q2: If Reps can only co-opt a fellow Rep, should the ORO Team (ie. the Ombudsman and Returning Officer Team) be able to co-opt an Ombudsman or Returning Officer in the period between auto-promotion and the next scheduled election for the post?

CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, 14 votes, 87.50% - No, 2 votes, 12.50% - Abstain, 0 votes, 0.00%

Q3: If Reps or the ORO Team can't co-opt an Ombudsman or Returning Officer, should the Returning Officer or Ombudsman be able to co-opt their fellow Returning Officer or Ombudsman by themselves in the period between auto-promotion and the next scheduled election for the post?

CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, 11 votes, 68.75% - No, 5 votes, 31.25% - Abstain, 0 votes, 0.00%

Q4: Questions 1 - 3 assume the Returning Officer or Ombudsman will be elected at the next scheduled election for the post which could in some situations mean they are co-opted for more than a year. Would it be better if they are elected at the next scheduled election for any post, ie at the next Rep election if that comes before the next scheduled election for the post, thereby minimising the time the post is co-opted without having to schedule extra elections?

CHOICES AND RESULTS - Yes, 14 votes, 87.50% - No, 2 votes, 12.50% - Abstain, 0 votes, 0.00%

The questions currently being polled are:

Poll 3

Q1: Should the team (Reps or Ombudsman/Returning Officer) responsible for co-option, post their proposal on Central so that any objections can be lodged confidentially with them before appointment?

o Yes o No o Abstain

Q2: Should any person co-opted into a normally elected position stand down at the next election for that role, but be able to stand for that election if they wish?

o Yes o No o Abstain

Q3: If co-option hasn't happened within a set period of a vacancy happening an election will be held:

o Yes, after one (1) month o Yes, after two (2) months o Yes, after three (3) months o No, wait until the next set of scheduled elections for any post (please note this will require a constitutional change) o Abstain

Q4: Should a co-opted role holder have equal status and work on the same basis as the elected post holders? (If the answer is 'no' to this question, we will run further polls to decide which aspects of the role will be equal and which not.)

o Yes o No o Abstain

...discussions continue and poll 3 is still open, so if you’d like to express an opinion please come and join us. http://freegle.it/Structure

Reps election - need for a co-RO

The Reps pointed out that there is a need for Stuart to appoint a Co Returning Officer with equal access to the RO account and the survey software and data to verify any manual changes he might need to make. This is particularly important because of the option to delete/change votes until the election is over. Kathy, Ombudsman, agreed to step in to help the Returning Officer for this current election.

Task List

Our Task List can be viewed at http://freegle.it/StructureTasks

If any of the above topics interest you, or if you have proposals about the structure of Freegle to suggest, please do join our group. http://freegle.it/Structure

The Coordinator for this group is Jacky (Great Yarmouth) Deputy Coordinator is Peter Johnson (Hunts) and Secretary is Wendy (Woodley) Owners are Jacky, Peter and Wendy.

Back to Freegle Structure or Structure Group Report 2011-10-30, or forwards tao Structure Group Report 2011-12-30