Number of council members
As we approach new elections, there is a suggestion to make the number of council members smaller (what is fully within statutes). 15 showed itself to be inconvenient: almost impossible to gather this amount of people at the same time in one place, and irc meetings at least once in a while are essential. Loomio does not always cover it. Suggestion: for next elections to limit the number of seats in council to 9. Attention: President is elected separately and he is the council leader, Treasurer and Secretary may be and may be not council members, this is independent.
Poll Created Wed 11 Mar 2015 2:57PM
Limiting number of council seats to 9 (+1 President) Closed Sat 14 Mar 2015 2:04PM
Do you agree to limit number of seats to 9? + President, total 10. This would come instead of current 15.
Results
| Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Agree | 66.7% | 6 |
|
| Abstain | 22.2% | 2 |
|
|
| Disagree | 11.1% | 1 |
|
|
| Block | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Undecided | 0% | 3 |
|
9 of 12 people have participated (75%)
Wayne Sallee
Wed 11 Mar 2015 3:20PM
I don't think that reducing the number of council members is the answer.
Wayne Sallee
[email protected]
Bernhard Rosenkränzer
Wed 11 Mar 2015 4:06PM
Reducing the size is a good step - but we may need to take extra steps to get rid of inactive council members.
Cam we fire someone who doesn't show up for 3 subsequent meetings without appointing a proxy?
Raphaël Jadot
Wed 11 Mar 2015 4:47PM
I think many people don't know exactly what it consists of being member of council. I'd prefer less but more active members, but I'm not sure of the perfect number fitting with oma.
rugyada Wed 11 Mar 2015 3:46PM
Currently I still have no strong opinion on the topic.
Maybe the more members are there, the more chance we'll have to get some arguments developed in a more "right" way, due to the more POVs brought?
Kate Lebedeff Wed 11 Mar 2015 4:47PM
@rugyada anybody can be present at any council meeting, so opinions would still be in (not in Loomio though). Normally discussions are open.
Kate Lebedeff Wed 11 Mar 2015 4:48PM
@waynesallee good point Wayne:) new elections should improve that situation, since now we have experience. And reducing the number should serve more activity as well, as I see it
Kate Lebedeff Wed 11 Mar 2015 4:49PM
@bernhardrosenkranz very good point, and according to statutes we do have this right already now, and after new elections we possibly have to execute it. Otherwise what is the sense?
Colin Close Sat 14 Mar 2015 1:02AM
We need to have active council members the difficulty with too many is that becomes harder and takes longer to find agreement. If you have alot of memebers of which a good proportion don't participate the councils exposed to comments about undemocratic practises. I guess from that I would be in favour of reducing the number though we should tread carefully with this. Inactive members should be offered the opportunity to redeem themselves or to retire gracefully.
Wayne Sallee · Wed 11 Mar 2015 3:18PM
The better question, might be. " If you want to remain a council member, respond to this Loomio."
:-) :-) :-)
Wayne Sallee
[email protected]