Coordinating Committee Rules and Procedures Background
Coordinating Committee Rules and Procedures
Table of Contents
Article I Co-Coordinators
Article II Work Plan and Long Term Agenda Planning
Article III Meetings
Article IV On-Line Proposals
Article V Liaisons to Standing Committees and Working Groups
Article VI Appointments to Standing Committees of the General Assembly
Article VII General Assembly Planning Committee
Article VIII Personnel Committee
Article IX Strategy Committee
Article I Co-Coordinators
Currently the rules governing CC Co-coordinators are not in one place and in some cases they exist in practice but not in writing.
- Although the position of Co-coordinator was created in 2000 at the April 2000 General Assembly in Berkeley (http://www.cagreens.org/plenary/archives/agendas/0004Agd_Brk.pdf), the implementing language simply said the State Coordinating Committee (CC) will have Co-coordinators, but did not specify how many, when their terms begin and end and for how long they serve. This proposal codifies the existing, unwritten practice of Co-coordinator seats beginning and ending in February, and terms being two years (Section 1-1: Number and term).
- An extensive job description for CC Co-coordinators approved at a CC retreat in February 2001 (http://www.cagreens.org/cc/internal/admin/coco.txt). This description is shortened a bit for clarity by combining items and rephrasing, but the core responsibilities remain (Section 1-2 Duties and Authority).
- The CC currently has no approved of procedure to elect CC Co-coordinators. The last time the CC voted to approve a procedure, it was on a one time basis for the September 2006 Co-coordinator election. Since then, the CC has made it up as it goes along, without codifying any procedure. This proposal (Section 1-4: Elections) would codify some parts from the 2006 process and slightly modify others. A defined period for nominations is also added to correspond to the February date (Section 1-3: Nominations).
The election process from 2006 consisted of an IRV on-line vote by email to a person outside of the CC, who them reported the results back to the CC at the end of the voting period. This proposed new procedure would utilize a web-based voting page instead and would require a request to IT to design one, presumably utilizing the same functionality that IT used to design the voting page for CC elections held this past June. This proposal provides for a six day vote when a seat is contested and a three day vote when there is only one candidate.
