[Foundation-l] Board-announcement: Board Restructuring

[Michael Snow]

Brianna Laugher wrote:
> Will the Board look to the community first to fill the appointed
> 'expertise' seats? (I understand in many, probably most cases, that
> expertise + willingness may not exist.)
>   
We consciously avoided calling them "external experts" for that reason. 
The priority for those positions is the expertise, though. A marginally 
qualified candidate from the community would not take precedence over a 
fully qualified "outsider". But in case of similarly qualified 
candidates, someone from the community would have the advantage by being 
familiar with the culture already.
> Under this new structure, will it be possible that community-elected
> positions may be converted to board-appointed? (Expert in the
> community?)
>   
Depends what you mean. In the bylaws amendments that will implement this 
plan, we are specifically providing that a majority of the positions 
(not counting Jimmy) are to be selected by the community/chapters. The 
structure as outlined is 5 and 4 (3+2=5 community seats, 4 expertise 
seats, and Jimmy), so no, the position itself could not be changed in 
this fashion.

If you're referring only to the person, someone who was once elected 
could later be given an appointed position. That depends on whether the 
person has expertise of the kind the board is looking to appoint. Nobody 
can occupy two seats at once, though.
> Are the 'specific expertise' seats going to be for specifically named
> areas of expertise?
>   
We'll be reviewing exactly what expertise the foundation most needs on 
the board. It's possible that this may change over time, so we may not 
want to attach an area of expertise permanently to a specific seat. It 
also remains to be seen what expertise comes out of the selections by 
the community and the chapters.
> Community Founder seat seems to be locking Jimmy into the Board for,
> well, indefinitely. Presumably he is happy with that, but it will mean
> the rules need to be changed when he can't do it any more, right?
> (Yer, maybe decades from now :))
> I mean, there are no other people in the community, and there never
> will be, who fufil the role of "community founder". What is the point
> of "formalizing Jimmy's role as Community Founder" - why not just make
> his seat one of the Board appointed ones?
>   
This is touched on in the FAQ, but maybe the reasons for it aren't fully 
explained. The distinction is partly because of the balance outlined 
above, by which a majority of the board would come from the community in 
one way or another. It would be ridiculous and insulting to say that 
Jimmy is not from the community, but it's also desirable not to have the 
community majority depend on him always being around, so he's set aside 
as a special case. Jimmy can of course resign anytime he wants to, and 
the board can choose not to renew his term if it wants to, but in either 
scenario the seat disappears.

--Michael Snow