Board Vote I on Merger Concerns

Proposed questions from January 16, 2019, Board Meeting discussion
Vote open Friday, January 18 - Monday, January 21, 2019

RESULTS
  1. I vote that the ALCTS/LITA/LLAMA Steering Committee (SC) should adopt the due process for decision-making based upon the following condition:
    • Unanimous YES votes by all 3 divisions: 10 votes
    • Majority YES votes by 2 divisions (=the vote will pass even if 1 division votes NO as long as 2 other divisions votes YES): 0 votes
    • I abstain: 0

     
  2. If “Unanimous YES” gets more votes from the question above, I vote in favor of:
    • Unanimous YES votes by all 3 divisions only: 2 votes
    • Unanimous YES votes by all 3 divisions or YES Votes by 2 divisions + ABSTAIN vote from 1 division: 8 votes
    • I abstain: 0

     
  3. Regarding the new division name, I vote in favor of trying to come up with a new name by Jan 31, 2019 one more time, through member engagement at the Midwinter.
    • YES: 8 votes
    • NO, just adopt the ALLTC either as a final or a working name: 2 votes
    • I abstain: 0

     
  4. If we fail to get a new name selected by Jan 31, 2019, I vote in favor of adopting ALLTC (=“Association of Library Leadership, Technology, and Collections”) as the following:
    • as a temporary working name (the new name should be decided by wide input from the membership following the due process of the decision making.): 4 votes
    • as the final name: 6 votes
    • I abstain: 0

     
  5. Regarding the ALA ballot for LITA members consisting of only one question - whether the member is in favor of the proposed merger of three divisions or not, I vote:
    • YES to one single question only in the ballot: 5 votes
    • NO to one single question only in the ballot (=I am in favor of having both the merger vote “and” the additional votes to elect some officer(s) either the President-Elect of the new division or the 3 division officers, who will serve for the new division if the merger passes, on the ballot): 5 votes
    • I abstain: 0

     
  6. Regarding “Networks (=sections)” with its own self-governance structure in the new division, I vote:
    • YES in favor of Networks WITH deliverables specified in the charge, clear purpose specified in bylaws distinct from IGs, and the clear creation/sunset process: 8 votes
    • YES in favor of Networks WITHOUT condition(s) listed above: 1 vote
    • NO, I object to having Networks (sections) in the new division: 1 vote
    • I abstain: 0

     
  7. I will NOT be able to vote in favor of proceeding with the merger vote for the membership IF: (=”I believe this will be a deal-breaker for me and/or the membership vote.”)
    • Nothing is a deal-breaker for me; Putting the merger vote on the Spring 2019 ballot should take priority over addressing any of the concerns outlined below): 5 votes
    • The SC makes decisions not following the due process. (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1I-1E4CEr0ITl3cas7i5NSp7uZURYidg5gldBW2rbnLg/edit):
    • The SC overrides recommendations by Working Groups/Task Forces etc without providing clear reasoning to the membership/boards: 4 votes: 1 vote
    • The SC fails to provide ample opportunities for the membership involvement and participation in the transition process and incorporates the feedback and recommendations into the final transition process: 2 votes
    • Membership vote takes place later than Spring 2019. (=timeline delay): 0 votes
    • The SC fails to provide some specific details for the membership that demonstrate the new division’s commitment to its mission/ vision/ values and to forming the open, transparent, and participatory culture: 0 votes

     
  8. I will be seriously CONCERNED about proceeding with the merger vote for the membership IF (check all that apply):
    • Nothing is a concern for me; Putting the merger vote on the Spring 2019 ballot should take priority over addressing any of the concerns outlined below: (check all that apply)
    • The SC makes decisions not following the due process. (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1I-1E4CEr0ITl3cas7i5NSp7uZURYidg5gldBW2rbnLg/edit): 6 votes
    • The SC overrides recommendations by Working Groups/Task Forces etc without providing clear reasoning to the membership/boards: 5 votes
    • The SC fails to provide ample opportunities for the membership involvement and participation in the transition process and incorporates the feedback and recommendations into the final transition process: 8 votes
    • Membership vote takes place later than Spring 2019 (timeline delay): 1 vote
    • The SC fails to provide some specific details for the membership that demonstrate the new division’s commitment to its mission/ vision/ values and to forming the open, transparent, and participatory culture: 6 votes