Category: LITA Board Votes

LITA Board Vote II on Merger Concerns

Proposed questions (private Board working document) from January 16, 2019, Board Meeting discussion
Vote open Friday, January 18 - Monday, January 21, 2019

RESULTS
  1. Regarding the new division presidency during its first year 2019-2020, I vote in favor of:
    • 3 Co-Presidents for the new division (=Emily/Jennifer/Anne; 3 current Prez-Elects of LITA/ALCTS/LLAMA): 4 votes
    • 1 President to be chosen among the 3 current Presidents-Elects of LITA/ALCTS/LLAMA (N.B. The one president would be selected based on having had the largest percentage of votes from their "home" org and that the other presidents would have roles in the new administration): 2 votes
    • I abstain: 2 votes

     
  2. Regarding when the election of the President-elect 2019-2020 (=President 2020-2021) for the new division should take place, I vote in favor of:
    • Before the new division begins in Fall 2019: 3 votes
    • After the new division begins in Fall 2019 (=I understand that in this scenario, the election of the President-Elect 2019-20 will take place likely after 2020 Midwinter): 3 votes
    • I abstain: 2 votes

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