Essentially the Council resolution takes away major powers from the Council and vests them in all powerful, seemingly unaccountable, Board.
-Council no longer elects 2/3 Executive Board Members
-Exec Board no longer reports to Council
- Council no longer approves the budget
- Council no longer oversees units of the Association or delegates responsibility
- Council no longer makes committee appointments
Council Committees - IFC, Legislation etc no longer exist
Council no longer creates/ dissolves/ oversees committees
The EXecutive Board becomes extremely powerful, but also cumbersome- and likely very expensive
What are financial implications of these recommendations?
How much money is actually saved? ( I questioned Maggie Farrell some time ago about costs attributed to Council and she agreed they needed to be revised. For example travel costs were enormous, but ALA does not pay Council travel )
-How does operating Agreement relate to all this?
- Who pays Exec Board ( now double in size) expenses for meeting? . ALA has until now paid these expenses.
Some other questions:
How do we define affiliates? Is there a minimum number of members? Will reps have to be members of ALA?
Who will approve affiliates ( currently Council does)?
How is Spectrum " cohort" determined?
How will thèse new proposed - seemingly « squished « together - Committees possibly deal with their extensive agendas?
I prefer a larger, more representative Council than an all- powerful Board-but the real question is - what will Council become and why?
As a member of the Forward Together Fiscal Analysis Working Group, I would like to address a common misconception about the work of FTFAWG. Betty Turock wrote:
225 N Michigan Ave, Suite 1300 | Chicago, IL | 60601 | USA
Request a New Community