Re: GR proposal, Call for Seconds - term limit for the tech-ctte
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 11:50:27AM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > + 7. Term limit:
> > + 1. On January 1st of each year the term of any Committee member
> > + who has served more than 42 months (3.5 years) and who is one
> > + of the two most senior members is set to expire on December
> > + 31st of that year.
> > As a transitional measure, if this GR is passed after January 1st, 2015,
> > then the provision of section ?6.2.7.1 is taken to have occurred on January
> > 1st, 2015.
> We discussed, and I thought there was consensus around, the idea that due to
> the recent ctte churn, the transitional measure was no longer needed.
The transitional measure here just makes the GR have the same effect
whether passed in late December or early January.
Timelines would be:
a) Stefano's proposal w/ transitional measure
Dec/Jan - GR passed
Jan 1st - Bdale and Steve's terms set to expire
...
Dec 31st - Bdale and Steve no longer members of the ctte
b) Stefano's roposal w/o transitional measure
Dec - GR passed
Jan 1st - Bdale and Steve's terms set to expire
...
Dec 31st - Bdale and Steve no longer members of the ctte
/or/
Jan - GR passed
[no expiries]
Jan 1st 2016 - Bdale and Steve's terms set to expire
...
Dec 31st 2016 - Bdale and Steve no longer members of the ctte
c) Lucas's proposal (assuming no additional resignations)
Dec - Colin resigns
Jan 1st - no expiries (there's been 3 resignations)
...
Jan 1st 2016 - Bdale and Steve's terms expire
/or/
Jan 1st - no expiries (there's been 2 resignations)
Jan - Colin resigns
...
Jan 1st 2016 - Bdale's term expires
(it doesn't make a difference whether Lucas's proposal passes before
or after New Year)
Summarising the possible outcomes in date order:
2015-12-31 Bdale, Steve term expiry (a, b.1)
2016-01-01 Bdale term expiry (c.1, c.2)
2016-01-01 Steve term expiry (c.1)
2016-12-31 Bdale, Steve term expiry (b.2)
2017-01-01 Steve term expiry (c.2)
> As an amendment, I propose the transitional measure be removed.
ie, in summary, the effect this would have is that Bdale's and Steve's
terms would not expire until two years (and 30 days) from now, rather
than expiring at the end of next year; if and only if the GR doesn't
pass before the end of this month.
I think having the same effect independent of the GR passing in late
Dec or early Jan is a good thing, so if that's really the outcome that's
desired, replacing the transition statement with something like:
As a transitional measure, the implementation of section 6.2.7.1
will not begin until January 1st 2016.
would be better than removing it.
If it's just unclear, maybe adding "with the first expiry not occurring
until Dec 31st 2015" to the transition statement would help?
Cheers,
aj
Reply to: