Talkboard is considering Term Limits - seeking your input
 

This was post # 127 in the 'one more thing - term limits' thread. That thread discussed the concept generically, went off-topic re: mods, & then further went off-topic when the TB Prez election verbiage was added to it.

So, since the topic is being discussed/considered in TB & we ARE looking for FTers input, I am starting this thread as a stand-alone with the verbiage being considered included.

As noted in the other thread, this isn't a motion yet, but it is being discussed, and no idea if it will pass or not. But I think that anything that's up for a possible vote by TB deserves its own thread, and as mentioned the other one was both unweildy (sp?) & had gotten off-topic.

"The TalkBoard recommends modifying the TalkBoard guidelines as follows:

Add a new paragraph 3.B.i.e.
e. TalkBoard members who are subject to the term limit defined in Section 3.D.i shall be ineligible to be candidates in the current year.

Revise paragraph 3.D.i
i. TalkBoard Member: The term of a TalkBoard member shall be two (2) years. Five TalkBoard members shall be elected during odd numbered years and four TalkBoard members shall be elected during even numbered years. Term Limit: A FlyerTalk member is ineligible to be a candidate in the current TalkBoard election if by the end of the election period the member will have served on the TalkBoard more than three years out of the preceding four-year period. "

We're basically eliminating this part which currently exists: "There is no limit to the consecutive or cumulative number of terms to which a member may be re-elected." (I don't know how to do the strikeover of text, which shows what is being deleted; sorry. Someone can PM me if they know how & I'll change it). And adding the part that is italized above.

As koko said in post #128 in the other thread:

"As one of the TB members who helped draft this amendment, let me say that here is what I think it does:

- In most instances makes someone who has served two consecutive terms (4 years) on the TB take at least a year off before running again.

- In the instance of a replacement TB member, allows him or her to be elected 2 times after the appointment if he or she is appointed after the first year of the term of the person he or she is replacing. If he or she serves over one year of the term of the person he or she is replacing, he or she may only run one more time after serving out the over-one-year term before taking at least a year off.

I think this achieves those goals in a simple, straightforward way.

In the spirit of consistent, collaborative input (), comments on and analysis of the wording of the proposed motion (as well as the relative merit of the intention, of course!) is greatly appreciated!!!"

Cheers.

My reasons for support of term limits:

I belong to some professional associations that have a term limit of X amount of terms followed by Y time off before being able to run again at Z time. It's designed to have talented people who are familiar w/ the org serve & use their wisdom to better the organization, but not end up w/ 'career' board members or 'cartels' (cartel isn't the right word, but I think you know what I mean) & also provide a break to those who serve so that they don't burn out. And it's worked quite well.

And as posted by koko in the other thread & which I agree with:

By: BoardSource
Many boards find that setting term limits can be beneficial.

Advantages of a term limit policy:

•The board has the possibility of working with active community members who can devote only a few years to board service.
•Bringing diversity onto the board is easier.
•The board has a built-in balance of continuity and turnover.
•Passive, ineffective, or troublesome board members can be more easily rotated off.
•Board members experience a better rotation of committee assignments.
•A regular infusion of fresh ideas and new perspectives is brought onto the board.
•The board gains a regular awareness and pays attention to the changing group dynamics.
•Limits present an opportunity for the board and the retiring board member to reassess a mutual willingness to continue working together with the possibility of enlarging the circle of committed supporters by keeping retired board members involved.

Disadvantages of term limits:
The downside to having terms limits can mean:
•the loss of expertise and organizational memory;
•the board spends more time dedicated to recruitment and orientation; and
•additional efforts are needed to keep the group cohesive.

Disadvantages of not having term limits
Boards without a term limit policy can experience:
•stagnation if no change occurs among the board members;
•perpetual concentration of power within a small group;
•intimidation of the occasional new member;
•tiredness, boredom, and loss of commitment by the board; and
•loss of connection to the constituency due to a change in demographics or environmental factors"

Cheers.

I am opposed to term limits for the simple reason that this is an issue which the voters can decide.

Exactly.

+1

I would simply point out that incumbency has inherent advantages.

And asking a volunteer to take a year's break after four years so they can see the board for the perspective of a 'regular' poster is a good thing. And no great burden on either them nor the TB.

I believe that I was the first proponent of term limits and the first person I applied it to was myself. When I was running for my second term I said that I would never seek a third one.

I ran for TB because I felt that certain changes needed to be made. IMHO, that is the only valid reason to seek to be on it.

If someone can accomplish what he wants to do in two terms, he has no need to seek a third one. If he can't accomplish it in two terms, there is no reason to believe he will be any more successful in a third, fourth, or fifth term. He should therefore step aside and let someone else have a crack at getting these changes made.

Another vote for this.

Absolutely. Let the voters choose incumbents or not as they see fit. End of.

Agree and is one reason I support TB term limits.

Continuity is important.. Passing of the torch, where you don't have to get every single member up to speed is important..

Its alot more work to get members up to speed if rotation is required, even if its a 4 year limit.. Let the voters decide..

Either 4/9 or 5/9 already is at some sort of speed. Or more, if some of them aren't termed out and are re-elected.

New blood is good. Old blood needs oxygen from time to time, otherwise it is blue and doesn't feed the brain well.

I note some of the crustiest, oldest, and most dedicated FT members are in support of this.

"I note some of the crustiest, oldest, and most dedicated FT members are in support of this."
:eek:

Strongly in favor of term limits.

I said that with love :) - I guess the tone didn't come through on this antiquated platform :p