On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 15:05 +1100, Dave Davey wrote: > I'm not a corporate lawyer or expert, but in my experience boards are > usually partly or entirely drawn from outside the ordinary membership (or > employees) of an organisation. I don't think this is the model you have > in mind, or one that you would want to project to the community at large. Correct. As I said in my original post I think LA would totally lose credibility as a "community organisation" with that model. > Other organisations that want a management "committee" to bear a name that > readily distinquishes it from committees charged with specific tasks > use the term "Council". Just as a municipal council is elected from the > members of the municipality, the council of an organisation is elected > from the membership. Excellent suggestion. > Linux Australia also needs a clearly defined spokesperson. "President" > is probably the best title. Organsations with boards can, and usually have > both a president and a board chairman. > > So another model would be > elevate the committe to council > elevate sub-committees to commitees (best named committees) > retain president and vice president Sounds like a good model to me: it's basically what I'm wanting to achieve, but with "Council" instead of "Board". The connotations of a "Council" is that it's more representative of the community anyway. I like it! Anyone else have comments on this structure? Cheers :-) -- Jonathan Oxer Ph +61 3 9723 9399
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part