Talk:WikiConference UK 2013/Resolutions

Re: A motion to amend the Articles to introduce 3-terms limits for Trustees

The proposed text is "No person shall be appointed as a Director if they have, since 1 June 2013, been elected or appointed three times to the Board (except to fill a casual vacancy under Article 17.5), unless before the date of their appointment at least two years have passed since the date of their last departure from the Board". I don't think this has been discussed in any detail elsewhere, and a couple of things strike me that are worth going over:

1. This appears to only start the clock running from 1st June, so this might not make any difference for 6 years, which would seem a bit pointless. Is this the intention, or is the count of 3 times appointed actually meant to be retrospective?
2. There is ambiguity over term limits in the phrasing. We have had some trustees serving for 1 year before re-election needed rather than 2 years. My understanding of the governance review recommendations was to adopt a standard 2x3 model, intended to be a maximum of 3 terms of 2 years. Consequently we should probably avoid restricting anyone with less than a maximum of 6 years service on the board from standing again.
3. The "at least two years have passed" surprises me, I would have thought one year would be sufficient before a potential trustee was allowed to run for election again.
4. My assumption is that this limit applies for elected and co-opted trustees equally. It may be worth making that clear, in that both terms as co-opted or elected will count in the 6 year (or 3 term) total.
5. The phrasing "last departure from the Board" is ambiguous, we can potentially have roles on the board that are not directors or trustees, such as non-voting observers, honorary advisers/consultants or associates. I suggest this is amended to "last departure as a director on the Board".

--Fæ (talk) 10:34, 28 April 2013 (UTC)