[statecom-discuss] AdCom size; party growth

[Merelice]

Hi,
Given that I do not want to call an email meeting of statecom to
address this proposal, I am quite prepared to drop the subject for
now.

I think Jamie, Melissa, and Grace have made some good points worth
further consideration and discussion. Meanwhile, for the sake of the
committee directors (and all adcom members), I hope adcom will find
ways to reduce the need for so many meetings and activities.

One remaining misconception, however, relates to what is adcom's
responsibility and what is statecom's. The GRP bylaws specifically
assign to adcom the responsibility of selecting the facilitators for
statecom (and other) meetings. I would suggest that it is also
appropriate for statecom to assign to adcom other steps for preparing
for meetings. Where better than the administration committee since
those are clearly administrative needs?

Merelice

On 1/24/07, Melissa Harrell <lissagrp at gmail.com> wrote:
> My concerns about shrinking Adcom were not just about diversity, but also
> about Adcom's ability to delegate to committees, and for the committees
> themselves to stay coordinated and mutually supportive of each other.
>
> How can Adcom effectively delegate to committees if they don't know what the
> committees are doing or what their capacity is? If you take out the
> committee chairs, Adcom will be effectively cut off from the committees.
> Additionally, the committees don't function in little vacums where they
> operate totally independant of each other.  There are many interdependancies
> that are built into the committee structure. For example, there are three
> committees that have a stake in the party's website.  It's not the only
> example, but it is the most blatent one. Sometimes, the need is not for
> there for some cooperative project like re-vamping the website, but is
> instead just a need to be in the loop about what is going on in the other
> committees and need to know more often than quarterly (statecomm meetings).
> CDLC, Membership and ComCom have an interest in knowing when Platform puts
> out a new platform piece.
>
> And finally, you seem to be experessing a frustration that Adcom is not
> focused on what it should be and gettng sidelined on issues it shouldn't
> be.  And maybe, I'm wrong, but that doesn't sound like a problem with the
> structure of Adcom.  As members of Adcom (or any body in this party, for
> that matter), we all have a responsibility to arrive at meetings on time, to
> be prepared for our meetings, and respect the agenda by remaining focused on
> the business at hand.  Having four people or 15 people on Adcom won't effect
> it's ability to conduct its business if everyone lives up to that
> responsibility.  It only takes one person who doesn't take the
> responsibility seriously to sideline a meeting.