EMM 5

At-Large should update its Rules of Procedure to include a new procedure regarding the functioning and membership of the CoE.

Support in principle?

The ALAC recognises the usefulness and purpose of this recommendation. Nice to acknowledge those who have contributed but no current appointments. Danger of having to induct all people leaving office even if not warranted. Do we need it?

In the entire history of the modern ALAC (after the Interim ALAC was appointed by the Board), there have been 65 RALO and NomCom appointed ALAC members and only five of them have served for more than two consecutive terms (and two of those only exceeded the two-term point after the last AGM). 

Taking this into account, term limits would not have had much impact in the past, and it is unclear if having such limits would have fixed problems, or created them. That being said, term limits may well be reasonable, but it is less clear that two terms is optimal. One RALO currently has a shorter limit, and others may feel that in critical times, the limit should be able to be overridden. The only RALOs with term limits for ALAC Members are LACRALO (1 term, 2 years) and NARALO (2 terms, 4 years), but it is clear that very relatively few ALAC member exceed stay beyond two terms. 

The Review Team received many comments alluding to a lack of volunteer turnover, stagnant leadership, and people “clinging to power”. There is no question that such perceptions exist in the community. 

Volunteer statistics tell a quite different story. They demonstrate that over the 14 years of the ALAC history, and the 10 years since the current ALAC plus RALOs have existed, there has been very abundant turnover. 

To repeat and expand on the statistics reported earlier in this document, over the life of the ALAC,

• 126 people served on the ALAC or RALO leadership 
• 20 people in ALAC Leadership positions 
• 7 ALAC Chairs 
• 41 people in RALO Leadership positions 
• 23 RALO Chairs (or equivalent) 

A constant stream of new people entering into these leadership positions. Many stay just for a single terms, some for a more extended period, and a few for relatively long periods. Often, a person starts in a more junior role and progresses through other roles. This is exactly what one would hope for and expect. Those who have a great interest step into advanced roles, and some people stay around to ensure continuity and experience. In some years just a few new people come on board, and in others the number is quite large – twelve new people in leadership roles in 2014. It is clear that there is a regular progression of new ALAC members. Some people serve for a while then come back into another leadership position some years later. 

There is a clear peak at two years. Rather than showing that many people stay far too long, a real problem is that too many people leave after two years. The entry for 7-9 meetings should be much higher. This sharp drop-off is symptomatic of the difficulty in really being an effective and contributing member of the community.