Hello all
I agree that adding a board member to represent the federal government
is a good idea. I would not add additional members.
I am hesitant regarding adding additional members, when a group gets too
large it can become very ineffective, and often the strongest
personalities have the most influence and the quieter members as less
likely to contribute equally. I think the board is coming to a place
where it is more effective then at any time since I have been involved,
I do not see a reason to make significant changes. I would rather see
our energy put into having each of the current members use their
individually talents to accomplish as much as we can. We have a diverse
and committed group of people who are learning to work effectively.
I was nominated and appointed to the board by the Governors office to
represent State agencies due to the fact that I have been working for a
State agency doing GIS since 1989. The fact that a reorganization has
placed my position within the OIT/DAFS organizational structure, I
continue to have the same responsibilities at the Maine Department of
Environmental Protection I had before the reorganization, and I continue
to represent the interests of State agencies.
Regarding accountability
removal: 3 consecutive missed or 4 in a year
. Votes for member removal require 2/3 vote
Financial votes require quorum
Keep quorum at current level
Christopher Kroot
GIS Manager
Office of Information Technology
Maine Department of Environmental Protection
Station # 17,
Ray Building, AMHI Complex
Augusta, ME 04333
[log in to unmask]
207-287-6167
________________________________
From: Maine GeoLibrary [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Smith, Michael
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 1:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: GeoLibrary Board membership
The GeoLibrary legislation lies within the chapter for DAFS, in the
subchapter for Office of Information Technology. The situation that
Nancy is referring to though is that two members are currently directly
appointed from DAFS - she and I. Additionally, Christopher Kroot
actually works for OIT/DAFS (though he is a dedicated resource to DEP).
So really 3 of the seats on the Board are occupied by DAFS/OIT
employees.
Regarding repeated absences, we will put that in the new legislation.
Recall the whole purpose of this exercise is to draft some legislative
language and endorse it as a Board. If we endorse it, the CIO will
support it and get it introduced.
**********
Michael Smith
State GIS Manager
Maine Office of GIS
________________________________
From: Maine GeoLibrary [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of William H. Hanson
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 1:11 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: GeoLibrary Board membership
We will need legislation to amend our statute to add additional members
and to change quorum requirements. Getting a sponsor should be fairly
easy, but we should be sure to line up a legislator for any desired
action.
I don't see anything in the GeoLibrary statutes directly relating to
repeated absences or other undesirable conduct (maybe I missed the
relevant text) - I don't know if there are other provisions - perhaps of
the Administrative Procedures Act - which relate to conduct of agency
and quasi state agency board members. Perhaps there is an assistant AG
who could readily tell us if a law is already in place on this issue. It
is a good idea to adopt some rules to assure maximum participation -
particularly since we are representing constituencies who need a voice.
Maybe the Dept. of Admin and Finance is designated a member because
our governing legislation provides: Staff. Staff support to the
geographic information board is provided by the Department of
Administrative and Financial Services.
http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/5/title5sec2003.html
From: Maine GeoLibrary [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Armentrout, Nancy
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 9:35 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: GeoLibrary Board membership
I think a Federal rep is a good one to add as a large user and potential
funder and certainly an unrepresented sector.
As far as other interest groups I can see two schools of thought there.
One, if we start adding interest groups where does it end - who's in and
who is out? But, on the other hand, interest group representation could
bring new funding sources...and maybe the Board is too
government-centric. What if we added a single Industry representative?
The seat could be filled by forestry folks or surveyors or marine
interests, we could solicit from whatever areas we felt were
unrepresented at each time of filling.
Regarding Legislative representation, I think there is some validity to
that for survival purposes - funding. Having a relationship and
understanding inside of that world would be helpful. Could that be
accomplished by soliciting members for the existing seats who happen to
be a legislator? Should it be a more permanent area in the legislative
branch like a staff member and not a legislator? Maybe one of the
government seats could be taken by someone from this branch.
As far as the Board growing too big and unwieldy, I don't know why the
Commissioner of the Dept. of Admin and Finance (DAFS) has a seat (my
seat). I was actually appointed by Dick, the CIO, as was Mike, so does
he really have two reps. Should he? Why should DAFS be specifically
represented when other more GIS-involved agencies are not? I think the
answer is the history - the seed money that DAFS put in back in 2002?
But is it still relevant?
I think the scheme for non-attending members that we discussed will work
- missing 3 consecutive and 4 over a 12 month period makes sense. The
most we would live with is a year of under-representation but it could
be as little as 4 months if the person never shows up - right? Do we
have a county rep right now? I know we have a seat but I don't think
its been filled for a long time (at least physically).
I think the quorum and the voting number should be the same and about
half the members. To safeguard against a simple majority win that might
be contentious, could we add some language that says if a vote is close
and only half the members are voting then a revote with at least 2/3 of
the members voting would be necessary?
-----Original Message-----
From: Maine GeoLibrary [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Smith, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 4:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: GeoLibrary Board membership
Please recall our discussion at the previous meeting, I need your
comments regarding changes in the Board membership, i.e.:
What the membership profile should be - including adding a federal
representative and perhaps others such as we dicussed
Removal of members not attending regularly
Quorum #
Voting #
I need this by Thursday so I can compile for our next meeting.
**********
Michael Smith
State GIS Manager
Maine Office of GIS
________________________________
NOTICE: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the entity or individual to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify
the system manager at [log in to unmask] immediately. This email
does not reflect an intention by the sender or the sender's client or
principal to conduct a transaction or to make any agreement by
electronic means. Neither this communication nor any attachment shall be
deemed to satisfy the requirement for a writing, and nothing contained
herein shall constitute a contract or electronic signature under the
Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, any version
of the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act adopted by any political
subdivision of the United States, or any law governing electronic
transactions.
|
