Minutes, Nominating Committee
Date: April 28, 2011, 2:00pm
Location: Phone Conference
1) Meeting called to order at 2:00pm
2) Roll call
Diana Brawley Sussman , Committee Chair, Carbondale Public Library
Deanne Holshouser, Edwardsville Public Library
Nancy Huntley, Lincoln Library
Kim Keller , Bryan-Bennett Library
Bev Obert , Committee Liaison, Rolling Prairie Library System
Committee Members absent:
Nina Pals, Sarah Bush Lincoln Hospital Medical Library
3) The committee discussed committee assignments and next steps for soliciting and verifying nominations, setting slate of candidates and distributing voting ballot.
A draft ballot was created using almost all candidates who so far had responded to the survey that “yes” they were interested. The few exceptions include: Excluded one candidate who stated that she would not run if someone from her Board wanted to run, and her Board member did want to run; Excluded about 10-12 candidates who answered the survey with “yes,” but did not give their name or contact information; Excluded one or two “yes” candidates who would have thrown off the geographic balance, which guarantees 3-4 seats for each system; Included one candidate who had responded that she was “interested in serving if needed, but would prefer not to” (the only System representative willing to serve; that nominee will run uncontested unless another candidate comes forward).
The ballot groups individuals into pairs, or in some cases, groups of 3. Voters will choose one candidate from each group of 2-3 individuals. This follows ILA’s ballot as an example, and ensures geographic equality. The committee agreed that achieving the geographic equality requested was of utmost importance, and that doing so would make continuing geographic equality much easier to achieve in future elections.
There were more than 300 survey responses. Many people indicated that they were willing to serve if needed, but preferred not to. Because enough candidates said “yes,” they were interested, the committee did not seek out candidates who did not say “yes.” People who were recommended to the committee were invited by email to respond to the survey, when an email address was given. There may have been some people recommended without an email address provided, but the committee did not need to seek out these candidates because there were enough willing candidates. The committee did not eliminate or add any candidates beyond the above configuration, so no personal preferences were used to determine the slate. The slate appears to be balanced geographically, and according to other known factors (age, sex, library size). Library type is determined by the bylaws http://www.illinoisheartland.org/about-us/ihls-policies/IHLSBylaws.pdf/view?searchterm=bylaws :
a. Eight (8) members from the governing boards of public library members.
b. Two (2) members representing public libraries
c. Three (3) members representing school libraries
d. One (1) member representing special libraries
e. One (1) member representing academic libraries
Additional responses that come in to the survey, and interested or recommended candidates who were not selected to appear on the ballot will be given to subsequent nominating committees to help find potential candidates. It is unfortunate that we could not use everyone who was interested, but we were very pleased and surprised to find enough candidates to create a ballot with such strict specifications regarding geography and type of representative. Most selection committees (ILA, for example), hand pick nominees rather than open up the process to a broader audience with an area-wide survey.
Each committee member representing one of the 4 systems will contact the candidates in their system, verify that they are still interested, obtain a final biography for the ballot, and email it to Diana. Each system is to send Diana one email address per line, for each voting library. Diana will import these into survey monkey (again following ILA’s model). The ballot will be a survey sent to those specific emails. It can only be answered once by each respondent, ensuring that the process allows just one vote for voting each member library. As in the past, each entity, school district, library district, etc. gets just one vote no matter how many buildings they have.
4) Set next committee meeting to resolve any issues that arise, and set final ballot. Date to be determined.
5) Adjourned at 3:25 p.m.
Respectfully prepared and submitted by:
Diana Brawley Sussman, Nominating Committee Chair
Carbondale Public Library