I don't agree that the POC should tell the PAB how to nominate
folks for these seats. I think that it OK for them to say
that we have 9 more seats to poppulate on the POC, and that these seats
should come from various areas, but they don't have a leash on the PAB and
the POC shouldn't accept language that specificly states *anything* that
dictates how the PAB should preform some duty.
If the PAB is here to advise the POC, and now elect some part
of its membership, the POC shouldn't have the ability to lord over
how the PAB manages itself.
as for suggesting langauge to implement the above ideas, go talk
to a lawer, i'm not one.
-rick
> It is a proposal. You have to say if you like it or not, and, if you don't,
> to propose other ways of doing it.
>
> >> >>Nominations by PAB shall be completed within one month following
> >> >>adoption of this expansion program by POC, and elections of members
> >> >>shall be conducted not later than three months following adoption. Each
> >> >>PAB member must select one and only one of the first three
> >> >>classifications in which it will cast one vote, and must select one and
> >> >>only one of the three geographic areas in which it may cast one
> >> >>additional vote. The nominees receiving the highest number of votes in
> >> >>each category will be elected.
> >>
> >
> >
>