[IMC] New Board "Program Committee"

[Gary Storm]

Meeting to Explore Creating a New Board "Program Committee"
Minutes: 5-14-12

Attendance:  Elizabeth Abraham, Carol Ammons, Marya Burke, Danielle
Chynoweth, Chris Evens, Tom Garza, Barbara Kessel, Austin McCann, Don
McClure, Gary Storm, Janet Wesse

1. Gary Storm chaired the meeting and began by showing charts to provide
relevant background for the meeting (attached). These included lists of the
major organizational components of the UCIMC, current Working Groups, and
Board of Director members and standing committees.

2. Storm briefly reviewed the email which outlined a rationale for creating
a new Board standing committee (“Program Committee”) to replace the old
Steering Group and identified some of the initial goals and activities the
new committee might pursue.

3. Discussion focused extensively on how the new committee, as described in
the email, would both resemble and differ from the existing Steering Group
and why it would have a greater chance of succeeding.

a. Like the Steering Group, the proposed Program Committee would be made up
of at least one (1) officially appointed representative from each of the
Working Groups who would serve as an information conduit back and forth
from the committee to the Working Group and have authority to speak and/or
vote for the WG.

Several present at the meeting emphasized the need for the WG
representative to be a steady and consistent representative of the WG over
an extended period; a perceived weakness of the Steering Group was that
there was no steady and consistent representation from the WGs.

b. The Program Committee, as a standing committee of the Board of
Directors, would provide an organic connection between the Working Groups
and the Board. This connection would be enhanced by the committee being
co-chaired by a Board member and a Working Group member selected by the
Working Group members on the committee. The co-chairs would make regular
reports and program-related policy recommendations to the Board (see
below). No such organic connection existed between Steering and the Board
in the past, largely because the latter did not exist as an active
administrative and fiscal body within the UCIMC.

Several present thought that the Program Committee’s status as a standing
committee of the Board would position it better than the existing Steering
Group to expect and obtain administrative and fiscal support for
program-related recommendations that it made.

Several present also thought that the Program Committee’s status as a
standing committee of the Board would put constructive pressure on its
members to meet regularly, keep good records of its meetings, and share
these records through minutes circulated widely to the UCIMC membership as
a whole. These Program Committee responsibilities would be assumed by the
co-chairs.

The UCIMC Operations Manager would also serve on the Program Committee and
thereby guarantee better communication among Working Groups, the UCIMC
staff and the Board.

4. Discussion next focused on the possible goals and activities of a new
Program Committee. It was agreed that the committee should be the primary
place where the broad mission and goals (“vision”) of the UCIMC as a whole
are periodically reviewed and updated, but also, more regularly, a place
where Working Group members learn about what one another are doing and how
they might support one another or collaborate on cross-WG activities. There
was a sense that as WG needs or new initiatives are identified, the
committee would be in a good position to work with other standing
committees of the Board (especially Fundraising, Finance and
Building/Facilities) to move forward to address or realize them
successfully.

5. In terms of “next steps” to be taken, those present at the meeting
thought it would be appropriate for Storm to contact active members
associated with Working Groups not represented at the meeting to share what
had been accomplished there and to try to get a commitment from each WG to
send a representative to monthly (or perhaps bi-monthly) meetings over the
next six months on a trial basis. Each WG represented at the meeting
(Books-to-Prisoners, Print and WRFU) had at least one person willing to
make such a commitment (Barbara Kessel/Liz Abraham, Myra Burke, and Don
McClure/Tom Garza respectively).  Storm agreed to try to identify at least
one representative from each WG willing to participate and, once
individuals were identified, to establish a time and place for an initial
meeting where broad goals would be determined and co-chairs selected.

6. The meeting lasted exactly one hour, setting a good precedent for
efficient but productive sessions.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/imc/attachments/20120518/42fc299d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Components of the IMC.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 14180 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/imc/attachments/20120518/42fc299d/attachment.docx>