(5/15/03) SW/SC CC Representative Jana Black presented the following motion:

"I move that the USGenWeb Advisory Board declare Tim Stowell, Margie Daniels, Brenda Pierce, and Chuck Pierce be found members not in good standing within the USGenWeb Project for willfully and deliberately deceiving and knowingly participating in this deception of the members of the GAGenWeb and USGenWeb Projects by assuming the roles of "Phantom" County coordinators with the express intention of affecting the vote concerning the recall of Tim Stowell as State Coordinator of the GAGenWeb Project. Given the number of new AB members, supporting documentation will be re-posted to EXEC."

The motion was numbered 03-12.

(6/8/03)Voting commenced.

(6/12/03)The charges are not sustained against any of the named members.

(6/11/03) SE/MA SC Representative Tim Stowell presented the following motion:

"Whereas the status of the RAL (Representative at Large) has for well over a year been 'Member Not in Good Standing', and whereas the original motion conferring such status made mention of further action has not been forthcoming, and whereas to continue to have said status conferred on any individual constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, I move that the status 'Member Not in Good Standing' be immediately removed from the present RAL, Teresa Lindquist."

The motion was numbered 03-13. Discussion ensued.

The motion failed with 2 "yes" votes, 11 "no" votes, no abstentions, and 1 members not voting. (6/14/03)

Those voting YES: Robert Bremer, Tim Stowell

Those voting NO: Pam Reid, Tina Vickery, Jan Cortez, Don Kelly, Darilee Bednar, Gail Meyer Kilgore, Heather DeGeorge, Angie Rayfield, Larry Flesher, Phyllis Rippee, Jana Black

Those abstaining:

Those not voting: Vicki Shaffer

Additional Comments:

T. Lindquist remains a Member Not In Good Standing.

(6/11/03) SE/MA CC Representative Heather DeGeorge proposed the following amendment to Motion 03-13:

"I would like the motion to be changed to: Whereas there are MNIGS with one portion of the project and not others; And whereas the bylaws and guidelines are unclear on the issue of what a MNIGS is allowed to do in the way of working on the project in the same capacity that earned them a MNIGS declaration, or in any other capacity in any other part of the project; I move that the AB conduct a thorough investigation and come to a decision that creates procedures for declaring members not in good standing, defines what they are allowed to do within the USGenWeb project (if anything at all); specifies notification, appeal, and repeal procedures, and defines eligibility requirements for: voting at any level, participating in any level of USGenWeb affiliated project, running for any level of office or supervisory position anywhere in the project. The result should be a clear definition of how someone is declared of MNIGS, how and who is notified of this finding, the capacity in which a MNIGS is allowed to perform on the project, and how/if the declaration can be removed. The result will address the issues presented in the original motion and allow any future potential problems to be remedied with a clear and consistent manner; furthermore, it removes an individual person from the motion--allowing all to be discussed in the open. "

The motion failed for lack of a second.

(6/14/03) SE/MA CC Representative Angie Rayfield presented the following motion:

"I move that the Family Group Sheet Project be established as a Special Project affiliated with The USGenWeb Project."

The motion was numbered 03-14. Discussion ensued.

(6/16/03) NW/P CC Representative Gail Meyer Kilgore presented the following motion:

"I would like the Motion 03-14 amended to read:

The Family Groupsheet Pages Project would respectfully request that the Board take into consideration postponing this vote for six months. During that time, we request that the FGS Project:

1) At least be acknowledged by the USGenWeb Project.
2) Get better organized so we can represent the USGENWeb in the best way possible .
3) If in six months we can show that this is a working project that it be accepted as a 'special' project of the USGenWeb."

The motion TO AMEND passed with 9 "yes" votes, 4 "no" votes, no abstentions, and 2 members not voting. (6/20/03)

Those voting YES: Pam Reid, Tina Vickery, Robert Bremer, Don Kelly, Darilee Bednar, Gail Meyer Kilgore, Angie Rayfield, Larry Flesher, Jana Black

Those voting NO: Jan Cortez, Tim Stowell, Heather DeGeorge, Phyllis Rippee

Those abstaining: none

Those not voting: Vicki Shaffer, Teresa Lindquist

Additional Comments:

03-14 is so amended.

Voting then commenced on the motion, as amended.

The motion, AS AMENDED passed with 8 "yes" votes, 2 "no" votes, no abstentions, and 5 members not voting. (6/26/03)

Those voting YES: Vicki Shaffer, Tina Vickery, Robert Bremer, Don Kelly, Darilee Bednar, Angie Rayfield, Larry Flesher, Jana Black

Those voting NO: Tim Stowell, Heather DeGeorge

Those abstaining: none

Those not voting: Pam Reid, Teresa Lindquist, Jan Cortez, Gail Meyer Kilgore, Phyllis Rippee

Additional Comments:

None.

(6/26/03) SE/MA CC Representative Angie Rayfield presented the following motion:

"I move to adjourn this session of the Advisory Board."

(6/26/03) SE/MA SC Representative Tim Stowell made the following point of order:

Point of order.

There was a motion passed early in the session that says that this session of the AB will go until August 31st at midnight. Wouldn't that motion have to be overturned for this to be a valid vote?

The NC ruled:

Your point is not well taken. No such motion was ever passed. One was introduced, but that wording was amended out of it. Check http://www.usgenweb.com/official/02-10minutes.htm

The motion to adjourn passed with 9 "yes" votes, no "no" votes, no abstentions, and 6 members not voting. (6/28/03)

Those voting YES: Vicki Shaffer, Tina Vickery, Robert Bremer, Don Kelly, Darilee Bednar, Heather DeGeorge, Angie Rayfield, Larry Flesher, Jana Black

Those voting NO: none

Those abstaining: none

Those not voting: Pam Reid, Teresa Lindquist, Jan Cortez, Gail Meyer Kilgore, Tim Stowell, Phyllis Rippee

Additional Comments:

This session of the Advisory Board of The USGenWeb Project is adjourned, and the Board-L list closed, until 9:00am MST, Monday, 7 July 2003.

(6/7/03) NE/NC SC Representative Tina Vickery made the following announcement:

As the Advisory Board Representative to the Elections Committee, I would like to acknowledge to the USGenWeb Project that an appeal has been received from a nominee regarding their disqualification by their State Coordinator for the position of (SEMA) Southeast Mid-Atlantic County Coordinator Representative.

(6/7/03) National Coordinator Isaiah Harrison made the following announcement:

The AB has received a grievance regarding the "Ineligible" status of Teresa Lindquist and will discuss and resolve the issue on Board-Exec. As I am named in the grievance regarding Teresa Lindquist, Tina Vickery will serve as Temporary Chair to preside over the discussion of that issue.

(6/10/03) Jana Black rose to the following point of order:

It has been brought to my attention that the vote of Teresa Lindquist on Motion 03-12 may be out of order in that it is a personnel matter, she is NIGS and was not privy to what was presented and discussed on EXEC, therefore could not have made an informed vote. May I have a ruling please?

The National Coordinator ruled as follows:

While Teresa Lindquist has been declared a member not in good standing by the Advisory Board, she is still a member of that Board and may vote on motions under the same conditions that are applied to any other member.

The point is not well taken.

(6/10/03) NE/NC SC Representative Tina Vickery made the following announcement:

We, the undersigned members of the Advisory Board agree with Richard Harrison's ruling of ineligibility of the individual named in this grievance. The bylaws specify that candidates must be a "member in good standing". The individual mentioned in the grievance was previously declared a "member not in good standing" by the Advisory Board. The absence of mention of the Representative at Large position in article VI, section 9 of the USGenWeb Project Bylaws does not mean that the position is exempt from the "in good standing" requirement including declarations of "member not in good standing" made by the USGenWeb Project Advisory Board. A request for change of status must originate from the effected party or via the representative of the party as an item of routine business.

(Signed)
Tina Vickery, Temporary Chair of Executive Session
Darilee Bednar
Jana Black
Heather DeGeorge
Gail Meyer Kilgore
Angie Rayfield
Pam Reid
Phyllis Rippee
Vicki Shaffer

cc: Board-L
Board-Exec
Teresa Lindquist, Representative at Large
Ellen Pack, Election Committee Chair

(6/10/03) National Coordinator Isaiah Harrison made the following announcement:

In the matter of Bettie Wood's challenge to being determined ineligible to run for office by the GAGenWeb State Coordinator. After hearing the evidence, the Advisory Board sustains her challenge and declares Bettie Wood ELIGIBLE to run for the office of SouthEast Mid-Atlantic County Coordinator Representative.

-Isaiah

Richard "Isaiah" Harrison
National Coordinator
The USGenWeb Project

(6/11/03) NE/NC SC Representative Tina Vickery posted the following correspondence.:

I am submitting this on behalf of the Election Committee and have taken the liberty of appending the subject with "Question of Privilege". This is of an important urgent nature and demands the Boards immediate attention.

Tina Vickery
NE/NC SC Representative
Advisory Board Representative to the Elections Committee

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ellen Pack"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 10:12 PM
Subject: [EC] AB Question
> TO: USGenWeb Advisory Board
> From: USGenWeb Election Committee
> Subject: Membership Status of Nominator
>
> The Election Committee is in receipt of a nomination submitted by an
> individual who the EC strongly feels is not a member of the USGenWeb Project.
>
> The Election Committee feels it is obvious that the internal election
> affairs of the Project should not be influenced or intruded upon by
> non-members. However, while the eligibility of nominees are addressed in
> both the By-Laws and the EC Guidelines, the membership status of nominators
> is not addressed.
>
> In the event the nominator is not a USGenWeb member, would the AB please
> advise the EC as to whether a nomination submitted by a non-USGenWeb Member
> should be considered acceptable?
>
> If the AB finds that the EC should not accept a nomination submitted by a
> non-USGenWeb Member, would the AB grant the EC permission to attempt to
> verify the membership/non-membership status of the nominator?
>
> As the nomination period is drawing to a close, the EC would appreciate
> your attention to this matter at your earliest convenience.
>
> Respectfully,
> Ellen Pack
> Chair, USGenWeb Election Committee

NC Isaiah Harrison' s reply:

Sturgis defines one of the Rights of Membership as "To nominate." (Page 221, no. 6) One must be a member of The USGenWeb Project to nominate someone for office.

-Isaiah

Richard "Isaiah" Harrison
National Coordinator
The USGenWeb Project

(6/14/03) National Coordinator Isaiah Harrison posted the following:

The AB has receivd the following letter from members wishing to start a new Special Project affiliated with The USGenWeb Project. May I please hear a motion to establish the Family Group Sheet Special Project.

-Isaiah

We wish to actively support researcher's efforts to find information on their ancestors by starting a new project for USGenWeb called The Family Group Sheet Project.

This has been a popular project in Georgia and Texas--URLs are included below. Several requests have been made over the past year to start this for other states. We have the needed web space to unite all 50 states, have started gathering wonderful volunteers, and we are now making a "formal" request that the Advisory Board make this an official project of USGenWeb and allow us to move forward in this endeavor.

When we first start our ancestral search, we usually start with a Family Group Sheet. Through the Family Group Sheet project, (FGS) we can provide a way for internet users to do that, using electronic forms. In the year and a half that I've been providing this service in GA, I've had many come back and say they needed to change a FGS since they've found documentation, or have gotten new information through their online FGS. We encourage documentation, we encourage adding new information, and we recommend consulting the original materials for verification.

These are not GEDCOMs, but there is a link provided to World Connect.

This is what we have set up so far:

http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gary/allus.html

There are 2 or 3 other states that have this project going, but they are not affliated with USGW Project. We love our USGW Project and would like have this project to be declared a Special USGW Project so we can proudly use the USGWP logos.

For further questions, or comments concerning this, please write us. We encourage that too!

Thank You for you time,

Gina Heffernan (dala@mindspring.com)
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~txgenweb/famgroupsht/
& Bettie Wood (nana321@earthlink.net) <><
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~garichmo/groupindx.html

(6/16/03) SW/SC CC Representative Phyllis Rippee made the following point of privelege:

Mr. NC:

According to EC Procedural Rule, it is the duty of the Advisory Board to rule on an appeal by a member who has had his/her eligibility to vote, or run for office, challenged.

The Advisory Board did not rule on the appeal of Bettie Wood. The statement that was made was erroneous, in that, Mr. NC, you made the ruling. Therefore, I request that a vote be taken of the Advisory Board in regard to Bettie Wood's appeal.

NC Harrison's ruling:

The Advisory Board is required to rule on questions of eligibility in a timely fashion. At the suggestion of the Parliamentarian I made a ruling from the Chair based on discussion that had taken place on Board-Exec. That is acceptible Parliamentary Procedure.

Your point is not well taken.

(6/17/03) SW/SC CC Representative Phyllis Rippee rose to the following point of order:

I rise to a point of order. Sturgis states that a point of order must be raised immediately, but gives 3 exceptions. One of those is a violation of the bylaws.

The bylaws clearly define the rules regarding the nominees for Advisory Board positions. One of these rules is in regard to SC Representatives and there is no provision for ASCs to run. I will further point out that no amendment to the bylaws has changed this to include ASCS. Therefore, I request a ruling on the eligibility of Marcia Ann Kuehl, ASC of WI to run for SC Representative from the NE/NC region.

National Coordinator Harrison ruled:

The practice of allowing ASCs to serve as SC Representatives is one that is well established by precedent. It would not be an exaggeration to say ASCs have always been considered on an equal basis with SCs in elections.

The consideration has to do with the numbers. In order to justify 1 SC rep per region, when there would only be maybe 8-10 SCs having one full vote, the inclusion of ASCs would bring the number of members represented to a more palatable figure in comparison with the two CC reps that would represent so many more members. So it was felt it would help balance things out.

SCs and ASCs frequently perform the same duties and responsibilities, the ASC filling in for the SC, etc. That's the major reason that ASCs are subbed to the State-Coord list. Since the two positions were coupled to share voting rights, it naturally followed to allow ASCs to serve as SC Reps. It would not be fitting to allow one group to vote on a position in which they could not serve.

In fact, in 1999, Ginger Hayes, ASC of ILGenWeb was elected as the SC Representative for the NE/NC Region.

Sturgis says that if an organization has followed certain practices for a long time, the practices are considered rules of the organization. However, these kinds of practices must not conflict with the bylaws.

While the subject is certainly valid for discussion and possible AB action, due consideration of the rights of members and current candidates (ASC or otherwise) should not be infringed. Members and candidates have so far participated in this election and made decisions about whether to run or not to run for office based on the belief that ASCs qualified to serve as SC Representatives.

The interests of the project are best served by the Advisory Board and Election Committee jointly addressing this issue (and other issues that have been raised) after the election cycle.

(6/20/03) National Coordinator Isaiah Harrison made the following announcement.:

I am happy to announce that the following members have been appointed to the Bylaws Revision Committee.

Angie Rayfield
Wyndell Taylor
Ellen Rhor
Ron Henson