[reccom] Voting Results

[Kristin Purdy]

Let's discuss the voting results for Proposals 2 and 3 while the topic is 
hot.

First, I like the fact that we can now consider first state records on their 
own merits while we continue to encourage submitters to offer physical 
evidence on all records.

Second, when I initially reviewed David's proposal to accept a record but 
not include it on the checklist, I thought proposal #2 would eliminate the 
need for #3. However, the Pac-Slope Flycatcher record would still likely 
fall into this category. This is an important record for the state and 
well-documented, but we don't have the means to validate the bird's 
identity. Doesn't Proposal #3 apply to this record?

Kris

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Milt Moody" <miltonmoody at yahoo.com>
To: "Records Committee" <reccom at utahbirds.org>
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 7:56 AM
Subject: [reccom] Voting Results


> The results of the vote are in:
>
> Proposal #1 was not accepted. (Vote: 1 to 6)
>  This means that the terms for Voting Members
>  will remain the same as well as a two
>  consecutive term limit.
>
> Proposal #2 was accepted.  (Vote 4 to 3)
>  This means that section IV.C.11 of the
>  bylaws will be eliminated, so there are
>  no special requirements for 1st state records.
>
> Proposal #3 was accepted.  (Vote 5 to 2)
>  A vote category to accept a record but
>  not include the species on the checklist,
>  however it is not exactly clear if this
>  would be negated by the acceptance of #2.
>  (There may be a need for discussion)
>
> Lu Giddings was accepted as Secretary.
>  (Vote 7 to 0)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> reccom mailing list
> reccom at utahbirds.org
> http://utahbirds.org/mailman/listinfo/reccom
>