<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
RE: [council] Term limits
- To: <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>, <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [council] Term limits
- From: <Lucy.Nichols@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 13:03:27 -0600
- Cc: <council@xxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <45536FD6.1080505@tucows.com>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AccELEayrLF7H3MLTfSX/QknhjnKrAABVMYA
- Thread-topic: [council] Term limits
I support discussion of the issues surrounding term limits as
articulated in Ross' proposed resolution.
Lucy
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ext Ross Rader
>Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 11:14 AM
>To: philip.sheppard@xxxxxx
>Cc: council@xxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [council] Term limits
>
>
>
>philip.sheppard@xxxxxx wrote:
>> Fellow Council Members,
>> before we leap to a resolution on term limits could we possibly have
>> some discussion on their MERITS?
>
>
>I don't think we're "leaping" - please don't over-react. If I
>read Bruce's message correctly, we need to have a motion on
>the table in order to have a discussion of the issues on the
>agenda. Since I am interested in having a discussion on this
>issue, I thought it would be best to table a straw motion that
>would clear the procedural hurdle in order to have a
>discussion. The enthusiasm you are seeing, I believe, is
>simply indicative of support for a discussion of the issues
>surrounding term limits - which in reading your messages, you
>would seem to support as well.
>
>-ross
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|