Darlene,
IMHO, item 4 deals with what happens if the ALAC rejects the proposal. The liaison reports back to the group and then we start back on Item #1 (wash, lather, repeat as needed).
As Even's already pointed out, a referal of "pre-registration" to ALAC is a waste of time. There's not a lot to be gained by "wash, lather, repeat without effect".
Please provide specific wording that you would like to see that can be discussed on the list.
So for the purposes of discussion on the list I propose that #2 be changed as follows: Old:
2. Once consensus is achieved according to the NARALO Operating Procedures, the NARALO Chair sends a request to the Chair of the ALAC clearly stating our intentions and a specific request for action as per the group consensus decision.
New:
2. Once a decison is achieved according to the NARALO Operating Procedures, the regional Chair instructs the regionally elected member(s) to the Executive of the At Large Advisory Committee to inform the Executive that a decision has been made.
This change (a) allows "voting" to be the possible means of deciding any particular policy issue, and so will not fail if voting is adopted as a decision making mechanism, for failure to be a "consensus" decision. It also (b) substitutes the rights and responsibilities of any member elected from the region to "inform" for the Chair-to-Chair courtesy. It also (c) does not assume that informing the Executive will have any outcome, as such an assumption is beyond the control of the regional organization. Eric