First, the bylaws of the party specify what is supposed to happen with the selection of an Executive Director.
A. Executive DirectorÂ
The Executive Director shall be employed or appointed with the approval of the ExecutiveÂ Committee. The appointment shall be ratified by 60% of the County Committee at the nextÂ regular meeting. The job description of the Executive Director shall be approved by theÂ Executive Committee and ratified by the County Committee. The Executive Director shallÂ perform all duties assigned by the Officers and report in writing on any and all activities to theÂ Executive Committee.
The Executive Board took the following action at its meeting on February 8, 2010:
” To extend the deadline for completing Search Committee process until February 22nd, 2010 and to approve selection of the Search Committee of any of the finalists. “
While there are members of the Central Committee who dispute the ability of the Executive Board to prospectively approve the selection, there is clearly nothing in the Bylaws that prohibits them from taking that action. Absent such a prohibition, the Executive Board can pretty much decide how it wants to handle the appointment and approval of the hiring of an Executive Director. In this particular case, because of time constraints, they did so in advance by designating that decision to the Selection Committee.
Since the Central Committee took no action to ratify the appointment, the ratification is still outstanding. The appointment however, stands. Presumably, if the Central Committee ultimately fails to ratify the decision to hire, Schipske could be out.
I am still trying to determine if Schipske still wants the job.