Clarify Nomination Process and Eliminate “Trickling”

Fall
2019
Resolution Number: 
01.07
Contact: 
Category: 
Academic Senate
Status: 
Assigned

Whereas, The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) rules allow for candidates for officer and representative positions to be considered for any positions for which they qualify if they do not prevail in the election for the highest position they seek, a practice referred to as “trickling”;

Whereas, In spring of 2019, the ASCCC Standards & Practices committee, responding to concerns raised by various faculty regarding the fairness of trickling and the difficulty of being elected to the Executive Committee, recommended that trickling be eliminated;

Whereas, The current nomination process outlined in Section E.3. of the rules specifies that a nominee, once consenting to nomination, is allowed to indicate whether the nominee wishes to stand for other positions for which the nominee is eligible if the nominee does not prevail for the office nominated, resulting in an undemocratic nomination process; and

Whereas, Objective 2.2. of the ASCCC Strategic Plan is to “[i]ncrease the diversity of faculty representation on committees of the ASCCC, including the Executive Committee, and other system consultation bodies to better reflect the diversity of California”;

Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges eliminate “trickling” and clarify the nomination process to make it more intentional and transparent by amending Section E.3 from its Rules to reflect the following change:

Nominees may be nominated for at most two positions for which they are eligible. In the case that the nominee consents to two nominations during the same Plenary session, the first election in which the candidate prevails will be the position the candidate subsequently assumes.

MSC