Decisions; Voting Rules. 10.5.4.1In order for a General Assembly meeting to be quorate there shall be present no fewer than seventy-five (75) percent of the General Assembly Representatives.
Decisions; Voting Rules Sample Clauses
Related to Decisions; Voting Rules
Decisions of the Board The decision of the majority shall be the decision of the Board. Where there is no majority decision, the decision of the Chairperson shall be the decision of the Board. The decision of the Board of Arbitration shall be final and binding and enforceable on all parties, but in no event shall the Board of Arbitration have the power to change this Agreement or to alter, modify or amend any of its provisions. However, the Board shall have the power to dispose of any discharge or a discipline grievance by any arrangement which in its opinion it deems just and equitable.
Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users? Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain. Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function. The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation? Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator? Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions? Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour. Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project? It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
Quorum and Voting The holders of a majority of the Outstanding Units of the class or classes for which a meeting has been called (including Outstanding Units deemed owned by the General Partner) represented in person or by proxy shall constitute a quorum at a meeting of Limited Partners of such class or classes unless any such action by the Limited Partners requires approval by holders of a greater percentage of such Units, in which case the quorum shall be such greater percentage. At any meeting of the Limited Partners duly called and held in accordance with this Agreement at which a quorum is present, the act of Limited Partners holding Outstanding Units that in the aggregate represent a majority of the Outstanding Units entitled to vote and be present in person or by proxy at such meeting shall be deemed to constitute the act of all Limited Partners, unless a greater or different percentage is required with respect to such action under the provisions of this Agreement, in which case the act of the Limited Partners holding Outstanding Units that in the aggregate represent at least such greater or different percentage shall be required. The Limited Partners present at a duly called or held meeting at which a quorum is present may continue to transact business until adjournment, notwithstanding the withdrawal of enough Limited Partners to leave less than a quorum, if any action taken (other than adjournment) is approved by the required percentage of Outstanding Units specified in this Agreement (including Outstanding Units deemed owned by the General Partner). In the absence of a quorum any meeting of Limited Partners may be adjourned from time to time by the affirmative vote of holders of at least a majority of the Outstanding Units entitled to vote at such meeting (including Outstanding Units deemed owned by the General Partner) represented either in person or by proxy, but no other business may be transacted, except as provided in Section 13.7.
Written Decisions Decisions rendered at Level One which are unsatisfactory to the aggrieved person and all decisions rendered at Levels Two and Three of the grievance procedure shall be in writing setting forth the decision and the reasons therefore, and shall be transmitted promptly to all parties in interest and to the Association.
Decisions by Members Whenever in this Agreement reference is made to the decision, consent, approval, judgment, or action of the Members, unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, such decision, consent, approval, judgment, or action shall mean a Majority of the Members.
Decisions The General Assembly shall be free to act on its own initiative to formulate proposals and take decisions in accordance with the procedures set out herein. In addition, all proposals made by the Executive Board shall also be considered and decided upon by the General Assembly. The following decisions shall be taken by the General Assembly: Content, finances and intellectual property rights - Proposals for changes to Annexes 1 and 2 of the Grant Agreement to be agreed by the Funding Authority - Changes to the Consortium Plan - Modifications to Attachment 1 (Background Included) - Additions to Attachment 3 (List of Third Parties for simplified transfer according to Section 8.2.2) - Additions to Attachment 4 (Identified Affiliated Entities)] Evolution of the consortium - Entry of a new Party to the consortium and approval of the settlement on the conditions of the accession of such a new Party - Withdrawal of a Party from the consortium and the approval of the settlement on the conditions of the withdrawal - Identification of a breach by a Party of its obligations under this Consortium Agreement or the Grant Agreement - Declaration of a Party to be a Defaulting Party The identification of the breach is a first step in accordance with the procedure in 4.2 before declaring a Party as a Defaulting Party. - Remedies to be performed by a Defaulting Party - Termination of a Defaulting Party’s participation in the consortium and measures relating thereto - Proposal to the Funding Authority for a change of the Coordinator - Proposal to the Funding Authority for suspension of all or part of the Project - Proposal to the Funding Authority for termination of the Project and the Consortium Agreement Appointments On the basis of the Grant Agreement, the appointment if necessary of: - Executive Board Members
Decision of Board The decision of the majority shall be the decision of the Board. Where there is no majority decision, the decision of the Chair shall be the decision of the Board. The decision of the Arbitration Board shall be final, binding, and enforceable on the parties. The Board shall have the power to dispose of a discharge or discipline grievance by any arrangement which it deems just and equitable. However, the Board shall not have the power to change this agreement or to alter, modify, or amend any of its provisions.
Arbitration Decisions Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, the arbitrator(s) shall render a decision within ninety (90) Calendar Days of appointment and shall notify the Parties in writing of such decision and the reasons therefor. The arbitrator(s) shall be authorized only to interpret and apply the provisions of this LGIA and shall have no power to modify or change any provision of this Agreement in any manner. The decision of the arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding upon the Parties, and judgment on the award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. The decision of the arbitrator(s) may be appealed solely on the grounds that the conduct of the arbitrator(s), or the decision itself, violated the standards set forth in the Federal Arbitration Act or the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act. The final decision of the arbitrator(s) must also be filed with FERC if it affects jurisdictional rates, terms and conditions of service, Interconnection Facilities, or Network Upgrades.
Informal Resolution of Disputes 10.5.1 Upon receipt by one Party of notice of a dispute by the other Party pursuant to Section 10.3 or Section 10.4.5, each Party will appoint a knowledgeable, responsible representative to meet and negotiate in good faith to resolve any dispute arising under this Agreement. The location, form, frequency, duration, and conclusion of these discussions will be left to the discretion of the representatives. Upon agreement, the representatives may utilize other alternative Dispute Resolution procedures such as mediation to assist in the negotiations. Discussions and the correspondence among the representatives for purposes of settlement are exempt from discovery and production and will not be admissible in the arbitration described below or in any lawsuit without the concurrence of both Parties. Documents identified in or provided with such communications that were not prepared for purposes of the negotiations are not so exempted, and, if otherwise admissible, may be admitted in evidence in the arbitration or lawsuit.
Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:
