Dear CLC Members,

Over the past few years, we've done alot of hard work keeping the core libraries and `base` in good health. For that, I'd like to thank everyone on the committee. However, in the more recent 6 months, it's become increasingly clear that we are being spread too thin to function as well as we would like. There are several reasons for this, and all of them are understandable. In no particular order:

- Members of our committee are burnt out from watching and managing the 13 core libraries and `base`
- Members have higher priority life events, or work-related functions taking up their time
- Term lengths are long, and interest wanes.
- Etc etc.

As a result of these problems, there has been very little movement in the issues tracker for `base` and on the core libraries, and people have noticed. Unfortunately for us, the demand is actually *growing* for our input, and this poses a problem: the CLC is not well-suited for this as it's currently structured. Hence, we need to restructure.

Chessai and I have been working on a new structure for the CLC, and a proposals process that we hope will allow us to more effectively function as an advisory body, as well as place more burden on those doing the proposing to drive change. We would also like to restructure in the sense that we'd like to scale back the duties of CLC members to be exclusively in charge of maintaining `base`, and serve a supplementary role for the core libraries, locating resources and providing advice as opposed to actively maintaining them.

To be clear: this plan is yet unfinished, and we intend to finalize this work with the help of the CLC. The CLC needs to have the time to engage this new plan effectively, and help any subsequnt processes move along. As such, we'd like to present this email as an opportunity to raise your hand (or not) if you would like to continue on as a CLC member and dedicate some time over the next month to finalize the new ideas, or, in the case where you do not, let us know so that we can locate new members with more bandwidth. We'll consider non-response to be "no bandwidth", and timebox the responses at 2 weeks to gauge interest.

We genuinely appreciate your time and all of your hard work, and hope to hear from everyone as we push forward with this plan, and if not, then we're at least glad we can lighten the load.

Cheers,
Emily