- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Please read the proposal and keep comments on the topic of the proposal only. This proposal is moderated, and the GPCO Code of Conduct will apply (located here: http://gpco.fullydefiant.com/forum/index.php?topic=28.0).From the Bylaws, "4.3 All decisions concerning policy, finance, and objectives shall require consensus or a vote of at least 60% of the membership present at a state meeting and/or the Council."As Agreement Seeking has failed and a BLOCK was communicated, please designate your vote by using the following terms: YES or NO.There are currently twelve (12) active voting chapters in the Green Party of Colorado. Adoption of this proposal requires an AGREE of at least 60% of all votes cast and also requires a minimum quorum of at least one yes or no response from seven (7) chapters.Active ChaptersJefferson CountyAdams CountyArapahoe CountyDenverDouglas CountyGreater BoulderPikes PeakPoudre ValleyMesaSan MiguelPlatte ValleyLongmontThe floor is now open for one week of Voting, ending March 20, 2017 at 11.59 pm.1. Basic InfoDate proposed: March 12, 2017Name of the sponsors: Greater Boulder Green Party2. Title:Amend GPCO Bylaws to Clarify Two Year Term of Office3. Text of the actual Proposal:To clarify officers term of office and remove obsolete material, the Bylaws of the Green Party of Colorado shall be amended as follows. Replace Section 5.1 which currently reads, "In order to serve the growth of the GPCO and to communicate our message, platform and values to the public, the GPCO will elect two state co-chairs to two year terms. Every effort shall be made to reach gender and geographic diversity." with the following text:QuoteOfficers shall be chosen at each annual state meeting held in odd number years to two year terms. The term of office begins immediately upon election and ends with the election of officers at the next odd year annual meeting. Every effort shall be made to reach gender and geographic diversity.Delete Section 5.7 in its entirety. The section currently reads, "Co-chairs shall be chosen at each annual state meeting and other officers in odd number years to serve two year terms in office." This section is obsolete because co-chairs now serve two year terms.4. Background:Greater Boulder Green Party seeks to clarify the length of service of the co-chairs.5. Justification/Goals:Historically, terms of GPCO officers have run from annual meeting to annual meeting. This amendment simply codifies past practice, going back at least to 2007. An explicit reference to the co-chair term in the minutes from the state meeting in 2007 can be found at http://coloradogreenparty.org/about/history/gpco-2007-state-meeting-minutes/.The meeting was held June 23-24, 2007, in Carbondale, Colorado. On Saturday, June 23, after a decision to change the co-chair terms from two years (which they were at that time) to one year, the following is found in the meeting minutes. Quote11:15 a.m. Election of new state officers and national delegates and selection of webmaster and e-list manager Tom Kelly of the Arapahoe Greens and Dave Chandler of the Adams-Jefferson Greens volunteered to become co-chairs for the 07-08 term.Agreement seeking resulted in a consensus for Kelly and Chandler as state co-chairs for approximately one year, beginning June 23 and until the next annual state meeting.Dan Sage of the Arapahoe Greens volunteered to continue as state treasurer for the 07-09 term.Agreement seeking resulted in a consensus for Sage as treasurer for approximately two years, beginning June 23 and until the annual state meeting of 2009.Eric Fried of the Poudre Valley Greens volunteered to become state secretary for the 07-09 term.Agreement seeking resulted in a consensus for Fried as secretary for approximately two years, beginning June 23 and until the annual state meeting of 2009.This is an explicit description of a one-year term being approximately one year from the date of the election to the date of the following year's meeting. It is also an explicit description of a two-year term being approximately two years from the date of the election to the date of the meeting two years hence. Although the co-chair terms were reduced from two years to one year, the other offices continued with two-year terms, so both the one-year term and the two-year term are described in the minutes. The description of the term length is repeated for each office, so it does not seem to be a typo.The 2008 meeting was held on May 3, so the nominal one-year term from the 2007 meeting (June 23) to the 2008 meeting (May 3) was approximately ten and a half months. The 2009 meeting was held in July by teleconference, no specific date available on the history page, so the nominal two-year term from the 2007 meeting (June 23) to the 2009 meeting (sometime in July) was several weeks longer than two years.6. Pros and Cons:Pros: There is no precedent for setting the annual meeting date based on the date the current officers were elected. Delaying the annual meeting, so as to put the desire of an officer to serve 24 months ahead of the needs of the party to organize for the 2018 election cycle, hurts the party's prospects for the 2018 election.Cons:7. Alternatives to the proposal:8. References: Moderator Note: This issue has already been corrected via Proposal 007-15: length of co-chair term (http://gpco.fullydefiant.com/forum/index.php?topic=251.0).
Voting on this proposal is premature. The proposal needs to be amended because bylaws changes passed in proposal 007-15 never got put into the bylaws correctly. Section 5.7 currently reads
5.7 Co-chairs shall be chosen at each annual state meeting . . . .
This is obviously incorrect.Refer to http://gpco.fullydefiant.com/forum/index.php?topic=321.msg1708#msg1708 for the amendment to fix section 5.7.Andrea, please lock or remove this topic from the Proposal Voting board.
Andrea, you were able to fix the part about the relevant section and the local versus state, after I pointed it out. Perhaps you can change the wording of the proposal to clear up this additional confusion that has surfaced. Considering the level of interest in this proposal, I think it is bound to end up in voting no matter what the wording is, so perhaps we should work on getting it right in this folder.
It's already in voting. I've already made the updates to the bylaws that should have been made before Sean and I came on. A block means it goes to voting.
So the wording we are seeing contains all the fixes that need to be made in order to reflect the most up-to-date wording of the by-laws and the changes to the wording that would need to be made if the proposal passes? If so, thank you. Harry, do you agree that the wording is correct now?
I'll modify the proposal in voting with your text. I simply took what you originally submitted.EDIT: I've modified the bylaws to reflect the change ratified with 007-15. I will not modify the proposal language, because it contains hyperbole.
To be clear, this is my text:
5.7 Officers shall be chosen at each odd-year annual meeting to serve two-year terms, ending at the next odd-year annual meeting.
OK. I see the newly published bylaws on the website. I agree that the changes from proposal 007-15 are incorporated correctly and that sections 5.1 and 5.7 no longer conflict. So there is no need for changes to section 5.1.But now the words "at each annual state meeting" are missing from section 5.7 and need to be reinserted. This is because proposal 007-15 inadvertently deleted the part about state party officers being chosen at annual meetings. I take full responsibility for the mistake because I submitted the wording for section 5.7 and accidentally deleted too many words.This is the text to be voted on:
5.7 Officers shall be chosen at each odd-year annual meeting to serve two-year terms, ending at the next odd-year annual meeting.
Considering the context of this proposal keeps changing, it is ill-defined. I'm casting a vote of NO.
Harry, here's what I understand that you want this proposal to say:
3. Text of the actual Proposal:To clarify officers term of office and remove obsolete material, the Bylaws of the Green Party of Colorado shall be amended as follows. Replace Section 5.1 which currently reads, "In order to serve the growth of the GPCO and to communicate our message, platform and values to the public, the GPCO will elect two state co-chairs to two year terms. Every effort shall be made to reach gender and geographic diversity." with the following text:Officers shall be chosen at each annual state meeting held in odd number years to two year terms. The term of office begins immediately upon election and ends with the election of officers at the next odd year annual meeting. Every effort shall be made to reach gender and geographic diversity.Delete Section 5.7 in its entirety. The section currently reads, "Co-chairs shall be chosen at each annual state meeting and other officers in odd number years to serve two year terms in office." This section is obsolete because co-chairs now serve two year terms.
If this is true, then this has been captured accurately in the proposal that is now in Voting, and Larry's block stands.If this is not true, then I'm very sorry, you will have to submit another proposal, and I suggest you withdraw this proposal altogether. We cannot keep massaging the substantive parts of your proposal midstream during voting.Please advise.
Andrea, Read your own post and my response at http://gpco.fullydefiant.com/forum/index.php?topic=322.msg1720#msg1720 That is our understanding.Reneging on your commitment, less than 6 hours old, to modify the proposal for voting is a highly objectionable action. I don't call what you are doing 'facilitation'. But if your intent is to sabotage this proposal by changing bylaws section 5.7 in the middle of voting, making the text of the proposal obsolete, you are doing an excellent job. Given the new bylaws, published today, the proposal to be voted on is simply to amend section 5.7 to read:
5.7 Officers shall be chosen at each odd-year annual meeting to serve two-year terms, ending at the next odd-year annual meeting.
You need a new proposal. I'm not going to change a substantive portion of this proposal midstream.Thank you.
But you have no problem making a substantial change to section 5.7 of the bylaws, the very section to be amended by this proposal, on the first day of voting? With today's publication of the bylaws on the website, our bylaws no longer require an annual meeting to elect officers. Passage of this amendment simply restores this important requirement.So my vote is YES, to amend bylaws section 5.7 to read:
5.7 Officers shall be chosen at each odd-year annual meeting to serve two-year terms, ending at the next odd-year annual meeting.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.