Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Here is a rough draft of the proposal. Bob, if you could look it over let me know if this will suffice. If anyone sees any errors or would like to suggest additions please let me know. [hr]This is proposal 13-001 to support the Palestinian Right of Return. Please read the proposal, and confine any comments to the proposal only. Designate your wishes by using "agree", “block”, or "stand aside". Any blocks will require a vote of the Council. . There are currently nine (9) active voting chapters in the Green Party of Colorado. A quorum of 60% requires at least one response from six (6) chapters. Active Chapters: Adams/JeffersonArapahoe CountyDenverDouglasGreater BoulderPikes PeakPoudre ValleySan MiguelSouthwest Thank you,Bill Bartlett, Co-chair and Interim Current Council Facilitator1. Date Proposed: January 23, 2013. Proposed by Bob Kinsey, Co-sponsor Bill Bartlett2. Title: Support the Jews for Palestinian Right of Return. 3. Text: The Palestinian people are still struggling to retain the little land they have left. Passage of this proposal would permit the Green Party of Colorado to support the Jews for Palestinian Right of Return. We would also encourage our individual Greens in Colorado to sign the petition and spread word of this movement to guarantee the Palestinian people their right to return to their lands. 4. Background: This background to this conflict is public knowledge. The Jews for Palestinian Right of Return is a recent movement in response to recent talk about conceding Palestinian lands that have been taken over by Jewish settlers. More information can be found at the website: http://jfpror.wordpress.com/5. Goals/Justification: As outlined above, the people of Palestine have been suffering continued encroachment. Endorsing this movement could help shine some light on this complex and controversial issue that effects all of us. The United States is an ardent supporter of Israel and donates billions of dollars to their security. As US citizens and as Colorado Greens it is our place to vocalize where we stand on this issue. Alternatives: We could refrain from an official endorsement at the state level, and instead encourage local chapters to support the measure. We could also encourage individuals to sign the petition and support the movement.
Thanks, Ryan, for posting these events. I will make an effort to get these out to the website and the Facebook page if you continue taking the time to post them! Anyone who attended this meeting, it would be interesting to hear any details you may wish to share.
Below is a link to the original post, along with some links to the Facebook event and other information. At first glance I agree with the statement and the principles behind it. I will co-sponsor the bill and draft a statement in support to be voted on. http://jfpror.wordpress.com/
I was out of town during this event. but interested in the subject. I'll reach out to them and see where we can help each other.
This proposal has passed. Final results: 9 Agree / 1 Stand-Aside / 0 Blocks, 7 of 9 Chapters Voting. Detailed results attached here in PDF.
Thank you Michael. It has been made clear, in this proposal, in our discussion together, and on the listserv itself, that the issue at hand is his behavior and how it reflects on the party. His positions are not what is at stake here. Victor has not rescinded his statements, which were not only insulting to the people he was engaged with, but also to party constituents who were not present to hear it. This is a matter of holding party officials accountable for how they represent us in public and how they speak to voters. Please do not confuse his positions with his behavior as a representative. They are separate issues. The fact that their are numerous separate issues involving Victor only underscores the point that he is an improper fit as a representative of the state party. To your last point, yes we will be finding new candidates for several offices. As of now, we have one reliable national candidate (Ryan Jones) and that will be enough to hold our position on the national committee. First things first: let's open up the position so that we can fill it with someone who will put the concerns of the party ahead of their personal agenda. I hope this clears up some of your concerns.
This proposal has passed. The final calculations were: 11 Agree / 1 Stand-Aside / 0 BlocksNote: There were two disagrees. Tom's was after the deadline, and Claire changed hers to a stand-aside so we could find consensus and avoid a vote. Thank you!! Full tally is attached in PDF format.
Good evening all, This agreement seeking is closed... sorry for not stating this on time. Agreement seeking closed on November 18. (I need help with this facilitation thing. Thanks for your patience.) After speaking with Claire, she was amenable to changing her position to stand aside so this proposal would pass without drawing it out in a vote. Thank you Claire!! I'll post official stats on the proposal in the morning.
Agree. (We lowered the allotment to $50. I hope this is an amenable solution for all involved. )Bill BartlettPoudre Valley, officer
Since the Bylaws (4.3) require consensus of the council for expenditures over $200, this version of the proposal has been tabled. A new round of Agreement Seeking on an amended proposal can be found at the link below. Proposal 005a-12 to Designate Funds for Advertising in Adams/Jefferson.http://gpco.fullydefiant.com/forum/index.php?topic=154.0
"Disagree" is not a valid voting option in the consensus phase. The options should be, Agree, Stand-aside, Block, Abstain. If a block is placed and the originator of the proposal does not wish to amend the proposal to meet the concerns of the person blocking, the proposal goes to the vote phase. The options for the vote phase are Yes, No, or Abstain. Tom, is your vote of "disagree" a block? This process is outlined in Procedures and Guidelines. http://www.coloradogreenparty.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/PG-2004.pdf
Sorry this was my fault. I copied and pasted this wording from previous proposals and haven't vetted it against the P&Gs. I'll update my template accordingly.
or "stand aside". A block to bring the issue to an immediate vote. < < I think you might be missing a word here?
Yes, that sentence should have read "A block will bring the issue to an immediate vote."
So if I get this straight a local is asking for state funds for priinting their own flyers?
You have that correct, Claire. The original discussion was in the Proposal Drafting board for a bit.. You can read the evolution of the conversation here: http://gpco.fullydefiant.com/forum/index.php?topic=151.0I also voiced concerns that the state is being asked to fund local advertising. Tanya advised that there have been donations from their chapter to the state. There are alternatives if we think the cost is too high for the return (see the Alternatives listed: cheaper printing or less pages).
Information request: How much money is in the treasury and re: Claire's note, have we ever spent that money for a local activity before. I would support spending it per their request because it might help grow the green party in Jeffco/Adams. I think some of the advertising might say they are looking for candidates for 2014 for County Commissioners and State Legislative seats. How about a Green Sheriff? I ran as a D in 1974 for Sheriff. A Green Assessor?
The state account stands at about $2000. The fliers have been made already, but can be changed easily. I think it would be a good idea to mention that the party is looking for 2013/2014 candidates.
The cost seems much more reasonable at around $200. I've inquired about the state books and we'll see where we stand and how this impacts that balance. It would be a great gesture to make the flier source files available through the state to local chapters who may be interested in changing them for local use. 🙂 And thank you for putting them together. I particularly like the "billionaires got you down?" and the color scheme, which is a little like the state website and the green is kind a of a "zinger" color.
