[candidate-development] [adcom] Report of CDLC to State Committee

[Merelice]

On 6/16/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com <Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com> wrote:
> ....>
>  as for apportionment, as we all know, there is no agreement and that is not
>  about McKinney one way or another, it is about all of the candidates and the
>  uncommitted delegates -


Grace,

"As we all know," according to the Delegate Selection Plan, the CDLC
calculation apportioning delegates to the candidates was automatically
approved when the Administrative Committee was unable to reach
agreement. That is the provision of the Delegate Selection Plan
approved and confirmed by the State Committee.

While "there is no agreement" on the Administrative Committee, the
AdCom is not the authority regarding the apportionment. The Delegate
Selection Plan is. The candidates DID receive official notification
from the co-chairs of the allocation, and the subsequent unauthorized
letter to the candidates has only added to their confusion. Yet again,
for a third time, the State Committee is going to have to make its
wishes clear.

If the concern now is that the parameters of how to present the
delegates list should be conveyed by the co-chairs on behalf of AdCom
to make them "official," that can certainly be done for the campaign
that seems to need it. The important thing is that the information has
been conveyed to the candidates on at least two and possibly three
occasions.

Regarding to whom the information should be sent: The letter from the
co-chairs was on GRP letterhead, which provides the party's mailing
address.  In addition, candidates were referred to Elie's email
address if they had any questions relating to the delegation. Elie is
doing a heroic job of handling this complex assignment.

Merelice