[candidate-development] Fwd: delegate allocation

[Daniel Melnechuk]

Mike Heichman brings up an issue about process that we need to  
address if his assertion is correct.

So Dave, did CDLC meet and approve this version of the allocation to  
send to Adcom?

Peace,
Dan



Begin forwarded message:

> From: Mike Heichman <mikeheichman at verizon.net>
> Date: May 6, 2008 10:09:22 AM EDT
> To: Merelice <merelice at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Green-Rainbow Party (GRP) Administrative Committee"  
> <adcom at green-rainbow.org>, candidate development <candidate- 
> development at green-rainbow.org>
> Subject: Re: [candidate-development] delegate allocation
>
> Hi Merelice,
>
> I do not have posting privileges to Adcom. Please forward this to  
> Adcom.
>
> This proposal comes from Dave England. Dave is the co-chair of  
> CDLC. He
> is not CDLC.
>
> This proposal did not come from the CDLC as required by our Delegate
> Selection Plan.
>
> CDLC did NOT have a meeting and approve this plan.
>
> This is another violation of our process.
>
> I object!
>
> Mike Heichman
>
>
>
>
> Merelice wrote:
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> Attached in rich text format is the CDLC memo regarding the  
>> allocation
>> of delegates. This calculation is based on the results of the Feb. 5
>> Primary vote, the response from the Elections Division to our
>> questions as applicable to CDLC's earlier calculation, and the GRP
>> delegate selection plan as both confirmed and amended by StateCom
>> April 12.
>>
>> We have reached the stage of the delegate selection plan where the
>> following statement applies:
>>
>> "If the Administrative Committee still does not agree with the
>> calculations that determine the results, then they have one (1) week
>> to revise them or they are accepted."
>>
>> That gives us until midnight, Monday, May 12, to approve this
>> calculation. Since one version of this calculation was discussed by
>> AdCom and provisionally approved pending Tassinari's answers and  
>> since
>> this version makes the changes that reflect input from the Elections
>> Division and StateCom, I suggest we move the process along to the  
>> step
>> of asking whether there are any concerns.
>>
>> Nat is away on a science project and is not available between 3 p.m.
>> and midnight any night this week. So I'm hoping we can handle this
>> piece of business by email.
>>
>> Meanwhile, I am working on a draft of the letters that AdCom will  
>> send
>> to the candidates for your review. When we asked Michelle Tassinari
>> what was required of the delegates, her answer included,
>> ""Accordingly, based on your own delegate selection plans and state
>> law, it appears that delegates must vote on the first roll call for
>> their presidential candidate UNLESS THEY HAVE BEEN  
>> RELEASED" [emphasis
>> mine]. Accordingly, in the letter, I will encourage the candidates  
>> who
>> are no longer seeking the Green Party nomination to formally release
>> their delegates.
>>
>> I will send a separate email sometime soon about other AdCom business
>> needing attention and possible AdCom meeting dates.
>>
>> Please review the attached and respond with your approvals/ 
>> concerns/suggestions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Merelice
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> ---
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> candidate-development mailing list
>> candidate-development at green-rainbow.org
>> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/candidate-development
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> candidate-development mailing list
> candidate-development at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/candidate-development
>