[Procedures] [statecom] Email Decisionmaking process threshold and transitions

[Daniel Melnechuk]

Just wanted to bring up that there are actually 22 delegates right 
now. The 17 are the remaining delegates from the last year, plus the 
5 new delegates elected this year.

So that makes the threshold to be "Round Down( 22 x 2/3 ) + 1" = 15.

While John Pepi is changing his ballot to YES CONSENT since he 
mistakenly read the original version and responded to that, it does 
not change the outcome of the proposal passing as it is got only 12 
YES consents.

I do want to bring up that the changing over from current delegates 
to newly elected delegates is not specified in our bylaws. I think we 
need to have a clear date for start and end of delegate years to make 
sure that we don't have any unclear process about when a newly 
elected state com delegate starts to serve.

There are dates for 2004 when the 80 senatorial district delegates 
get elected - at the primaries in September. And then the regional 
delegates are elected after them based on how many were elected in 
the senatorial districts. This further complicates things such that 
we can't have our first statecom meeting until both of these 
elections are over and that puts it squarely in the Fall. This years 
meeting is on Sept. 21st. Is that fall or is that summer? I guess we 
can call it either.

The point i am trying to make is that we need to set some clarity on 
transitions -- or when do folks "take office".


Dan M
East Middlesex

At 5:36 PM -0400 9/3/02, John Pepi wrote:
>I voted No on concensus because I was reading the original and not the
>amended proposal. If there is reason to refigure the vote or repropose -
>I will vote yes. That would change the outcome on the 2/3 rule. Still, I
>don't really believe this accomplishes anything significant in the max.
>3 weeks for which it is in effect.
>
>John P.


At 1:35 PM -0400 9/2/02, David Agnew wrote:
>I believe the measure failed to pass.
>
>Quoting from the rules,
>"In the case of one or more "NO Consent" responses, then for the 
>proposal to pass at least 2/3 of Seated State Committee Delegates, 
>rounded down, plus 1, must have responded with a "YES Consent"."
>
>votes required = 17 members x 2/3 = 11.33 (round down) = 11 + 1 = 12
>votes received = 11
>
>
>
>At 12:24 PM -0400 9/2/02, jackswin wrote:
>>  NEW TITLE: StateCom, AdCom, Fundraising,
>>                 Accountability, Oversight, Respect
>>
>>             Remainder of discussion & amendment period:
>>             [Aug/23,  2:32pm   -->   Aug/25,  10:12pm]
>>
>>-------------Sunday, August 25, 2002 10:12 PM--------------
>>
>>  [CONSENSUS CALL]
>>
>>Betty Zisk          Y
>>Daniel Melnechuk    Y
>>David Agnew               N
>>Larry Klay          Y
>>Lin Pierson         Y
>>Tony Lorenzen       Y
>>Karen Kraut         Y
>>Jonathan Leavitt    Y
>>Mark Laserte        Y
>>Jack Swindlehurst         N
>>Andy Griswold       Y
>>Laurissa Swaine     Y
>>Jessica Almy                   A
>>Gretchen Klotz      Y
>>John Pepi                 N
>>
>>-------------Sunday, September 1, 2002 10:12 PM--------------
>>proposal version#2 passes by majority vote
>
>--
>_____________
>David Agnew
>Barnstable County delegate to the State Committee
>of the Massachusetts Green Party
>http://www.gogreens.com