[Procedures] Tinkering with the List of Proposals for Nov. Meeting -Being Present

[Gil Obler]

Anthony -

You are correct about what we want to do (look at all proposals).

The correct process for this is to HAND THEM OFF to other sponsors.

This is part of why several sponsors are needed, and why vetting by
committee is a good idea.

There are NO Lorenzen proposals. There are only Lorenzen, et al
proposals.

Another example was Jim Bosman withdrawing his email proposal at the
Sept statecom meeting. This was inappropriate because he did not first
consult with the other sponsors. I plan to argue (and have with him)
that he needs to unwithdraw it.

Similarly, when friendly amendments are introduced, it is inappropriate
for one person to accept or reject them, the sponsors present should
first confer.

We REALLY need to get away from the idea of one person controlling a
piece of legislation.

               Gil Obler
               Fundraising Director, Mystic River Green-Rainbow Action
               Fundraising Director, Green-Rainbow Party
               Middlesex Delegate, Green-Rainbow Party State Committee

                                             
======================================================================
email                                             greengil at comcast.net
home phone                                               (617)623-0582
cell phone                                               (617)388-5445
======================================================================


-----Original Message-----
From: procedures-admin at green-rainbow.org
[mailto:procedures-admin at green-rainbow.org] On Behalf Of Anthony
Lorenzen
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 5:50 AM
To: procedures at green-rainbow.org
Subject: Re: [Procedures] Tinkering with the List of Proposals for Nov.
Meeting -Being Present


Folks, 
I think it important to consider all proposals left over from the
covention and the sept. meeting even if the sponsors are not present. I
have a few proposals in the list and I can not attend the meeting nov.
16 because I have a PRIOR committment for my JOB in Los Angeles.  I
don't think all the work i put into these proposals should go to waste
because we as a body couldn't get our work done in June and then again
in Sept (When I did attend).  I am espeically concerned about my
proposal regarding the way we nominate and elect party ad-com. We MUST
decide on this at NOV meeting because JAN will be TOO LATE. We need a
decision on how this will work because materials need to be prepared for
winter newsletter on the convention and they need to include this
process.

PEACE
Tony
Jim Bosman <jamesbosman at yahoo.com> wrote:
(Note: Dan's email got hung up in our mailman system
due to size, so in case you haven't seen it, you may
find it futher back chronologically in your inbox
though it was just released this morning.)

Dan Melnechuk Wrote: <using the ranking from the last statecom. Well we
have
two levels of ranking and i would like to strongly
suggest that we use both of the rankings.>>

[[For the record, the petition does in fact state that
we will use the two rounds - Expedited and Regular.]]

<unclear exactly as to which proposals would and would
not be on the agenda.>>

[[True.]]

<with the error on inclusiveness.>>

[[Though it may be obvious to many of us that some of
the items are no longer relevant 'coz their time has
passed or it was already approved policy (proposal E
Making Monthly adcom member reports manditory) 
I feel we need explicit (written/email) consent of the
original sponsors in order to remove them from the
list ahead of the meeting. 

If we don't do this ahead of the meeting, I think we
ought to keep the list as-is, and then at the meeting,
before we start in on the expedited proposals, we
double-check to make sure all proposals' sponsors' are
present, and ask at that time if any of the sponsors
would like to retract their proposals.]]

Regardless of how we deal with removing proposals from
consideration, it would be procedurally good to make
sure all the proposals' sponsors are present, and
re-check that there are enough sponsors for each
proposal before we get into the expedited proposals
round.

[[Jim Bosman]]




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Procedures mailing list
Procedures at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/procedures


PEACE,
Tony Lorenzen
Co-chair, Nashua River Green-Rainbow
Mass Green-Rainbow Party
State Committe Rep. / Worcester County
9785341373
greentbow at yahoo.com


Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search