[statecom] revised draft minutes of 6-29-08 SC in Fall River

[Yarden]

Merelice,
Thank you,  for your needed and rapid review, as co-chair of the party  
of the minutes, and it is completely to the point that the clarity  
that you request, be attended to.  I not only concur fully, but  
insist, that what ever the status of a consensus in law, the  
_realities of an intention and a desire_  to welcome and place a group  
of people into the leadership of the party on the part of all of us,  
is very different from the _realities of an intention and a desire_ to  
have that same group participate in arriving at a consensus on any  
matter -- especially one on which it has proven difficult to even  
arrive at consensus on the part of people who have been engaged in  
trying to achieve it for many weeks.

There is no need to argue for this.  It was fully understood and  
implied in the wording of Nat's modification of the proposal to seat  
the people who wished to be seated.
Thank you again.
Elie Yarden
CDLC

In the e-mail following the one to which I am responding, I note the  
importance of the 'Official' minutes in your getting the information  
needed by the Credentials Committee to them now.

I will continue to assert the potential for undermining the  
possibility of consensus all communications to any Committee or  
members of any committee of the GPUS, on the part of any responsible  
member of any of member of the State Committee, or its sub-committees,  
that are not open to scrutiny, when needed, by the GRP, and its  
decision making bodies; and act accordingly in the letter and spirit  
of the 10 KV that generally guide my actions.  Thus, I am deeply  
grateful to you and to Nat, as co-chairs, for your sense of fulfilling  
all such legal, and ethically sound, responsibilities.  Even when it  
might be difficult, for you, it is a sense that I share.
Elie Yarden
delegate NCMA GRP



On Jul 4, 2008, at 10:17 AM, Merelice wrote:

> Hi Larry,
>
> URGENT correction: The consensus of the StateCom meeting was to admit
> the new StateCom members as of July 15. That is what got consensus. We
> cannot change the wording of that consensus, even if it turns out not
> to be allowed by how the bylaws are interpreted. In fact, that July 15
> date is what made consensus possible, since some StateCom members felt
> we should not vote on the admission at all, given that the candidates
> had left the meeting. Also, there was concern about whether they were
> still interested in being appointed.
>
> This last item caught my eye; I have not actually reviewed the rest of
> the minutes.
>
> Merelice
>
> On 7/4/08, Larry Ely <tetrahedrons at crocker.com> wrote:
>> StateCom,
>>
>> Attached are revised draft minutes of our 6-29-08 StateCom meeting  
>> in Fall
>> River.
>>
>> Larry
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> StateCom mailing list
>> StateCom at green-rainbow.org
>> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> StateCom mailing list
> StateCom at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom