[statecom] FINAL DRAFT MINUTES of 6-29-08 GRP State Committee Meeting

[Eli Beckerman]

Thanks Larry for your diligence.

The proposal to accept new members to State Committee was also conditional
upon their continued willingness to serve... which we had no way to confirm
at the moment, with the proposed new members absent.

Jim, I'm not sure what you mean they were just admitted
to StateCom with no delay in their ability to vote...

The decision was to appoint them starting July 15 - a clear indication that
their participation on all matters of GRP decision-making was welcome,
except a revisiting of the decisions made regarding the delegate selection
plan.
This date is included in the minutes (though the second conditionality
doesn't seem to be).

Against my own desires, I voted for your proposal (well advocated by Nat) to
seek a consensus decision that would satisfy the membership of this party. I
would not have been able to vote that way in the presence of a partisan
dispute (as opposed to a consensus-seeking evaluation of people's concerns).


On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Jim Hammerman <jim_hammerman at terc.edu>
wrote:

> Hi Larry,
> There are a couple of important misrepresentations in the notes. I want to
> clarify that the vote about the new state committee members was whether to
> admit them that day. There wasn't a question on the table about whether
> they would be able to vote or not, just a clear up or down do we admit
> them to StateCom including voting rights, or not admit them at all. The
> fact that Nat proposed a "compromise" that would admit them at the end of
> the meeting makes clear that these two things went together.
>
> In addition, after lunch, Dan was standing with me, Grace, Gary, Jamie,
> Mike and the new StateCom candidates and walked out with us on principle,
> not for pragmatic reasons of needing a ride. If that were the only reason
> he was leaving, I'm sure someone else could and would have offered him a
> ride home.
>
> I also see that the 6 new StateCom members were just admitted to StateCom,
> with no delay in their ability to participate in votes. Is that correct?
> Why was something different communicated on the StateCom list?
>
> There may be other problems with these notes, but these seem important to
> clarify if they're being sent to the national as a partial explanation of
> what happened on June 29.
>
> Best, Jim
>
>
> statecom-bounces at green-rainbow.org wrote on 07/04/2008 01:40:10 PM:
>
> >
> > StateCom,
> >
> > These are the final draft minutes of the 6-29-08 StateCom meeting in
> Fall
> > River.  I deleted explanatory notes and put them in a separate document.
> >
> > Please print these and ignore any previously sent minutes.
> >
> > Larry Ely, GRP Secretary[attachment "final draft minutes GRP
> > StateCom 6-29-08 Fall River.rtf" deleted by Jim Hammerman/ERC/TERC]
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>