I am sorry for this follow-up. Evidently what ever caused the original message also deleted my address files. Hopefully, this will help me reconstruct the files. Mike Fratto Payne Phalen Please help those who don't get enough to eat. http://oyh.org http://hungersolutions.org The future depends more on what we do between now and then Than what we did in the past.
I did not send the message below. I apologize for the intrusion in your e-mail in box. Mike Fratto Payne Phalen Please help those who don't get enough to eat. http://oyh.org http://hungersolutions.org The future depends more on what we do between now and then Than what we did in the past.
Dear friend, I would like to introduce a good company who trades mainly in electornic products. Now the company is under sales promotion,all the products are sold nearly at its cost. They provide the best service to customers,they provide you with original products of good quality,and what is more,the price is a surprising happiness to you! It is realy a good chance for shopping.just grasp the opportunity,Now or never! The web address: http://www.cxkeg.com
I agree with Gary. A summary of major changes with, perhaps, an explanation of the purpose of the changes, followed by a copy of the actual document showing strike-outs and additions would be my choice. For member suggested changes we might ask the proponent to provide the same information.
Hi all,
I like the idea of a summary as it is a long document. Maybe a compromise would
be, if after each major part, a summary of the changes to that part could be
inserted.
It looks good up to now.
Gary--- On Thu, 5/15/08, Tim Erickson <<email obscured>> wrote:
From: Tim Erickson <<email obscured>>Subject: Re: [SPED-Team] Changes to the
ConstitutionTo: "Mike Fratto" <<email obscured>>Cc: "St. Paul E-Democracy
Team" <<email obscured>>Date: Thursday, May 15, 2008, 9:43
AMOn May 15, 2008, at 9:39 AM, Mike Fratto wrote:
> It looks okay to me. But I think we need to make sure we include
> strike outs and either underlines or highlights for proposed
> deleted and new language.
I understand.
I was hoping to simply propose to everyone a NEW version of the
constitution with a summary of some of the major changes - BUT, I can
see where it might be better to provide an annotated document showing
all changes (like Charlie and David did).
I just think that the changes are so extensive that this might be
confusing to folks.
Anyone else have any comments on how to present this.
A) Do we list (or highlight) all the detailed changes?
B) Do we present a NEW constitution and by-laws with
summary of key changes that have been made?
Best wishes,
Tim Erickson
Tim Erickson
Hamline Midway
Info about Tim Erickson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/timerickson
This topic's messages may be viewed at:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4nBXqdwXgF7n25Ngw7KGi2
"Any Voting member present at the Annual meeting shall have the right to propose additional amendments to this Constitution." I am uncomfortable with this provision which allows voting members to propose constitutional amendments at the annual meeting. I believe this has the potential to be disruptive of the meeting and could also result in some very bad changes to the constitution. I can foresee situations where someone proposes an amendment and is followed by another and on and on. Many of these amendments would be made up on the spot and not be well thought out. There would also be little time to debate them or think them through by the voting membership. It would be better I think to provide members the right to submit amendments to the Executive Committee within an appropriate time period prior to the meeting. The EC would then distribute those amendments prior to the meeting and have them debated on-line (in the Feedback Forum) and then voted on at the meeting. The EC would also have the right to give its recommendation as to how the membership should vote on any proposed amendment.
Article VIII: Amendments
Section 1: Procedure. This Constitution may be amended by a
vote of 2/3 majority of the voting members present at the Annual Meeting or a
special meeting called for that purpose.
Section 2: Procedure. The Executive Committee may propose
amendments to this Constitution. Voting members may propose amendments to
these proposals or other parts of the Constitution within the time frame
contained in Article VIII, Section 3 Notice. Any amendment proposed by the
voting members will be voted on prior to voting on the Executive Committee
proposal.
Any Voting member present at the Annual meeting shall have the
right to propose additional amendments to this Constitution.
Section 3: Notice. Executive Committee shall publish any
proposed Amendments to this Constitution at least 30 days prior to the Annual
Meeting on the St. Paul Issues Forum and the WIKI page for review. Voting
members of St. Paul E-Democracy then have at least 14 days prior to the Annual
meeting to propose amendments to the amendments.
Mike Fratto
Payne Phalen
Please help those who don't get enough to eat.
http://oyh.org
http://hungersolutions.org
The future depends more on
what we do between now and then
Than what we did in the past.
You guys are great!! You've inspired me to update the sign-up form template we've used with great success in the past. Feel free to adapt to St. Paul specifically: http://e-democracy.org/if/issuesforumsignupform.doc Or print this PDF and write "St. Paul" in the top: http://e-democracy.org/if/issuesforumsignupform.pdf (PDFs work best for remote volunteer printing based compare to Word Docs) And blog post with some tips: http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/138 Steven Clift E-Democracy.Org Gary Thompson wrote: > I have a hand-full of volunteers to pass out SPIF and SPIF Outreach info at > Tuesday's caucuses. But, to date, only Mike, Rosa Maria(with Chip), and possibly > Kelly have offered their willingness to do this from the 2 committees. I believe > Tim and Chuck, who are involved in putting the info together are also going to do
I have a hand-full of volunteers to pass out SPIF and SPIF Outreach info at Tuesday's caucuses. But, to date, only Mike, Rosa Maria(with Chip), and possibly Kelly have offered their willingness to do this from the 2 committees. I believe Tim and Chuck, who are involved in putting the info together are also going to do this. Please, do we have anymore of you who are willing to step forward?
I vote yes. Kelly
I vote yes ...? Dave Hutcheson
I vote YES.
I vote yes
Tim Erickson <<email obscured>> wrote: FYI, before I go to bed tonight. A
recap of the vote, so far:
Motion made by: Gary Thompson
Seconded by: David Hutcheson
Votes For:
Gary Thompson
Charlie Swope
Tim Erickson
Votes Against:
Not Yet Voted:
Rosa Maria de la Cueva Peterson
Bob Spaulding
Mike Fratto
Grace Kelly
David Hutcheson
Thanks,
Tim Erickson
Chair of St Paul E-Democracy Executive Committee
Tim Erickson
Hamline Midway
Info about Tim Erickson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/timerickson
This topic's messages may be viewed at:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/2V5O9fyXAqmWZc4xJd3goW
FYI, before I go to bed tonight. A recap of the vote, so far:
Motion made by: Gary Thompson
Seconded by: David Hutcheson
Votes For:
Gary Thompson
Charlie Swope
Tim Erickson
Votes Against:
Not Yet Voted:
Rosa Maria de la Cueva Peterson
Bob Spaulding
Mike Fratto
Grace Kelly
David Hutcheson
Thanks,
Tim Erickson
Chair of St Paul E-Democracy Executive Committee
Thanks for going ahead with the vote. I vote YES (AYE). Tim Sent from my Blackberry - so I must be on the road.
I also vote Aye. Gary Thompson
I vote Aye on the motion. Charlie
"The St. Paul E-Democracy Executive committee authorize the chair of the committee to spend up to $850 on a laptop computer, external hard disk, and necessary software." I second this motion. Dave Hutcheson
T move that; "The St. Paul E-Democracy Executive committee authorize the chair of the committee to spend up to $850 on a laptop computer, external hard disk, and necessary software." Gary Thompson