1/19/12 7:00 PM at Alexander’s

 Proxies:  Stan Lockhart ( for Donald Garlitz), Peggy Burdette (for Linda Housekeeper), Raphael Millet (for Chad Bunn)

Chair: David Acheson
Secretary:  Absent

Called to order at 7:15 pm

The previous meeting being held in Executive Session, no minutes were approved

The agenda was adopted on a motion by Chris Shelley.

Committee Reports

C&BC – Lisa Shepherd
Norm Jackson resigned from the committee.  Dave Duncan was appointed by the Chair.
Chris Shelley moved to approve Dave Duncan as a committee member.  Adopted 9 to  4

Audit Committee – Chris Shelley
The committee is putting the audit out to bid.

 Officer Reports

Chair report
Cory  Maloy reported on the  Dist 57 Election.  Craig frank was elected by 69% of the vote (62 votes).  89 delegates were credentialed.

The report to the Central Committee regarding his [sic, Jeremy's] removal from office by the Executive Committee was reviewed and adopted by unanimous consent.  The report is that the Julie Blaney complaint was upheld in Executive Session, and the EC recommends removal from office as Secretary and as a member of the State Central Committee.

Lisa Shepherd moved that Kirby Glad be elected Secretary Pro Tem for the meeting, which was adopted.

New Business

 District Caucus Rules
Lisa moved to adopt the 2 page district rules (attached)

Stan moved to Amend the title to “Suggested District Caucus Election rules 2012’  and to add to the bottom:

“Changes from the italicized section of these rules is not permitted.  Other Variations from these suggested rules approved by the majority vote of the District Caucus shall not be grounds for challenges of the election results.’

The Amendment was adopted 11 to 4
The amended suggested rules were adopted by unanimous vote.

Lincoln Day Dinner
Kirby reported we have raised about $12,000 by sales of tables and some tickets
Tickets will be on sale at the CC meeting at the discount rate

Precinct Caucus night – March 15
The insurance certificate from the state party is now available.
Kirby discussed a plan to have precinct secretaries enter the caucus information within 24 hours on a website.

CC Meeting Proposed Agenda
The proposed agenda was discussed, but a vote was delayed pending items to be presented later.

Other Business from the Floor

Barbara Petty moved that “this body recognize the invalidity of the December 10^th meeting.”

Adopted by 10 to 5 by a roll call vote.

Voting Yes: Scott Bell, Jeff Alexander, Jacki Wilson, DeLaina Tonks, Becky Pirente, Barbara Petty, Mathew Thompson, Marian Monahan, Stan Lockhart, Raphael Millet

Voting No:  Wendy Woodfield, Chris Shelley, Lisa Shepherd, David Duncan, Peggy Burdette

Abstain: David Acheson, Cory Maloy

It was moved by Barbara Petty that we nullify the adoption of B114-A because it is in conflict with RNC rule 15,c 2.  There was a Point of Order from Dave Duncan on whether the EC has the authority to nullify actions of the Central Committee.  The Chair ruled the motion out of order.

Stan Lockhart moved that “we forward the action of the Executive Committee to the Central Committee as a point of order relative to the December 10^th meeting for their consideration.”

Adopted 11 to 5

It was moved that we place this on the agenda after Jackie’s Precinct Caucus training

Approved

Stan Lockhart moved the each side of the validity issue be given 5 minutes on the Central Committee agenda to makes a presentation on the issue, and debate be limited to 3 speakers on each side for 2 minutes each.

Adopted

David Duncan moved “We recognize that the county party is subject to the state and national party rules.”

Adopted by unanimous vote

Adjourned at 9:50 pm

Submitted by Kirby Glad

The meeting ran very smoothly, with a pre-published agenda (in accordance with Special Meeting rules), a well-run credentialing process, presentations from both the For and Against sides, a healthy amount of respectful debate, and a transparent balloting process.

Central Committee members line up in the aisle to vote on Bylaw 114A

To view the text of the bylaw proposals, visit the Constitution and Bylaws Committee website.

At issue was the allocation process for State Delegates.  There were two bylaw proposals to be considered on this topic:  B114-A would have allocated all state delegate seats to the precincts (eliminating the 78 ex officio state delegate seats).  If B114-A failed, B114-B would be taken up, which would allow the committee to choose which state delegate seats to allocate to the precincts and which to keep as ex officio.

The committee first voted on B114-A, which passed by a vote of 144 for, 130 against.  The effect of this vote will be to allocate all state delegates to the precincts.  (Because this bylaw passed it nullified any need to address B114-B, so B114-B was not taken up).

The effect of this vote is that those ex officios currently listed in Bylaw 1 will no longer have an automatic State Delegate seat:

- Executive Committee Members
- Legislative District Vice-Chairs and Education Officers
- Federal Republican Elected Officials residing in Utah County
- State Republican Elected Officials residing in Utah County
- County Republican Elected Officials
- State Party Officers residing in Utah County
- The most recently released County Party Chair

All of these still retain their ex officio County Delegate seat, as well as their existing membership on the Party’s governing committees.  Precinct Chairs’  State Delegate status is not affected by this vote.

Ballot counting for B114A took place on the stage in front of the Central Committee.

Also voted on at this meeting was Bylaw 140, which outlined notification and filing procedures for Legislative District Officer elections.  An amendment was made and approved by the body to allow nominations from the floor if fewer than 2 candidates have filed for a position.  The bylaw proposal passed as amended.

The committee also raised $1,005.00 in donations from members.  The Party now has a mobile card reading device allowing more people to donate at meetings.

This meeting has been called by Central Committee members in accordance with Bylaw 8.C for the purpose of addressing bylaw proposals not finished at our 11/17/11 meeting.  Please see the proposed agenda below.

We hope you will make every effort to attend so the Party may address these time-sensitive business items. We look forward to seeing you there.

Sincerely,

Dave Duncan
(on behalf of David Acheson Utah County Republican Party Chair)

————————————————————————

UCRP Central Committee Meeting Agenda 

Special Meeting of the Central Committee, called by Central Committee Members in accordance with UCRP Bylaw 8.C, for the purpose of addressing bylaw proposals not finished at our 11/17/11 meeting.

Saturday, December 10, 2011, 9:00 a.m.

Dixon Middle School (NE entrance)
750 West 200 North
Provo, Utah 84601

Credentialing will open at 8:15 a.m. (sign in, name badges, ballots and wrist bands).  Please bring photo ID.  Balloting will be under the direction of the Party Chair and the Audit Committee.

1. Call to Order
2. Invocation
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Credentials Report
6. Constitution and Bylaws business:

a.  B-114-A (Bylaw 1 – State Delegate Allocation):

• Presentations are limited to 20 minutes (10 minutes FOR and 10 minutes AGAINST), followed by up to 10 minutes for questions and answers.
• Debate is limited to 30 minutes (90 seconds per speaker), alternating between FOR and AGAINST.
• Vote.

b.   B-140 (Legislative District Elections – Candidate Filing and Notification Procedures):

• Debate is limited to 15 minutes (90 seconds per speaker), alternating between FOR and AGAINST.
• Vote.

c.  B-114-B (Bylaw 1 – State Delegate Allocation by Office):

• Debate is limited to 30 minutes (90 seconds per speaker), alternating between FOR and AGAINST.
• Vote.

7. Adjourn

End of Notice, Beginning of Explanation
PS Q: Why is Dave Duncan sending this, instead of David Acheson, or Bonnie Morrow (the new party vice chair, as of November 17th)?
A: Good question. If you are wondering, feel free to read on. If not feel free to stop. The duly submitted petition, authorized by Bylaw 8.C was submitted days ago on November 29th. Chairman Acheson is tied up with the Novell/Microsoft trial and has had limited communication ability. He authorized Kirby and me (taking us up on previous pledges we made to help in any way we can) to work with Vice Chair Bonnie Morrow on this, but we have not been able to contact her over the last few days. Today is the last day this notice can go out, so I am forced to proceed, since it is called by a petition I helped initiate. A post card noticing the meeting has already been sent out. Some of you may have already received it.

Feel free to reply to this email with concerns or complaints. I’m happy to respond as best I can, starting tomorrow. I have a plane to catch this evening.

Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 21:33:26 -0700
Subject: Bonnie can you work with Kirby and Dave to get an email out
From: David Acheson <dacheson@gmail.com>
To: Bonnie Morrow <bonnie4provo@gmail.com>, Dave Duncan <dave@duncans.org>,
	Kirby Glad <kirbyglad@comcast.net>

under your signature, announcing the meeting on Dec 10.

Dave and Kirby can direct you.

--
David Acheson

___________________________

Dear Central Committee member,

A Special Meeting has been called according to our bylaws by members of the Central Committee to address the unfinished C & B items that we were on the agenda for the November 17th meeting at Orem High School.

This meeting will be held on Saturday, December 10, 2011 at Dixon Middle School, 750 W 200 N, Provo, at 9:00 a.m.  Enter the school at the NE entrance by the auditorium.

New C&B Website
The C & B items are the same; however, for your ease the items are being once again being forwarded to you.  You may also find this information available on the new Constitution & Bylaws Committee website.

http://www.utahcountygopcbc.info/  (This page is still under construction, but don’t let that scare you. ; )  )

Hover over the menu item “Constitution and Bylaws Amendment Proposals” in the black strip.
You will notice a side drop menu appear with “For Central Committee Vote”.

Here are the direct links to the items.

B114A http://www.utahcountygopcbc.info/?page_id=143
B114B http://www.utahcountygopcbc.info/?page_id=167
B140  http://www.utahcountygopcbc.info/?page_id=215

If you are interested in reading about a called “Special Meeting”, you may find the rules in Robert’s Rules of Order (RONR) 11th Edition, Page 91, line 28. It’s only eight paragraphs.

If you have any questions, I may be reached at 801-787-8211.

Lisa Shepherd
UCRP CBC Chair
801-787-8211

(The original information posted in this article was moved HERE).

Members line up to discuss a bylaw change that would allocate all delegates to the precincts (eliminating ex officio/automatic delegates)

The Utah County Republican Party Central Committee met on Thursday at Orem High School to conduct business.

A credentialing snafu caused a lot of problems.  In a departure from the norm, there were no credentialing name tags, wrist bands, etc., to designate who was eligible to vote.  Additionally, many of the members’ names were absent from the credentials list, and some nonmembers names were on the list.  This caused nearly an hour’s debate over whether the body could/should proceed with voting business.  Ultimately the body voted to move forward with business.

• It was announced that Vice Chair Adrielle Herring is resigning, so that she can work on a campaign (in accordance with Bylaw 5, C, and 9, A).

• Bonnie Morrow was presented and approved as the new UCRP Vice Chair.

• Lisa Shepherd and Kristen Chevrier were approved as the Constitution and Bylaws Committee Chair and Vice Chair, respectively.

• The C&B Committee announced it is in the process of creating a website to discuss/track C&B proposals, and they have launched a Facebook page.

The following Bylaw proposals were addressed:

• B-133 Update to current (11th) edition of Robert’s Rules — changes our bylaws to specify that we will now use RONR 11 rather than 10.  Passed.
• B-114A Bylaw 1 – State Delegate Allocation — would amend Bylaw 1 to allocate all state delegate seats (including ex officio/automatic delegate seats) to the precinct caucuses — a very hot topic that received a lot of good discussion, but just as we were about to vote, the time-certain (9:00 p.m.) adjournment time was upon us.  A motion to extend the meeting to finish this proposal and B-114B failed by only 5 votes (of the 2/3 required).  Consequently, no vote was taken on this bylaw amendment.

Adjourned.

The boundaries of several precincts were affected by redistricting, and changes to voting precincts are the authority of the county clerk.  Any new precinct boundaries are slated to be available in February.

Future releases will include precinct boundaries and political caucus information.

Provo

Orem

Early voting runs from Tuesday, October 25 through Friday, November 4, 2011.

In PROVO, early voting for the 2011 Provo City General Election will be held Tuesday, October 25 through Friday, October 28 and Monday, October 31 through Friday, November 4, 2011, from 1:00 p.m to 5:00 p.m. in the Provo City Recorder’s Office, 351 West Center Street, Provo, Utah.  Please bring photo I.D. and proof of residency.

In OREM, early voting will be held Tuesday, October 25 through Friday, November 4, 2011, at the Orem City Offices at 56 North State.  Hours are Monday through Thursday, from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and Fridays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.  All voters are required to provide “valid voter identification” before they will be allowed to vote.

In VINEYARD we did not locate early voting information, but your town newsletter has some good election and candidate information.

General Election voting will be Tuesday, November 8, from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.

Be sure to get out and vote, and remind your neighbors to vote, too!

• Finance Report: The Treasurer received authorization to create a merchant account to enable us to collect donations via credit card.

• Education Tools for Caucus are being developed and plans are to make them available online.

• Leg District Elections will be held January 7th after Central Committee Meeting.

Here are some of the meeting highlights:

The following individuals were elected the Constitution and Bylaws Committee, where they will serve for 2 years:

Diane Christensen (154 votes)
Kristen Chevrier (139)
Lisa Shepherd (130)
Kirby Glad (129)
Dan Forward (124)
Paul Baltes (124)
Norman Jackson (121)

The following were elected to the Audit Committee by acclamation, since the number of candidates exactly matched the number of required committee members:

Chris Shelley
Dann Hone
Clayton Holbrook
Dave Duncan
Peggy Burdett

The crowd was pleased to hear short remarks from Speaker Lockhart, Senator Bramble, and Lt Governor Bell, as well as brief reports from some of our elected Party officers.  Audit Chair Dann Hone read the yearly financial review report from the accounting firm Gibert and Stewart, which reported that they were unaware of any material modifications necessary with the Party’s cash method of accounting.

The Committee voted on 4 Constitution and Bylaws amendments, as follows:

• B-125-B Discharge Proposal from Committee – Helps move a C&B change proposal out from the C&B committee if *50* Central Committee members sign a discharge petition.  PASSED.
• B-134 Delegate Vacancy Replacements Appointed by Precinct Chair – Provides that only a Precinct Chair may nominate a delegate if a replacement is necessary.  PASSED.
• B-128-B SCC elected at SCC Caucus – Would create State Central Committee districts and elect 1 State Central Committee member per district, at the County Convention.  FAILED.
• B-128-A State Central Committee Elected by Senate Caucus – Would apportion State Central Committee seats among the county’s senate districts, with SCC members being elected in the various senate districts, at county convention (to eliminate the ‘beauty pageant’ walk now used to help elect SCC members).   PASSED 88 to 85.

Delegate allocation panel discussion 9/20/11

Panelists:

Against having ex officio delegates – Lisa Shepherd, Dave Duncan

For having ex officio delegates -  Don Garlitz, Wendi Baggaly, Mike Terry

CON – opening statements:

• Video – Tim Bridgewater speaking against the practice of ex officio delegates – transparency, should be neighbors representing neighbors, party leaders should be able to get support and be elected in precincts.
• Letter from Jason Chaffetz, Howard Stephenson, Tom Hatch, and Tim Brigewater, supporting the removal of the “automatic and appointed delegate” from the Utah republican Party system.
• Dave – Is the practice allowed, and if so is it a good idea?  If it was a good idea, would it be allowed by the rules as they currently stand?
• Lisa – It’s not just a vocal minority speaking out; in 2006 vote sustaining the practice failed @ state convention.

PRO – opening statements:

• Mike Terry – Auto delegates are not “unelected”; elected either by grass roots or by others elected by the grassroots.  Rules clearly allow ex officios.  Prior to having auto dels things not working well; lacking unity.
• Don Garlitz – A faction of people argue the state party const doesn’t allow the practice.  More than one way of interpreting laws and rules and knowing what they mean.  Reps don’t have to be elected by the most grass roots body to be a rep.  Founding fathers didn’t think it was a bad idea to have representatives electing representatives.

Questions:

1)  What does the state Party constitution say about ex officio delegates?

PRO - Wendi – “It’s easy to see the same thing in 2 different lights.”  Quoted State Party Const Article XII; says it means ‘distributed fairly’ through Relative Republican Strength.  Thinks county can make a formula for distributing not at the precinct level.

Pro – Dave – Robert’s Rules of Order, 571, interpretive principles of bylaws – express mention of one is exclusion of others.  It’s the only allocation mentioned, excluding any others.  Underfill of delegates can be filled per section XII.

Lisa – “The specific outweighs general, and it’s very specific.”  Appointed people are not elected.  Weber Co got rid of autos; they were against getting rid of it but are glad they did; feel they have more participation.

Rebuttal  - Mike – RONR only for meetings, not general;  Weber and Wa are the only 2 counties w/out auto dels.

2)  State the other side’s position w/out using the words ‘but’, ‘however’, or ‘on the other hand’:

Lisa - We should reward volunteers w/delegate seat; no time to sit in caucus.  “I deserve it; I work hard; this is my pay”.  Elected officials crucial part of the Party; grassroots people not as smart.

Don Garlitz – Our state party docs prohibit the practice.  Even if it were allowed we shouldn’t do it; should be elected at the precinct level.

3)  Does the ex officio delegate degrade grass roots organization and if so, how?

• Dave – yes; the whole purpose of a delegate is precinct representation.  Fosters grass roots nature by representing neighbors to candidates, and candidates communicating w/delegates.  Shouldn’t take the voice from them.
• Lisa – a GOP principle is local control; how much more local can you get than in your precinct?  Must live in precinct and be registered GOP to vote in precinct, why turn that privilege over to another body — when general voter (GOP, unaffil, Dems) votes for elected officials they are also voting for a delegate.

• Don – Thinks Chaffetz and Bridgewater are wrong on this issue; it doesn’t degrade party.  It didn’t offend founding fathers when they arranged for senators to be elected by state legislatures.
• Wendi – we’re somewhere in the middle of Party Bosses and direct primary – in a just right type spot.  Delegates hold candidates accountable.  Why is it bad to have 10% of the delegates be those who have been in the party “for a very long time and have a lot of experience”? They can weed out candidates/delegates who “really are just spouting nonsense”.

• Lisa – elected officials don’t want to offend colleagues and constituents so sometimes they don’t vote on delegate issues. The one vote phenomenon – whether or not a race goes to a primary is decided by 1 vote and happens often; candidates (who are delegates) running a campaign can’t vet other candidates as well as precinct delegate.

4)  We all have the same goal – to advance party platform.  How do ex officios help or hinder advancing that goal?

• Wendi – SLC didn’t allow precinct chairs to auto serve as delegates when she lived there; people wouldn’t run for positions w/out delegate spots.  It is human nature that we want to be involved and that we want to have a vote in decisions.  “It’s not necessarily a reward; it’s that we want to have our voice heard.”  Possibility of alienating officials if they don’t get to have a voice in the principles and the people who will carry the banner of our party.

• Lisa – Bylaw 2 – precinct chairs not technically ex officios.  Elected officials are so important that they have the ability to get elected in their caucus, whether working the caucus or not.  Local control.  81 voices silenced from precincts in our county – what about those who ran for delegate and lost?  They could maybe have had another delegate spot. “I’d like to ask them, would they agree with our practice?”
• Dave – SLC demographics diff than us; dropping population, more Democratic than here.  Volunteers should want to work for the love of the principles and Party.

• Mike – In caucus, outlines what the PC must do to be a delegate (attend, work etc).  Many delegates run only to elect a candidate at nominating convention, then skip organizing convention.

5)  Describe the underlying principles that drive your position?

• Dave – everyone is protected by the rules in place; respects rule of law; “if they’re bad rules we ought to fix them but we never should just ignore them.”  What’s good for the party and will help us accomplish our principles?  Need people committed to the principles, not the power.  9.5% county, 12.5% state autos does not include PC/VC.
• Lisa – “What allows the most people to be involved?”  wants to allow many to be involved; nothing precludes from holding as many offices as wanted. At last State Convention one delegate spot was reallocated through 3 people and ended up w/2 people taking the same spot.  Constant fluid method, reallocation; not easy method.  “We have to be super careful; these are peoples’ voting rights we’re talking about.”

• Don – 1) strong/effective leadership at all levels; need incentives in precinct or good leaders wouldn’t serve in precinct but would go for “higher” position w/auto del; 2) keeps elected officials close to party and vice versa; 3) can’t ignore drive to work for a reward – best incentive to stay engaged.
• Mike- Leg District officers can’t be in caucuses to get elected. “There’s physically no way they cant’ go to their own caucuses and be elected as a delegate.”
• Wendi – 2 people ran dist 58 caucus @ 3 schools; no one would help because they want to be elected themselves.  Because she was fulfilling her role as LD officer, she didn’t have to worry about herself but could instead serve the others.  It may work in one district but not in all; needs to be practical for all districts.

• Lisa – offered to train how it can be accomplished, to run a caucus and be in your caucus to get elected.

6)  Are all current delegates that are not elected at caucus – are they all the same, or can we do away with some slots but keep others?

• Mike – C&B Committee will have varying degrees for vote by the CC;  CC will be taking a poll about it.  How many/who do you want to be ex officios?
• Don – some delegates currently aren’t elected, such as LD committee members.  There is some “wiggle room” there, but it would make it hard to get help w/out the delegate spot incentive.
• Wendi – committee members are county delegates.  5 appointed SC members are the only state delegates not elected but they are ratified.

• Lisa – respects the voice of the majority; respects decision made by governing body. Past party leaders?  No.  Appointed officers?  ratification is not election.  Elected officials – get elected in precinct.  Party Volunteer officer can help find people to help.
• Dave – state constitution allows replacements of delegate; it’s whether or not you follow the process.  Being elected to one thing doesn’t automatically mean you should be elected to something else on the side.
• Lisa – 9 instances we have violated Precinct Chair-only appointments of replacements.

• Don – Language doesn’t say they have to be elected @ precinct.

Surprise question -

CON TEAM – How would you explain to a party volunteer who’s worked hard why they don’t deserve a delegate spot?

• Lisa – worked full time as Party Secretary  – “I was not the party sec to get a del position; i can go in m precinct and ask them.”  Important to support organization; up to precinct to elect delegates.  If you work so hard, they will probably agree you should be one.
• Dave – Constitution says there’s a way to become a delegate and it’s not by working; work and volunteering is good but that’s it’s not how it works.  Would have relinquished his own delegate slot if it went back to precinct, but it goes to appointed LD committee member.

PRO TEAM – How would you convince a precinct they are better off w/out a delegate slot lost to ex officios?

• Don – probability of reallocating back to precinct is about 1 in 3 to get one of the ex officio slots back in your precinct. “The current practice is not terribly out of balance as it is.”
• Wendi – Delegate spots are based on Relative Republican Strength, so if you want more, work to get more people involved and voting. That’s what will get you more del spots and increase your voice.  Should change the county const that allows Leg Dist Chair to appoint replacements for precinct delegates – shouldn’t be allowed.

• Lisa – PR20 got 2 more dels w/ ex officios living in their precinct, but those spots were taken from other precincts.  Better to keep those voices were RRS is highest.
• Dave – Some precincts have twice as many delegates as they should due to autos.  State Constitution says  – any part of county docs in conflict w/state law or party const are null and void (article VII).

Closing arguments:

• Don – Current practices are legitimate, consistent w/party docs, and effective.  Utah County’s delegation at capitol is considered most conservative as result of our system.  “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”  Reps choosing other reps is reasonable and legitimate and “I think we ought to continue w/the practices the way we have them today.”
• Wendi – 2006 convention; I was there.  Not a lot of education on pro side, but a lot of negative rhetoric on the other side.  When people are confused or uneducated, they tend to vote no; the vote didn’t mean they were against ex officios but that they were confused.  “It’s a good practice; we need to continue it.”
• Mike – SCC standing rule #1 says ex o’s not against const.

• Lisa – Caucus attendees should have direct representation from delegates they elect.
• Dave – we’re taking away delegates from precincts that deserve them. “The system is broke; we need to fix it.”  How many issues are decided by a margin of 10% or less?  What about when that 10% is concentrated in a few districts?  Some have up to 30% additional allocation.  Significant numbers. We have a constitution, we should follow it – article XII, VII, X – outlines how to change const – standing rule is not one of the ways to change the const.