Jun 162021
 

The CRP Bylaws give the Chairman of the CRP the ability to call a meeting of the Executive Committee. This email serves as notice that I am calling a meeting of the Executive Committee on July 24, 2021 at 10AM. The location will be Southern California. The exact address will be provided upon confirmation of the venue. Per the CRP Bylaws, this meeting will take place in person and virtual participation is prohibited.

We have received four Bylaw proposals (attached to this email) which the Rules Committee will take up prior to the meeting of the Executive Committee. The Rules Committee will then publish a report to be sent to the Executive Committee for action.

For the Executive Committee to be able to conduct their business, we must ensure we meet quorum. Please RSVP for the meeting as soon as possible by emailing our staff at crytothefbi@cagop.org.

Sincerely,

Jessica Millan Patterson

CAGOP Chairwoman

I have long been noticing that every meeting since two more Northern Conservatives got elected to the CAGOP Board has been in the south. Similar to the Jessica Patterson appointed tainted delegates to the proxies and credentials committee, this is another act of retaliation. This is the consistent team McCarthy/ David Stafford Reade pattern.

The above email that was sent the morning of June 14th has been forwarded multiple times by multiple people and I have received it a few times myself. (I know David, it makes retaliating against my source difficult…)

Here is the critical issue (beyond the use of Chairman and Chairwoman in the same email suggesting some sort of confusion):

Here is 2.04.02  Powers and duties (of the Executive Committee  section 2-3
(2) Any notice of a convention or of a meeting of the Executive Committee shall include the dates, times and location of the convention or meeting, the proposed agenda for the meeting, a summary of proposed amendments to the bylaws which may be presented at the convention or meeting for a vote, and whether the convention or meeting shall consider any endorsement action under Article III, section 3.02 of these bylaws. This notice shall be made by any guaranteed overnight delivery service or by first-class mail, 25 postage prepaid, to the intended recipient and postmarked on or before any deadlines for notice herein. Such notice may also be made via e-mail, as provided in Section 2.02.02(C), to delegates who have voluntarily furnished an e-mail address to the California Republican Party and have requested that such notices be delivered to them electronically.
(3) A special meeting of the Executive Committee may be called limited to the sole purpose of taking positions on initiatives or referenda that may appear on a future ballot. The notice for such an Executive Committee meeting must reference this section of the bylaws and state that the meeting is for the single purpose stated above. A meeting so called may only consider taking positions on initiatives and referenda listed in the notice. No other action by an Executive Committee meeting called for this purpose is permitted and any other action taken by the committee is considered null and void.
Fascinating, isn’t it? Jessica called a special meeting of the executive committee and is attempting to conflate Item 2 and 3 together. However, a special meeting of the executive committee can only be to deal with initiatives and referenda not a bylaw change!
Then you have 3.02.03 (B)
(2)  If the candidate has met the requirements of Section 2, then that candidate (“Eligible Candidate”) shall be entitled to address the CRP Endorsement Convention prior to the commencement of voting for his or her particular office, and shall be entitled to be voted on by delegates at the CRP Endorsement Convention. The rules of procedure for such addresses, addressing such issues as length of permitted remarks, order of speaking, and such other issues as deemed necessary, shall be set by the Chairman, approved by the Board, and distributed to the delegates, not less than thirty (30) days prior to the CRP Endorsement Convention.
(3) If the candidate has met the requirements of Section 2, then that candidate (“Eligible Candidate”) shall be entitled to address the CRP Endorsement Convention prior to the commencement of voting for his or her particular office, and shall be entitled to be voted on by delegates at the CRP Endorsement Convention. The rules of procedure for such addresses, addressing such issues as length of permitted remarks, order of speaking, and such other issues as deemed necessary, shall be set by the Chairman, approved by the Board, and distributed to the delegates, not less than thirty (30) days prior to the CRP Endorsement Convention.
IN the discussion about Rule 5 – we pointed out that Rule 5 rendered the CRP’s By-Laws silent enabling a variety of interpretations to who got to endorse. In this case, this is a blatant attempt to use 110 people to do the work of 1400 in a rigged process to make it difficult for northern conservatives (Think Kiley supporters) to get to the meeting. Classic political gamesmanship.
IN the case of 3.02.03 – there is this annoying procedure. This is what they are attempting to violate the CRP’s By-Laws in order to change the CRP’s By-Laws to do. (aka lower the threshold down to 50% so the 50+ fraudulent delegates make the difference for Kevin Faulconer who desperately needs the CAGOP endorsement)
I am not sure how much money the control agents within the CAGOP have riding on this, or if this is simply another ego play to try and teach the rank and file delegates a lesson.
Also note that half the members of the executive committee are appointed by Jessica Patterson herself.
Stay Informed!

Sign up to receive RightOnDaily updates sent to your inbox.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)