PROPOSAL NUMBER: 008-04

PROPOSAL SUBJECT: Add Kelly as a delegate to the 2004 GPUS National Convention

PRESENTER: Lanny Kness, GPCO Co-Chair

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:
At the April 20th DGP meeting, Kelly put his name forward to be a delegate to the National Convention. Because of an oversight, his name was not inlcuded on the list of delegates ratified at the State Meeting. Kelly is an active member of the DGP, and was one of the DGP's delegates to the State Nominating Convention. He has committed to travel at his own expense to the National Convention.

At the April 24th State Meeting, the Green party membership approved via consensus a list of 11 delegates and alternates. Since then, Tanya Ishikawa, selected at the State meeting as an alternate, has declined the selection. This leaves 10 delegates and alternates.

In the week of April 26th, Kness put forward via the GPCO Discuss List, a query asking for anyone, who is not a currently a delegate/alternate, but wishing to be one, to contact him. As of 5/3/2004, no one has responded.

The GPUS requires delegate certification to be submitted by May 10th, 2004.

FULL PROPOSAL:
This proposal requests the Council add Tom Kelly of the Denver Green Party (DGP) to the list of authorized delegates for the 2004 GPUS National Convention.

JUSTIFICATION/GOALS:
We currently have 10 total delegates and alternates. Adding Kelly as a delegate, and if limited proxy voting is allowed, the GPCO would be represented by its allowed 22 votes (11 votes and 11 proxies).

Kelly made known his desire to be a delegate prior to the State Meeting.

Review of Statues / Bylaws / Procedures:
----------------------------------------

Colorado Statue 1-4-1301 (1-c) empowers Minor Political parties to select delegates for assemblies and conventions per their bylaws, but the GPCO Bylaws do not cover how these delegates are selected. The GPCO Bylaws do thru 4.2.3 cede to the Council the right to "decide on issues needing expedient attention between state meetings". Also, the GPCO "Procedures and Guidelines" do not address the selection of delegates.

Therefore, because of the deadline of May 10th, 2004 ("needing expedient attention") the Council can address this proposal.

PROS AND CONS:
Benefits: Minimally, the GPCO will be better represented at the 2004 GPUS Naitonal Convention. If proxy voting occurs, the GPCO will be fully represented.

Drawbacks: None.

Alternatives to the proposal (including taking no action):
The alternative is to submit the original list of delegates generated at the State Meeting to the GPUS.