Received: by 10.151.32.19 with SMTP id k19mr3685566ybj.5.1276728852398;
        Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: pnb_elections@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.151.33.42 with SMTP id l42ls461757ybj.1.p; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 
	15:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.167.27 with SMTP id p27mr3689328ybe.2.1276728850498;
        Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.167.27 with SMTP id p27mr3689327ybe.2.1276728850475;
        Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <irish...@verizon.net>
Received: from vms173011pub.verizon.net (vms173011pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.11])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id u4si7135729ybe.15.2010.06.16.15.54.10;
        Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:54:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of irish...@verizon.net designates 206.46.173.11 as permitted sender) client-ip=206.46.173.11;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of irish...@verizon.net designates 206.46.173.11 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=irish...@verizon.net
Received: from [192.168.1.46] ([unknown] [71.160.50.73])
 by vms173011.mailsrvcs.net
 (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009))
 with ESMTPA id <0L44000EPQA8A...@vms173011.mailsrvcs.net> for
 pnb_elections@googlegroups.com; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:54:10 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: the nomination period
MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Shawn Casey O'Brien <irish...@verizon.net>
In-reply-to: <p5fi165e7bsen1m5r0jua5n768c48nd4pv@4ax.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:54:08 -0700
Cc: Renee Asteria <n...@pacifica.org>, Melinda Iley-Dohn <iley_d...@yahoo.com>,
 Bill Crosier <k...@crosierbiomed.com>, <pnb_elections@googlegroups.com>,
 Pacifica National Board PNB a <p...@pacifica.org>,
 Ricardo de Anda <rica...@deandalaw.mailstreet.com>,
 kpft electons <les_k...@pacifica.org>, Grace Aaron <graceaa...@ca.rr.com>,
 KPFK LSB <l...@kpfk.org>
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Message-id: <CFBD3C1D-FF1C-4993-A3DA-5D5560459...@verizon.net>
References: <6BD009D5-0F3F-48CE-A0E4-505124A95...@verizon.net>
 <476398.56134...@web65410.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
 <AANLkTimdydYjbyTJoZ4xZrL7B_g0XJiWnNuRw5Mqs...@mail.gmail.com>
 <2524D1F8-4A63-4F89-B092-3C644B238...@verizon.net>
 <p5fi165e7bsen1m5r0jua5n768c48nd...@4ax.com>
To: <tgoodm...@roadrunner.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)

Again, common words have common meaning and no amount of turgid spinning =
can change that.

Shawn


On Jun 16, 2010, at 3:17 PM, Terry Goodman wrote:

> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, Shawn O'Brien wrote:
>=20
>> Excuse me.  First, the NES says it's the PNB's job to extend =
deadlines,=20
> <snip>
>=20
> This reads far more into the terse comment "I don't make the call"
> than was there.  If the NES was referring to the bylaws timeline
> "making the call" regarding the nomination close date, then there was
> no implication that the PNB could do so.  There is no clear bylaws
> authority for the PNB changing election-related dates except "in the
> year preceding Delegate elections... by November 30..." (Art. 4, Sec.
> 5, as amended), but the PNB has previously interpreted certain dates
> in bylaws as being "of the nature of rules of order" that may be
> suspended by a 2/3rds vote.  I don't know that this was legal, but
> there is the precedent.
>=20
> The NES language "if there is a need to extend beyond what the Bylaws
> dictate, then we will deal with that reality and make logical
> extensions" is similarly vague as to the identity of the "we" making
> extensions. =20
>=20
> Understanding that the PNB usually doesn't meet frequently enough to
> be consulted on such immediate questions, previous National Election
> Supervisors have extended deadlines on their own authority.  This was
> before the timeline amendment of Article Four, which arguably limits
> the PNB's authority over the timeline whenever "the schedule... cannot
> be executed due to exigent circumstances" by its specificity.  If I'm
> remembering the rule correctly, when something in bylaws is
> specifically permitted, other things of the same class are normally
> interpreted as prohibited. This is precisely why an extention of the
> election close date beyond the specifically permistted two weeks is
> arguably illegal under our bylaws.
>=20
> Recognizing the serious nature of any bylaws violation in the context
> of her job description, which presumably includes the phrase "to
> confirm said elections' compliance with these Bylaws" from the job
> description in Article Four, Section 4(A), Renee may not have given up
> on seeking PNB ratification of such a decision if an insufficient
> number of nominations demonstrates its necessity when the deadline
> specified in the bylaws is reached.
>=20
> Alternatively, the word "we" from the NES might mean the NES herself
> in consulation with the Local Election Supervisors. =20
>=20
> If the PNB wants to maximize its opportunity to be consulted by the
> NES on this issue, then it should schedule a PNB meeting for a day or
> two after the nomination close date.  If it does not, then the PNB
> Elections Committee might want to do so. The committtee does not have
> authority to suspend a bylaws date, but it could register its support
> for or dissent from an NES decision to do so or not do so, especially
> if such a vote is requested by the NES.=20
>=20
> --Terry Goodman