BOARD-L Archives

Archiver > BOARD > 2003-06 > 1055857273


From: "Richard (Isaiah) Harrison" <>
Subject: Fwd: {not a subscriber} Re: Fwd: {not a subscriber} Re: [BOARD-L] Point of Privilege
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 06:41:13 -0700


>Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 23:11:38 -0600
>X-From_: Mon Jun 16 23:11:38 2003
>X-Sender:
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32)
>Old-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 01:24:14 -0400
>To:
>From: Tim Stowell <>
>Cc:
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=6.0
> tests=CARRIAGE_RETURNS,FWD_MSG,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,
> SPAM_PHRASE_02_03
> version=2.43
>X-Spam-Level:
>X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list
>Subject: {not a subscriber} Re: Fwd: {not a subscriber} Re: [BOARD-L]
>Point of Privilege
>X-Envelope-To: BOARD-L
>
>At 10:05 PM 6/16/03 -0700, you wrote:
> >
> >> >At 11:34 AM 6/16/2003 -0500, Phyllis wrote:
> >> >>Mr. NC:
> >> >>
> >> >>According to EC Procedural Rule, it is the duty of the Advisory Board to
> >> >>rule on an appeal by a member who has had his/her eligibility to
> vote, or
> >> >>run for office, challenged.
> >> >>
> >> >>The Advisory Board did not rule on the appeal of Bettie Wood. The
> >> statement
> >> >>that was made was erroneous, in that, Mr. NC, you made the ruling.
> >> >>
> >> >>Therefore, I request that a vote be taken of the Advisory Board in
> >> regard to
> >> >>Bettie Wood's appeal.
> >> >>
> >> >>Phyllis Rippee
> >> >>SW/SC CC Representative
> >> >
> >
> >Isaiah responded:
> >
> >> >The Advisory Board is required to rule on questions of eligibility in a
> >> >timely fashion. At the suggestion of the Parliamentarian I made a ruling
> >> >from the Chair based on discussion that had taken place on Board-Exec.
>That
> >> >is acceptible Parliamentary Procedure.
> >> >
> >> >Your point is not well taken.
> >
> >Tim inquired:
> >
> >>Which means what?
> >>
> >>Tim
> >
> >It means that I don't agree and rule against her.
> >
> >It doesn't matter anyway. Bettie has withdrawn from the SEMA CC Rep
> election.
> >
> >-Isaiah
>
>Ah but it does matter. Proper procedure, was not followed.
>
>As Mr. Eason has often commented (paraphrased)- it can be done, but doing
>it right
>the first time is better.
>
>Tim

Proper procedure was followed.

The conditions no longer exist to support a Point of Privilege.

-Isaiah

This thread: