MyColoradoGOP.org note:
The following is an example for District Chairmen to follow regarding Colorado GOP Chairman Kristi Burton Brown’s edict removing all District Officers from their elected positions and nullifying all 107 District’s established bylaws. The State Senate District 24 Chairman is rightfully IGNORING the edict and running his meeting as a vacancy committee meeting.
Note: Many districts’ bylaws state that a voting member is automatically removed from their position if for any reason, including redistricting, they no longer live in the district. Officers, however, are elected in the Spring of an odd numbered year and SHALL SERVE a two-year term, or until they resign, are found incapable of serving, or are removed by a vote of a specified percentage of voting members.
January 17, 2022,
Dear (SD24 Vice Chairman),
You may have received a Call for SD 24, but you’re not in the new SD24 boundary! You probably already know that, but if not, I can save you a meeting to attend!
I confirmed the addresses of all PCPs in the new SD24 to that I can do a proper credentials accounting for the meeting, and surprisingly—or maybe not, most of them still reside within the new boundaries! You were the only exception.
FYI: I am treating this meeting as a vacancy meeting to fill your position as vice chairman, rather than as a “re-organizational meeting." Surprisingly, you are the only officer from the old SD24 that no longer resides in the new boundaries! I disagree with the state chairman about the appropriateness of having a “reorganizational” meeting when the district is not “new.” Below is the paragraph I sent out about my analysis:
I believe that our Republican state chairman, Kristi Burton-Brown, has interpreted the State bylaws (Article XVI, Section F 1, "Effects of Reapportionment”) incorrectly. You can see for yourself, the applicable section reads: “. . . each such new. . . senatorial. . .district shall be called to meet for the purpose of electing a chairman, vice-chairman, and secretary, selecting a vacancy committee and adopting bylaws.” Her decision is solely based upon an interpretation of what constitutes a “new” district. She is interpreting “new district” to mean any district that has any changed boundaries, rather than, as a district that did not previously exist, such as the new congressional district Eight, a completely new district (we had Seven congressional districts before Reapportionment). A dictionary definition for “New” is, "not existing before,” or "recently born, built, or created.” Such definition makes more sense.
Additionally, there are no bylaws provisions, state or Adams county, for a “Reorganizational Meeting.” The term, “Reorganizational” does not appear in either bylaws. More importantly, neither does such term, or provision, appear in State Laws regarding party committees (CRS 1-3-103). However, the term “Organizational” does appear, and is specified to occur, for Senate Districts that are comprised of "a portion of one county," during the county odd-year Organizational meeting. I quote the law regarding Senate District central committee organizational meetings, "The committee shall meet on the same date and select a chairperson and vice-chairperson in the same manner as the party county central committee.”
If/when some government official fails to follow the law, or the Constitution, a higher law, should those officials below follow the higher official, or instead, follow the law/Constitution? I am attempting to follow the law, rather than our party chairman’s bad interpretation.
I just had a revelational thought that much of our Republican party may be running more like a communist party than as an American political party patterned after our Representative Constitutional Republic as it should be! Specifically, in a communist party, officials at each level have absolute power over everyone below them (sounds like a state chairman telling every senate and house district how they should respond to the boundary changes). But in a Constitutional Republic, the various divisions of power Federal, State, County, etc., have power and authority based upon the people who elected them, i.e. county officials don’t necessarily “work for” state officials, nor state for federal. In the case of Adams County (some of our bylaws, when changed under a previous chairman) imply that the various Central Committees (house and senate districts) are subservient the the County Central Committee (or its Executive Committee), but that is not the case, the state law does not imply or support such dictatorial structure! Bottom line, the neither the County Central Committee nor its Executive Committee, have the power to demand that HDs or SDs do anything, unless specified in statute (such as the requirement to have an Organizational meeting on the same day as the County Organizational meeting)!
Keith