The committee has recommended to the Party’s State Central Committee to recognize the election of Curtis Colgate when it meets tomorrow to decide the issue.
The Appeals Committee found that the controversial practice of “slating” (whereby a majority can shut out participation by a minority) is permissible under the Party’s rules. However, in the case of the Virginia Beach mass meeting that elected delegates to the 2nd District convention, the Committee found that the practice was not carried out properly.
“The Virginia Beach Mass Meeting – the source of many of the problems in the 2nd District – was properly called and improperly conducted.”
The Committee further concluded that the seating of the delegation certified by the credentials committee at the 2nd District convention was proper and in accordance with the Party’s rules. Finally, the Committee also found that the election of Ken Longo as chairman of the Virginia Beach GOP was invalid because of certain procedural failings and the lack of measures taken to ensure the process was open to only Republican voters.
This ad hoc Appeals Committee is comprised by three members of the Party’s Executive Committee: 10th District GOP Chairman John Whitbeck, 6th District GOP Chairman Wendell Walker, and Republican National Committeewoman Kathy Hayden. The Committee has no binding authority over the 2nd District dispute, but was instead empaneled by RPV Chairman Pat Mullins to wade through the thicket of issues and competing versions of the facts surrounding the controversy, and to report their findings and recommendations to the larger State Central Committee.
In addition to recommending that the Party recognize the election of Curtis Colgate over Sen. Frank Wagner (R-Virginia Beach) as chairman of the 2nd District GOP, the Committee recommended that a new mass meeting be conducted, under the scrutiny of RPV Staff, for the purpose of electing a chairman of the Virginia Beach Republican Committee. The Committee recommends that the Virginia Beach Committee Chairmanship be deemed vacant until the new chairman is thus elected.
The full Republican Party of Virginia State Central Committee will meet tomorrow, Saturday, August 16, to decide the 2nd District appeals, as well as those arising from the open encouragement of the participation of Democrats and other non-Republicans in the election proceedings of the Campbell and Fauquier county GOP organizations.
Contributors to The Bull Elephant will be providing live coverage of the debates and deliberations on Saturday. In the meantime, the full report of the ad hoc committee is embedded below.
13 comments
[…] votes, he would win). This attempt was overruled in a series of party organization meetings (http://thebullelephant.com/rpv-appeals-committee-rules-sen-frank-wagner-slating-virginia-beach/), but bad feelings among Republican conservatives abound- and they are looking to hold Wagner to […]
http://www.rpv.org/node/281 Here is a link to The Republican Party of Virginia Party Plan. Members/membership is discussed under Article 1
RPV did not rule on anything regarding the 2nd. The SCC never heard the appeal. A deal was cut behind the scenes between Wagner, Colgate & other parties.
Yes, a compromise was reached among the people involved.
“The Appeals Committee found that the controversial practice of “slating” (whereby a majority can shut out participation by a minority) is permissible under the Party’s rules.”
That’s an inaccurate definition of slating. Slating is where a larger body delegates its authority to a smaller body for the purpose of representing them at a future meeting. Whether people are denied participation or not, when you vote on a list of delegates, it is a slate.
The irony is that those who are opposed to the slating done in 2014 have made it clear that they wish to deny participation to anyone who has ever voted in a Democratic Primary, despite the fact that the standard would exclude 3rd District Chairman Chris Stearns among dozens of other individuals who are now active in the Republican Party but have previously supported Democrats or voted in Democratic Primaries when there was no Republican primary that year.
Has is been suggested somewhere that your criteria be a hard-fast rule….that any instance of voting in dem election is automatic disqualification? If so, I’d be interested in reviewing your linked material discussing same.
I have asked numerous times that same question almost every time I’ve read a comment by someone saying that people must be or should be excluded because they voted in a Democratic Primary or are a Democrat. I’ve yet to get a response.
The only objective way to prove someone is a Democrat that self-identifies as a Republican, which is exactly what you do by showing up at a GOP mass meeting or convention, is voting in a Democratic Primary.
It has been suggested numerous times on this blog by commenters and contributors that voting in a Democratic Primary should disqualify you from participation. As of yet, no one has said how far back that standard should go. I know the Virginia Beach Party says you are kicked out for 5 years if you don’t support the nominee, at least that was what it was in 2010 when I supported Kenny Golden over Scott Rigell.
Then all of this is a reason to have CLOSED party elections, so fraud cannot be perpetuated and violate the spirit and intent of each political party’s candidate and other intraparty issue elections.
Hmmmm. I haven’t read anything that supports your statement, “…they wish to deny participation to anyone who has ever voted in a Democratic Primary…” Obviously, we need to do something about people who fraudulently participate in GOP intraparty elections, because that is a distinct effort to cause harm within the party. Democrats were encouraged to show up and vote with that purpose in mind, not only in the 2nd District Mass Meeting, but in other congressional districts across the state.
If memory serves, Rush urged Republicans in Virginia to vote in the Democratic presidential primary election for Hillary in order to keep her candidacy alive and to force Big Ears to expend more campaign cash. One could only vote in one party’s primary of course, but the Republican primary at that time was meaningless. I did so. I do not believe that that makes me any less a Republican. It was a tactical move that benefited our party.
If one chooses to vote in one party’s primary, that’s is up to the individual because they obviously can’t then vote in the other party’s primary. In the case of intraparty elections, ie district chairmanships, city GOP chairmanships, that should only be registered party voters. The MS Sen race is an example of fraud deliberately perpetrated on the people, because Democrats voted in their own primary and then showed up and voted in the Republican party’s runoff election, thus manipulating the outcome.
In the Commonwealth of Virginia, we do not have party registration. Many of us believe that our party of preference is no business of the gummit. The point of contention is whether, in intra-party nominating functions, folks who are not Republicans should be allowed to participate. One way to tell if they are not our folks, is if they had previously voted in a Dim primary. In your example, the voting in two party’s primaries was particularly egregious.
Well that is a good start to get this sordid year behind us.