Re: FW: ballot typo

["Iceman" <iceman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Not to defend Paul......
but *I* see the problem being that "in each odd numbered years" is repeated.
Remove the second "in each odd number year", and the meaning becomes
clearer.
(They aren't changing "November", nor "each odd numbered year"......only
changing
the "First Tuesday after the first Monday" to "First Tuesday")

Don't forget....if it ever came to court, *intent* is where they will
go.....the intent is to conform with Colorado State law, and is so stated.
So, it's really rather moot......

Iceman

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Evan Daniel Ravitz" <evan@xxxxxxxx>
To: <cvv-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: FW: ballot typo



Looks like Alison is right and Paul is wrong, again. This reminds me
of how Paul repeatedly, and on occassion, insultingly, claimed that
hand counting was illegal. He never apologized for this. This
behavior discredits the Libertarian party.

You're a good detail man, Paul, now pay attention to the big picture
and the people in it.

I will email everyone i can about the Thursday meeting, and ask them
to vote against the ballot issue.

Evan

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Peter or Alison Richards wrote:

> From:  Peter Richards
>
> To:  Paul Tiger, at al...
>
> Re:  Typo on City ballot...
>
> Paul;
>
> There is a huge typo... in the paragraph below.
>
> The word 'November' was left out...
>
> Send this email below to every lawyer you know...or just one,   starting
> with Dick Lyons !!
>
> (My computer crashed, so I have lost all those email addresses, including
> Dick Lyons, or I would do so myself..)
>
> The word 'November' should have appeared a second time in the paragraph
> below.
>
> Stith Bennett wrote an email about the problem on Monday, 1 February,
> when he figured out the problem existed...  Joe Pezzillo or someone else
> will have to find that email...
>
> The way it is written means we will be voting in January, according to
> attorneys I have spoken to, one of whom worked in the City Attorney's
> office for many years.
>
> Some of those attorneys may be at Council tomorrow night to explain...
>
> Bye, Peter Richards
>
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:47:12 -0700 "Paul Tiger - LPBC - Outreach"
> <LPBC-O@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Okay - show me the typo (scroll down). There isn't one.
> The word 'November' appears once in the sentence, which is all it needs
> to.  If there had been a comma the first appearance of the word 'year',
> then a second occurrence of the word 'year' might be warranted.
>
> This was written by lawyers. Lawyers tend to create the world's longest
> run on sentences. It is simple and I understand what it says. Calling it
> the 'other issue' means to me that you don't know what it says, or what
> it is about.
> This is about coordinated elections. If this does not pass then Boulder
> may very well have to have a separate election from the county. This is
> very costly and really quite pointless.
>
> I urge everyone in COB to understand what this issue is about and vote
> you opinion accordingly. And if you still don't get it, then OVERVOTE
> your ballot to prevent fraud.
>
> Paul Tiger
> PS: this was a snipe hunt. Thanks so much for enabling me to completely
> waste my time looking into this (albeit I had a very pleasant chat with
> Alisa Lewis, whom you could have called on your own).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alisa Lewis
>
>
> AMENDMENT OF THE MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION DATE TO CONFORM WITH THE
> CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
>
> Shall Section 22 of the Charter be amended to change the date of the
> general municipal election from the first Tuesday after the first Monday
> in November of each odd-numbered year to the first Tuesday in each
> odd-numbered year in order to allow Boulder elections to conform with the
> dates specified in the Constitution of the State of Colorado?
>
> For the measure ________                  Against the measure ________
>
>
>