Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bring PCO appointments in-line with RCW and remove ambiguity #12

Open
btb opened this Issue Jan 31, 2019 · 0 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
1 participant
@btb
Copy link

commented Jan 31, 2019

Article 3 refers to a vacated RCW. 29A.28.071 was "Recodified as RCW 29A.80.031 pursuant to 2013 c 11 § 93."
The newer RCW says no appointments between the primary election (when PCOs are elected) and election of the county chair at reorg, which we are contradicting.
RCW doesn't refer to LD reorg (most LDs don't deal with PCO appointments, this is largely a King County thing)
I think the principle is basically that we don't want the existing chair to be able to pick the PCOs who could re-elect them, so to be consistent we shouldn't allow appointments (or recommendations) between the primary and the LD reorg

@btb btb referenced this issue Feb 3, 2019

Closed

realign with RCW #15

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.