Green Party of the United States - National Committee Voting

Home	Vote	Results	History	Contacts	Admin
	National Committee Voting

Login

Ranked Choice Vote Details

Ranked Choice Vote ID	792
Ranked Choice Vote	Selection of Site for 2016 Presidential Nominating Convention
Type	Open Ballot
Number of Seats	1
Ranked Choice Vote Administrator	Tamar Yager
Phase	Closed
Discussion	07/13/2015 - 07/26/2015
Voting	07/27/2015 - 08/02/2015
Result	Results
Presens Quorum	31 0.6666
Candidates	Houston, Texas Toledo, Ohio

Background

At the Annual National Meeting (ANM) in July 2015 the Annual National Meeting Committee (ANMC) formally began soliciting sites for the 2016 GPUS Presidential Nominating Convention. Five locations responded with Letters of Interest/Intent : Boston, MA, Carbondale, IL, Houston, TX, Jersey City, NJ and Toledo, OH. After reviewing the Request for Proposals (RFP) and participating in question/answer conference calls with committee member(s) two cities submitted proposals: Houston, TX and Toledo, OH.

Because many delegates appreciate the intimacy, lower cost and easier networking opportunities of a meeting at a University, we encouraged the planners to seek an all-inclusive venue (food, lodging, meeting space). Both proposals are for university settings. One proposal has some alternatives for housing since it is unlikely University housing can be booked in August. Both assume the same number of breakout rooms for workshops, space for delegate’s meeting, media, registration, and nominating convention. Many costs can be negotiated and the costs you see on both proposals are the maximums for meeting spaces and most other budget items.

The groups were asked to provide budget and substantive information on the locations for the date of August 4-7, 2016 as the first choice. The alternate date was July 28-31, 2016. The August date was the preferred date because it was the furthest away from the Democratic and Republican conventions which were in back-to-back weeks in July. Both proposals are for the first choice date.

This is a ranked choice vote so please vote for both proposals if they are both acceptable ranking your first choice as “1” and your second choice at “2”.

Cost is only one factor in voting and it is usually negotiable. Some other important additional considerations in ranking the PNC proposals are (in no particular order):

----- Geographical location - have we been to your city or area of the country recently? We definitely try to be in a different region for the PNC every 4 years. (2008 was Chicago and 2012 was Baltimore). ANMs were 2009-Durham, 2010- Detroit (in collaboration with the US Social Forum), 2011- Alfred, NY, 2013 - Iowa City, 2014- Minneapolis and 2015 will be St. Louis.
----- Demographics/Diversity - Are there opportunities for outreach to underrepresented groups including young people, working class, people of color, marginalized populations
----- Activities – are there opportunities to petition, protest or participate in petition drives, living wage campaigns, etc
----- Accessibility – are the venue and lodging near a major airport hub. Is there good public transportation between venues and lodging
----- Major media market
----- How big is the volunteer base

Contact: Tamar Yager, tamaryager@gp.org, 502-296-3849

Candidate Information

Houston, Texas
See:

http://gp.org/2016-PNC/Houston.htm

Toledo, Ohio
See:

http://gp.org/2016-PNC/Toledo.htm

Questions about this system?
Contact the Voting Admin.
The Green Party of the United States voting system is free software, licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL).
You can download a copy here.
To independently verify a ranked choice vote, or for information about how that works, go to Jonathan Lundell's Voting Page and upload the ballot file from the ranked choice vote result page. JL's ranked choice module is licensed under an alternate free software license.

Green Party of the United States