California District Supt. Resigns - Page 19

Hesetmefree238 · #**181** 03-31-2007, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thad

There are suppose to forge ahead with splitting the District and making the northern District Ultra con territory and the southern the land of the LIibs.
sort of like a north and south Korea could you say ???

Is Larry Booker a Lib? He is in Southern California, right?

mfblume · #**182** 03-31-2007, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seguidordejesus

Is this related to the church you are at in Winnipeg, or a separate endeavor?

A separate endeavour.

non-upc.

Hesetmefree238 · #**183** 03-31-2007, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCaliUPC

Prax...whereas that is most probably the case district-wide....anyone who is NOT an Ultra Con is automatically labeled as liberal. The church can be very conservative, very moderate...but because they are not an Ultra-Con, or "identified" with one of two men...they are automatically given the "liberal" label. Just a fact of life here.

That is very sad, but so often it is the way it is.

mfblume · #**184** 03-31-2007, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Prax...whereas that is most probably the case district-wide....anyone who is NOT an Ultra Con is automatically labeled as liberal. The church can be very conservative, very moderate...but because they are not an Ultra-Con, or "identified" with one of two men...they are automatically given the "liberal" label. Just a fact of life here.

Man, they're going to call me "liberal" then. I want nothing to do with ultra con manners, but I love the brethren.

triumphant1 · #**185** 03-31-2007, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCaliUPC

Sorry...t1...YOUR statement is inaccurate. AT THE TIME that Thad posted this, this was indeed a fact. You were not at the meeting and have not spoken to anyone who was at the meeting. If I was to call the reaction of RM at that moment...it was a little premature. However, that was the statement made. NOW, apparently he talked to a few people afterwards and was able to "cool" a little. An email/letter went out the subsequent day of which was posted here in this thread. At this time, with 2 months left to the District Conference, RM is staying on as Superintendent and will not be Superintendent after that meeting.

The title may be "misinformed" at this juncture...but at the time that it was posted and created...it was what was happening.

Okie Dokie...

rrford · #**186** 03-31-2007, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCaliUPC

Exactly.

Pianoman...he is voluntarily not going to let his name be even considered for the job that he has occupied for the last few years. When you voluntarily step away from a job, I call that resignation. The conference will be voting on a new Superintendent to fill the vacancy he is leaving in May.

But only if you voluntarily step away BEFORE your term is up. To state you will not let your name be considered again is not a resignation at all. He is not "leaving a vacancy" as the vacabcy is created by the nature of the end of a term. Technically, even if he wanted his name to be considered, he is not the DS until after elected at that Conference. That is one reason why an HQ representative handles the voting for the DS.

SoCaliUPC · #**187** 04-01-2007, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy

BooM
Better check it out. My contacts tell me that this has not gone through the GB. I could be wrong about the Conference floor.

As I understand it, it was supposed to voted on by the General Board in Tampa. Unlike the last attempt of a seperation, this one is supposed to go through with no opposition this time. I could be wrong, but I do not think that the "Conference" votes on this.

SoCaliUPC · #**188** 04-01-2007, 01:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hesetmefree238

Is Larry Booker a Lib? He is in Southern California, right?

You're kidding, right?

BoredOutOfMyMind · #**189** 04-01-2007, 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy

BooM
Better check it out. My contacts tell me that this has not gone through the GB. I could be wrong about the Conference floor.

The official Western District Letter announcing the vote I believe said it was approved by the GB- Perhaps I read it wrong. I thought it was quick to get to the GB in February- You were wrong on the conference floor.

In either event, this issue has come up often in California-Nevada, and if for nothing else, Geography says it may be a good idea.

.

South of I 90 · #**190** 04-01-2007, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCaliUPC

Sorry...t1...YOUR statement is inaccurate. AT THE TIME that Thad posted this, this was indeed a fact. You were not at the meeting and have not spoken to anyone who was at the meeting. If I was to call the reaction of RM at that moment...it was a little premature. However, that was the statement made. NOW, apparently he talked to a few people afterwards and was able to "cool" a little. An email/letter went out the subsequent day of which was posted here in this thread. At this time, with 2 months left to the District Conference, RM is staying on as Superintendent and will not be Superintendent after that meeting.

The title may be "misinformed" at this juncture...but at the time that it was posted and created...it was what was happening.

Thanks for the clarification of the clarification.