The following is a summary of the proposed bylaw changes to be debated at the statutory meeting.
Proposal votes are listed as follows (AYE – NO).
PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGES
PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE 1 |
Submitted by: Julie McIlwain |
Proposed change in bold and underline Article III – MEETINGS
Any bylaw proposal may be brought to the floor of any State Committee meeting if it is sponsored by at least 20% of the state committeemen present in person and who represent at least four counties. Each such bylaw, unless previously submitted to the Bylaw Committee and included with the call, must be submitted with sufficient copies for all State Committeemen present in person. |
Reason for the proposed change: The resolutions committee is currently called out in the bylaws but there is no bylaws committee mentioned and at least 4 counties should be represented leaving a manageable and odd number of committee members. In addition, the procedure and a method for floor bylaws should also be mentioned and allowed. |
Status in Committee: PASSED (6-0) |
PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE 2 |
Submitted by: Ray Michaels |
Proposed change in bold and underline Article IV – OFFICERS, Section A. List of Officers and Terms of Office 4. Elected Members at Large Three Members at Large representing each Congressional District will be Elected at the Statutory Meeting for two- year terms beginning and ending one week following the January statutory organizational meeting. |
Article IV – OFFICERS, Section F. Duties of Elective Officers 8. Elected Members at Large Members at Large for the Congressional District elected shall attend all State Committee’s meetings and shall perform such duties as the State Chairman may assign. They shall keep each Legislative District/County Committee within their Congressional District boundaries informed on State Party matters. |
Reason for the proposed change: Congressional Members at Large are an elected position at the Statutory Meeting and should be recognized in the Bylaws. |
Status in Committee: PASSED (6-0) |
PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE 3 |
Submitted by: Steve Zipperman |
Proposed change in bold and underline Article IV – OFFICERS, Section C. Method of Electing Officers 2. The Republican Party of Arizona shall treat all Republican candidates fairly during the primary irrespective of whether the party has aided in the recruitment of such candidate or any other factor. In races without a primary election, the Republican Party of Arizona shall continue to treat all candidates fairly through the general. Notwithstanding, this paragraph does not apply to either judicial retention elections or in presidential preference elections, or potential presidential preference elections, where an incumbent Republican president is seeking re- election. Prior to the statutory organizational and mandatory meetings, the State Chairman shall appoint a nominating committee and chairman thereof to recruit candidates for statewide party offices. The nominating committee shall meet before the call is issued. The report of the nominating committee shall be included in the call of the meeting. This report shall not preclude nominations from the floor. This provision shall not prohibit individual county Executive Committees from establishing a caucus meeting of the Precinct Committeemen to select specific Republican candidate(s) to endorse prior to a primary election. |
Reason for the proposed change: Yavapai County consists of a large majority of Republican voters. The candidate who wins the Republican Primary election WILL win the general election. Currently, Article IV, C 2. is being interpreted to prevent the Yavapai County GOP from helping to promote any specific Republican candidates before the primary election. Unfortunately, that means the Republican party cannot fulfill its mission - working to get Republican candidates elected. By the time the party can actively support a candidate (after the primary election), that candidate will already be guaranteed to be the winner of the general election, so any of the party's actions to support a specific candidate are totally irrelevant and ineffective. Candidates don't get necessary funding, door knocking or support until too late in the process (after they are already guaranteed a win in the general election). If it chooses to do so, the County party should be able to determine the best republican candidate for the office by conducting candidate debates, and having PCs vote for the candidate they wish for the County party to support. That would give PCs more voice in the candidates that should be supported by the County Republican Committee, and it would allow the County party to have an influence over which Republican candidate gets elected. |
Status in Committee: PASSED (5-1) |
PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE 4 |
Submitted by: Gina Swoboda |
Proposed change in bold and underline Article IV - OFFICERS, Section G. Duties of Appointed Officers, 2. Finance Chairman The Finance Chairman shall raise funds for the party. The Finance Chairman need not be a member of the State Committee. The Chairman and Treasurer, may elect to apportion and allocate funds for all joint candidate committees, and if pre-approved within 90 days of the general election, the Finance Chairman shall have the ability to administer joint candidate committee activities and coordinated campaigns, including the disbursement of pre- approved allocations. The Finance Chair shall report all raised funds quarterly to the Executive Committee and report on all funds raised and dispersed on behalf of any joint candidate committee 30 days following the general election to the Executive Committee. The Finance Chair shall not disburse any other funds. |
Reason for the proposed change: In the 2024 election cycle, the Arizona Republican Party for the first time managed an extensive Legislative coordinated campaign program. Many people - including state legislators - attribute this program to being one of the primary reasons that the AZGOP expanded its legislative majorities in 2024. To be efficiently managed, this program requires fast action to send out mail and other marketing and voter contact. Often times the Chairman and Treasurer are not available to make micro-decisions on approving mail pieces and other items. This bylaw would allow the Chairman and Treasurer to "pre-allocate" money to the coordinated and joint campaign funds and then give the Finance Chair authority, at the direction of the Chair, the ability to disburse these funds accordingly. Since this is a very detailed, expansive, and time-intensive effort, this takes a large administrative burden off of the Chair and the Treasurer. |
Status in Committee: PASSED (6-0) |
PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE 5 |
Submitted by: Julie McIlwain |
Proposed change in bold and underline Article VI - STATE CONVENTION, D. Election of Delegates and Alternates of National Convention D. Each congressional district caucus shall elect delegates and alternates pursuant to the national call. Each alternate within the district shall be listed and serve in an order determined by the number of votes received or, in case of a tie, by lot. The State Convention shall then elect delegates and alternates at large pursuant to the national call. The at- large alternates shall be listed and serve in an order determined by the number of votes received or, in case of a tie, by lot. Delegate candidates may have the opportunity to run for both at large and congressional districts at the State Convention; however, they may only hold one position. |
Reason for the proposed change: The bylaws should allow members the most opportunity to chances and be elected, especially in competitive districts. |
Status in Committee: PASSED (6-0) |