 It is March the 25th. We are 7.05 PM and we are gonna get this meeting underway. So I'm calling the meeting to order. Now what I'd like to talk to you about is we're, this is a special meeting, it's held a little differently. I know there's a lot of questions that have gone out there in regards to notice and so on and so forth. I want you all to know that we milled everything out with proper notice. We have green cards back. So notice was given, as you can see, mail was sent out, so we are good in regards to that. Now what I'd like to then, we're gonna try to move along very quickly. We, just because I typically the chair and I chair the meeting, because of the circumstances, it's best at this time in the rule in states let's have a parliamentary, non-partial, you know the rules. So I'm gonna actually hand over the gavel at this time to Mr. Mark Heyman. I'm appointing Mr. Heyman to chair, to temporarily be the presiding officer and to chair this meeting. Can I have a motion on this one? Second. Do I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? It's unanimous, thank you. Thank you Madam Chair. So the agenda has been mailed and because this is a special meeting, what that means is that we don't have no business, we don't open the floor to new motions instead. The business before us is what was specified in the call to the meeting and we can have disciplinary motions rise to the front if things happen there can be motions regarding how this meeting is conducted, but not motions as to what the business is of this meeting. So the first thing on the agenda, a motion to hand Mr. Adrienne Flores for the remaining group of 2018 to 2020 term from CEC meetings for aggressive threatening and disruptive behavior during official meetings. The motion has been made, is there a second? I second. Okay, so next Madam Chair is going to present evidence and there will not be any discussion during the time that she's presenting evidence, but we're going to time how long it takes to present the evidence and then the accused will have an equal amount of time to give a defense. All right, well, we're moving a little faster than I thought we were gonna go, which is good. So at that in regards to Mr. Adrienne Flores, I believe that most of you are well aware and have also endured some of the practices of Mr. Flores, he has been disruptive at a majority of our meetings. The last two CEC meetings we have had, he has had to been ejected. The last steering committee meeting, he has also been asked to leave. He has made now numerous threats against the chair and other members of the body. And so verbal threats of physical harm are not going to be tolerated. And so I have received numerous, as you can imagine, I have received numerous complaints in regards to Mr. Flores. As you know, his conduct has been quite unbecoming and we have now had two articles written in regards to painting the party as to how we have been ejected from movies and then another article in regards to ejecting Mr. Flores from the VFW. So in regards to his conduct, this is the evidence that I have before you, which I also believe many of you have experienced as well. Do we have Mr. Flores here too? Is Mr. Flores present? Is there anyone here who has been authorized to speak on behalf of Mr. Flores in his defense? If you may come forward to the microphone please and state your name and precinct number. Madam Chairman, my name is Evelyn Boring, I would my precinct number is 3105. My comment and defense of Adrienne Flores is this. Even Flores's behavior was not any different than when Manuel Medina was the chairman. There was an instance when Adrienne Flores ran out the side door before Javier the current sheriff, he was coming in one door, Adrienne ran out the other door. Adrienne Flores's behavior has been no different when he's not recognized her point of order and becomes frustrated. He yells out, with regard to police report, excuse me, with regard to threats, has there been a police report filed? There are several members in regards to our body to have out these reports, yes ma'am. Okay, and then the other thing is the last meeting in particular, the other precinct chair, Ralph, I can't think of his last name. Ralph Galvan did egg him on, as well as I hear the awe because that's what I witnessed as well, that there were hecklers that egg-owned Adrienne Flores. Now there were other people there, I'm telling you what I witnessed, so that in light of Adrienne Flores's removal, Ralph Galvan also needs to be removed, thank you. I remind the body that the removal of Mr. Galvan is not on the agenda for tonight. So we've heard speakers in favor and against the motion we now proceed to a vote. So the motion is to remove, I'm sorry, the motion is to ban Mr. Flores from CEC meetings for the remainder of this term. All those in favor of the motion, please raise your armband. Yes, the counters, if you can please count. To our precinct chair, we ask that you move to the center of the vote. Step until we finish counting. Please. So if you would space yourselves out and one counter would take three rows, and the next counter, do the next three rows, and the next counter, I think that would help. We appreciate your attention, so I figure this out. Thank you. 36 from here, back. I'm sorry guys, just keep your hands up. Okay, you may have to count the vote screen. What is your account? 83. Did y'all get close to 83? Y'all also have 83. People on stage. The account appears to be 83. If this is a close vote, we may do a separate count. There are 83 votes tonight because we don't want any shouting. But we're going to assume that it's a count of 83 in favor. You can put your hands down. All those opposed to the motion, please raise your armband. Rows three. Any account for the nays? I see two, but that's what we said, three. Three for the nays. Okay, so there are 83 votes in favor of the motion. Three against the motion, the motion carries. What is your point of order, sir? I have under control the removal of an elected precinct chair where the ban in him from meetings is not in accordance with the state rules or the Texas election code 171, which we do apply to. I think we cannot remove an elected chair. We can follow the rules that the state do have for us and we can pass a motion which will allow the chairperson to send him a letter saying he's out from the party and give him seven days. But we cannot overrule both the Texas rules and the state election code. Yes, I've heard your attention, sir. The state party rules do allow for the removal of a party official for a specific cause supporting an opposing party's candidate, but those provisions and the rules do not say that that is the only reason for which a party official can be removed. For that reason, I do not sustain your objection. But it's the process. We can't just vote it here. Well, the Robert's Rules of Order do provide us a process and that's what we are following tonight. Is it my understanding that you are appealing my decision? That would put this to a vote of this body. So there is an appeal of my decision and that means that a yes vote would be to sustain my decision that this process is valid. A no vote would be to overturn my decision about the process that we are following. Is there any further discussion? Come to the microphone, please. Okay, so we're voting now on whether or not to sustain my decision concerning the process of banning Mr. Flores from our meetings. All those in favor of all those voting yes to sustain my decision, please raise your armband. Okay, so we see that a lot of hands are raised. All those voting nay, please raise your hand. It appears that the ayes have it and my decision is sustained. The next item on the agenda is to remove Mr. Adrian Flores from office of precinct chair for his aggressive threatening and disruptive behavior during official meetings. Madam Chair, do you have further evidence? The evidence that I provided speaks to both one and two in regards to our agenda. Okay, so this is a separate agenda item because it requires a higher voting threshold. It would require a two-thirds vote to remove a precinct chair from office. All those in favor of the motion to remove Mr. Flores from office, please raise your hand and your armband. It appears that the ayes have it. Mr. Adrian Flores is removed from office as precinct chair. The next agenda item is the removal of Mr. Guerra-Marmanda from the office of Secretary. Madam Chair, do you... I'm sorry, is there a second to the motion? The motion is seconded. Madam Chair, if you would present evidence. Okay, so this one is going to be a pointly deal. It started, we'll kind of go back to June the 21st of 2018. We were, the majority of the precinct chairs were at the State Convention and at that time, Garrett-Marmando along with a handful of others called a meeting to order to name or vote in the rules co-chairs and the voter and integrity co-chairs. This was not called on by the chair for the first meeting. The chair is to make that first vote movement. That was not done. So while the majority of us were in conference, they had a special meeting back in Bear County. So that brought on the chair, Stephen Huerta, and his co-chair was, at the time, Miss Kate Shremer. So in regards to that, Garrett-Marmando was the one that called that meeting to order. The next issue at hand is that Garrett-Marmando intercepted mail that was addressed specifically to myself and held it in a locked office in a locked desk. So that is a federal offense. He did not provide me my mail that was addressed specifically to me. The next issue that I raise is that Garrett's responsibilities as a secretary is to be the keeper of records. He is not the sole custodian of records. And he and I, after I was elected, had sat down and come up with a mutually agreed location in which we would hold all of the records. It was going to be in the middle office, locked. So as you can see, there's photographs that will show you that six months have passed and none of the documentation that Mr. Garrett-Marmando was keeping records of ever made it to the central filing section. They were all locked in his office. During this time, we had multiple requests from members of the body requesting documentation, copies of records. We are a public organization. Those records are your records. And any time you request a copy of the documentation, you should be provided. It is now over eight months, and those documents have not been provided to the requesters. Garrett has refused to put, we have many instances, where Garrett has refused to put notices on the calendar that have been requested either by myself, either by other chairs for committees, and those meetings do not make it to the calendar. The issue that I will bring to everybody's attention if we go in order. There is an unauthorized use of the debit card and the checking account by Garrett-Marmando. As of recent of February 27, 2019, he used a charge, he charged $115 at El Tarron restaurant for an executive called meeting, an executive meeting that he called. Now, there was no emergent meeting, there was no scheduled CEC meeting, and no or urgent matter or new business was discussed at this meeting. So we have video recording of this meeting, there's no new business, there's no urgent matter. And at the end of this, Garrett-Marmando paid $115, which we had put a budget in finance in January. So in January, there was a hold for expenditures that were not of an urgent matter or a pressing matter. So this was without authorization. The next issue that I raise is that Garrett-Marmando abandoned his position as a position of office and as secretary on December the 11th when he left his post and walked out of the December 11 CEC meeting. The next issue that I raise is that he has submitted incomplete and inaccurate meeting minutes for the December 11th meeting and of course a few others. Garrett-Marmando, one of the most egregious is that Garrett-Marmando has removed myself as a chair off of the Facebook account as an administrator. So if you all wondered why there are two Facebook accounts out there is because Garrett-Marmando has removed me from being able to put anything on the Facebook, comment, and so forth. This was just an example of, if you can see here at the bottom, the last inquiry is the 115 that was an expenditure that was not approved. The next issue that I raise in regards to Garrett-Marmando is that he has paid for an unauthorized webpage. He has created, there's two communication teams. There was one communication team which was set. Now they removed Mr. Joe Flores who is sitting here in the front unlawfully but even with that, there was still a co-chair, Megan Smith, who still should have remained and they've removed Megan Smith. So they themselves held Garrett-Marmando led the way with Stephen Whatcom and several others and they have created a new communications team and we will have to discuss this issue at least at another time. But back to Mr. Armando. He has signed an agreement for a new website without bringing this before the CEC, before the Executive Council or the chair. And he has written an unauthorized amount of $500. This amount was written March the 6th, 2019. This was even after Budget and Finance had agreed in January that we were going to hold off on any large expenditures until we could pay the remaining balances of our previous bills. So the previous utilities and so on and so forth from the ITEN headquarters. So even after this hold, Garrett-Marmando has still paid and written a check for $500. Garrett has also been using the unauthorized letterhead. This is no longer the BCDP letterhead, as you can see. And the reason we have a new letterhead is because of issues just like this that have been occurring for months. February meeting at the BFW, Garrett-Marmando brought in a roster that was not current with the Secretary of State. So I know there was a lot of confusion, a lot of people were up at the front and you recall that ordeal. Garrett has also sent out disparaging untruthful emails regarding the Barrick County Democratic Party Chair using unauthorized Barrick County Democratic Party letterhead and property. Again, I mentioned that Garrett has received multiple requests for multiple members here within our body requesting documentation, attendance records and so forth. And to date, not one record has been presented. I mentioned that there are multiple formal complaints that have been sent and submitted in regards to Garrett-Marmando threats of violence, calling members profanity, using profanity and calling member's names, making racist remarks about several of our members. Pushing and shoving members are other complaints that I have received in regards to Garrett-Marmando. As you can all recall, at multiple, many of our CEC meetings, I may mention that I was requesting from Garrett-Marmando the current lease that he was authorized to sign back in July. And today, I still have not received a copy of this. I have, of course, as you all can recall at our last CEC meeting where I brought it to your attention that I went to the building management to also try to attain a copy of that lease that was signed by Garrett and the building manager ran away, which we have video of that as well. Today, Garrett has held over a handful of unauthorized meetings that have not been approved, not on the calendar, in hidden locations, and it goes on. Here is one complaint. I hope you can see it. If not, I will put it on the website or I can send it to you. This is one complaint where one of our members went to an executive council meeting that was called by Garrett-Marmando and wouldn't allow any other member, other than a handful of selected people, he would allow anyone else into the building at the I-10 headquarters. They had locked the door. So this is a complaint that we have received from one of our members who tried to enter the building and was being refused. It wasn't until another member showed up and she was able to follow him into the meeting and Garrett-Marmando quickly adjourned the meeting. So that, there are still more bits of evidence that I could show you. I have videos. I have e-mail. I have complaints. If you need more information, I definitely can provide that for you. Like I said, this is an open organization. All of that is for your view. But this is some of the information that I have for him at this time. Okay. Is Mr. Armando present? Seeing that he is not, is there anyone present who has authorization to speak on Mr. Armando's defense? Is there anyone who, without Mr. Armando's authorization, would like to speak on his defense? You could vote on holding the question, but it appears that it's not necessary. Okay. So we proceed to the main motion. The motion is to remove Mr. Armando from the office of secretary. All those in favor, please raise your arm vans and continue to hold them up while we have a count. Sorry, I forgot to call for a second. But lots of people are raising their hands, so it's clear that they're going to welcome people who would second the motion. Okay. We're going to count four rows at a time. Do you understand where the fourth row is so that everybody can see? Great. That's what it should look like. The counters would also lift the votes of those who are on stage. Okay. In opposition to the motion, the nays, if you would raise your arm band, please, and be counted. This is N2 nays. The motion is suspended. The motion for recorded vote, are you asking for a roll call vote? So there is a motion to have a roll call vote. This is a time-consuming procedure, and as such, the state party rules require that 10% of those present must want the roll call vote in order to proceed. So if you would raise your hand if you are in favor of having a roll call vote. This appears to be, people, I see six hands raised. Okay. If you are opposed to a roll call vote, please raise your hand. What it means is that we go down the sign-in sheet person by person and ask each person one by one how they wish to vote. This is not a vote. You are voting on whether or not we go down the sign-in sheet and vote one by one. So a no vote now means that you do not want to vote one by one. Okay. So the question is whether the recorded vote has more validity than the vote that we already did, and the answer is no. Other than 60 people, precinct chairs present, and so that means that we do not have 10% request in the roll call. We proceed with the next item of business, which is a motion to suspend Stephanie Carrillo from duties as treasurer. Does the motion have a second? Second. Okay, Madam Chair, if you would speak in favor of the motion. In regards to Ms. Stephanie Carrillo, Ms. Stephanie Carrillo currently serves as our unofficial treasurer for the Bear County Democratic Party. The reason I tell you this is because there is a filing that was supposed to have been filed with the TEC shortly after her June election. It was August 18th of 2018 that the TEC commission had been trying to contact Ms. Carrillo to file the proper documentation. I will tell you that as of recent, after our last executive council meeting, she did file the paperwork eight months later. But our former treasurer, Mr. Marquis Williams, has not filed his report, which was due 10 days after her official filing. So in contacting the TEC today, she is still currently not our official treasurer. So that brings great concern. It is now, we are now in March, she was elected at this position in June, and the proper paperwork has still not been, has still not taken place. The next action in regarding Ms. Carrillo is that, we feel or we feel that it is her ability to actually represent us in a legal, fiduciary, statutory, regulatory manner is in jeopardy. And so this is another reason I bring this to you. Currently Ms. Carrillo has been, or up until recent, Ms. Carrillo had been using Mr. Marquis Williams' passwords and PIN numbers to make filing with the TEC. So as you can imagine, there are concerns in regards to her being in charge of our financial situation, our checkbook and so forth. Ms. Carrillo is a sole person who has the access to our checkbook. It is solely in her possession at this current time. Even with that, it is a concern because Ms. Carrillo, even after our budget and finance meeting in January, where it was discussed with her and she agreed strongly that currently due to our financial situation, we needed to prioritize our bills. But even with doing so, Ms. Carrillo, being the sole possessor of the checkbook, has given a check to Garrett Armando to write the $500 payment that was unauthorized. Stephanie also refused to provide information in regards to her office to provide a key to provide records. I did gain interest, as you all know, into the Treasurer's Office. And here's what I found. I found stacks upon stacks of an unopened government mail from the IRS requesting documentation by the Bear County Democratic Party for persons who worked and received payment from 2014 to 2016. We received letters from the IRS saying that our status is in jeopardy because multiple people have, as they should, filed with the IRS, state that the Bear County Democratic Party is worthy of receiving funds, but the Bear County Democratic Party has not once submitted any of those documentation under the former chair. So here are boxes of documentation that was just found within our office, no organization, no runner reason, stacks upon stacks, unopened bills, unopened mail, boxes upon boxes. So Stephanie, as our acting treasurer, is to provide reports to Budget and Finance of the Bear County Democratic Party's accounting. Mrs. Carrillo has failed to give a report on the 2018 primary election account to Budget and Finance or to the CEC. There was a second account. Well, we went down in June to sign off on the accounts of the former chair, myself, the treasurer, and the secretary. I signed the card, we all signed the card, but there was one account that they told me was closed, and that seems not to be the case. The sole signer on that account is Stephanie Carrillo. Her last, after the primary, she was still writing checks out of this account, making payments for utilities, the rent, multiple payroll checks to herself, and several other people. I understand that happens in a primary. The issue here is not that. The issue is that Budget and Finance, nor anyone else, knew of these accounts. And her last check that was written on August 8th was to Manuel Medina for $3,500 for chair services. And I'm not saying that's illegal, but nobody in CEC, none of you all, nor me, nor anyone else knew of this check that was written two months after I was in office. So the next issue that I bring up in regards to Mrs. Carrillo, while I mention about her payroll, none of these records that we have found were kept in an orderly, timely, accurate fashion in regards to the party's finances, account, and regulatory obligations. So that is what I have on Mrs. Carrillo. Is Mrs. Carrillo here? Is anyone present who has authorized to speak on Mrs. Carrillo's behalf? Is anyone without authorization present who would like to speak in her defense? Seeing as there is none, we proceed to a vote. All those in favor of suspending Mrs. Carrillo from her duties, I'm sorry. The motion has been seconded. All those in favor of the motion to suspend Mrs. Carrillo from her duties as treasurer, please raise your armband and be counted. Are we counting about four rows at a time? Here, here, and here, right here. I'm doing E through J. This is E right here. Look at that. Come on. E through J. Are we done with this row? We're done. Are we here? Hey, there you are. Hey, it's me. I'm so happy. I'm so happy. This is so sweet of you. This is so funny. Those voting in opposition to the motion to remove Stephanie Correo from her duties as treasurer, please raise your arm band. Those voting nay. Yes. If you wish to abstain, you may notify the counters. If you wish to abstain and would like for that to be counted, you can notify the counters of your wish to abstain. Okay, so the vote is 96, yay, two nay, and one abstention. The motion carries. I'm sorry, suspending her from her duties as treasurer is different from removing her from office. Our rules have a procedure for doing that and the next motion is a step in that direction. The motion is to mandate that the budget and finance committee review the performance of this Stephanie Correo as treasurer. Madam Chair, do you wish to speak on that motion? I believe that I believe I have given sufficient evidence to that as well. The motion has been seconded. Is there anyone present to speak on Mrs. Correo's behalf in opposition to the motion? Yes, if you may come to the microphone, please. Madam Chairwoman, my opposition to the motion has to do with the fact that it's a little disturbing that someone in an unofficial role is being removed from an unofficial role. Also, that it concerns me that the representation is lacking, that there's nothing, perhaps you think it's sufficient that to say they should be here to go against, but this seems very prepared and that it just comes across to me that something doesn't seem right that all of this is listed up and down all of these things. It doesn't seem that there's a equal representation. Well ma'am, just to let you know that I have sent them two certified letters. They have posted all over Facebook and all through email that they know of this meeting. They were calling everyone to not come to this meeting, so they have received ample notice because they've been posted all over their Facebook. They were here earlier this afternoon and chose not to stay. Okay, we've received down to a vote. The motion is to mandate that the motion of Finance Committee review Ms. Stephanie Correo's performance as treasurer. The motion has been made and seconded. All those in favor of the motion please raise your armbands if you have any different numbers. Can you go pick up your hand? No, I don't. Okay. So close. One, two, touch me. That's not okay. Okay. All right, those opposed to the motion to mandate that the motion of Finance Committee review Stephanie Correo's performance as treasurer. Those opposed to the motion please raise your armbands and be counted. Okay, so the vote is 95 yea, 2 nay, and 3 abstentions. The next motion is to remove Mr. Emilio Pena as co-chair of the precinct recruitment and training committee. Is there a second to the motion? Okay, Madam Chair, if you would present evidence. So for Mr. Emilio Pena who is the co-chair to precinct chair and recruitment. Mr. Pena and let me just start by saying precinct chair recruitment committee is a committee that has been working amazing. They've been doing amazing work. Unfortunately that we have is with our co-chair Mr. Pena who has called most or a few of the members in precinct chair recruitment racial names. He's called them very unprofessional names with very unprofessional tax that they've had to endure. Not only has Mr. Pena done this to a few members within the precinct chair recruitment committee, but he has also done it to me myself. Whether he has done personal tax on Facebook, email, messenger. He is also physically in discussion with he and his wife in regards to that issue. Mr. Pena has in the last three CEC meetings pushing people across that were not vetted. The precinct chair recruitment committee has a vetted system that has been working very well. They have a checklist. So there's multiple signatures. One of the co-chairs, another member of their free seat. I mean, another member of the group, myself and one other person. There's like four different signatures that are signed off on each application and they're very meticulous about it. And that's why I commend them. Mr. Pena has tried going around that vetting process. And in such you have seen in our last two CEC meetings where he has brought multiple people to the front saying that we are or that I am being racist against them, not allowing them to join the party and such. That is not the case. I have examples where I reached out to several of those precinct chairs where you have communication. We have worked on their precincts and we have them in. And they are a minority. So that is incorrect. Mr. Ben-Yang has been going around stating that we are just knocking people off at least 50 or so people out of the precinct. That is not true. There have been less than 15 people that were a question. Five of those people resigned. I have a resignation. If the party is open to you all, you're welcome to see those resignations. The other few did not reside in their precinct. We can show you that as well. Have never, were not registered to vote. Or have voted for the Republican Party. Mr. Ben-Yang is trying to say that that was the precinct term. And that was I. So we have evidence to show that is not the case. And you are all welcome to copy of that as well. I will tell you that Mr. Ben-Yang, and one gentleman I don't know, he's here at the moment. In particular, Mr. Martin Williams, had tried to give Mr. Ben-Yang his application four times. Mr. Ben-Yang was saying that we were not accepting his application. As you can see, there are text messages from me and Mr. Williams all of the Christmas break. Talking about how we can obtain and get a copy of his application and that I would need him anywhere. So we go back and forth, and he's saying, I'm giving it to Emilio, and Emilio's not providing it. He's giving it to Emilio, and Emilio's not providing it. I finally, Mr. Williams joins my husband and myself at a water burger so that he can bring to me in hand his application. So he will be vetted, he has been vetted, and he will be accepted at our next CEC. So these are the antics that Mr. Ben-Yang has gone through great links to try to show that our precinct chair recruitment and I are kicking out people in droves and are racist, which is untrue, and we will not stand for some of the issues that I have in regards to Mr. Ben-Yang. He also was a part of the group that didn't allow our precinct chair, one of our precinct chairs, into a meeting. So he's on video, hold in the door. He also was one of the members that was at the group in which they held the meeting, the unauthorized meeting, while we were all in conference so that he became the rules chair. Okay, is Mr. Pena present? Is anyone present who is authorized by Mr. Pena to speak on his behalf? Is anyone else here present to speak in Mr. Pena's defense? Seen as there is none, we proceed to a vote. All those in favor of removing Mr. Pena as co-chair of the precinct recruitment and training committee, the motion has been seconded. All those in favor of removing him as co-chair, please raise your arm band. Thank you so much. The motion is to remove Mr. Emilio Pena as co-chair of the precinct recruitment and training committee. All those opposed to the motion, please raise your hand and be counted. Okay, so there are 92 votes in favor, three votes opposed, one abstention. The next motion is to remove Mrs. Angie Garcia as co-chair of the fundraising committee. Mr. Motion has a second. This one is going to be just very quick. Mrs. Garcia is our co-chair of the fundraising committee who held a barbecue plate fundraiser for the BCDP at the I-10 headquarters. Mrs. Garcia stated during our December CC, which was videotaped and recorded that she had collected $800 from the party. When asked in our January Budget and Finance about the funds, Mrs. Garcia made mention that she was waiting for her bingo money to come in and that she could then pay it, but that she had lost the checks that were written to the party. Gloria Olive, who is a former chair of the Budget and Finance who, as of last week, resigned, has stated that Mrs. Garcia has paid $400 of the money so that it has been collected. The remaining balance of $400 is remaining from Mrs. Garcia and Mrs. Betty Ford. So that is what I have in regards to Mrs. Garcia. Okay, is Mrs. Garcia here? Is anyone present to speak on her behalf with her authorization? Is anyone else present who wishes to speak in her defense? Okay, we proceed to a vote. All those in favor of removing Angie Garcia as co-chair of the fundraising committee, the motion has been seconded. All those in favor of removing her, please raise your armband and be counted. I have short arms. Okay, those voting against the motion to remove Angie Garcia as co-chair of fundraising, please raise your armband and be counted. Okay, so they vote as 89 in favor to oppose and one abstention. The motion carries. Three abstains. The last motion on our agenda concerns the removal of Olga Regina Gomez as co-chair of the fundraising committee. There's two. There's one more for them. It's not the last item on the agenda, but it's the last motion. Is there a second to the motion? So for the next issue is pretty much the saying that Mrs. Regina Bettencourt did not make the claim, of course, of the bingo and the money and all of that, but she is the co-chair. She also confirmed raising the $800 and is responsible for the remainder of the money, but also they have not held a fundraising committee. Today there is no plan, future fundraisers by this committee. There are other fundraisers in the works, but not by this committee. That is what I have for Mrs. Bettencourt. Okay, is Mrs. Olga Regina Gomez Bettencourt present? Is anyone here prepared to speak on her defense with her authorization? Is there anyone else present to speak on her defense? Okay, we proceed to vote. All those in favor of removing Mrs. Olga Regina Gomez Bettencourt as co-chair of the fundraising committee raise your arm and be counted. All those opposed to the motion to remove Olga Regina Gomez Bettencourt from the co-chair of the fundraising committee. All those opposed, please raise your arm and be counted. The one next stage. Regarding the last motion, I guess it's not even going to be a motion. Just we need to revamp, we'll have to work internally about what we need to do in regards to our committees. So we'll need to look at our next CEC meeting as to filling in some of these spaces because as you know, there were several committees that were formed improperly. The state party has stated that that's just a notice that needs to be given. So we have done so. Also, in regards to several of these other committees, we'll be looking for you all to fill in for these positions as far as secretary and treasurer and in regards to our fundraising committee. So I hope that you'll go back and think about it. Please think to help us move this party along and forward. And I just appreciate all of you attending and being so well behaved. You always are, guys. You always are. But I so appreciate it. Thank you. The votes tonight. The ayes have it. This motion stands adjourned.