[Lnc-business] Ruling of the Chair re: Doug Craig's sustaining membership status at the time of his election

[Roland Riemers]

Yes on Craig and No on sustaining chair.
Roland Riemers of ND

      From: Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
 To: lnc-business at hq.lp.org 
 Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 4:30 PM
 Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Ruling of the Chair re: Doug Craig's sustaining membership status at the time of his election
   
I agree with the Chair that we should both address the ruling as well as the vacancy.  I am not comfortable that they should be combined into a single motion, as a motion to sustain a chair's ruling is not amendable and is to be only on the question of the ruling itself.

But in two separate email threads I will ask for co-sponsors for two motions for the following purposes:
1) to sustain the ruling of the chair, and
2) to elect Doug Craig to fill the vacancy

If the chair's ruling is sustained, then the second ballot becomes out of order anyway, and the LNC has effectively decided to accept the election on March 29.

If the chair's ruling is not sustained, then the LNC has decided to not accept the election on March 29, but the 2nd email ballot is then in order and can fill the vacancy.

If the co-sponsors arise (or if the chair wants to sponsor it just to get the voting started faster), my suggestion will be that members vote FIRST on whether to sustain the ruling of the chair, and THEN on the motion to elect Mr. Craig.  Just for technical considerations, the motion on the ruling of the chair should be answered before the other, even if the time gap is only a matter of a minute difference on the last person's vote.

-Alicia





On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:18 AM, Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org> wrote:

All,

Mr. Goldstein has requested a ruling as to whether Doug Craig's
purchase of a convention package on May 6, 2014 was sufficient to make
him a sustaining member at the time of his election the the LNC on
March 29, 2015.  I believe it was.

Bylaws Article 5, Section 3, says "'Sustaining member' is any Party
member who has given at least $25 to the Party in the prior twelve
months, or who is a life member."  There is no language in the Bylaws
that discusses convention purchases as separate from an other giving
to the Libertarian Party.  Without explicit language in the Bylaws to
the contrary, I find that the money Mr. Craig gave to the Libertarian
Party for his convention package on May 6, 2014 was in excess of $25
and given in the twelve months prior to the  LNC meeting in Phoenix on
March 29, 2015.

The Association levels that Dr. Lieberman points to are not in the
nature of a Bylaw, but are set by the LNC as a way to recognize
supporters at different giving levels.  Whether his contribution would
count for an association level is not the question at issue here.

With that, I don't think there is an issue with Mr. Craig's
eligibility at the time of his election.  If there are those on the
LNC who would still like a mail ballot on the issue Ms. Mattson has
raised, I think it's appropriate to phrase it in a way that it is
clear that it is also an appeal of the ruling of the Chair, but it
would probably be most appropriate to combine it with the question of
voting to fill the vacancy with a particular person should the ruling
of the Chair be successfully appealed.


-Nick

_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org



_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20150430/8d297806/attachment-0002.html>