[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2015-03: Sustain Chair's Ruling Regarding Convention Packages

[Joshua Katz]

To address Dr. Feldman's questions:
1.  Email ballots are tricky animals.  Where we have no particular rules of
order, we do our best to approximate our parliamentary authority.  The
closest such approximation here is:  a point of order was raised; the chair
issued a ruling; an appeal was made.  The ruling of the chair does, indeed,
stand unless there is a successful appeal.  However, what happens when a
member appeals the ruling of the chair is that the chair will state the
question as "shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?"  As a result, a
yes vote is to sustain the ruling of the chair, and a no vote is to
overturn it.  Therefore, what's really going on is that the appeal is
resulting in a vote on the question of sustaining the chair.  In dealing
with the rules for email balloting, where parliamentary motions are tricky,
it makes more sense to state the motion in its effective form - had this
been a meeting, and there been an appeal, the vote would have been on
sustaining the ruling, hence, the question is stated that way here.
2.  The bylaws state:

  The National Committee shall appoint new officers and members-at-large if
vacancies occur, such officers and members-at-large to complete the term of
the office vacated.

They do not prescribe the means by which the LNC is to do so.  An election
would not be wrong, and would be reasonable under other circumstances, as
was, in my opinion, the case at our last meeting.  However, a motion to
appoint is also not out of order or wrong, and appears to me to be most
reasonable here.  The LNC has made its preference clear; the issue at stake
now is making sure our rules are being followed.

3.  I don't think such an interpretation is reasonable.  How does one
underpay for a package while, in the exact same payment, making a donation
in the precise amount of the underpayment?  If I go out for dinner (as I
will shortly) and my meal costs $20, and I pay $25 (counting tip), can the
restaurant decide that, actually, I paid only $15 and tipped $10, and now
owe the restaurant another $5?  Can they decide that my entire payment was
the tip, and that I owe $20?

Joshua A. Katz
Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Marc Allan Feldman <marc at openivo.com>
wrote:

>  I vote aye to sustain the ruling of the chair.
>
> I apologize if I missed relevant discussion, and I am no parliamentarian
> but:
>
> 1.  I thought the ruling of the chair stands unless there is a motion to
> appeal and a vote to overturn it.  I would think a motion to sustain would
> be unnecessary and to have no affect.  Has a motion been made to overturn
> the ruling?  If the motion to sustain fails, would we need another motion
> to overturn the ruling?
>
> 2.  If the ruling is overturned, is the email ballot for election
> acceptable?  If this really is an election, wouldn't it be required to open
> to nominations?  Shouldn't it be required to have alternatives, rounds of
> voting, at least including NOTA?
>
> 3.  I believe that at the time of his election, he thought he was a
> member, we thought he was a member.  I would say that he paid for
> membership, but underpaid for the convention package.  Could we charge  him
> another $25 to finish paying for the convention package and move on?
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 3:39 PM, James Lark <jwl3s at virginia.edu> wrote:
>
>>  Dear colleagues:
>>
>>     I hope all is well with you.  I am writing in my capacity as Region 5
>> representative to vote "no" on the motion.
>>
>>     As always, thanks for your work for liberty.
>>
>>     Take care,
>>     Jim
>>
>>     James W. Lark, III
>>     Advisor, The Liberty Coalition
>>     University of Virginia
>>
>>     Region 5 Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>> -----
>>
>>
>> On 4/29/2015 1:04 AM, Alicia Mattson wrote:
>>
>>  We have an electronic mail ballot.
>>
>>
>> *Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by May 8, 2015 at 11:59:59pm
>> Pacific time. *
>> *Co-Sponsors:*  Mattson, Olsen, Wiener, Hagan
>>
>> *Motion:*  To sustain the Chair's ruling that a person's purchase of a
>> convention package in the prior twelve months
>> meets the requirement of Bylaws Article 5.3 that a sustaining member must
>> have "given at least $25 to the
>> Party in the prior twelve months"
>>   *Note about Effect*:
>>  Because this is phrased as a motion to sustain the chair's ruling, a
>> "yes" vote means that the purchase of a convention package should count
>> toward sustaining membership.  A "no" vote means that the purchase of a
>> convention package should NOT count towards sustaining membership.
>>
>> Alicia Mattson
>> LNC Secretary
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Marc Allan Feldman
> CEO
> OpenIVO, Inc.
> Beachwood, OH
> marc at openivo.com
> http://about.me/marcallanfeldman
> 216-312-4169 (direct)
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/a9d0d08a/attachment-0002.html>