[Lnc-business] SD?

[Wes Benedict]

Roland, South Dakota's coming along well. There are new developments in 
interpreting the rules nearly daily, so it's a bit of a roller coaster, 
but I don't need you to send new petitioners, at least so far. If the 
situation changes and requires more help, I'll let you know and 
appreciate your help.

Regarding moving expenses, I'm sure well over 200 man-hours have been 
wasted on this controversy that was manufactured by a few using one 
phrase in my contract while ignoring the other phrases in my contract 
and all the written evidence suggesting the LNC did expect to pay my 
moving expenses and did actually approve each expenditure along the way. 
I'd like to thank the LNC for ratifying all of the expenses (again I 
guess) -- Alicia Mattson was the only vote against ratifying those 
expenses.

Yes, we got publicity from the Oklahoma turn-in. See blog and attached 
print image.

I don't have time to help with the technical details of the election 
rule details in North Dakota--I worked 12 hour days each of the last two 
weekends--I'm copying Carla Howell, our political director, to help you 
out with that, or to find someone to help you.

If she, or whomever she delegates this to, doesn't come up with a 
zero-cost or near zero cost option for you, then let me know and I'll 
get involved.

Thanks,

Wes Benedict, Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
(202) 333-0008 ext. 232, wes.benedict at lp.org
facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
Join the Libertarian Party at: http://lp.org/membership

On 2/28/2016 11:00 PM, Roland Riemers wrote:
> Wes,  how is SD going?   Do we need any additional help there do you 
> think?
>
> Oh,  glad we were able to resolve your moving expenses.  I thought it 
> was unusual enough to review, but I thought you had a good case so 
> voted to support you after that review.  Generally, I am for reviewing 
> unusual expenditures,  but do not like making staff pay back unless it 
> was outright fraud.  So, I give the benefit of any doubt to the staff 
> (usually).  Sorry for the hassle though, as I know the job you have 
> must be a real pain in the arse sometimes, and I certainly appreciate 
> your efforts.
>
> Did we get any good publicity from the Oklahoma turn-in?
>
> Looks like we finally resolved our governor candidate issue in ND, so 
> that should be no problem and I fully expect we will maintain ballot 
> status after the election. (99% certain)   Should be a land-mark year 
> for ND Libertarians and we should have a full state-wide slate.
>
> One question,  ND has laws regulating the major parties, such as 
> requiring precinct caucuses, etc.,  I suppose that is the same in most 
> other states as well.  But once we get ballot status, does that mean 
> we have to follow all those minute party procedures?   For instance, 
> precinct caucuses must be advertised in the newspapers, but if we did 
> that, we would be broke in no time.   How have other states handled this?
>
>
>
> Roland Riemers
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160301/87309919/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: article Oklahoman 2016-02-23 ballot access.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 127587 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160301/87309919/attachment-0002.pdf>