[Lnc-business] Committee Transparency revived

Fri Aug 12 17:44:14 EDT 2016

Caren Ann,

1)  I do not want my phone number published on LP.org.  This is not
negotiable for me.

2)  I believe that committees should operate as they see fit.  Given that
they are only allowed to make recommendations to the LNC, and not actually
create policy without LNC approval, I see no reason to require them to
share every detail with the while of the membership.  If they make
proposals that violate our principles, we don't approve them.  People who
want to know everything the committee does, should find out how to get on
the committee.

3)  I do appreciate committees that give notice of their meetings, and
allow folks to listen in.

4)  I think it is best practice for a committee to solicit input from
membership at-large via a partywide forum/medium, and receive such input
via e-mail (example: policycommittee at lp.org) or by phone (numbers provided
voluntarily by individual members, if they choose).

5)  I do not agree with requiring any committee to operate in a certain
manner...top-down control is not my thing.  LNC members were elected to do
the business of the Party, LNC members then vote to create
committees/subcommittees.

6)  I am the Chairperson of the LPTexas Policy Committee.  We believe in
keeping it simple....as you can see from the Policy Manual excerpt below:
STANDING COMMITTEES

Any standing committee formed shall be chaired by a current member of the
SLEC unless decided otherwise by majority vote of the SLEC.

Standing committees do not include the convention committees of rules,
platform, and credentials.

We do, however, have commitee e-mail addresses for standing committees...to
which anyone can submit inquiries, suggestions, etc...all committee members
see these messages, and they are addressed accordingly.  While each
committee may not always invite everyone to listen in to committee
meetings, we do submit minutes after each meeting, and those are posted in
the forum, as well.  Nothing we do is in secret, and all decisions are made
public.  The SLEC, still has to vote on any proposal, and those sessions
are streamed/videotaped in the case of the LNC anyway.  So, no decisions
get made in the shadows....at least, that is how I see it.

7)  Opening up every single conversation, deliberation, exchange of ideas,
or proposal to the entire membership to scrutinize, question, challenge, or
change is an invitation for confusion, convolution, inefficiency, and
impasse.

8)  What Daniel Hayes is doing, opening his calls to us all, is great!  It
works for that committee, and I expect it will render positive results.
However, I don't agree with requiring Daniel to open his meetings.  Those
charged with that business should be empowered to take care of their
business in accordance with the dynamics of their team.  As Ken stated
earlier, certain committee material is sensitive, and should be.
Therefore, I oppose the notion that every single communication should be
open.

9)  If an issue arises, and a committee's integrity is questioned, or
evidence of wrongdoing is put forth, let's address it.

10)  The Policy Manual should be brief, concise, clear, and everything in
it must be enforceable, without creating undue burdens on the LNC itself.

11)  I am not seeing in the Policy Manual where it says that
(sub)committees must do all the things you suggest.  You say you are only
suggesting one thing different...that is the phone number publication.  I
think LNC meetings should be subject to more transparency than
(sub)committee meetings.  I don't wish to *require* committees (subordinate
to the LNC) to do the things being suggested here.

Whitney Bilyeu
Region 7 Representative

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com
> wrote:

> Whitney, I have to ask, do you then object to the current transparency
> level of the LNC?  Because I have proposed little different (other than the
> listing of information about committee members) then presently exists.
>
> And I have to ask all Regionals, and this is a drum I will constantly
> pound.  Is opacity what the members of your Region want?  I make it a point
> to interact as much as they wish with the members of my region and the
> affiliates, and not a single one has told me they favour opacity.  I will
> be raising this question in my next regional mailer.
>
> I thank Starchild for the very thorough post, and the "cost of secrecy"
> part had me nodding my head vigrously.
>
> Another cost of secrecy is that we will not have great LNC candidates for
> the future.  I do not flatter myself into thinking I was a "great"
> candidate but my region is happy so far, and the only reason I felt
> competent to run was that I spent the six months prior to convention
> studying all the decisions and information that was available in the open
> and attending every single open meeting I could.  Slamming the door on this
> is slamming the door on opportunity to groom future Party leaders.
>
> I still hope to provide my full response to Ken's thoughtful points this
> weekend.
>
> --
> *In Liberty,*
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I agree with Ken.
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So, I'm breaking this down, and I still have a few concerns. (I never
>>> intended to de-rail before, sorry about that.)
>>>
>>>
>>> First, there are committees with no power to spend, but are strategic in
>>> nature that would fall under this proposal. Specifically, I can tell you
>>> that the Ballot Access Committee has discussed important strategies on how
>>> to achieve ballot access.
>>>
>>> I have already heard from some members that they believe committee
>>> transparency would expose our strategy, putting us at greater risk of being
>>> on the wrong end of shenanigans. By the wording, these substantial
>>> strategies would be required to be exposed.
>>>
>>> And it's not even just the Ballot Access Committee. Look at Affiliate
>>> Support or Candidate Support; do we really want to let our opposition know
>>> our next few chess moves?  I foresee a day where our opposition raises
>>> money to counter the actions of a candidate to be funded by the LNC before
>>> the candidate even gets the money from the LNC.  Politics is a game of
>>> chess, and telling your opponent your next 3 moves means you're either
>>> really good, or really dumb. And I don't see us winning elections, so that
>>> might narrow such a move into only one of those two categories...
>>>
>>> I'm all about transparency, but only after the information is of no
>>> value to our opponents anymore, and cannot be used by our opponents to
>>> cause harm to the party or its candidates.
>>>
>>>
>>> Second, a committee would be able to set their own rules on executive
>>> session.  What stops a committee from adopting rules that puts them
>>> permanently into executive session whenever they're in a business meeting?
>>> Unless, of course, we create special rules for every committee (and clutter
>>> up the Policy Manual -- sorry, but it's true!)
>>>
>>>
>>> Third, you're talking about creating new mailing lists aliases.  That's
>>> more work for the LNC staff.
>>>
>>>
>>> Fourth, the Ballot Access Committee has had one or two emergency
>>> meetings. There are times when 48 hours notice is not realistic.
>>>
>>>
>>> Fifth, I strongly oppose publishing my phone number on LP.org.  I'm
>>> already annoyed enough that I get phone calls from petition coordinators
>>> from around the US. It is great to have my phone going off in the middle of
>>> the day while I'm trying to be on a conference call, or trying to lead a
>>> meeting (sarcasm). Maybe some folks like having their phones blown up and
>>> being put on spammer phone lists. I do not.
>>>
>>>
>>> Finally, I would suggest not hardcoding the "public reflector" language.
>>> There are better ways to publicize mailing lists that don't involve the
>>> current configuration which could be examined in the future.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So, now that I'm through everything that I see wrong with it, here's
>>> what I'd counter-propose:
>>>
>>> *Any committee which has been empowered to expend funds shall notify the
>>> LNC chair, in writing, of the exact wording of any motion passed by the
>>> committee to expend funds, and the LNC chair shall be responsible for
>>> approving those expenditures prior to funds being expended.  All
>>> expenditures shall be recorded in compliance with the law and this policy
>>> manual.  All expenditures shall be reported to the full LNC at the next
>>> in-person LNC meeting.*
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
>>> LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
>>> LPKY Judicial Committee
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2016-08-11 22:20, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>>
>>> As per the request of several committee members, here once again is what
>>> I like to offer as a Policy Manual Amendment:
>>>
>>>
>>> 2) Committee Transparency
>>>
>>> The names and contact information (phone number, email address, or
>>> both)for all committee members shall be posted on the LP.org website.
>>> Unless otherwise specifically excepted on a committee-by-committee basis or
>>> within the committee's own published standing rules for "executive
>>> session," all committee meetings shall be open to any member of the
>>> National Party to observe or listen and all electronic committee
>>> correspondences shall bemade available on a public reflector system on the
>>> LP.org website, the location of which will be published with the committee
>>> contact information. Notices, minutes, agendas, and call-in information of
>>> committee meetings shall be published to said reflector list or otherwise
>>> on the LP.org <http://lp.org/> website, including a record of all
>>> substantive committee actions and how each membervoted. At least 48 hours
>>> public notice will be given for any committee meeting.
>>>
>>>
>>> My intent for this is that I want to empower committees but will oppose
>>> that if it adds a layer of opacity that does not presently exist.  Right
>>> now, we as an LNC are micromanaging things, but at least the members can
>>> see the decisions.
>>>
>>> I would like some real discussion on this and respectfully ask that any
>>> discussions about the policy manual being too long, or needing to be
>>> consolidated, that do not debate or make suggestions as to the merit of
>>> this specific proposal have their own email thread.
>>>
>>> I want to sponsor with Joshua Katz a Candidate Support Committee.  But I
>>> cannot/will not unless we have transparency in place either in the
>>> description of that committee or as a general rule which guides all of our
>>> committees.
>>>
>>> --
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *In Liberty,*
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.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/20160812/f4fa340e/attachment-0002.html>