[Lnc-business] Committee Transparency revived

Sun Aug 14 04:23:32 EDT 2016

Tim's emails keep ending up in my spam folder.

Tim, yes it is a case by case basis in my proposal. Certain committees
would be excepted in their charter, such as the APRC and others.  I am
proposing a general rule.  Rather than the default being opacity, the
default would be transparency with exceptions carved out.

I so *appreciate your open-ness to discuss this.*  And the information on
some possible exceptions.

-- 
*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 Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Certain committees need to have non-public discussions on matters other
> than lawsuits or personnel matters, so the openness of meetings needs to be
> on a case-by-case basis. Some that came to my mind are when the website
> committee solicited bids, the bids could not be published publicly where
> later bidders could get an unfair competitive advantage. If a Candidate
> Support Committee is formed, candidates and campaign managers may not want
> their campaign plans available to their opponents, although any donations
> or in-kind contributions can be published since they will end up reported
> in publicly available reports.
>
> Last year the Awards Committee agreed to have confidential discussions.
> This allowed us to discuss the pros and cons of award nominees more
> frankly, and have the award recipients be surprised when the winners were
> announced at the convention. The award winners, but not the Hall of Liberty
> inductees, were kept secret until the announcement at the convention.
>
> Having a webpage where all of the committees can publish contact
> information (either for each committee member or an e-mail address that's
> forward to all members), minutes, and meeting notices would be good.
> Requiring 48 hours public notice before meetings is problematic. Sometime a
> committee may need to act fast (I'm thinking Ballot Access) and other times
> the most convenient time all committee members are available may be the
> next evening. Besides, would party members be checking the page every day
> to look for meeting notices? I'm just brainstorming now, but maybe we could
> have an e-mail list that anyone can sign up to that would announce all
> meeting notices.
>
> Tim Hagan
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 11, 2016 8:46 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Committee Transparency revived
>
> PS:  That means that most of Ken's concerns are problem he should have
> with the system we have *right now*.  I am not proposing anything new or
> revolutionary.  I am simply wishing to codify that with the transfer of any
> authority the duties of that authority, as it exists *right now*, must
> also be transferred.
>
> If anyone is truly opposed to that, I am in wonder that no motions or
> attempts to change the LNC rules as they are *right now *hasn't been
> attempted.
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thank you for your input!
>
> I will respond in full this weekend (maybe tomorrow) but the elephant in
> the room that is being ignored is this:  these items are being taken care
> of by the LNC *right now.*  It is transparent *right now.*  I am not
> proposing *further transparency than we have right now.  *Since we have
> that *right now* and it is supported by our membership and was passed by
> the LNC, I would find any attempt to shift this to a committee without the *transparency
> we have right now* as a back door attempt to abrogate current policy and
> would oppose.
>
> That being said, there are some of Ken's points I can agree to or
> concede.  More details in my full response.
>
> I thank you sincerely for your participation.
>
> --
> *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
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Sam Goldstein <goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> I agree with Ken in his analysis of this proposal 100%  We are a political
> party, not a social club and the members and delegates
> elect LNC members to do the business of the party.  Committees have enough
> serious work of the party to accomplish without
> having to worry about every action or word being help up for criticism.
>
> I would consider supporting Ken's proposal if there were an amount of
> spending that would trigger a review or approval of the chair.  I
> doubt the chair wants to be involved in micro-managing the expenditures of
> several committees for stamps and envelopes.  Either a
> set dollar amount or percentage of that committee's budget would be
> acceptable.
>
>
>
> Sam Goldstein
> Libertarian National Committee
> Member at Large
> 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
> Indianapolis IN 46260
> 317-850-0726 Phone
> 317-582-1773 Fax
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:15 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
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________ _________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listi nfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
> ______________________________ _________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listi nfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
>
> ______________________________ _________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listi nfo/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
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> *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
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160814/aaccfbe5/attachment-0002.html>