[Lnc-business] Motion to Rescind - Request for Co-Sponsors

Tue Sep 20 04:06:13 EDT 2016

Yes Arvin and rescind any signatures already executed

On Tuesday, September 20, 2016, Arvin Vohra <votevohra at gmail.com> wrote:

> This would be to remove the authority previously granted the chair to sign
> the contract, correct?
>
> On Sep 20, 2016 1:59 AM, "Daniel Hayes" <danielehayes at icloud.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','danielehayes at icloud.com');>> wrote:
>
>> I was told there would be a sunset on the silence after the
>> inauguration.  If that is not the case, I have to wonder what else I was
>> told that was in there might be in there.  I can't find out until I sign
>> away my voice.  I am disturbed.
>>
>> I will cosponsor this motion to rescind something previously adopted.
>>
>>
>> Daniel Hayes
>> LNC At Large Member
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:16 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','carynannharlos at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>
>> Fellow LNC members, it is with great regret that I have to present this
>> Motion and ask for support, but I feel this is our duty – our duty to our
>> Bylaws, this Party, and its members.  I will give my narrative support
>> following.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Move to rescind the authority granted to the Chair to negotiate and
>> execute a campaign contract and the Joint Fundraising Agreement and rescind
>> any signatures already executed.*
>>
>>
>>
>> Procedurally, I note I voted to grant this authority and thus have
>> standing to bring this Motion.  I note the contract has not yet been signed
>> by the campaign, and thus, there is no agreement.  This motion should put
>> the campaign on notice that there is a dispute in the LNC, but at least one
>> member.
>>
>>
>>
>> To recap the events of the last few days.    On Friday we learned that
>> the Chair had signed a campaign contract and the Joint Fundraising
>> Agreement with the campaign and that he had decided, upon advice of
>> counsel, to keep them confidential until Inauguration Day.  When I
>> requested to see the documents, I was presented with an NDA, and this whole
>> thing began.  It is, to me, without dispute, that we agreed to keep the
>> negotiations confidential until they were signed but were silent on any
>> silence afterwards.  On these grounds and the over-reach of the NDA, I
>> refused to sign it.  I asked if the contract itself required
>> confidentiality until Inauguration Day as arguably we granted the authority
>> to negotiate that term when we granted this authority to the Chair.  On
>> Saturday, at 14:28CDT, the Chair responded to me and us that this provision
>> to keep the contract confidential was NOT a provision of the contract but
>> was a decision reached unilaterally by him on advice of counsel.  Starchild
>> and I objected that the Chair did not have this authority and that such
>> would require a vote of the LNC in Executive Session or otherwise.
>> Starchild in fact proposed a Motion for that very thing.  However, a mere
>> forty minutes after advising me that the contract did not contain such a
>> provision, the Chair advised us that the contract did, in fact, contain an
>> eternal secrecy clause, a fact which he verified with counsel today.  When
>> I saw all this happening, and in light of my earlier lack of information in
>> which any earlier agreements would be rendered null, I formally withdrew my
>> request to see the documents until these issues could be resolved.
>>
>>
>>
>> This should be very disturbing, because one thing has become patently
>> clear.  *The Chair did not know there was an eternal secrecy clause in
>> the contract when he signed it. * There is then quite obviously some
>> negligence here.  I do not know if it is negligence of the Chair or
>> professional negligence of LNC counsel to advise of all the potential and
>> reasonable implications, but a contract was signed in complete ignorance of
>> one of the key terms.  This is unacceptable and is reason enough for the
>> LNC to take control of this situation and rescind the authority and the
>> signatures.  I argue that it is our fiduciary duty to do so.
>>
>>
>>
>> But let’s put that reason aside, though that is justification enough.
>> Let’s stipulate that the Chair and LNC counsel knew full well that there
>> was an eternal secrecy provision and went ahead with it.  Such a provision
>> must be repudiated as it usurps and abrogates our rights and privileges as
>> Committee members to be able to publicly enforce our Bylaws and represent
>> our members, and further is in direct conflict with our fiduciary duty to
>> this Party, its members, and our Bylaws.  How so?  Well I can think of a
>> few ways it is possible, and this is not intended to be exhaustive as the
>> unknown can contain quite a few subjunctives.
>>
>>
>>
>> Does the contract create potential financial liabilities for the current
>> committee, its members, or future committees? If the answer is "I can't
>> tell you" unless I waive my rights, the contract makes the budgetary
>> process impossible and thus we abrogate our public duties.
>>
>>
>>
>> Does the contract create potential liabilities that could be visited on
>> state affiliates that are not separately incorporated? If the answer is "I
>> can't tell you,” why should that be believed?  Why should the state
>> affiliates and members, who can never see it, be assured?
>>
>>
>>
>> Does the contract potentially violate the Statement of Principles?  Well
>> if I am sworn to secrecy, I have lost my right to press this case to the
>> Judicial Committee and through the appeal process in the Bylaws (as well as
>> the same right of the membership), then such rights are rendered null and
>> void making a mockery of our Bylaws.
>>
>>
>>
>> I would also note that this completely hobbles the membership from being
>> able to judge for itself if either side is upholding their sides of the
>> bargain.  It is opaque and completely unaccountable.  It further prevents
>> the members from using the lessons learned from the successes and failures
>> of this contract (as all things can be improved on) in negotiating and
>> crafting future contracts with future campaigns and thus is a complete
>> abrogation of our duty to the future of this Party and the members’ rights
>> to ensure the same.
>>
>>
>>
>> There is the further issue that I am being ask to agree to a secrecy
>> provision in order to see the contract to judge for myself whether it is
>> there, in effect having to “pass it, to see what is in it” and to
>> proactively waive my rights and bind myself to a repellant stipulation.
>> This is the way the corrupt state and duopoly behave, and should not be the
>> way the Libertarian Party is conducted.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lastly, this is indeed a rumour, but it was told to me, and I have to, in
>> the discharge of my duties consider it- no matter how incredible, if there
>> is any chance that it could be the case, particularly since I have to waive
>> my rights to ascertain for myself, a source, allegedly from within the
>> campaign, has relayed that there is a eternal non-disparagement clause in
>> the contract.  I find that difficult to believe (but I would have earlier
>> thought the idea of an eternal secrecy cause to be ridiculous), and if so,
>> absolutely repellant to the Libertarian principles we are supposed to be
>> upholding in our modeling of transparency and integrity to the watching
>> world, but if there was, I couldn’t tell anyone.  And without waiving my
>> rights, I cannot even know if I am supposed to be bound to any such thing.
>> And if anything was done by the campaign (and I am NOT alleging anything
>> would be) that while legal would be against our principles or our duty to
>> the Party, I would be unable to say so to the membership nor pursue any
>> redress.   I do not think our Chair would ever agree to such a thing.  But
>> .... an eternal secrecy clause was agreed to unknowingly, how do I know
>> this wasn't too?  Or what other clause that I cannot even imagine, and once
>> I learn of it, I am bound to silence to the grave? This is unacceptable.
>>
>>
>>
>> All of this is reason enough.  I have no desire to put a target on my
>> back, and I literally am sick about this, but my duty compels me to protect
>> rights and duties and the integrity of our judgment and our Party Bylaws,
>> and potentially, our Statement of Principles which is the only charter for
>> our existence.  I feel I have been put in an impossible situation.
>>
>>
>>
>> I want to be perfectly clear here. This is NOT about the campaign. Anyone
>> who uses this email to attack or belittle is doing so against my express
>> intent. This is ONLY about the LNC, its rights and duties, and the members’
>> rights.  This is on our doorstep and no one else.  We have only ourselves
>> to praise or blame.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *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 <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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/20160920/bc704e53/attachment-0002.html>