[Lnc-business] Committee transparency

Sun Sep 25 00:06:27 EDT 2016

Whips, accept not except.  Sounds the same and means opposite :)

Very tired.  Productive evening of Gary Johnson sign planting.

On Saturday, September 24, 2016, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Joshua, I will consider these and may except some but I see some I will
> not.
>
> I THANK YOU for your careful consideration.  I will give just as much care
> in reviewing prior to our meeting tomorrow.
>
> On Saturday, September 24, 2016, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','planning4liberty at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> I will be introducing the motion to amend indicated below.  Bold is for
>> additions, italics for removal.
>>
>> Before that, though, I have some comments on this motion.  First, not all
>> committees have power - in fact, some members of the LNC are likely to
>> support this while also believing that no committees, or very few, should
>> be empowered.  What is the purpose of a non-empowered committee?  It
>> depends on the committee, but in all cases, the committee is supposed to be
>> composed of people with particular knowledge in a particular area or on a
>> particular question, and to return recommendations for action.  RONR
>> differentiates between a few sorts of committees.  Standing committees are
>> composed of "the strongest possible group for the handling of any task that
>> may arise within the province of the committee."  Special committees are
>> subdivided into types.  A special committee appointed to carry out an
>> instruction from the assembly should be composed only of those who favor
>> the action.  When one is appointed for investigation and deliberation, it
>> should be larger, and should represent all viewpoints within the
>> organization, to the extent possible.  This motion, though, treats all
>> three of these committees types alike.
>>
>> When we impose obligations on committee members, we are limiting the pool
>> of people willing to serve.  We should, therefore, be sure that the
>> obligation makes sense and serves a purpose.  When a special committee is
>> appointed to carry out an instruction, I see no particular purpose to
>> compelling committee members to provide their contact information.  Their
>> task is not aided by being provided with the opinions of various party
>> members - the views of the one, or the several, do not prevail over the
>> views of the many - in particular, as ordered by the assembly or its
>> appointees.  The other two sorts it probably makes sense to display contact
>> information for - particularly the last type.  However, even there, what
>> we're doing is politicizing the process of committee deliberation.  We're
>> purposefully trying to allow for lobbying and email campaigns - in the case
>> of the candidate committee, for instance, we're making it easier to get a
>> letter-writing campaign on behalf of a candidate whose campaign does not
>> advance our strategic objectives.  As I said here a few weeks ago, we're
>> favoring the most vocal over the decisions made by the delegates as a whole.
>>
>> Regarding "or within the committee's own published standing rules for
>> executive session," why on earth would we require this?  We are discussing
>> committees appointed by the LNC.  The LNC operates under RONR and our own
>> rules.  Committees we appoint are not permitted, unless we give them
>> permission, to adopt their own rules of order.  Presumably, we'd interpret
>> this rule as us giving them permission to adopt their own rules of order as
>> regards executive session, but that misses the point - unless they do, they
>> operate under our rules of order, in which executive session is
>> well-defined (and limited more than in RONR).  What is being achieved here,
>> other than forcing a committee to adopt a motion making either our rules or
>> RONR's less restrictive rules for executive session their own?  These rules
>> exist, and are available on our website.  RONR is available in any
>> bookstore.  Exactly what 'transparency' is gained by simply chucking out
>> portions of our own rules for committees, and then telling them "if you
>> want it, you can adopt it."  Furthermore, if a committee is not permitted
>> to enter executive session, a standing rule would not be sufficient to
>> allow them to.
>>
>> I agree with Ken that we should not bind our rules to any particular form
>> of technology.  As concerns all internal email communications, I oppose
>> this restriction on committees.  Unlike boards, committees produce a
>> work-product.  Committees often do not keep minutes because their report is
>> exactly what they've done.  An empowered committee is a bit different, but
>> similar in this sense - I'd support everyone being able to know what
>> they've done, and the right of the committee to make its reasons public.
>> Furthermore, exactly how would this be enforced?  If two people are both
>> appointed to a committee, are they permitted to email each other separately
>> from the "official list?"  Are they allowed to call each other and discuss
>> how they feel about a topic before the committee, phones being electronic
>> devices?  True, a phone call isn't a correspondence - how about texts?
>>
>> As for emergency meetings, I for one am not interested in missing filing
>> deadlines or other statutory dates because it is realized 36 hours before a
>> meeting that the committee didn't properly file its rules for emergency
>> meetings, or didn't think to word them in a way that includes the situation
>> in which it finds itself.
>>
>> Move to Amend Policy Manual Section 2.02 (page 23) to add a new
>> subsection (2) and re-number the remaining as follows:
>>
>> 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*, except
>> that the committee member may choose not to disclose contact information*.
>> 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 *with the exception of executive
>> sessions **and all electronic committee correspondences shall be made
>> 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 member voted.* At least 48
>> hours public notice will be given for any committee meeting*, with the
>> exception of emergency meetings as defined within the committee's own
>> published standing rules., except that a call to meeting agreed to by all
>> committee members shall be made available publicly at the time it is
>> issued.*
>> Joshua A. Katz
>> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>>
>
>
> --
> *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>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
*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/20160924/beaacccf/attachment-0002.html>