[Lnc-business] Bylaws Committee Veil of Secrecy.

Mon May 22 20:11:09 EDT 2017

So it seems to me that I can forward all the emails to my own reflector
list if I wished?  Or anyone else on the committee could?  That the
committee cannot prohibit that?

Further, we spring from the parent organization - I don't see how members
can be prohibited from something the parent organization does.

-Caryn Ann

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 5:36 PM Daniel Hayes <danielehayes at icloud.com>
wrote:

> From pages 500-501.  Of RONR 11th Ed.
>
> *"Committees of organized societies operate under the bylaws, the
> parliamentary authority, and any special rules of order or standing rules
> of the society which may be applicable to them. A committee may not adopt
> its own rules except as authorized in the rules of the society or in
> instructions given to the committee by its parent assembly in a particular
> case. If a standing or special committee is so large that it can function
> best in the manner of a full-scale assembly, it should be instructed that
> the informalities and modifications of the regular rules of parliamentary
> procedure listed for small boards on pages 487–88 are not to apply to its
> proceedings. When a committee is to make substantive recommendations or
> decisions on an important matter, it should give members of the society an
> opportunity to appear before it and present their views on the subject at a
> time scheduled by the committee. Such a meeting is usually called a
> hearing. During actual deliberations of the committee, only committee
> members have the right to be present. "*
>
>
> So Caryn Ann,
>
> Unless I am missing something in our rules somewhere else, the LNC Bylaws
> committee does not have the authority to create rules of order on its own.
>
> If this secrecy is just how this has always been done regarding our bylaws
> committee I would point you to page 19 of RONR 11th ed. It covers custom.
> When a point of order is raised custom falls to the floor.
>
>
> Daniel Hayes
> LNC At Large Member
>
>
>
> On May 22, 2017, at 5:46 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> And to be clear as well, if the committee does not want to have an
> automatical read-only list like this one, under what authority can any
> individual member be prevented from copying any or all emails and posting
> them on a list themselves?
>
> This is Party business not personal love letters.
>
>
> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:24 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> And at the risk of speaking for Ms. Ruff (who follows this list due to
>> our transparency), I think she is equally unclear.
>>
>> -Caryn Ann
>>
>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> See David demonstrates exactly what the problem is.... neither of us
>>> know what we can say and it is like walking on eggshells.  Our rights and
>>> duties should be clearly spelled out.
>>>
>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:20 PM, David Demarest <
>>> dprattdemarest at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Daniel, likewise on the Nebraska Unicameral. The Judiciary Committee
>>>> chaired by Laura Ebke is wide open to the public as are all Unicameral
>>>> committees that I am aware. I may have heard that they can optionally use
>>>> executive sessions for votes which sounds dubious to me but I will check
>>>> with Laura. I am not sure if and why the fact that we are a party not a
>>>> legislature should make a difference.
>>>>
>>>> Darned if I know how to answer Whitney's question at this point without
>>>> risk of impropriety until our transparency rules are defined but I do have
>>>> serious concerns with the direction this is going and the possible
>>>> justifications for lack of transparency. Perhaps a minority report will
>>>> shed some light.
>>>>
>>>> Out of curiosity, I wonder how the two major parties handle
>>>> transparency on their Bylaws & Rules committees. I would hope that we
>>>> compare favorably on the side of transparency.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> On May 22, 2017 3:45 PM, <danielehayes at icloud.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All, and especially Mr. Katz in his role as chairman of the Bylaws
>>>>> Committee,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It has come to my attention and my brain momentarily allotted enough
>>>>> bandwidth to really think about this.  Under what authority are our bylaws
>>>>> meetings secret?  (No, Starchild has not hijacked my computer).
>>>>> Specifically Ms. Harlos is acting like she just joined Fight Club.  Ms.
>>>>> 1000 Emails being mostly clammed shut.  I am worried she might end up like
>>>>> the kid from Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory movie that got the
>>>>> experimental candy.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are all the reasons for going into executive session in our
>>>>> rules with a majority vote.
>>>>> • Legal matters (potential, pending, or past)
>>>>>
>>>>> • Regulatory and compliance matters (potential, pending, or past)
>>>>>
>>>>> • Contractual compliance
>>>>>
>>>>> • Personnel matters (including evaluation, compensation, hiring, or
>>>>> dismissal)
>>>>>
>>>>> • Board self-evaluation
>>>>>
>>>>> • Strategic issues (only those requiring confidentiality)
>>>>>
>>>>> • Negotiations (potential, pending, or past)
>>>>> Other topics require a two-thirds vote of LNC.
>>>>> No action can be taken while in Executive Session.
>>>>> Discussion of action which may be taken in Open Session can occur.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The reasons for going into Executive session are supposed to be listed
>>>>> if a vote was taken.
>>>>>
>>>>> But when I ask about the vote to go into executive session I am told
>>>>> that there was no vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> I realize that we have rules all over the place and I might be missing
>>>>> something, hence I am asking, Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> Someone enlighten me as to what’s up before I slam big brown(11th
>>>>> ed.) on down.
>>>>>
>>>>> How is this remotely in line with what this organization stands for?
>>>>> I would flip a gasket if the Louisiana Legislature was operating in
>>>>> this manner.   This wouldn’t pass muster under Sunshine Laws for
>>>>> government.  Let that sink in.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel Hayes
>>>>> LNC At Large Member
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
>>>>> Windows 10
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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>
>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>
>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>> *We defend your rights*
>>> *And oppose the use of force*
>>> *Taxation is theft*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *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>
>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>
>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>> *We defend your rights*
>> *And oppose the use of force*
>> *Taxation is theft*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
> *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>
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>
> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
> *We defend your rights*
> *And oppose the use of force*
> *Taxation is theft*
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170522/cdfdf351/attachment-0005.html>