[Lnc-business] status of call for electronic meeting

[Daniel Hayes]

The email ballot for Censure isn’t tied to this call for an electronic meeting. It doesn’t stop members that wish to call a meeting from doing so. Members can do both.

We DO have the required number of sponsors for the email motion to censure.

Daniel Hayes
LNC At Large Member

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 20, 2018, at 8:58 PM, Alicia Mattson <alicia.mattson at lp.org> wrote:
> 
>   Joshua, you raise a fair point that 4 email ballot sponsors aren't
>   sufficient to stop a called meeting, however the other thought I should
>   have written was that at least one of the email ballot sponsors made
>   comments that to me said he wanted the email ballot instead of the
>   meeting.  Now that there is a date/time, that could change a person's
>   willingness to co-sponsor as well if that date/time is objectionable
>   for some reason.  We really need to get the details of the motion
>   first, then the co-sponsors, instead of co-sponsors for a concept
>   before the details are defined because the details could ruin it for a
>   co-sponsor.
>   -Alicia
> 
>   On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Joshua Katz
>   <[1]planning4liberty at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>        I will join the other one too.  I believe we have until midnight
>        Pacific to get joiners. It's not clear to me that the mere
>     presence of
>        an email ballot means that past statements of joining in a call
>     are not
>        meaningful - if that's the case, every call for an electronic
>     meeting
>        can be killed by 4 people putting an email ballot together on the
>        limine of the required notice time.  However, in this instance,
>     where
>        there was no past agreement on time and date, I would agree that
>        support cannot be inferred.
>        Joshua A. Katz
> 
>      On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 8:31 PM, Alicia Mattson
>      <[1][2]alicia.mattson at lp.org> wrote:
>           From the policy manual, "Each committee member calling for an
>           electronic meeting must do so by emailing the entire committee
>        and
>           specifying the date of the meeting, time of the meeting, and
>   the
>           topic(s) to be addressed.  Meetings must be so called no fewer
>        than 2
>           days in advance for committees with fewer than 10 members, or 7
>        days in
>           advance for committees with 10 or more members."
>           The call needs to include 1) date, 2) time, and 3) topic(s) to
>   be
>           addressed.
>           Previously there were six people requesting an electronic
>   meeting
>        for a
>           topic (suspension of VC Vohra- previously moved by both
>   McKnight
>        and
>           Van Horn), but there was no date/time specified.  Those people
>        were:
>           Harlos, Katz, Redpath, Goldstein, McKnight, Van Horn.
>           Now there is a date/time specified (on a thread which implies
>   the
>        topic
>           is suspension of the Vice Chair), but since there is a
>           sufficiently-sponsored email ballot on a related topic I cannot
>        just
>           assume that the same people are willing to still sponsor the
>   call
>        of
>           the meeting under different circumstances.  I have a lot of
>   email
>           clutter today, but so far I believe I have seen the following
>        people
>           join meeting calls:
>           01/28/17 at 10:00 p.m. Eastern (Harlos, Katz)
>           10/28/17 at 9:00 p.m. Eastern (Harlos, Hagan)
>           As a parliamentary matter, scope of notice rules would allow a
>        meeting
>           called to consider suspension to also consider a lesser action
>        such as
>           censure.  The scope of notice covers anything in the range
>        between the
>           status quo and the proposed action which was noticed.
>           -Alicia
> 
>          _______________________________________________
>          Lnc-business mailing list
>          [2][3]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>          [3][4]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>     References
>        1. mailto:[5]alicia.mattson at lp.org
>        2. mailto:[6]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>        3. [7]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>     _______________________________________________
>     Lnc-business mailing list
>     [8]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>     [9]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 
> References
> 
>   1. mailto:planning4liberty at gmail.com
>   2. mailto:alicia.mattson at lp.org
>   3. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   4. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>   5. mailto:alicia.mattson at lp.org
>   6. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   7. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>   8. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   9. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business