[Lnc-business] Note about our electronic meeting

Daniel Hayes daniel.hayes at lp.org
Mon Feb 5 15:14:21 EST 2018


That is not Authoritative.  ONLY RONR 11th ed and Roberts in brief to a degree fit that.  All other works are only persuasive at best.

RONR is part of our rules.  What someone thinks it should be is not what if necessarily is legally.

Daniel

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 5, 2018, at 1:36 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
> 
>   Okay, first is from an informal summary of  RR which is where I think
>   most members are getting this understanding --- and the understanding
>   makes a lot of sense IMHO.  Of course one is not going to vote to
>   censure oneself.
>   ==
> 
> Making a Motion to Censure
> 
>   To censure a member or an officer is to warn him or her that if a
>   certain behavior continues, the next step is suspension or expulsion.
> 
> Censure
> 
>     * Purpose: To reprimand the member with the hopes of reforming him or
>       her so that he or she won't behave in the same way again.
>     * Needs a second.
>     * Amendable.
>     * Debatable.
>     * Requires a majority vote.
>     * Can't be reconsidered.
>     * Result: The member is put on notice that if he or she repeats the
>       offense, he or she can be suspended or removed from membership or
>       office.
> 
>   This is an incidental main motion and can be made only when no business
>   is pending. All subsidiary and incidental motions can be applied to
>   this motion. The member or officer being censured may come to his own
>   defense during the debate but can't vote. Taking the vote by ballot is
>   wise. A member can not be censured twice for the same offense.
>   ===  source [1]https://www.kidlink.org/docs/RobertRules/chap15.html
>   Now I know that seems to be a document referring to an earlier version
>   (or the original) and I can only find this idea of not being allowed to
>   vote in the case of an imposed penalty or a trial in RONR Chapter 20.
>   But the logic certainly holds.  And it wasn't for no reason that Nick
>   originally thought that Arvin couldn't vote, and Arvin originally
>   thought so as well.  Of course I also think it logical that if a voting
>   member of any body has a specific pecuniary interest in the outcome,
>   that they should be required to recuse themselves, and RONR does not
>   require that.
>   Alicia previously said that our bylaws supersede a requirement for a
>   trial.  I disagreed then and still disagree now.  If a suspension vote
>   had passed, I think that would have been a fatal defect.
>   So I am just trying to learn for my own benefit - can a member (officer
>   or not) vote on a censure motion?  I cannot find specific language that
>   they cannot - though I CAN find specific language that a member cannot
>   if it is an infraction during a meeting (page 647) and for which a
>   penalty will be imposed (and a censure alone is not a penalty) [implied
>   by page 643 asterisked note on bottom).
> 
>   On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Daniel Hayes <[2]daniel.hayes at lp.org>
>   wrote:
> 
>     This is why I asked you to cite your point from RONR.   It’s how you
>     hopefully end an argument.
>     Daniel
>     Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Feb 5, 2018, at 12:28 PM, Joshua Katz
>   <[3]planning4liberty at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>  Can you explain exactly what the objection is?  I don't the book in
>>  front of me, but I do not recall any statement in RONR about voting
>   on
>>  censure.
>> 
>>  Joshua A. Katz
>>  On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 11:36 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>>  <[1][4]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>> 
>>       Oh I know.  This is an informal question in order to learn.
>>       Without being binding - and even if raised then no result
>   would
>>    be
>>       changed - does anyone have any thoughts?  If I’m mistaken can
>>    someone
>>       explain to me?
>>       This is simply an effort to further master RONR not to start a
>>       controversy or rehash a settled vote.
>>       On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 10:11 AM Nicholas Sarwark
>>    <[1][2][5]chair at lp.org>
>>       wrote:
>>         Points of order need to be made at the time.
>>         We are no longer at the time.
>>         -Nick
>>         On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 8:58 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>> 
>>       <[2][3][6]carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>  I think we made an error.  It doesn't affect the outcome but
>>  I
>>       have
>>>  seen members comment on this (and big surprise, there are a
>>       vocal few
>>>  who are seeing a conspiracy in it) but I don't think Arvin
>>       should have
>>>  been allowed to vote on the censure motion.
>>>  Our Bylaws supersede RONR on suspension (and I think our
>>  Bylaws
>>       are
>>>  flawed there but it is what it is) but do not supersede RONR
>>  on
>>>  censure.
>>>  Thus I think it was in order for Arvin to vote on suspension
>>       but not in
>>>  order for him to vote on censure.
>>>  Thoughts?
>>>  --
>>>  In Liberty,
>>>  Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>  Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>>       (Alaska,
>>>  Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
>>       Washington)
>>>  - [1]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
>>>  Communications Director, [2]Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>>  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
>>> 
>>> References
>>> 
>> 
>>>  1. mailto:[3]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>  2. [4][4][7]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>>    References
>>       1. mailto:[5][8]chair at lp.org
>>       2. mailto:[6][9]carynannharlos at gmail.com
>>       3. mailto:[7]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>       4. [8][10]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>> 
>> References
>> 
>>  1. mailto:[11]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>>  2. mailto:[12]chair at lp.org
>>  3. mailto:[13]carynannharlos at gmail.com
>>  4. [14]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>>  5. mailto:[15]chair at lp.org
>>  6. mailto:[16]carynannharlos at gmail.com
>>  7. mailto:[17]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>  8. [18]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 
> References
> 
>   1. https://www.kidlink.org/docs/RobertRules/chap15.html
>   2. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
>   3. mailto:planning4liberty at gmail.com
>   4. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>   5. mailto:chair at lp.org
>   6. mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com
>   7. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>   8. mailto:chair at lp.org
>   9. mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com
>  10. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>  11. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>  12. mailto:chair at lp.org
>  13. mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com
>  14. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>  15. mailto:chair at lp.org
>  16. mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com
>  17. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>  18. http://www.lpcolorado.org/




More information about the Lnc-business mailing list