[Lnc-business] Acknowledging election of JC members
Caryn Ann Harlos
caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Sat Jul 7 03:38:19 EDT 2018
It seems clear to me that whatever we do is a kludge. But it also seems
clear to me that since the JC is the watchdog for the Party, that the foxes
shouldn't decide who guards the henhouse and we defer to their kludge.
We probably haven't had a valid JC since 2016 in the first place.
On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 1:01 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> The first thing to do here is read our existing bylaws relating to the
> Judicial Committee.
> Bylaw Article 8.1 says (in part), "The Judicial Committee shall take
> office immediately upon the close of the Regular Convention at which
> elected and shall serve until the final adjournment of the next Regular
> Convention."
> I don't understand Mr. Moulton's analysis and current plan which,
> unless I've misunderstood what he wrote, seems to say the JC members
> from the prior term are still serving on that body with the capacity to
> resign and fill vacancies. It seems pretty clear from the bylaws that
> their terms expired at the final adjournment of the convention on
> Tuesday afternoon.
> -Alicia
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Joe Bishop-Henchman via Lnc-business
> <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
> Mr. Moulton, the chair of the old JC, has permitted me to forward
> this
> from him. I agree with his analysis of the problem and believe
> the
> proposed LNC motion would help make clear who the JC is.
> JBH
> Sam and Joe,
> I only speak for myself and not for the whole JC from the
> 2016-2018
> term.
> Because no one received a majority vote with approval voting,
> there is
> a
> controversy as to whether the Judicial Committee was properly
> elected.
> Without getting into details of the relative merits of each
> interpretation, I believe this is an exhaustive list:
> 1. The convention elected all 7 JC members by plurality (the
> motion to
> suspend the rules for at-large applies to JC because our rules
> say the
> JC uses the same method of election as at-large).
> 2. The convention elected 5 JC members by plurality (the motion
> referenced above explicitly said the top 5 would be elected by
> plurality)
> 3. The JC from the previous term continues serving another 2 or 4
> years
> (no one received a majority)
> 4. The LNC can appoint the JC (the LNC can fill at-large
> vacancies, and
> our rules say the JC is elected by the same method as at-large)
> 5. We have no JC (no one received a majority and our bylaws say
> the JC
> serves until the final adjournment of the next convention rather
> than
> when the next JC is elected)
> I can't do anything about interpretation #5.
> I am trying my best to at least make the interpretations in #1,
> #2, #3,
> and #4 be the same people so those with different interpretations
> don't
> think we have 4 different JCs. I believe this will add to the
> legitimacy of the JC.
> To that end I have asked the previous term's JC to resign (except
> me,
> as
> I serve on both) and appoint the 6 new JC members to fill the
> vacancies
> created. That makes the people under #3 the same as the people
> under
> #1. 6 of us (including me) have voted yes, and 5 have
> simultaneously
> submitted their resignations effective at the end of the vote.
> One
> member of the old JC refuses to vote or resign because he thinks
> that
> interpretation is without merit. He told me over the phone
> (repeatedly)
> "I am not on the JC."
> Once the new JC is constituted on the email list, I will offer a
> motion
> for the top 5 to fill 2 vacancies with the next 2 on the list.
> That
> makes the people under #2 the same as the people under #1.
> The LNC's motion could be construed to make the people under #4
> the
> same
> as under #1.
> Please feel free to forward this email to the LNC. Anyone may
> email me
> at [1][2]chuck at moulton.org or call me at 215-768-6812 if you have
> any
> questions.
> Chuck Moulton
> Chair, 2016-2018 LP Judicial Committee
> References
> 1. mailto:[3]chuck at moulton.org
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 2. mailto:chuck at moulton.org
> 3. mailto:chuck at moulton.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/>
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*
-------------- next part --------------
It seems clear to me that whatever we do is a kludge. But it also
seems clear to me that since the JC is the watchdog for the Party, that
the foxes shouldn't decide who guards the henhouse and we defer to
their kludge.
We probably haven't had a valid JC since 2016 in the first place.
On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 1:01 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business
<[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
The first thing to do here is read our existing bylaws relating
to the
Judicial Committee.
Bylaw Article 8.1 says (in part), "The Judicial Committee shall
take
office immediately upon the close of the Regular Convention at
which
elected and shall serve until the final adjournment of the next
Regular
Convention."
I don't understand Mr. Moulton's analysis and current plan which,
unless I've misunderstood what he wrote, seems to say the JC
members
from the prior term are still serving on that body with the
capacity to
resign and fill vacancies. It seems pretty clear from the bylaws
that
their terms expired at the final adjournment of the convention on
Tuesday afternoon.
-Alicia
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 1:43 PM, Joe Bishop-Henchman via Lnc-business
<[1][2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
Mr. Moulton, the chair of the old JC, has permitted me to
forward
this
from him. I agree with his analysis of the problem and believe
the
proposed LNC motion would help make clear who the JC is.
JBH
Sam and Joe,
I only speak for myself and not for the whole JC from the
2016-2018
term.
Because no one received a majority vote with approval voting,
there is
a
controversy as to whether the Judicial Committee was properly
elected.
Without getting into details of the relative merits of each
interpretation, I believe this is an exhaustive list:
1. The convention elected all 7 JC members by plurality (the
motion to
suspend the rules for at-large applies to JC because our rules
say the
JC uses the same method of election as at-large).
2. The convention elected 5 JC members by plurality (the motion
referenced above explicitly said the top 5 would be elected by
plurality)
3. The JC from the previous term continues serving another 2 or
4
years
(no one received a majority)
4. The LNC can appoint the JC (the LNC can fill at-large
vacancies, and
our rules say the JC is elected by the same method as at-large)
5. We have no JC (no one received a majority and our bylaws say
the JC
serves until the final adjournment of the next convention
rather
than
when the next JC is elected)
I can't do anything about interpretation #5.
I am trying my best to at least make the interpretations in #1,
#2, #3,
and #4 be the same people so those with different
interpretations
don't
think we have 4 different JCs. I believe this will add to the
legitimacy of the JC.
To that end I have asked the previous term's JC to resign
(except
me,
as
I serve on both) and appoint the 6 new JC members to fill the
vacancies
created. That makes the people under #3 the same as the people
under
#1. 6 of us (including me) have voted yes, and 5 have
simultaneously
submitted their resignations effective at the end of the vote.
One
member of the old JC refuses to vote or resign because he
thinks
that
interpretation is without merit. He told me over the phone
(repeatedly)
"I am not on the JC."
Once the new JC is constituted on the email list, I will offer
a
motion
for the top 5 to fill 2 vacancies with the next 2 on the list.
That
makes the people under #2 the same as the people under #1.
The LNC's motion could be construed to make the people under #4
the
same
as under #1.
Please feel free to forward this email to the LNC. Anyone may
email me
at [1][2][3]chuck at moulton.org or call me at 215-768-6812 if
you have
any
questions.
Chuck Moulton
Chair, 2016-2018 LP Judicial Committee
References
1. mailto:[3][4]chuck at moulton.org
References
1. mailto:[5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
2. mailto:[6]chuck at moulton.org
3. mailto:[7]chuck at moulton.org
--
--
In Liberty,
Caryn Ann Harlos
Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
- [8]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
Communications Director, [9]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:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
3. mailto:chuck at moulton.org
4. mailto:chuck at moulton.org
5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
6. mailto:chuck at moulton.org
7. mailto:chuck at moulton.org
8. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
9. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list