[Lnc-business] DRAFT MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 29-30, 2018 LNC MEETING - V1
Caryn Ann Harlos
caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Mon Nov 26 07:41:12 EST 2018
I am going through this in batches and will address thusly and will submit
an amended draft. *I deeply appreciate the advance review.*
*Re: counts in hand-raise votes*
I do not believe this is proper or necessary as the body did not order a
counted vote. I consulted briefly on the RONR forum regarding this
question and so far the conversation affirms my position. I will continue
to monitor my question there to see if anything further is added. Thus, I
will not be making those changes. If the count is important any member can
and should request a roll call vote or move that the count be placed in the
record.
*Re:* *Appendix E v F*
This was corrected. Please note in the forthcoming draft that there is an
additional appendix added.
*Re: notations of amendments to agenda*
I do not believe my minutes insinuate that Nick has the power to
unilaterally amend the agenda. The item in question was properly noticed
and was inadvertantly not included and Nick was merely recognizing that
point. However, this is a quibble I do not wish to expend energy on and
made the appropriate amendments to satisfy this objection.
*Re: notation of as amended*
It wasn't formally amended but rather I simply agreed, but not a point I
wish to quibble on so I added that language to satisfy this objection.
*Re: it's v its*
That was already corrected in the updated draft.
*To be continued...*
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 1:35 AM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> Skimming the subject lines of still-unread emails in my inbox, I see
> that an updated draft of the September minutes has been sent today. My
> comments below are from looking at the first draft. I have not
> reviewed today’s update to see whether these have already been
> addressed, so there may be some items listed here that are now moot.
> No appendices were included with this draft of the September minutes.
> I’m not inclined to approve things sight unseen. Many of the
> appendices were sent in advance, but three of the appendices have not
> yet been seen by the LNC:
> Appendix A – abstracts of public comments
> Appendix B – updated list of potential conflicts of
> interest
> Appendix M – Candidate Support Committee report
> There were a number of counted hand votes which were recorded to only
> say whether the motion passed or failed but do not include the counted
> vote totals:
> p. 13, the Mattson amendment to 7/3/18 minutes was an 8-8 vote
> p. 29, the Merced amendment to add “if any” to the Mattson amendment
> regarding data to the Membership Support Committee was a 12-1 vote
> p. 29, the Mattson amendment, as amended by the Merced motion, was an
> 11-2 vote
> p. 29, the Redpath motion to change the next day’s starting time was a
> 7-6 vote
> p. 35, motion 180930-6 was a 13-2 vote
> p. 39, Lark motion to insert “non-voting” was an 11-2 vote
> p. 39, Longstreth motion to insert the parenthetical phrase was a 6-7
> vote
> p. 42, Harlos motion to amend to add the phrase “and the Statement of
> Principles” was a 13-0 vote
> p. 42, Bilyeu motion to strike the original language was a 6-8 vote
> p. 45, motion 180930-13 was a 13-2 vote
> p. 46, Lark motion to postpone indefinitely was an 11-4 vote
> p. 46, Merced amendment to strike the phrase “the entire LNC” was a 9-2
> vote
> p. 6 – Secretary’s Report is identified as being Appendix E, but later
> in other locations it is referenced to be Appendix F
> When amending the proposed agenda, we tend to operate very loosely, but
> the draft minutes are phrased in a way that looks like the Chair
> unilaterally has the power to dictate the agenda, rather than as though
> we were making motions approved without objection by the LNC:
> p. 8 “Mr. Sarwark noted a prior request…and instructed the LNC to note
> that change”, rather than noting the change was made without objection
> p. 8 add “without objection” before “The time allotted for the Special
> Counsel’s Report…”
> p. 8 “Mr. Sarwark added five (5) minutes to Mr. Hagan’s report…”,
> rather than “Without objection, five (5) minutes were added…”
> p. 8 change “Ms. Harlos requested ten (10) minutes…” to “Ms. Harlos
> moved to add ten (10) minutes…” and “There was no objection.”
> p. 13 motion 180929-4 has no “as amended” notation, though the prior
> sentence indicates that an amendment was agreed to.
> p. 14 in the penultimate bullet point, “it’s” should instead be “its”.
> None of the election results tell the reader how many ballots were cast
> on that election. That’s critical information to calculating how many
> votes constituted the majority necessary for election.
> p. 16 indicates the rules for population of the Audit Committee come
> from the LNC Policy Manual, but as the Policy Manual notes in footnote
> 27, that policy is inherited from LP Bylaws Article 9.2.
> p. 17 indicates that “Mr. Goldstein nominated Mr. Redpath, but he is
> ineligible as he is the Assistant Treasurer.” I know of a bylaw which
> makes Mr. Hagan ineligible, since he is an officer, but I know of no
> rule which makes Mr. Redpath ineligible as the Assistant Treasurer.
> I’m making a mental note for myself that the bylaws should probably be
> amended to add such a rule in the future.
> p. 17 indicates that I “formally objected” to a nomination, but I don’t
> know what it means to “formally object”. It sounds rather personal. I
> believe I raised a point of order regarding distinctions between
> members and alternates.
> p. 17 spells my name incorrectly when I appealed the ruling of the
> chair.
> p. 19 under Maine Ballot Access issues, it parenthetically indicates
> the law is effectively requiring a “doubling” of the registration
> roster by the November elections. I don’t think that is practically
> correct. Doubling would be sufficient only if we had 100% Libertarian
> turnout, which ain’t gonna happen. It really requires much more than
> doubling. The previous sentence details the actual requirement, so I’d
> recommend just striking the parenthetical.
> p. 21 motion 180929-9 about opening nominations for the COC should
> append “for the next term” to the end of the motion text. It may sound
> like Sam was making a trivial distinction, but it’s not since the
> then-current term of the COC members had not yet expired, and that
> language clarified that it was not to name the members for the tiny
> remainder of the existing term, but was to take effect upon expiration
> of their existing terms.
> p. 24 says the LNC was unclear on the actual costs of Mr. Koerner’s
> proposal, however he did give us some price points during the Q&A from
> his presentation. My notes say he priced it at $10k to license
> trademarks for 6 months, plus 15% of merchandise sales, plus $120/hr
> consulting for his time.
> p. 27 Youth Engagement Committee – We did pass a motion to open
> nominations for an election to appoint one and only one LNC member.
> That does not preclude appointing another one later. It only limits
> that particular election to only choose one. There were two people who
> commented during debate that they wanted it limited to one total, but
> the debate comments of two people are not binding decisions made by the
> whole LNC. Several phrases written into the text of the minutes take
> that comment stated by a couple of people during debate and project it
> onto the whole LNC as a binding prohibition, though I think it is a
> personal interpretation. Many LNC members later chose to also vote for
> Dustin Nanna for this committee, so that likely indicates some
> disagreement with the interpretation embedded into the minutes like
> this:
> p. 27, first paragraph, “LNC member involvement should be limited”, was
> merely a debate comment made by two people, though this is worded as
> though it was confirmed that the LNC as a whole agreed with it.
> p. 27, Ms. Lee was elected as the “sole” LNC member
> p. 27, Mr. Sarwark confirmed that voting for the “non-LNC” members
> would take place… though I don’t believe that was stated that way
> during the meeting
> p. 36, inclusion of the phrase “comprising non-LNC members”
> p. 36, identifying Ms. Lee as “the sole” LNC member
> the footnote on p. 45
> All of these can easily be rephrased to not take a position on an
> interpretation question as though it is a statement of established
> fact.
> p. 31, my motion to apply an end date to email ballot 2018-19 was
> merely to insert the phrase, “until the adjournment of the 2020 regular
> convention”, but the draft minutes also format the next phrase “the
> Libertarian National Committee” as text to be inserted, though that
> text was part of the already-adopted language.
> p. 32, the text of the “Neale Rule” being rescinded is not included in
> the minutes. It’s long enough that it probably makes sense to put it
> in an appendix, however the wording of the actual text being rescinded
> should be included in the record. A reader would not otherwise have
> any idea where to find the text of an unpublished rule.
> p. 35, upon comment by Mr. Hagan, you indicated that the word “whether”
> was intended to also be struck in first sentence of the motion, but it
> is not struck in this draft or listed as an amendment adopted without
> objection.
> p. 35, did the Chair rule that my amendment had German
> characteristics? Perhaps “germaneness” is the word for which you were
> searching.
> p. 40, motion 180930-9 describes the general nature of the motion but
> does not show the actual text of the motion.
> p. 40, also on motion 180930-9 there is a typo with a colon where a
> period was intended, plank “2:12” rather than “2.12”.
> p. 47, “Discussion of LNC Goals for the 2018-2020 Term” was actually
> done post-adjournment, though this looks like it happened during the
> meeting.
> p. 47, indicates adjournment was at 1:01 p.m., but my notes say it was
> at 2:15 p.m., followed by the informal goals discussion which ended at
> 2:47 p.m. I quickly checked a couple of external indicators (including
> my text message history) to confirm the later adjournment time.
> Large sections of the body of the minutes contain material which is
> merely repetition of the staff/committee reports which will become
> appendices. In some cases, it appears that the text in the minutes is
> copy/pasted directly from the reports, so I don’t understand the need
> to have so many pages duplicated in part rather than just inviting them
> to go to the appendix to see the full original. Here are a few
> examples:
> p. 13+ bullet list of items from Staff Report
> p. 15 another bullet list of items from staff report
> p. 20 bullet list from COC report
> p. 21 section about the post-convention survey
> -Alicia
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 2:31 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
> <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone attached please find the first draft of the minutes
> for
> the September 29-30, 2018 LNC meeting. First I want to thank
> everyone
> for their forbearance for not submitting during the auto-approval
> window due to my unexpected medical leave of absence.
> So that we can hash out any changes ahead of and simply vote on
> adoption at our December meeting, please advise asap of any
> suggested
> revisions or corrections.
> --
> In Liberty,
> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
> Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
> Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at
> [2]facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
> ====================================================================
> =====
> Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism *
> Re-Legalize
> All Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun
> Laws * Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The
> Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and
> Repeal
> the Income Tax * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure *
> Free-market
> Emergency Services * Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To
> The Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation *
> VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or [3]http://www.LP.org
> ====================================================================
> =====
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 2. http://facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
> 3. http://www.LP.org/
>
--
* In Liberty,*
*Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary *- Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org> or Secretary at LP.org.
*Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee* - LPedia at LP.org
Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at
facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
=========================================================================
Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize All
Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun Laws *
Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The Fed * End
Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal the Income Tax
* Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market Emergency Services
* Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To The Private Sector *
Eliminate Regulation *
*VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or http://www.LP.org <http://www.lp.org/>*
=========================================================================
-------------- next part --------------
I am going through this in batches and will address thusly and will
submit an amended draft. I deeply appreciate the advance review.
Re: counts in hand-raise votes
I do not believe this is proper or necessary as the body did not order
a counted vote. I consulted briefly on the RONR forum regarding this
question and so far the conversation affirms my position. I will
continue to monitor my question there to see if anything further is
added. Thus, I will not be making those changes. If the count is
important any member can and should request a roll call vote or move
that the count be placed in the record.
Re: Appendix E v F
This was corrected. Please note in the forthcoming draft that there is
an additional appendix added.
Re: notations of amendments to agenda
I do not believe my minutes insinuate that Nick has the power to
unilaterally amend the agenda. The item in question was properly
noticed and was inadvertantly not included and Nick was merely
recognizing that point. However, this is a quibble I do not wish to
expend energy on and made the appropriate amendments to satisfy this
objection.
Re: notation of as amended
It wasn't formally amended but rather I simply agreed, but not a point
I wish to quibble on so I added that language to satisfy this
objection.
Re: it's v its
That was already corrected in the updated draft.
To be continued...
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 1:35 AM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business
<[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
Skimming the subject lines of still-unread emails in my inbox, I
see
that an updated draft of the September minutes has been sent
today. My
comments below are from looking at the first draft. I have not
reviewed today’s update to see whether these have already been
addressed, so there may be some items listed here that are now
moot.
No appendices were included with this draft of the September
minutes.
I’m not inclined to approve things sight unseen. Many of the
appendices were sent in advance, but three of the appendices have
not
yet been seen by the LNC:
Appendix A – abstracts of public comments
Appendix B – updated list of potential conflicts of
interest
Appendix M – Candidate Support Committee report
There were a number of counted hand votes which were recorded to
only
say whether the motion passed or failed but do not include the
counted
vote totals:
p. 13, the Mattson amendment to 7/3/18 minutes was an 8-8 vote
p. 29, the Merced amendment to add “if any” to the Mattson
amendment
regarding data to the Membership Support Committee was a 12-1
vote
p. 29, the Mattson amendment, as amended by the Merced motion,
was an
11-2 vote
p. 29, the Redpath motion to change the next day’s starting time
was a
7-6 vote
p. 35, motion 180930-6 was a 13-2 vote
p. 39, Lark motion to insert “non-voting” was an 11-2 vote
p. 39, Longstreth motion to insert the parenthetical phrase was a
6-7
vote
p. 42, Harlos motion to amend to add the phrase “and the
Statement of
Principles” was a 13-0 vote
p. 42, Bilyeu motion to strike the original language was a 6-8
vote
p. 45, motion 180930-13 was a 13-2 vote
p. 46, Lark motion to postpone indefinitely was an 11-4 vote
p. 46, Merced amendment to strike the phrase “the entire LNC” was
a 9-2
vote
p. 6 – Secretary’s Report is identified as being Appendix E, but
later
in other locations it is referenced to be Appendix F
When amending the proposed agenda, we tend to operate very
loosely, but
the draft minutes are phrased in a way that looks like the Chair
unilaterally has the power to dictate the agenda, rather than as
though
we were making motions approved without objection by the LNC:
p. 8 “Mr. Sarwark noted a prior request…and instructed the LNC to
note
that change”, rather than noting the change was made without
objection
p. 8 add “without objection” before “The time allotted for the
Special
Counsel’s Report…”
p. 8 “Mr. Sarwark added five (5) minutes to Mr. Hagan’s report…”,
rather than “Without objection, five (5) minutes were added…”
p. 8 change “Ms. Harlos requested ten (10) minutes…” to “Ms.
Harlos
moved to add ten (10) minutes…” and “There was no objection.”
p. 13 motion 180929-4 has no “as amended” notation, though the
prior
sentence indicates that an amendment was agreed to.
p. 14 in the penultimate bullet point, “it’s” should instead be
“its”.
None of the election results tell the reader how many ballots
were cast
on that election. That’s critical information to calculating how
many
votes constituted the majority necessary for election.
p. 16 indicates the rules for population of the Audit Committee
come
from the LNC Policy Manual, but as the Policy Manual notes in
footnote
27, that policy is inherited from LP Bylaws Article 9.2.
p. 17 indicates that “Mr. Goldstein nominated Mr. Redpath, but he
is
ineligible as he is the Assistant Treasurer.” I know of a bylaw
which
makes Mr. Hagan ineligible, since he is an officer, but I know of
no
rule which makes Mr. Redpath ineligible as the Assistant
Treasurer.
I’m making a mental note for myself that the bylaws should
probably be
amended to add such a rule in the future.
p. 17 indicates that I “formally objected” to a nomination, but I
don’t
know what it means to “formally object”. It sounds rather
personal. I
believe I raised a point of order regarding distinctions between
members and alternates.
p. 17 spells my name incorrectly when I appealed the ruling of
the
chair.
p. 19 under Maine Ballot Access issues, it parenthetically
indicates
the law is effectively requiring a “doubling” of the registration
roster by the November elections. I don’t think that is
practically
correct. Doubling would be sufficient only if we had 100%
Libertarian
turnout, which ain’t gonna happen. It really requires much more
than
doubling. The previous sentence details the actual requirement,
so I’d
recommend just striking the parenthetical.
p. 21 motion 180929-9 about opening nominations for the COC
should
append “for the next term” to the end of the motion text. It may
sound
like Sam was making a trivial distinction, but it’s not since the
then-current term of the COC members had not yet expired, and
that
language clarified that it was not to name the members for the
tiny
remainder of the existing term, but was to take effect upon
expiration
of their existing terms.
p. 24 says the LNC was unclear on the actual costs of Mr.
Koerner’s
proposal, however he did give us some price points during the Q&A
from
his presentation. My notes say he priced it at $10k to license
trademarks for 6 months, plus 15% of merchandise sales, plus
$120/hr
consulting for his time.
p. 27 Youth Engagement Committee – We did pass a motion to open
nominations for an election to appoint one and only one LNC
member.
That does not preclude appointing another one later. It only
limits
that particular election to only choose one. There were two
people who
commented during debate that they wanted it limited to one total,
but
the debate comments of two people are not binding decisions made
by the
whole LNC. Several phrases written into the text of the minutes
take
that comment stated by a couple of people during debate and
project it
onto the whole LNC as a binding prohibition, though I think it is
a
personal interpretation. Many LNC members later chose to also
vote for
Dustin Nanna for this committee, so that likely indicates some
disagreement with the interpretation embedded into the minutes
like
this:
p. 27, first paragraph, “LNC member involvement should be
limited”, was
merely a debate comment made by two people, though this is worded
as
though it was confirmed that the LNC as a whole agreed with it.
p. 27, Ms. Lee was elected as the “sole” LNC member
p. 27, Mr. Sarwark confirmed that voting for the “non-LNC”
members
would take place… though I don’t believe that was stated that way
during the meeting
p. 36, inclusion of the phrase “comprising non-LNC members”
p. 36, identifying Ms. Lee as “the sole” LNC member
the footnote on p. 45
All of these can easily be rephrased to not take a position on an
interpretation question as though it is a statement of
established
fact.
p. 31, my motion to apply an end date to email ballot 2018-19 was
merely to insert the phrase, “until the adjournment of the 2020
regular
convention”, but the draft minutes also format the next phrase
“the
Libertarian National Committee” as text to be inserted, though
that
text was part of the already-adopted language.
p. 32, the text of the “Neale Rule” being rescinded is not
included in
the minutes. It’s long enough that it probably makes sense to
put it
in an appendix, however the wording of the actual text being
rescinded
should be included in the record. A reader would not otherwise
have
any idea where to find the text of an unpublished rule.
p. 35, upon comment by Mr. Hagan, you indicated that the word
“whether”
was intended to also be struck in first sentence of the motion,
but it
is not struck in this draft or listed as an amendment adopted
without
objection.
p. 35, did the Chair rule that my amendment had German
characteristics? Perhaps “germaneness” is the word for which you
were
searching.
p. 40, motion 180930-9 describes the general nature of the motion
but
does not show the actual text of the motion.
p. 40, also on motion 180930-9 there is a typo with a colon where
a
period was intended, plank “2:12” rather than “2.12”.
p. 47, “Discussion of LNC Goals for the 2018-2020 Term” was
actually
done post-adjournment, though this looks like it happened during
the
meeting.
p. 47, indicates adjournment was at 1:01 p.m., but my notes say
it was
at 2:15 p.m., followed by the informal goals discussion which
ended at
2:47 p.m. I quickly checked a couple of external indicators
(including
my text message history) to confirm the later adjournment time.
Large sections of the body of the minutes contain material which
is
merely repetition of the staff/committee reports which will
become
appendices. In some cases, it appears that the text in the
minutes is
copy/pasted directly from the reports, so I don’t understand the
need
to have so many pages duplicated in part rather than just
inviting them
to go to the appendix to see the full original. Here are a few
examples:
p. 13+ bullet list of items from Staff Report
p. 15 another bullet list of items from staff report
p. 20 bullet list from COC report
p. 21 section about the post-convention survey
-Alicia
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 2:31 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
<[1][2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
Hello everyone attached please find the first draft of the
minutes
for
the September 29-30, 2018 LNC meeting. First I want to thank
everyone
for their forbearance for not submitting during the
auto-approval
window due to my unexpected medical leave of absence.
So that we can hash out any changes ahead of and simply vote on
adoption at our December meeting, please advise asap of any
suggested
revisions or corrections.
--
In Liberty,
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
-
Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at
[2][3]facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
====================================================================
=====
Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism *
Re-Legalize
All Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal
All Gun
Laws * Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money *
Abolish The
Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and
Repeal
the Income Tax * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure *
Free-market
Emergency Services * Open Migration * Transfer Government
Schools To
The Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation *
VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or [3][4]http://www.LP.org
====================================================================
=====
References
1. mailto:[5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
2. [6]http://facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
3. [7]http://www.LP.org/
--
In Liberty,
[uc?id=1DeRjq-L8dvRZabgEG94VkkUvjoHatcfP&export=download]
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
Secretary - [8]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page
at [9]facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
=======================================================================
==
Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize
All Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun
Laws * Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The
Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal
the Income Tax * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market
Emergency Services * Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To
The Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation *
VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or [10]http://www.LP.org
=======================================================================
==
References
1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
3. http://facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
4. http://www.LP.org/
5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
6. http://facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
7. http://www.LP.org/
8. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
9. http://facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/
10. http://www.lp.org/
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list