[Lnc-business] Secretary''s Report

[Alicia Mattson]

<CAH> ...attached is an additional form that was used that she has not
given me.</CAH>

You attached a file named "2018 LNC At-Large Tally Sheets" which is merely
a product created with the form that I sent to you on Sept 4, 2018 titled
"Sample Election Tally Sheet."  What I sent you is a template.  If you
choose to use it, during the convention you will need to edit the text to
remove the placeholder candidate names such as "Justin Tyme" and "Pete
Zerria" and instead insert the actual names of each of the nominated
candidates.  If there are many candidates, perhaps you will choose to do as
I did in the attached example and make two columns of candidate names to
fit it on one sheet.  Depending on the number of candidates nominated,
spacing on the sheet may need to be adjusted, so each iteration at
convention may vary slightly to match unique conditions of that election,
though they come from the same template.  But yes, the file you attached
with a claim that I didn't give you that form was created from the template
that I sent you long ago.  It is a simple form, and even if I had not long
ago provided you the Word document, it would take a person only about 10
minutes to make a new one from scratch...much less time than you spent
writing your latest message.

<CAH>However, Ms. Mattson keeps ignoring that the delegation chair manual
is NOT THE ONLY MANUAL I requested or that exists.  Attached is the
Delegate Allocation and Region formation manual.</CAH>

That is merely a subset of the Delegation Chairs Manual which we have
already discussed.  The reason that Bob Sullentrup handed his version over
to me in 2010 was that he wasn't just retiring from an officer position,
but he was ending his involvement in party activities and wanted someone
staying in the party to be able to use it.  So he gave it to me.  I have
significantly built upon the original concept over time and added quite a
bit of my own material to it.

<CAH>... I will give evidence as to why I have the justified position that
you have been less than helpful</CAH>

Interesting attempt to try to change the subject, but no, this discussion
was not about your opinion that I should have done things on a different
timeline.  It's about your false accusations that I have not given you
certain forms which I have given you.  And you have taken it further on
Facebook, at times saying I gave you "nothing" though here you've had to
acknowledge that I have given you many things.

Anyway, thanks for pointing out how unreasonable you were with me following
the convention.  The convention adjourned on July 3, but the Judicial
Committee tellers were working until late that night to get those results
tabulated.  I spent July 4 traveling home and getting some catch-up rest.
On July 5 you started your demands for immediate handover of records I had
not yet had time to update from the convention, and many of those were by
no means things that were immediately needed.  In your selective listing of
communications about this subject you completely ignore my comments on the
LNC email list cautioning the LNC about the many, many time-consuming tasks
I needed to do after the convention, and promising that I would prioritize
them and get them done in a reasonable time frame.  Yet you decided it was
a good idea to nag me about things you wouldn't need for two years while I
was trying to complete more timely tasks with deadlines.  It's no different
than mothers ignoring the kid saying, "Mom...mom...mom...mom..mom..."

Producing national convention minutes takes orders of magnitude more time
than producing weekend LNC minutes, but I couldn't even do them until I
completed tasks like updating the bylaws, the platform, audits of
elections, etc.  Even harder in 2018 when you were burning my time by
flinging pubic accusations at me based on your disappointment in the
at-large election results.  It took me until August 31 to finish the first
draft of convention minutes (barely ahead of the 60-day deadline), and just
a few days later (Sept 4) I gave more attention to your requests for forms
that you wouldn't need until 2020.

It was a perfectly reasonable time frame considering the typical
post-convention work load a secretary has.  And your opinions that I should
have done it sooner have nothing to do with what you wrote about me in the
secretary's report.

-Alicia


On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 3:43 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
wrote:

> Ms. Mattson,
>
>
>
> I have now carefully read your response.  I do not think you will read
> that in future and be proud of that nor do I think objective members will
> receive it without reading a good bit of sour grapes.
>
>
>
> It is a fact that getting any information from you during the transition
> was worse than pulling teeth.  In fact, I had to ask the chair to intervene
> as you simply ignored my requests, a practice which continued to the extent
> that I routinely gave up on asking you.  My concern in this whole matter is
> not ultimately you or me, it is our complete lack of procedures for
> position transitions.  Everyone is well aware of this concern as I brought
> it up as a potential policy manual amendment which was tabled to
> wordsmith.  There should be zero documents that are used for party business
> that are kept solely on the personal computers of one person.  As I stated
> in my last email, I do not NEED you to provide anything further.  Just like
> you had to admirably pick up pieces from a prior secretary that left
> incomplete work product, I CAN do it even if you never sent me a single
> piece of information.  It is just that I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO.  I do not
> believe that any reasonable person will disagree that for secretary and
> treasurer there should be an archive of records that are immediately
> transferred to successors.  To claim that I can hunt and find things in
> other ways is not the point. *The point is that I should not have to.*  I
> think in any other situation, you would agree with the above.  I have
> always taken care to respect your work product and ethic.  However, it is
> patently obvious that you have done the absolute minimum to provide any
> kind of mentorship.  Yes, I think that is an institutional problem.  And no
> matter who is my successor, if they have not been national secretary
> before, I will bend over backwards to assist them.  I will give them items
> and direction before they ask, because being ignorant, they might not even
> know to ask.  But rest assured, I need no scapegoat.   I will handle it and
> handle it well.
>
>
>
> All of us need to have the mindset of putting the organization first and
> setting up our successors for success.  I do not wish to sully a compliment
> of another LNC member in the midst of a less positive exchange, so no names
> will be added but the way you handle issues, suggestions, and corrections
> is in marked contrast to another well-respected and long-term LNC member
> who contacts me personally, anticipates future difficulties as they have
> been through them, and provides proactive mentorship.  Contrarywise, you
> routinely ignore private requests made to you and are sure to make a public
> spectacle out of anything you perceive to amiss.  That is your
> prerogative.  And it is my prerogative to think it is unprofessional and
> petty.  I have chosen to take it as a trial by fire through which gold will
> emerge.  As I have always held you to be one of the best secretaries I have
> ever worked with, any input you give will help, regardless of the manner it
> is given or whether it was given in a spirit of amity or animus.
>
>
>
> So with regret, since you are determined to create a scenario where I am
> looking for a scapegoat (that is not my style nor my competence level), I
> will give evidence as to why I have the justified position that you have
> been less than helpful and still have items that need to be turned over.  I
> have print-outs of these emails that I will bring to the next meeting.
>   Other exchanges were made personally at meetings, and I do not walk
> around with a personal voice recorder to spy on everyone.  (if this chart
> comes through garbled to anyone who wants to see it, I can send a pdf
> version)
>
>
>
> DATE
>
> FROM/TO
>
> CONTENT
>
> DIRECT RESPONSE
>
> 7/5/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Broad request for all operational documents and forms to be transferred
>
> None
>
> 7/6/18
>
> Harlos to Bennedict
>
> Thanking him for proactively providing me with forms he thought I might
> need and asking him about where other records are stored
>
> He responded that Alicia would have anything else I need
>
> 7/13/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Reminder on things needed including latest affiliate bylaws
>
> None
>
> 7/15/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Request for the bylaws archive required under the national bylaws
>
> None
>
> 7/22/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Followup on 7/15/18 email requesting bylaws archive
>
> None
>
> 7/24/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> 7/28 from Harlos with list of items as follows:
>
>
>
> 1.     Archive of current bylaws for all affiliates
>
> 2.     Master party deadlines and diaries/ticklers
>
> 3.     Master forms (for instance, ballots, tokens…)
>
> 4.     Word copies of all manuals (for instance the delegation chair
> manual)
>
> 5.     Any other documents, research, and standard forms that should be
> transferred from Secretary to Secretary
>
> None
>
> 7/28/18
>
> Mattson to Harlos
>
> Forwarding conflicts of interest list
>
> Restating request for items in 7/24 email
>
> 8/5/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Following up on 7/28 email
>
> None
>
> 8/23/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Following up on 7/24, 7/28, 8/5 emails and stating “I understand you are
> very busy with convention minutes.  Can you please just acknowledge and
> give me a loose time frame?”
>
> None
>
> 8/25/18
>
> Sarwark to Mattson
>
> Please answer the secretary’s requests
>
> 8/26 email from Mattson to Sarwark  - handling things with deadlines first
>
> 9/4/18
>
> Mattson to Harlos
>
> Attaching delegate motion form, region formation notice, presidential
> ticket certificate of nomination, and sample election tally sheet
>
>
>
> 9/22/18
>
> Mattson to Harlos
>
> Extensive email responding to many requests and stating that she needed to
> reorganize her file of affiliate bylaws to make sense to someone else.  She
> declines to give the word file for the delegation chair manual but does not
> address the other manual – the delegation allocation and region formation
> manual nor the open-ended general request for her entire institutional
> archive.
>
> 9/22/18 reply from Harlos interacting with response and objecting to
> Mattson producing the delegation chair manual as follows:
>
>
>
> “Please get with me so that conflicting or confusing items are not sent
> out as I do intend on being pretty hands-on working with the affiliates on
> that and will produce a manual to pass on to my successor.  I will just
> start from scratch then.”
>
> 9/24/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Request for updated affiliate petition form
>
> None
>
> 11/18/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Following on prior requests for bylaws archives
>
> None
>
> 11/24/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Following up on prior requests for bylaws archives
>
> Reply by Mattson 11/27 questioning my need for them
>
> 11/27/18
>
> Harlos to Mattson
>
> Asking if she has the records or not and stating that I do not have to
> justify my request for records from my predecessor to the extent they exist
>
> None
>
>
>
> As you can see, requests still remain unanswered and most of my requests
> did not even receive an acknowledgment even when requested.  In
> frustration, I started making my requests on this list since the courtesy
> of private emails was not working. Those too were mostly ignored so I had
> to resort to putting it in my report which finally got a response.
>
>
>
> Now Ms. Mattson claims she did not withhold certain information from me
> because I had it in my report.  I had it in my report because I went and
> hunted it down myself.  I never claimed it did not exist.  I am asserting
> that I have it despite Ms. Mattson.  With that being said however, Ms.
> Mattson missed my point.  It is obvious she previously calculated the
> committee appointments and had this data prepared and available.  That
> should have been turned over immediately.  I should not have had to
> re-create that information.  I did.  And I will.  But I should not have
> had to.
>
>
>
> Now on the issue of the delegation chair manual – Ms. Mattson proactively
> assumes many things about my intentions and then points to her assumptions
> as proof.  A copy of the 2018 delegation chair manual is attached.  It was
> sent to the chairs under colour of her position as secretary.  It credits a
> prior secretary with the original version (and to answer Ms. Mattson’s
> insinuation, that is what I will do, credit her and Mr. Sullentrup) so is
> not Ms. Mattson’s original brainchild, and is obviously something started
> by a secretary prior to her.   There is absolutely nothing in it that would
> indicate that this was something done as a “private” non-LNC member and
> everything that marks it as an official work product.  That is definitely
> how it was received by many state chairs. Ms. Mattson may intend to
> continue that project.  I cannot stop her from being tacky.  But as part of
> my secretarial duties, I will be producing something similar and will pass
> it along to my successor.
>
>
>
> However, Ms. Mattson keeps ignoring that the delegation chair manual is
> NOT THE ONLY MANUAL I requested or that exists.  Attached is the Delegate
> Allocation and Region formation manual.  I still have not received the word
> version of that and renew my request for that document.
>
>
>
> Ms. Mattson alleges some malfeasance about a prior form provided – I do
> not know if that is the only one that exists and have seen other versions,
> thus my inquiry.  With the way she has produced things piecemeal and
> obviously still has items not turned over, I have no idea if there are
> others yet to be produced.  As for her claim that I obviously know I have
> everything, attached is an additional form that was used that she has not
> given me.  What else is there?  That is a very reasonable request.
>
>
>
> Ms. Mattson references spreadsheets used in the At-large audit that were
> provided to the entire LNC.  Again, I do not know if these are the same
> tools she uses at convention and since she has never given me a single
> excel spreadsheet identified as the convention tools, I am once again
> guessing.
>
>
>
> You see, this is just me, but let me tell you how I intend to handle the
> transition to my successor.  I will give over every single record produced
> in relation to my duties.  At critical times, I will contact them privately
> to give them a heads up such as – hey we are X months out from convention,
> I would really suggest you get together a team to assist you.  What I did
> was [insert narrative].  I have verbally requested Ms. Mattson’s input on
> this issue.  It has been ignored.  Thus, I am reaching out to other people
> in the party to assist who frankly are pretty shocked that Ms. Mattson has
> not offered to do this.  Any disinterested observer should be.  This is not
> the way the third largest political party should operate.  I have seen
> local sewing clubs with more functional records transitions.
>
>
>
> No Ms. Mattson is NOT REQUIRED to be proactively helpful.  But she SHOULD
> be.  And our rules should be changed so that future officers know that it
> is part of their duties to ensure smooth transitions, not because their
> successors cannot recreate the wheel, but because they should not have to.
>
>
>
> My report is my report.  Putting such items in my report is the only way I
> have found to inspire Ms. Mattson to actually respond to my requests as I
> had to do to finally get the requested bylaws archives.  If Ms. Mattson
> wishes to censor my view from preservation on the record, she can move to
> do so.  If she wishes to include a response that does not engage in the
> unworthy snipes made above, I will include it in my report.  I do not wish
> to silence anyone.
>
>
>
> I could write a lot more.  But I doubt many people have read this far.
> Ms. Mattson can try to find one nit to pick about a form provided but that
> does not negate the entire history and thrust of her making things
> purposefully difficult and refusing to give the courtesy of acknowledgments
> of receipts.  Most of you had no idea this was going on behind the scenes.
> Why?  I was hoping to work it out with Ms. Mattson privately.  I do not
> take every public opportunity to berate or correct her as she does with
> me.  I took the private route until it was proven absolutely fruitless.
>
>
> If Ms. Mattson wishes to address this further at the meeting, I would
> welcome it more than I can say. It more than time that this frustrating
> stonewalling sees the light of day and we create institutional procedures
> to avoid this in the future.
>
> *In Liberty,*
>
> * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
> (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
> communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
> found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
> pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 5:09 AM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for providing these comments early.  I will respond prior to
>> issuing V2.  Here you have made some incorrect statements.  I will not
>> however uncharitably insinuate that it was with ill intent or an attempt to
>> smear.  It is unfortunate that you did not choose the same route, but that
>> is your prerogative.
>>
>> I want to make one thing abundantly clear here, and will again.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *==Ms. Harlos seems determined to give people the false impression that I
>> havesomehow crippled her ability to prepare for convention, and if I don’t
>> callthat out, some people might be fooled into believing it.  I do not
>> enjoythese arguments, but I will not agree to be her silent scape goat.===*
>>
>> *If my husband doesn't understand what I am thinking Ms. Mattson, you
>> certainly do not have the requisite knowledge or familiarity to make such a
>> diagnosis. So hear me clearly- I am not in any crippled to prepare.  If
>> that were so, I would be asking for a motion.  I will be fully prepared no
>> matter what information is given or not.  However, there is an easier way
>> to prepare and a harder one.  It would be fair to say that I am stating you
>> have made it more difficult and time-consuming and I blame that on our
>> institutional failure to have central records repositories and requirements
>> for continuity binders not you.  I do not need you or any else to be a
>> "scapegoat" - in the spirit of charity I will ignore what  I could read
>> into that statement.  As I changed up multiple things in the way
>> secretarial things are done in between conventions (numbering ballots,
>> having master vote tallies and live vote tallies, and the one note system
>> to name a few), I have already planned what I believe to be several
>> improvements to convention processes (which is what each successor in any
>> position should do or we stagnate).  I am not dependent on you providing
>> anything.   Frankly none of us are that important.  Not me, not you, and
>> not anyone.  It would be helpful - and it is a demonstration of our deficit
>> in the area of succession.*
>>
>> *That point is important enough to state here and repeat.  This isn't
>> about you.  This is about not having systems in place to make sure that
>> transitions are smooth and in the best interest of the organization - not
>> subject to the vagaries of individual preference and debate. *
>>
>> *I do wish you hadn't indulged the temptation to make an attack on me
>> about events during the audit.  I chose to be there and cancel other
>> obligations.  I certainly was not paying attention to social media and not
>> the process.  And if any time I had to take a text or email, you do not
>> know what it was about.  My work contacts me regularly and I am attentive
>> to that, and with multiple pets being left with others, I was regularly
>> checking to be sure there was no message about them.  One of my pets was 21
>> years old at the time, and I worried whenever I was away.  That was indeed
>> a smear Ms. Mattson, and it was unworthy of you.*
>>
>>
>>
>> *In Liberty,*
>>
>> * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
>> (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
>> communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
>> found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
>> pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 4:30 AM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ms. Mattson, please see below.  I had intended upon posting V2 this
>>> morning, but I would like your thoughts on the below first (and any
>>> additional commentary you may have).
>>>
>>> On one item, I do disagree, and that is Mr. Phillips vote on ballot
>>> 190906-1.  In the last sentence of his commentary, he stated "
>>> As a pragmatist, I know the importance of not letting the perfect get in
>>> the way of the good. But in my opinion, the status quo is preferable to this bill passing.
>>> "
>>>
>>> I interpreted that as a no (and that could be coloured by my private
>>> discussions with Mr. Phillips in which he told me he was voting no), and
>>> Mr. Phillips did not challenge that when the results were posted.  If Mr.
>>> Phillips wishes to challenge, I can issue amended results.
>>>
>>> I took a look at what the government has committed to as far as
>>> publication dates, and March 31, 2021 is when the population data is to be
>>> released for redistricting purposes.
>>>
>>> However, I disagree with your interpretation of our bylaws on that
>>> point, and would like to hear your thoughts.  Specifically:
>>>
>>> 3. The Platform Committee shall consist of 20 members selected as
>>> follows:
>>>
>>> *a. One member by each of the five affiliate parties having the greatest
>>> per capita sustaining membership as determined for Convention delegate
>>> allocations at the most recent Regular Convention. *
>>>
>>> The numbers used are specified to be related to the time frame for the
>>> 2020 convention allocation which is this month - thus, the 2010 Census
>>> numbers would be used.  It would not make sense to use BSM numbers from one
>>> time period and census data from another.
>>>
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>>
>>> * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
>>> (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
>>> communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
>>> found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
>>> pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 7:01 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thank you very much.  I’ll take a look when I get home.
>>>>
>>>> Your close readings of everyone’s reports is most appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 4:58 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Below are some additional corrections needed for the Secretary’s
>>>>> report:
>>>>>
>>>>> In the section titled, “Status of Minutes Since Last Report”, the date
>>>>> of
>>>>> the July minutes was July 27-28, rather than July 28-29.
>>>>>
>>>>> In that same section, the July 27-28 minutes were approved by email
>>>>> ballot
>>>>> number 190922-01, rather than 190922-11.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a section titled, “LNC Membership Changes Since August
>>>>> Meeting”
>>>>> but the meeting was in July rather than August.  That section lists
>>>>> that
>>>>> Pat Ford was elected as the new Region 8 alternate, but it should also
>>>>> mention that the vacancy existed because Jeff Lyons resigned by email
>>>>> to
>>>>> the LNC on 08/06/19.  This resignation was also after the July meeting,
>>>>> thus hasn’t been documented in other minutes.
>>>>>
>>>>> The census-related URL at the bottom of page 2 is not a valid
>>>>> webpage.  It
>>>>> leads to an error message landing page.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the section titled “Delegate Allocations” it indicates your intent
>>>>> to
>>>>> calculate and notify the states that will have earned committee seats
>>>>> for
>>>>> the 2022 convention.  Please note that there will be a new census
>>>>> before
>>>>> the 2022 convention, leading to new denominators for the per-capita
>>>>> calculations and we don’t know those numbers yet.  I don’t recall how
>>>>> long
>>>>> it typically takes the U.S. Census Bureau to publish the results of a
>>>>> new
>>>>> census, but presuming that data is available well before committee
>>>>> appointment deadlines, the new data should be used for the 2022
>>>>> calculations, rather than the 2010 data.
>>>>>
>>>>> Under the heading “Email Ballots” the first sentence also needs the
>>>>> dates
>>>>> corrected for the July meeting.
>>>>>
>>>>> Email ballot number 190804-01 is missing from the listing of email
>>>>> ballots
>>>>> since the last regular meeting.
>>>>>
>>>>> Email ballot number 190830-1 ended on 09/06/19, rather than 09/07/19.
>>>>>
>>>>> On email ballot number 190906-01 a “no” vote is reported for John
>>>>> Phillips,
>>>>> but I did not find that he voted.  The closest I saw was a comment
>>>>> from him
>>>>> that if something is true, then he would not support the motion, but
>>>>> that’s
>>>>> not a clear vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> On email ballot number 190922-01, it lists the co-sponsors as “Harlos,
>>>>> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips” but I saw no co-sponsorship from Mr.
>>>>> Merced.
>>>>> I saw that you inquired whether Mr. Merced would, but I saw no response
>>>>> from him.  I did instead see co-sponsorship from Hagan and Smith who
>>>>> are
>>>>> not listed there.
>>>>>
>>>>> On email ballot 190922-01, the vote total reports 11 “aye” votes, but
>>>>> the
>>>>> roll call listing only shows 10 names in the list.  It is missing an
>>>>> affirmative vote from Tim Hagan, which can be seen on the email list
>>>>> here:
>>>>> http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2019/055042.html
>>>>>
>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 7:10 PM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <
>>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Attached
>>>>> >
>>>>> > *  In Liberty,*
>>>>> > * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's
>>>>> Syndrome
>>>>> > (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
>>>>> > communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If
>>>>> anyone
>>>>> > found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social
>>>>> faux
>>>>> > pas) in an actual email, please contact me privately and let me
>>>>> know.  *
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> *In Liberty,*
>>>>
>>>> * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
>>>> (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
>>>> communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
>>>> found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
>>>> pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
>>>>
>>>>