[Lnc-business] Ruling of the chair

[Nicholas Sarwark]

Dear Mr. Phillips,

There is not a ruling of the Chair without there being a question of
whether a motion is in order. While my email message of a few days ago
outlined my reading of the bylaws, there was no pending motion and thus no
ruling that could be appealed or challenged.

As has been discussed elsewhere, Federal committees are required to deposit
or return contributions within 10 days of receipt. There is not enough time
for there to be a motion resolved prior to the legal requirement to deposit
the contribution or return it. My reading of the bylaws is that the person
in question has met the requirements for sustaining membership that are
written in the bylaws. There is no bylaws or policy manual provision that
supports the Chair, the Board, or staff establishing a further requirement
for membership (not having a particular criminal conviction and/or serving
a prison sentence for that conviction) and refusing this person's
contribution and signed certification for not meeting that further
requirement.

Given the legal requirements under Federal law, that I am not persuaded we
have the authority to refuse the contribution as some LNC members have
discussed, and that there is not enough time for a motion to direct me to
act otherwise to be voted on and pass, I directed the Executive Director to
process the contribution. Even though there was discussion and controversy,
those things do not stop the legal timeline, and without a motion, there is
nothing pending. If you believe this oversteps my authority as Chair,
please let me know how you think it does so.

The role of a presiding officer is a difficult one, as it requires that you
treat all members (and prospective members) fairly and respect their
rights, even if you find those people personally unpleasant or offensive.
This is not the first time, nor will it be the last time, that I will stand
up for the rights of Libertarian Party members who I may personally
disagree with. All of us on this board have the same fiduciary duties to
the membership and the bylaws, and we all must carefully consider what
those duties require of us, but only the Chair is specifically empowered by
our bylaws to direct staff members and the operations of Libertarian
National Committee.

Yours in liberty,
Nick




On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 11:19 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

> So I asked if something was a ruling of the chair, and expressed my desire
> to challenge it if so.
>
> A question that was never answered, yet apparently it was a ruling of the
> chair and our chair issued direction to the Executive Director based on it.
>
> "As per the instruction of the chair, I have processed the membership
> application.
> ---
> Daniel Fishman
> Executive Director
> The Libertarian Party"
>
> While it is the chair's prerogative to make direction, is it appropriate
> to do so during discussion on the topic, particularly after a board member
> has expressed a desire to challenge such a ruling?
>
> A ruling based on a bylaw open to interpretation, that some board members
> were interpreting in a different manner?
>
> I am beyond disgusted that such an action was taken.  I am particularly
> disgusted that it was taken in what I consider at best an underhanded
> manner, and possibly a procedural violation.
>
> I find it even more disturbing that such action was taken in a dictatorial
> fashion in an organization designed to oppose exactly that sort of behavior.
>
> John Phillips
> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
> Cell 217-412-5973
>