<div dir="ltr">On further consideration, I find my objections on jurisdiction to be incorrect. As regards the SOS, the motion only directs the Secretary to write a letter asking something and saying something, making an objection on jurisdiction incorrect. Regarding staff, it can reasonably be interpreted to mean that the LNC will take action to cause staff to do something, such as requesting such an instruction of the chair, and so is also within the LNC's jurisdiction.<div>
<br></div><div>Since my objection to consideration adheres to a motion not yet stated, I do not believe it is in the hand of the body, but remains in my hand, allowing me to withdraw it without unanimous consent. I therefore withdraw my objection to consideration, without taking a position on the underlying motion, or the premises underlying the motion, at this time.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Joshua Katz</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr">Joshua A. Katz<div>Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)</div></div></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Joshua Katz <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:planning4liberty@gmail.com" target="_blank">planning4liberty@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p dir="ltr">Mr. Chairman, I raise an objection to consideration for reasons of jurisdiction. The LNC has no jurisdiction to control to whom the SOS grants ballot access. Further, to my understanding, only the chair, not the LNC itself, may direct staff. </p>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<p dir="ltr">Joshua Katz </p>
</font></span><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="h5">On Aug 7, 2014 5:48 PM, "Alicia Mattson" <<a href="mailto:agmattson@gmail.com" target="_blank">agmattson@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution">
</div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="h5">
<div dir="ltr"><div>The Wagner group has been for a while essentially treated as the affiliate by our staff due to administrative decisions, rather than the past decisions of the LNC which were to recognize the Reeves group and not the Wagner group.<br>
<br>The only rationale I have heard for this is the Judicial Committee ruling dated August 25, 2011. I have already explained numerous ways in which the JC ruling is inoperable. Rather than repeat them all again while the readers' eyes glaze over, I'll just emphasize that at the very least it is inoperable because the Oregon SOS refuses to accept the responsibility the JC attempted (without bylaw authority) to delegate to them. The JC said the SOS has to do it. Then the SOS said a judge has to do it. The judge says the party has to do it, in contradiction to the JC which said the party can't do it. That's an inoperable JC decision in the most basic sense of the word, without even having to dig into longer debates about rules which I have previously presented, which I believe also make the JC ruling null and void.<br>
<br>I am asking for co-sponsors for the following motion:<br><br>----------START OF MOTION----------<br><br><div style="margin-left:40px">WHEREAS, the national Libertarian Party's Judicial Committee ruling dated August 25, 2011 is inoperable;<br>
<br>RESOLVED, the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) Secretary is directed to send a letter to the Oregon Secretary of State:<br><br>1) Asking her office to correct their records because after May 21, 2011, the outgoing chair of the Libertarian Party of Oregon (Wes Wagner) failed to notify them of the expiration of his term; and<br>
<br>2) Reminding her that the LNC has several times acknowledged the legitimacy of the Tim Reeves group of officers who were selected on May 21, 2011 to replace them (and by implication, any subsequent successor officers);<br>
<br>BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the LNC hereby directs staff to update their records to reflect that the Tim Reeves group of officers are - and have been since May 21, 2011 - the leadership of the Libertarian Party of Oregon and that they are entitled to the same rights and privileges as that of any other affiliate, including being listed on our party's website, subscribed to the state chairs' email list, and sent monthly data files required by LNC policy.<br>
<br></div>----------END OF MOTION----------<br><br></div> -Alicia<br><div><br></div></div>
<br></div></div><div class="">_______________________________________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</a><br>
<br></div></blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>