<div dir='auto'>I agree with Caryn Ann on this specifically in the case of out-of-state alternate or delegates who are seated with Oklahoma. We determined at the last convention that per our own State bylaws the minute we accept an out-of-state alternate or delegate we also accept them at least for the duration of that convention as a member of the Oklahoma libertarian party and as such they represented us in our caucus votes. Region 7 also voted at caucus to accept that<br><br><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Erin Adams Region 7 alt.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On May 1, 2020 9:06 PM, Francis Wendt via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:<br type="attribution" /><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">I do believe this has been inconsistently treated in the past. Howard
<br>
Wetsman, was seated as a Montana delegate in 2018, but did not attend
<br>
the region 1 meeting. Anecdotal, but informative.
<br>
<br>
---
<br>
FRANCIS WENDT
<br>
LNC Region 1 Alternate
<br>
406.595.5111
<br>
<br>
On 2020-04-29 09:34, Joe Bishop-Henchman via Lnc-business wrote:
<br>
> The balloting is done as quickly as possible. The clock is left open
<br>
> to give the regions time to finalize agreements and select regional
<br>
> representatives. It's the difference between running one set of
<br>
> elections and nine sets of elections simultaneously.
<br>
>
<br>
> Since it's on my mind, the regional election bylaw has an ambiguity -
<br>
> regional representatives are elected by "the delegates from the
<br>
> region." Say a Florida resident (R2) is seated with the Washington
<br>
> delegation (R1). Can that person vote in both R1 and R2 elections, R1
<br>
> only, or R2 only? The two people I've asked so far say it's been
<br>
> inconsistently treated in past regional rep elections. So if anyone
<br>
> has strong feelings on what the right answer is, please share.
<br>
>
<br>
> JBH
<br>
>
<br>
> ------------
<br>
> Joe Bishop-Henchman
<br>
> LNC Member (At-Large)
<br>
> joe.bishop-henchman@lp.org
<br>
> www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837
<br>
>
<br>
> On 2020-04-29 11:21, Sam Goldstein wrote:
<br>
>> Joe,
<br>
>>
<br>
>> Thanks for the update. This version seems more practical than the
<br>
>> first draft but still seems ungainly since it appears that our
<br>
>> national convention will take about 5-6 weeks!
<br>
>>
<br>
>> I look forward to discussing various options with you and other LNC
<br>
>> members on Saturday.
<br>
>>
<br>
>> Live Free,
<br>
>>
<br>
>> ---
<br>
>> Sam Goldstein, At Large Member
<br>
>> Libertarian National Committee
<br>
>> 317-850-0726 Cell
<br>
>>
<br>
>> On 2020-04-29 11:04, Joe Bishop-Henchman wrote:
<br>
>>> Attached. It's still draft as the Bylaws Committee does not plan on
<br>
>>> adopting it unless the LNC decides to go in that direction. We have a
<br>
>>> meeting scheduled for May 3 for that eventuality.
<br>
>>>
<br>
>>> The Bylaws Committee is not making a recommendation to the LNC, just
<br>
>>> preparing for any eventuality that may require Bylaws actions.
<br>
>>>
<br>
>>> JBH
<br>
>>>
<br>
>>> ------------
<br>
>>> Joe Bishop-Henchman
<br>
>>> LNC Member (At-Large)
<br>
>>> joe.bishop-henchman@lp.org
<br>
>>> www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837
<br>
>>>
<br>
>>> On 2020-04-28 22:33, Sam Goldstein wrote:
<br>
>>>> Ken,
<br>
>>>>
<br>
>>>> If that is the case then I would suggest that Mr. Bishop-Henchman
<br>
>>>> submit the language for Option 3 that has been approved by the
<br>
>>>> Bylaws
<br>
>>>> Committee or their most recent language if they have not yet
<br>
>>>> approved
<br>
>>>> a proposal to the LNC. That would give the LNC an additional option
<br>
>>>> to consider this Saturday.
<br>
>>>>
<br>
>>>> ---the v
<br>
>>>> Sam Goldstein, At Large Member
<br>
>>>> Libertarian National Committee
<br>
>>>> 317-850-0726 Cell
<br>
>>>>
<br>
>>>> On 2020-04-28 20:39, Ken Moellman wrote:
<br>
>>>>
<br>
>>>>> Some of you have received the report and for others it is still
<br>
>>>>> in-flight. I have been informed by Mr. Bishop-Henchman that the
<br>
>>>>> report inaccurately characterizes the state of the bylaws proposal
<br>
>>>>> for scenario #3.
<br>
>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> This was unintentional. Some members of the COC had spoken with
<br>
>>>>> several bylaws committee members after the original COC/Bylaws
<br>
>>>>> meeting who gave us that impression, but I did not reach out to Mr.
<br>
>>>>> Bishop-Henchman directly. This was my error, and I apologize for
<br>
>>>>> it.
<br>
>>>>>
<br>
>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> ken
<br>
>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> --
<br>
>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
<br>
>>>>> Groups "LNC Gsuite Migration" group.
<br>
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
<br>
>>>>> send an email to lnctest+unsubscribe@lphq.org.
<br>
>>>>
<br>
>>>> --
<br>
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
<br>
>>>> Groups "LNC Gsuite Migration" group.
<br>
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
<br>
>>>> send
<br>
>>>> an email to lnctest+unsubscribe@lphq.org.
<br>
</p>
</blockquote></div><br></div>