October 2019 - Lnc-business - Moellman Enterprises Email

Stepping away for a day or 2.
by John Phillips 29 Oct '19

29 Oct '19

3 2

Re: [Lnc-business] Director of Development
by Caryn Ann Harlos 29 Oct '19

29 Oct '19

If I ever fail in my duty point it out. I failed in my duty to Mr. Hauptmann. We have potential corruption and if it’s rude to demand that everyone take that seriously, then I will be rude AF. I’m in region 1 and the immediate past representative. I feel some duty to them and always will. And I question every representative if they have proactively consulted their region. And I will always do that. And I honestly don’t care if anyone thinks that’s outside my lane. I will always strive to word it diplomatically but it seems the offense is to the right to even ask the question, not the wording. Too bad. I’ll always question every regional representative. Most certainly my own. Here is what I want. Unwind this. Start over cleanly. Demand answers to previous questions. Is Mr. Fishman paid for CPAC planning? Why wasn’t his CPAC involvement disclosed? Why did Mr Fishman give a different public story than he said to Ms Adams about his “introduction” of Weld? Was Mr Sarwark offered a job by Weld, even if informally? And I’d like each LNC member to state their view (silence is a view) on Mr Sarwark’s open endorsement as party chair of Weld. That’s a start. And I want the truth about Lauren, but I doubt we will get that. I am asking the On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 9:17 PM Richard Longstreth < richard.longstreth(a)lp.org> wrote: > As stated in my previous email, I am fine if we disagree with how I see > things. Regardless, my question still is, what are the next steps? I have > proposed a direction to go that would improve the party. What do you want > to see done? Are you demanding someone's resignation? A censure? Please let > me know. As to your wording Ina rude manner, you were rude. I'll get over > it. > > This is not something anyone in the region has approached me about (this > or other items we have discussed) and I always welcome input. My phone, > email, and Facebook are all very public. I am happy to hear all thoughts > and, in the absence of input, I try to be the best representative I can and > work toward the betterment of our party. Complaining about the actions is > one thing; trying to take a bad situation and turn it into something which > helps the party is something else. Further, you have absolutely no right to > imply that I am failing in representing my region and I would appreciate it > if you stayed in your lane. I do not publicly allege that you are failing > in some secretarial roles and when you do err, I recognize that mistakes > happen. I believe I am owed the same courtesy. > > I ask again what action or result would you like this body to work toward? > I've already shared my thoughts but am open to other viable ideas if you > have them. > > Richard Longstreth > Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, HI, KS, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY) > Libertarian National Committee > richard.longstreth(a)lp.org > 931.538.9300 > > Sent from my Mobile Device > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 20:03 Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < > lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > >> Yep. >> >> And I don’t consent to my posts being deleted. If some info needs to be >> scrubbed, repost the rest. >> >> This girl is done carrying water. >> >> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 9:00 PM Erin Adams <erin.adams(a)lp.org> wrote: >> >> > I am not inclined to just let this lay. Too many issues. I suggest that >> we >> > indeed start over and this time, do things properly and above board. >> > >> > I find it ironic that tonight I'll be the one to say Carry that water, >> yet >> > that is what Im saying >> > >> > On Oct 28, 2019 9:49 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < >> > lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: >> > >> > Mr Longstreth. Enough is enough. I have no more benefit of the doubt >> to >> > give. This isn’t a matter of being 100%, it’s a matter of not even >> being >> > a >> > Party member. >> > >> > Our objections were clear. >> > >> > The intent of the policy manual is clear. >> > >> > The fact that we are intentionally blind-sided is clear. >> > >> > The fact she is not qualified - to me - is clear and to the numerous >> angry >> > member phone calls I’ve fielded is clear. >> > >> > The fact that smoke is being blown up my behind about a MA politico >> having >> > no ties to Weld (that’s impossible) is clear. >> > >> > The fact that this is just another in a long series of completely >> improper >> > entanglements never disclosed to the LNC is clear. >> > >> > Did we give authority to hire a co tractor that would require no >> approval? >> > >> > WE DO NOT PLANT LIBERTY SEEDS WITH OUR DONOR LIST. This is not >> > evangelism. I can’t believe I even have to say that. >> > >> > I’m second guessing remaining a donor at this point, and that’s >> pathetic. >> > >> > There’s been too much “oh well what’s done is done.” >> > >> > You know what’s done? My tolerance for this. >> > >> > And we’ve never received an answer to whether Mr Fishman was paid to >> plan >> > for COAC. Why even an unpaid was never disclosed? Either a disclosure >> or >> > denial that Mr Sarwark was offered - even if wink wink informally - a >> job >> > with Mr Weld prior to trying to get a paid position with the party >> funded >> > by unnamed donors. >> > >> > The cumulative case stinks and I’m done sweeping it under the rug. >> > >> > And - I’m trying to word this in a non-rude manner - I don’t think >> Region >> > 1 >> > shares your sentiments. Perhaps they do. I’ve been out of the loop. I >> > am >> > pretty sure that LPCO is not. I am medium sure LPWA is not - the two >> > largest constituencies. >> > >> > Dan and Nick are not victims here. And our questioning is not harassing >> > them. It is doing our duty and it’s about time we all started doing it. >> > >> > We were not told the truth about Lauren. Never forget that. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 8:02 PM Richard Longstreth via Lnc-business < >> > lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: >> > >> > > Too many threads out there. I'm going to break this down as simply as >> I >> > can >> > > and put it here and here only. I have feelings on all of this but if I >> > take >> > > a step back, here is how I am seeing things at this point. It is ok if >> > you >> > > disagree but let's figure out the next steps. >> > > >> > > 1) A contract was offered and was sent to the EPCC even though that >> part >> > of >> > > the PM deals with 'Directors'. The role in question was changed to a >> > > contracted director (read contractor) and so there is definitely some >> > grey >> > > as to how all of this should have been handled. I also note the lack >> of >> > > clear definitions. If the contract was required to be submitted, it >> did >> > not >> > > receive approval but if it was for a contractor, no approval needed. >> > News >> > > flash: our policy manual needs some work to fix and clarify these >> things >> > > for the future. Mr. O'Donnell had several suggestions at a previous >> > meeting >> > > and it may be worth revisiting them. >> > > >> > > 2) Our new DD is not 100% in line with our philosophies. I agree that >> > this >> > > is a concern, however, I would also note that very rarely does someone >> > > score a 10-10 on the Nolan quiz and we still welcome them into our >> folds >> > > and plant more liberty seeds along the way. The selected candidate >> meets >> > > all of the criteria that we voted on and approved, albeit, the feeling >> > of >> > > the room was clear, but it was not in our explicit direction. Do I >> wish >> > she >> > > was more libertarian, absolutely - I look forward to getting to know >> her >> > > more and find out where she disagrees with us and seeing if we can >> > change >> > > that. Until that time and given where we are at in the process, offer, >> > etc >> > > now, should we not utilize her skills and experience and trust in our >> > ED's >> > > selection and Chair's approval? Our only other option is to revoke the >> > > contract, pay her whatever severance fee and start over. I'm not over >> > the >> > > moon on that one. >> > > >> > > 3) So, where exactly do we go from here? Do we harass Dan until he >> says >> > he >> > > has done wrong? Resigns? Do we go after Oliver and Nick for approving? >> > Are >> > > we just raising flags to bring public attention and if so, what's the >> > > actual point unless you are campaigning (which is not the purpose of >> > this >> > > email list)? Do we demand the contract be cancelled and start the >> search >> > > over? All of these are options I suppose. Or, as a suggestion, we >> could >> > > recognize this opportunity to move our organization forward and ensure >> > that >> > > future LNCs have a clearer procedure and policy manual? First, I >> suggest >> > we >> > > let up and give the new DD a chance. Second, I propose we redirect >> this >> > > conversation to policy manual fixes and workshopping a hiring policy. >> > Off >> > > the top of my head, we need to clarify in a real way what the LNC >> should >> > be >> > > involved with at the very least - all hiring at an arbitrary line or, >> my >> > > suggestion, should we restrict the LNC to only be involved in >> employment >> > > matters concerning the ED and evaluating their performance? >> > > >> > > 4) I will say that thus far our discussion has not been largely >> > productive. >> > > What do we, as the governing body of the world's largest Libertarian >> > Party >> > > intend to do in an effort to ease the future growth and expansion of >> our >> > > Party? How can we use this to set an example for affiliate parties? I >> am >> > > happy to take part in any discussion that focuses on where we go. >> What's >> > > been done is done and as far as I can tell, nobody actually did >> anything >> > > wrong outside of optics and a very large grey area in our policy >> manual >> > was >> > > discovered. Let's figure out how to fix it. >> > > >> > > Richard Longstreth >> > > Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, HI, KS, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY) >> > > Libertarian National Committee >> > > richard.longstreth(a)lp.org >> > > 931.538.9300 >> > > >> > > Sent from my Mobile Device >> > > >> > -- >> > >> > *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. * >> > >> > >> > -- >> >> *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. * >> > -- *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. *

3 10

Re: [Lnc-business] Director of Development
by Richard Longstreth 28 Oct '19

28 Oct '19

Too many threads out there. I'm going to break this down as simply as I can and put it here and here only. I have feelings on all of this but if I take a step back, here is how I am seeing things at this point. It is ok if you disagree but let's figure out the next steps. 1) A contract was offered and was sent to the EPCC even though that part of the PM deals with 'Directors'. The role in question was changed to a contracted director (read contractor) and so there is definitely some grey as to how all of this should have been handled. I also note the lack of clear definitions. If the contract was required to be submitted, it did not receive approval but if it was for a contractor, no approval needed. News flash: our policy manual needs some work to fix and clarify these things for the future. Mr. O'Donnell had several suggestions at a previous meeting and it may be worth revisiting them. 2) Our new DD is not 100% in line with our philosophies. I agree that this is a concern, however, I would also note that very rarely does someone score a 10-10 on the Nolan quiz and we still welcome them into our folds and plant more liberty seeds along the way. The selected candidate meets all of the criteria that we voted on and approved, albeit, the feeling of the room was clear, but it was not in our explicit direction. Do I wish she was more libertarian, absolutely - I look forward to getting to know her more and find out where she disagrees with us and seeing if we can change that. Until that time and given where we are at in the process, offer, etc now, should we not utilize her skills and experience and trust in our ED's selection and Chair's approval? Our only other option is to revoke the contract, pay her whatever severance fee and start over. I'm not over the moon on that one. 3) So, where exactly do we go from here? Do we harass Dan until he says he has done wrong? Resigns? Do we go after Oliver and Nick for approving? Are we just raising flags to bring public attention and if so, what's the actual point unless you are campaigning (which is not the purpose of this email list)? Do we demand the contract be cancelled and start the search over? All of these are options I suppose. Or, as a suggestion, we could recognize this opportunity to move our organization forward and ensure that future LNCs have a clearer procedure and policy manual? First, I suggest we let up and give the new DD a chance. Second, I propose we redirect this conversation to policy manual fixes and workshopping a hiring policy. Off the top of my head, we need to clarify in a real way what the LNC should be involved with at the very least - all hiring at an arbitrary line or, my suggestion, should we restrict the LNC to only be involved in employment matters concerning the ED and evaluating their performance? 4) I will say that thus far our discussion has not been largely productive. What do we, as the governing body of the world's largest Libertarian Party intend to do in an effort to ease the future growth and expansion of our Party? How can we use this to set an example for affiliate parties? I am happy to take part in any discussion that focuses on where we go. What's been done is done and as far as I can tell, nobody actually did anything wrong outside of optics and a very large grey area in our policy manual was discovered. Let's figure out how to fix it. Richard Longstreth Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, HI, KS, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY) Libertarian National Committee richard.longstreth(a)lp.org 931.538.9300 Sent from my Mobile Device

3 3

Re: [Lnc-business] Director of Development
by Daniel Fishman 28 Oct '19

28 Oct '19

I wrote a name that should not have been on the public thread. I was attempting to remove that name and then will respond again without that person's name. I would appreciate people extend the courtesy of allowing that person to remain anonymous. Dan --- Daniel Fishman Executive Director The Libertarian Party Join Us <http://www.lp.org/join> > >

1 0

Re: [Lnc-business] Director of Development
by Caryn Ann Harlos 28 Oct '19

28 Oct '19

Ambiguities should not be exploited to overcome known objections. That is old party shennagins. And are we back to silence is consent? Seriously? This gets worse and worse. On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 7:06 PM Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business < lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Dear Mr. Longstreth, > > A copy of the proposed contract was sent to EPCC on October 20. There is an > ambiguity as to whether this provision applies to contractors as opposed to > employees. If it does apply, the contract is not proposed to be effective > until November 4, which is more than 10 days after the contract was > provided to the EPCC. I am not aware of any EPCC concerns about the > contract as proposed, nor do I think Mr. Fishman would have made the > announcement of the selection to the LNC if there was an known concern or > objection. > > Yours truly, > Nick > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 6:43 PM Richard Longstreth via Lnc-business < > lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > > Erin nailed it. A contract was offered with EPCC approval contrary to our > > policy manual. Everything else aside, there is a clear violation in this. > > What is the next appropriate course of action? I ask the question to Nick > > or anyone more familiar with such procedures or precedent. > > > > Richard Longstreth > > Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, HI, KS, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY) > > Libertarian National Committee > > richard.longstreth(a)lp.org > > 931.538.9300 > > > > Sent from my Mobile Device > > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 12:49 Erin Adams via Lnc-business < > > lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > > > > Unfortunately it appears that a contract was offered without either > EPCC > > > Aproval of said contract at least 10 days prior nor an affirmative vote > > > from a majority of the membership of the LNC. > > > > > > > > > On Oct 28, 2019 1:51 PM, Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business < > > > lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > > > > > Furthermore, Section 4 of the policy manual states : > > > "The Chair shall provide advice and consent to the Executive Director > on > > > the appointment, employment, and termination of all LPHQ personnel." > > > > > > Leaving the discretion of hiring solely to the Executive Director, with > > > the consent of The Chair, not the LNC. > > > > > > This was also a contentious issue that we recently debated amending, > > > during an Electronic meeting earlier this year, ahead of the search for > > > a new Executive Director, and this clause was not amended due to > > > concerns by Members of the LNC that we were teetering on overstepping > > > our bounds in micromanaging the daily business of HQ by inserting > > > ourselves into hiring decisions by the Executive Director. > > > > > > --- > > > Yours in Liberty, > > > > > > Justin O'Donnell > > > LNC Region 8 Representative > > > Candidate for US Senate, NH > > > www.justinodonnell.me > > > www.odonnell2020.com > > > > > > Renew your membership today at https://www.lp.org/wethepeople/?f=jod ! > > > > > > On 2019-10-28 14:18, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote: > > > > Interesting. I doubt the intention was to blind-side the LNC with > > > > secrecy and have us completely unaware until it was fait accompli. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 12:13 PM Justin O'Donnell > > > > <justin.odonnell(a)lp.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> With regards to the LNC needing to approve all director level > > > >> contracts, > > > >> the Policy manual states this is not the case. > > > >> > > > >> Section 8 of the Policy manual states: > > > >> "Following General Counsel’s review of a director-level employment > > > >> > > > >> contract, the EPCC shall review the proposed contract and any > > > >> related > > > >> advice from General Counsel. No such contract may be signed by the > > > >> Chair > > > >> without having first obtained either EPCC approval of the contract > > > >> at > > > >> least 10 days prior, or an affirmative vote from a majority of the > > > >> fixed > > > >> membership of the LNC." > > > >> > > > >> The Chair would only need the affirmative vote of the LNC to sign > > > >> and > > > >> effect a contract without the requisite 10 day review period from > > > >> the > > > >> EPRC. > > > >> If I remember correctly, this was a major point of contention when > > > >> we > > > >> debated amending it at our July 2018 LNC Meeting before the start of > > > >> the > > > >> NOLA Convention, but as the policy manual currently reads, there is > > > >> no > > > >> need for an affirmative vote of the entire LNC in order to approve a > > > >> > > > >> director level contract that has been cleared by Counsel and the > > > >> EPRC. > > > >> > > > >> --- > > > >> Yours in Liberty, > > > >> > > > >> Justin O'Donnell > > > >> LNC Region 8 Representative > > > >> Candidate for US Senate, NH > > > >> www.justinodonnell.me [1] > > > >> www.odonnell2020.com [2] > > > >> > > > >> Renew your membership today at > https://www.lp.org/wethepeople/?f=jod > > > >> ! > > > >> > > > >> On 2019-10-28 13:22, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: > > > >>> I have several other concerns Mr Smith. I think the qualifications > > > >> are > > > >>> not > > > >>> as Mr Fishman stated and there is a pattern of no longer than 6 > > > >> months > > > >>> or > > > >>> so at any position. > > > >>> > > > >>> And it is my understanding that Ms Daugherty was told by Mr > > > >> Sarwark > > > >>> that > > > >>> all director level hires must be approved by LNC. How is this > > > >> final > > > >>> without our approval?? > > > >>> > > > >>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 11:06 AM Elizabeth Van Horn < > > > >>> elizabeth.vanhorn(a)lp.org> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Ms Harlos, I haven't told anyone to not exercise their rights. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> IF you wish to have no further interaction, then stop replying > > > >> with > > > >>>> false > > > >>>> accusations. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> This is a public list, and I will not let a false accusation go > > > >>>> unanswered. > > > >>>> --- > > > >>>> Elizabeth Van Horn > > > >>>> LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY) > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On 2019-10-28 12:26, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> EVH. We are not familiar and I request you stick to formalities. > > > >> You > > > >>>> are > > > >>>> completely out of bounds and are no expert. And telling someone > > > >> to > > > >>>> not > > > >>>> exercise their rights is also out of bounds. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I want no further interaction with you on this topic. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 9:49 AM Elizabeth Van Horn < > > > >>>> elizabeth.vanhorn(a)lp.org> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> Caryn Ann, as I stated in my reply to your private email back in > > > >> > > > >>>>> July, > > > >>>>> one of my sons was diagnosed with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder > > > >> in > > > >>>>> 4th > > > >>>>> grade. (I also have a nephew with moderate to severe autism) > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> I've advocated on behalf of those with autism for decades. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> This exchange is happening because you reacted to someone > > > >> pointing > > > >>>>> out > > > >>>>> that you were rude. Yet, you persist with threats and > > > >> accusations. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> If you seriously want guidance, and disregard fellow LNC members > > > >> > > > >>>>> pointing > > > >>>>> out perceived rudeness, than perhaps the guidance you need is > > > >> beyond > > > >>>>> our > > > >>>>> ability. You may wish to seek guidance elsewhere. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Meanwhile, please stop with the threats and accusations. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> --- > > > >>>>> Elizabeth Van Horn > > > >>>>> LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY) > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> -- > > > >>> > > > >>> *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. * > > > > -- > > > > > > > > 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. _ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Links: > > > > ------ > > > > [1] http://www.justinodonnell.me > > > > [2] http://www.odonnell2020.com > > > > > > > > > > > > -- *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. *

1 1

Notice for Agenda Item at the Miami LNC Meeting
by Elizabeth Van Horn 28 Oct '19

28 Oct '19

Nick, unless this is time already allocated, I'd like to request time for the LNC to discuss the Development Director hire. This may need to be in executive session, so please factor that in time-wise. I'm unsure of the time needed, but at least 20 minutes. (can extend if needed) As I think there will be multiple people who wish to speak on this subject. Thank you! EVH -- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY) Chair-Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus http://www.lpcaucus.org/

4 4

February 2020 Meeting Site Selection
by Nicholas Sarwark 28 Oct '19

28 Oct '19

Dear All, At our last meeting, we selected the date of the February 2020 meeting, with the LNC instructing staff to explore locations in the Los Angeles/Riverside area. Mr. Kraus has sent those options, along with DC, Reno, and Indianapolis, to the members of the committee. Prior to the inclusion of the other locations, the Embassy Suites LAX was the preferred location. After the inclusion of Reno as an option, it was the clear favorite of those voting. My inclination is to instruct Mr. Kraus to book Reno for our February 2020 meeting, but if the members of the committee feel it necessary, I can request an email ballot for a motion to that effect. Please let me know your thoughts. Yours truly, Nick

6 5

Disagreement.
by John Phillips 28 Oct '19

28 Oct '19

3 3

LPIN member omitted from the Bylaws Committee Ballot
by Elizabeth Van Horn 28 Oct '19

28 Oct '19

I've received a message from an LPIN member. Joe Hauptmann. Joe says that he applied for the Bylaws and Rules Committee, but noticed that his name wasn't on the ballot. I checked and his application wasn't in the Bylaws batch, nor was he listed. His application is in the Platform batch. He also says that he had an email exchange with the LNC Secretary, and he said that he was applying for the Bylaws committee. He said he has the email to verify. What if anything can be done at this point? This Lifetime member(Joe Hauptmann) of the LP isn't happy with how the Bylaws Committee applications were handled. Also, I think Joe Hauptmann plans to send emails to several people on the LNC regarding this matter. I'll add, that as the Region 3 Rep, I thought all the applicants from Region 3, for Bylaws were accounted for. I thought since Joe Hauptmann's application was in the Platform Committee batch, that was the committee he decided to go for. That was not the case. EVH -- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)

5 11

FYI: Second Bylaws Committee Ballot Issued
by Nicholas Sarwark 26 Oct '19

26 Oct '19

Dear All, If you are in the electronic meeting and stepped away from your computer during the meeting, the ballot was reissued to make sure that people can vote for as many people as you approve of. Yours truly, Nick

1 0