February 2022 - Lpil-bod - Moellman Enterprises Email

January BoD Meeting Minutes
by Donny Henry 06 Oct '22

06 Oct '22

BoD- I forgot to send January’s meeting minutes earlier. See attached. In Liberty, -Donny

2 1

Re: [LPIL - Board of Directors] Fwd: Board Cleanup
by itdeputy＠lpillinois.org 28 Feb '22

28 Feb '22

Deb, my apologies for the extended absence. I am finally getting through all of the back emails as my days are now uninterrupted by my former job. I was under the impression that this had already occurred, and I've seen that your emails come from the Director address (it@). I concur with your assessment since my time is going to be occupied for the foreseeable future with the job search. That and boning on new technologies will be more than full-time, but I can still provide backup as deputy, which I thought was already the case. Regards, Carter Mitchell On 2022-01-21 15:05, Deb Renwick wrote: > Lex, > > I think it's time to put my on the board. What do you think? > > Deb > > -------- Original Message -------- > > SUBJECT: > [LPIL - Board of Directors] Board Cleanup > > DATE: > 2022-01-20 09:02 > > FROM: > Steve Suess via Lpil-bod <lpil-bod(a)lists.lpillinois.org> > > TO: > Lpil Bod <LPIL-BOD(a)lists.lpillinois.org> > > REPLY-TO: > Steve Suess <chair(a)lpillinois.org> > > Hello all, > > Noticing a couple errors on our last agenda have led me to wanting to > clean up the information available about our Board and make sure we're > all on the same page. > > DIVISION DIRECTORS - I am asking you to please review the list of > Director positions, including those that are vacant, on our website. > Please verify that all of the listed information is correct. Here is a > link to each division's page. > > Communications Division [1] > Field Operations Division [2] > IT Division [3] > Political Division [4] > > If there is incorrect information, please let me know and we will get > it changed. Just by opening some of the pages, I see some errors > already (i.e. Carter is listed as IT Director, not Deb) > > If you have directors in your division who are inactive, please reach > out to them and ask them to be present at meetings and be active in > their roles. While I know there are a couple Directors who do their > work but cannot attend calls (Kevin Mahoney, for example), I believe > we have several Directors in our ranks right now who neither attend > meetings nor really do any work. > > If a Director is neither attending meetings nor doing any work for the > party, their only contribution to our organization is making it harder > to reach quorum at meetings. I would rather have positions listed as > vacant than have a Board of inactive Directors. Please reach out to > these individuals and set up a game plan for participation or offer > them the opportunity to resign if they feel like they're too busy or > uninterested in helping. > > Once we verify each Division, we will make any edits needed on our > website. Donny, please refer to the website before February's meeting > to make sure our agenda has the correct information, as we may have > several resignations from inactive members. > > For my part, I plan to contact the handful of inactive SCC reps we > have. There are only a couple who have been inactive, but I will make > sure to get our SCC list updated and see what everyone's deal is. > > It's important for us to do this bit of organizational cleanup now > before we dive headfirst into petitioning and then campaign season > this spring/summer. I also don't want to leave the next Chair with a > big ole' mess of a Board when he or she takes over. > > Thanks! > > Steve > -- > > [5] > > [6] > > [7] > > STEVE SUESS > > Chair, Libertarian Party of Illinois > > 815 483 4043 [8] > > chair(a)lpillinois.org > > www.lpillinois.org [9] > > PO Box 3611, Bloomington, IL 61702 > > [9] > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] https://lpillinois.org/about/leadership/communications-division/ > [2] https://lpillinois.org/about/leadership/field-operations-division/ > [3] https://lpillinois.org/about/leadership/it-division/ > [4] https://lpillinois.org/about/leadership/political-division/ > [5] https://www.facebook.com/lpillinois > [6] https://twitter.com/lpillinois > [7] https://www.linkedin.com/in/steve-suess-16704928/ > [8] tel:815+483+4043 > [9] https://www.lpillinois.org/

1 0

FW: LPTexas Convention FAQ
by Lex ITGuest 28 Feb '22

28 Feb '22

I know this is not BOD business, and I am impressed with what you all are doing in Cook and Illinois. But I thought you might want a brief glimpse at the differences you will find in other states. I am still learning a lot of this. Our precincts are not voting areas but just county subdivisions like your townships. We still have government run primaries, but you cannot vote in them AND vote in our conventions. You don’t have to register to a party unless you want to vote in conventions, in which case you are registered by the state as a Libertarian. Keep up the great work in Illinois. - Lex From: LPTexas Credentials Committee [mailto:info@lptexas.org] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 9:04 AM To: Lex Green <lex.green(a)fastkarma.com> Subject: LPTexas Convention FAQ <http://www.lptexas.org/?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&utm_source=lptex…> Hello Lex! The 2022 Convention Cycle is upon us, and we at the Libertarian Party of Texas want to ensure that our members and affiliates have everything they need for successful conventions. To that end, we’ve put together the below ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ (FAQ) to answer those questions and point you to key online resources. Q: Can I vote in the March 1 primary (or early voting for that primary)? A: No, not if you plan to participate in LPTexas conventions. If you vote in the primary, Texas Election Code (TEC) states that you nullify your eligibility to participate in the LPTexas conventions. Q: When are the upcoming conventions? A: An Election Cycle Timeline <https://convention.lptexas.org/election_cycle?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed…> is available that outlines dates for the conventions and deadline that county leaders (and candidates!) should be aware of. The convention dates are: * Precinct Conventions - Tuesday, March 8 * County Conventions – Saturday, March 12 * District Conventions – Saturday March 19 * State Convention <https://convention.lptexas.org/?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&utm_sour…> – Weekend of April 8-10 Q: How can I find out when and where conventions will meet? A: We are encouraging county leaders to post these details on the LPTexas website under Resources <https://www.lptexas.org/events_calendar?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&…> > Events Calendar. If your county has its own website or social media, you may find details there as well. If you cannot find your county’s convention details online, contact your County Chair <https://www.lptexas.org/state-county-affiliates?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221…> to confirm locations and times. Q: What do I need to bring to conventions, and what can I expect once there? A: Have a photo ID available, and present your Voter Registration Certificate (Voter ID Card), which will be used to document your affiliation with the Libertarian Party and identify your voting precinct. ARRIVE ON TIME, as you might not be able to participate if you arrive after the convention convenes. For more details about what to expect at conventions, visit our website’s FAQ pages for general <https://www.lptexas.org/conventions_faq?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&…> , Precinct <https://www.lptexas.org/precinct_faq?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&utm…> , and County <https://www.lptexas.org/county_faq?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&utm_s…> Conventions. Q: What other training and resources are available? A: All training materials will be made available on the LPTexas website under 2022 Conventions <https://convention.lptexas.org/training?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&…> > Training & Forms. At present, those training materials are geared toward county leaders and how to run conventions, but all members are welcome to review those materials. In addition, there are recordings of Convention Leader Trainings hosted 2/16/2022 <https://www.lptexas.org/r?u=jalJvum2JQxpPvfjGmN5k36A0rbODv8CJ33YoniqXjc&e=9…> and 2/26/2022 <https://www.lptexas.org/r?u=GQ96LxW7tJscudkL8mlwNzVEKXk7dMDJzwJlfbbiiRYXfgY…> on the LPTexas YouTube channel <https://www.lptexas.org/r?u=GQ96LxW7tJscudkL8mlwN8noaECmhrfHkzuyVTFS3Tjw8r6…> . The Credentials Committee <https://convention.lptexas.org/committees?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f…> plans to facilitate State Delegate Training in late-March as well! Closer to the State Convention, more resources for delegates including committee reports will be available through the 2022 Conventions website <https://convention.lptexas.org/?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&utm_sour…> . Please direct any questions on delegate credentialing and requirements for Precinct/County/District Conventions to the Credentials Committee: <mailto:credentials@lptexas.org> credentials(a)lptexas.org Toward Liberty, LPTexas 2022 Credentials Committee credentials(a)lptexas.org <mailto:credentials@lptexas.org> LPTexas http://www.lptexas.org/ <http://www.lptexas.org/?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&utm_source=lptex…> Libertarian Party of Texas · PO Box 1766, Austin, TX 78767, United States This email was sent to lex.green(a)fastkarma.com. To stop receiving emails, <https://www.lptexas.org/unsubscribe?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&utm_…> click here. You can also keep up with LPTexas on <https://www.lptexas.org/r?u=27Ax0UmWOX2J8J_QwK9Z6syGNada6BVi1b-SrN7mdIJbv64…> Facebook. Created with <https://www.lptexas.org/r?u=SWqLExi-4iBlEOa5qgO58jA2d62deOsOLwOgchKDecY&e=9…> NationBuilder, software for leaders. <https://www.lptexas.org/r/o?e=9b0b8f7def8453da733978221ed545f9&utm_source=l…> <http://email.nationbuilder.com/wf/open?upn=gjEttgP3QYUAy00VhYkcZ8N3OM7gP-2F…>

1 0

LP IL v. Cook County Clerk - Sur reply
by treasurer＠lpillinois.org 28 Feb '22

28 Feb '22

So here is the Cook County Clerk's second bite of the apple. Cliff notes version is that since the LP IL did not receive 5% in each subordinate race in Cook County when it was last run, we are not entitled to ballot access in all of those races. So even when you get it, you don't get it in Cook County. I will forward our response on Monday. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

5 5

Re: [LPIL - Board of Directors] LP IL v Cook County Clerk - Ruling pending
by Donny Henry 26 Feb '22

26 Feb '22

We can do tomorrow evening. Maybe like 7PM? I’m flexible on time… Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 26, 2022, at 12:14 PM, adam balling <adamballing(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Would you be available to Zoom tomorrow evening? Later in the week? Thank you for the offer! It’s a very unfamiliar process & your guidance is immensely appreciated! > > I had also wondered about the validation database from a couple years ago; in the LP Illinois conference call, someone suggested it may have the drawback of being less up to date, & I have no sense of if/how/when it could be updated. > > Thank you, > Adam > > From: Donny Henry <vicechair(a)lpillinois.org> > Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2022 10:02 AM > To: executivedirector(a)lpillinois.org <executivedirector(a)lpillinois.org> > Cc: treasurer(a)lpillinois.org <treasurer(a)lpillinois.org>; LPIL-BOD(a)lists.lpillinois.org <LPIL-BOD(a)lists.lpillinois.org>; Jim Humay <jhumay(a)gmail.com>; bsizelo(a)yahoo.com <bsizelo(a)yahoo.com>; Adam Balling <adamballing(a)hotmail.com>; jasonrossdecker(a)gmail.com <jasonrossdecker(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [LPIL - Board of Directors] LP IL v Cook County Clerk - Ruling pending > > Having gone through an in-depth petition challenge in 2020, I can be available for a Zoom meeting to give you an overview. It’s important that you validate signatures and know it may require hiring an attorney. The Peoria Election Commission would not allow me to defend our candidates signatures because I was not a lawyer. > > On the validation note: Russ/Steve- is it possible that Lex’s brother’s software could be populated with current voter data soon? Cook County is too large to Ctrl+F the data and tbh Peoria’s spreadsheet is awfully large as well. > > -Donny > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Feb 24, 2022, at 8:23 AM, executivedirector--- via Lpil-bod <lpil-bod(a)lists.lpillinois.org> wrote: > > > > For us in 2020, it was a gambit and it paid off. In 2022, it's a different story. Though we are stronger now than we were in 2020, we still will need help. Having no experience with defending petitions against challenges, is there a resource that walks us through the process? Are there resources, if needed, that we can utilize to defend petitions? > > > >> On 2022-02-23 20:01, treasurer--- via Lpil-bod wrote: > >> From our attorney, Andrew Finko. There is a lot to cover here but the > >> cliff notes version is that Judge Gettlemen is appears to be inclined > >> to rule in our favor. Issue is that the Deputy States Attorney asked > >> for more time for a brief to make some bs up describe how ILCS 7-2 > >> makes us not qualified as an "Established" party. That is due on > >> February 25. Our response is due on February 28. Ruling will be > >> handed down on March 4. > >> In the mean time, he says to expect the Clerk to be very aggressive > >> against us on petitions when we turn them in. He recommends having > >> 10x the number of signatures needed to get on the ballot for > >> countywide races. Her henchman, Jim Nally, has been messing with SEI > >> forms so please note. "[They] have been consistent about cutting off > >> the rest of the SEI, and only submitting to portion of the SEI which > >> contains the foregoing info only, and not submitting the answers to > >> questions. The answers to questions do NOT need to be submitted. The > >> new form has the Receipt separate on the first page of the packet - > >> and that's the only part Nally would submit, so he's revised the form. > >> Suggest that the LPI similarly submit only the Receipt portion of the > >> (new) SEI form - attached." > >> Russ Clark > >> From Andrew Finko to Russ Clark > >> The hearing lasted a bit over an hour, and I had a couple other > >> matters set this afternoon, sorry for delay in sending this email. > >> First topic was Green Party motion to intervene - and (of course) the > >> Clerk objected, and requested time to file a response. Ruling TBD. > >> Green Party to file an amended motion with proposed complaint by 2/25, > >> Clerk file response by 3/9 and reply by 3/14. > >> Second topic was our motion for prelim injunction. Judge Gettlemen > >> started out by summarizing his understanding/position, which was > >> basically our position. He commented that Section 10-2 defined 5% and > >> that the Election Code generally, and that Sec. 7-2 and 7-4 confirmed > >> that the LPI was authorized to nomination Commissioners and > >> committeepersons within Cook County specifically. He noted that > >> Section 10-1 expressly prohibited an established party from nominating > >> its candidates under Article 10. He said exactly what I intended to > >> say. > >> Judge Gettleman was totally on board with our arguments - his only > >> criticism is that the motion was not for declaratory judgment but only > >> prelim injunction so he expressed concern over the relief that we > >> requested. He actually commented about what I wrote - that he was > >> surprised the Clerk did not at all address the applicability of > >> Article 7 of the Election Code. I summarized the constitutional law, > >> that there's strong first and fourteenth amendment rights, and the > >> Clerk's position was well-defined, she refused to change her stance. > >> Judge Gettleman during the hour argument, also brought up Colleen > >> Gleason's email specifically saying that LPI was established for only > >> county-wide county officer positions, but not established for all > >> other listed offices on the ballot. > >> In response, Jessica Scheller said, outright that Article 7 did not > >> apply. Her logic was totally off base when she argued that Article 7 > >> applied only to municipal elections, and LPI did not attain > >> established party status or run candidates at the April 2021 election. > >> She's been an attorney since 2004 so should know better than to make > >> stuff up. I pointed out that 10 ILCS 5/7-1 defined applicability of > >> Art. 7, including nomination of partisan candidates for county > >> elections. Jessica Scheller then embarked upon utter BS backpeddling, > >> saying that the first sentence in Sec. 7-1(a) that said "unless > >> otherwise prohibited in this Article . . . " meant that Art 7 did not > >> apply and that Sec. 10-2 was the only part of Election Code > >> applicable. I pointed out that Sec. 7-1(b) actually defined the > >> elections that were not governed by Article 7 (the exception > >> referenced in 7-1(a)). She then tried to argue that the word > >> "Article" meant the Election Code . . . but Judge Gettleman was quick > >> to note the use of Article as referring to the section/chapter, rather > >> than the entire Code. I could not believe my ears - actually was > >> shocked to hear what a licensed attorney was saying to a federal court > >> judge - nothing less than total lies and BS. > >> Anyway, Jim Nally was on the line, but did not speak up. > >> At the end of the hour, State's Attorney asked for a sur-reply to > >> address the applicability of Article 7 and interplay with Section > >> 10-2. I objected, but Judge Gettleman said (more than once during > >> hearing too) that Election Code was confusing, not easily understood, > >> so allowed the further briefing (by Friday) and allowed me the last > >> word (by Monday). > >> Hearing continued to Friday March 4, 2022 at 11:30 AM before Judge > >> Gettleman. > >> Separately, I can also order the transcript if you wish, but that's > >> about $250 or so based on ballpark estimate from court reporter. It > >> would be needed for an appeal, and could provide additional detail > >> about the hearing today. Let me know if you're OK with the additional > >> cost - if we prevail, I could ask for reimbursement from the Clerk. > >> In addition, if we prevail, I would also ask the Clerk for payment of > >> my hourly attorney fees, and reimburse to the LPI the amounts that > >> were paid to me initially to get started. > >> I requested to order the transcript and will pay for this from ballot > >> access funds. We will see what reimbursement we get from Cook County > >> Clerk. > >> I asked Andrew: > >> Too bad we didn't go for declaratory judgement. It sounds like we > >> would get it. Is there a possibility we could ask for it? Our > >> countywide slate petitioning is going well so we should pass the > >> signature requirements. Two of the three plaintiffs also have enough > >> signatures to clear our calculated 47 valid signatures. Our > >> candidates are doing the work so this would just be icing on the cake > >> for them. If we got a declaratory judgement, would we be able to > >> slate for Cook County Board seats without petitioning?. > >> We did request a declaratory judgment - it's Count I of the Complaint. > >> However, at this juncture, the judge isn't ruling upon that request, > >> since it's only a preliminary injunction request. However, we needed > >> to address that argument, as likelihood of success on the merits is > >> one element we need to establish to obtain a preliminary injunction > >> (along with a direct conflict between the parties, monetary damages > >> could not adequately compensate, urgent need for relief, etc.). > >> Also, there's procedural rules that preclude the judge from deciding > >> the complaint right now. Defendant/Clerk has time to file a motion to > >> dismiss the complaint or an answer (until 2/24). Thereafter, we can > >> file a FRCP Rule 56 "motion for summary judgment," or possibly, a FRCP > >> Rule 12 "motion for judgment on the pleadings" depending upon how the > >> Clerk responds. That's next. I made sure that the summons was > >> personally served, rather than sending a waiver of service request, > >> that would then have allowed +60 days to respond to the complaint. > >> When personally served, the time to respond is +20 days from service > >> on 2/4/2022. Of course, the Clerk could ask for additional time, but > >> that's up to the Judge to decide. > >> At present, the preliminary injunction asks for ballot placement of > >> only the three commissioner candidates directly on the ballot, due to > >> denial of recognition/signature requirements from Clerk. Rest of > >> slate for countywide offices will need to file its nomination papers, > >> since that wasn't included in the requested relief. And, I'm not sure > >> Judge Gettleman has the confidence of Judge Pallmeyer to directly > >> place candidates upon the ballot, that's a big request. > >> For signatures, I would suggest obtaining AT LEAST 10 times the > >> minimum - and you should expect to get multiple challenges > >> nonetheless. For purposes of filing, ALL LPI candidates should > >> (strongly recommended) file on the LAST DAY to file, March 14, 2022 > >> rather than March 7, 2022. Extra week to gather signatures, plus, > >> there is NO advantage to filing on March 7, 2022 - with only one or > >> two candidates for each office, there's no lottery for first position, > >> and really, first or second doesn't matter if there's only two > >> candidates. The reason to file last day is to prevent the machine > >> from having an extra week to review signatures and then create > >> objections - and you can bet Jim Nally will be orchestrating those > >> objections. > >> As for the MWRD, it was created within Cook County, and the boundaries > >> of the MWRD have not changed or been remapped, so that's not a problem > >> from my point of view - it's the same (internal) boundaries within > >> Cook County. And its commissioners are elected countywide, not by > >> district. So again, no change based on redistricting. LPI should > >> similarly be authorized to run candidates for MWRD based upon Nov. > >> 2020 electoral success. > >> If we prevail upon the preliminary injunction, then it's smooth > >> sailing going forward - a judgment on the complaint, and possibly, the > >> Clerk might even agree to entry of a consent judgment to save money on > >> attorney fees. That's not likely right now, but if Judge Gettleman > >> grants motion for preliminary injunction then maybe (to minimize > >> exposure to attorney fees). > >> If the LPI is recognized as established by the court for all offices, > >> then the LPI would need to have candidates ready for township > >> committeepersons - and suggest that you solicit names now, and prepare > >> to file nomination papers. Township Committeepersons (and Ward > >> Committeepersons in Chicago) would then vote to fill vacancies from > >> the primary election and file nomination papers later - and remember > >> that's also a signature gathering endeavor, have to gather as many > >> signatures as would've been required for primary election, but during > >> the summer (after primary election results are certified). > >> Do you have statements of candidacy and statements of economic > >> interests for all candidates? The SEI form must be the Cook County > >> Clerk's template/form, and filed with the Clerk's office. The Receipt > >> is the portion with the name, address, office sought typed in, and the > >> round stamp or seal of the Clerk in the box. Jim Nally (and Jaconetty) > >> have been consistent about cutting off the rest of the SEI, and only > >> submitting to portion of the SEI which contains the foregoing info > >> only, and not submitting the answers to questions. The answers to > >> questions do NOT need to be submitted. The new form has the Receipt > >> separate on the first page of the packet - and that's the only part > >> Nally would submit, so he's revised the form. Suggest that the LPI > >> similarly submit only the Receipt portion of the (new) SEI form - > >> attached. > >> Also, must be bound with two hole (or three ring) punched hole/binding > >> system, or wire/string. Pages numbered at the bottom consecutively. > >> ------------------------- > >> [1] > >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > >> www.avast.com [1] > >> Links: > >> ------ > >> [1] https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > -- > > Lpil-bod mailing list > > Lpil-bod(a)lists.lpillinois.org > > http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpil-bod >

1 0

LP IL v Cook County Clerk - Ruling pending
by treasurer＠lpillinois.org 26 Feb '22

26 Feb '22

>From our attorney, Andrew Finko. There is a lot to cover here but the cliff notes version is that Judge Gettlemen is appears to be inclined to rule in our favor. Issue is that the Deputy States Attorney asked for more time for a brief to make some bs up describe how ILCS 7-2 makes us not qualified as an "Established" party. That is due on February 25. Our response is due on February 28. Ruling will be handed down on March 4. In the mean time, he says to expect the Clerk to be very aggressive against us on petitions when we turn them in. He recommends having 10x the number of signatures needed to get on the ballot for countywide races. Her henchman, Jim Nally, has been messing with SEI forms so please note. "[They] have been consistent about cutting off the rest of the SEI, and only submitting to portion of the SEI which contains the foregoing info only, and not submitting the answers to questions. The answers to questions do NOT need to be submitted. The new form has the Receipt separate on the first page of the packet - and that's the only part Nally would submit, so he's revised the form. Suggest that the LPI similarly submit only the Receipt portion of the (new) SEI form - attached." Russ Clark >From Andrew Finko to Russ Clark The hearing lasted a bit over an hour, and I had a couple other matters set this afternoon, sorry for delay in sending this email. First topic was Green Party motion to intervene - and (of course) the Clerk objected, and requested time to file a response. Ruling TBD. Green Party to file an amended motion with proposed complaint by 2/25, Clerk file response by 3/9 and reply by 3/14. Second topic was our motion for prelim injunction. Judge Gettlemen started out by summarizing his understanding/position, which was basically our position. He commented that Section 10-2 defined 5% and that the Election Code generally, and that Sec. 7-2 and 7-4 confirmed that the LPI was authorized to nomination Commissioners and committeepersons within Cook County specifically. He noted that Section 10-1 expressly prohibited an established party from nominating its candidates under Article 10. He said exactly what I intended to say. Judge Gettleman was totally on board with our arguments - his only criticism is that the motion was not for declaratory judgment but only prelim injunction so he expressed concern over the relief that we requested. He actually commented about what I wrote - that he was surprised the Clerk did not at all address the applicability of Article 7 of the Election Code. I summarized the constitutional law, that there's strong first and fourteenth amendment rights, and the Clerk's position was well-defined, she refused to change her stance. Judge Gettleman during the hour argument, also brought up Colleen Gleason's email specifically saying that LPI was established for only county-wide county officer positions, but not established for all other listed offices on the ballot. In response, Jessica Scheller said, outright that Article 7 did not apply. Her logic was totally off base when she argued that Article 7 applied only to municipal elections, and LPI did not attain established party status or run candidates at the April 2021 election. She's been an attorney since 2004 so should know better than to make stuff up. I pointed out that 10 ILCS 5/7-1 defined applicability of Art. 7, including nomination of partisan candidates for county elections. Jessica Scheller then embarked upon utter BS backpeddling, saying that the first sentence in Sec. 7-1(a) that said "unless otherwise prohibited in this Article . . . " meant that Art 7 did not apply and that Sec. 10-2 was the only part of Election Code applicable. I pointed out that Sec. 7-1(b) actually defined the elections that were not governed by Article 7 (the exception referenced in 7-1(a)). She then tried to argue that the word "Article" meant the Election Code . . . but Judge Gettleman was quick to note the use of Article as referring to the section/chapter, rather than the entire Code. I could not believe my ears - actually was shocked to hear what a licensed attorney was saying to a federal court judge - nothing less than total lies and BS. Anyway, Jim Nally was on the line, but did not speak up. At the end of the hour, State's Attorney asked for a sur-reply to address the applicability of Article 7 and interplay with Section 10-2. I objected, but Judge Gettleman said (more than once during hearing too) that Election Code was confusing, not easily understood, so allowed the further briefing (by Friday) and allowed me the last word (by Monday). Hearing continued to Friday March 4, 2022 at 11:30 AM before Judge Gettleman. Separately, I can also order the transcript if you wish, but that's about $250 or so based on ballpark estimate from court reporter. It would be needed for an appeal, and could provide additional detail about the hearing today. Let me know if you're OK with the additional cost - if we prevail, I could ask for reimbursement from the Clerk. In addition, if we prevail, I would also ask the Clerk for payment of my hourly attorney fees, and reimburse to the LPI the amounts that were paid to me initially to get started. I requested to order the transcript and will pay for this from ballot access funds. We will see what reimbursement we get from Cook County Clerk. I asked Andrew: Too bad we didn't go for declaratory judgement. It sounds like we would get it. Is there a possibility we could ask for it? Our countywide slate petitioning is going well so we should pass the signature requirements. Two of the three plaintiffs also have enough signatures to clear our calculated 47 valid signatures. Our candidates are doing the work so this would just be icing on the cake for them. If we got a declaratory judgement, would we be able to slate for Cook County Board seats without petitioning?. We did request a declaratory judgment - it's Count I of the Complaint. However, at this juncture, the judge isn't ruling upon that request, since it's only a preliminary injunction request. However, we needed to address that argument, as likelihood of success on the merits is one element we need to establish to obtain a preliminary injunction (along with a direct conflict between the parties, monetary damages could not adequately compensate, urgent need for relief, etc.). Also, there's procedural rules that preclude the judge from deciding the complaint right now. Defendant/Clerk has time to file a motion to dismiss the complaint or an answer (until 2/24). Thereafter, we can file a FRCP Rule 56 "motion for summary judgment," or possibly, a FRCP Rule 12 "motion for judgment on the pleadings" depending upon how the Clerk responds. That's next. I made sure that the summons was personally served, rather than sending a waiver of service request, that would then have allowed +60 days to respond to the complaint. When personally served, the time to respond is +20 days from service on 2/4/2022. Of course, the Clerk could ask for additional time, but that's up to the Judge to decide. At present, the preliminary injunction asks for ballot placement of only the three commissioner candidates directly on the ballot, due to denial of recognition/signature requirements from Clerk. Rest of slate for countywide offices will need to file its nomination papers, since that wasn't included in the requested relief. And, I'm not sure Judge Gettleman has the confidence of Judge Pallmeyer to directly place candidates upon the ballot, that's a big request. For signatures, I would suggest obtaining at least 10 times the minimum - and you should expect to get multiple challenges nonetheless. For purposes of filing, ALL LPI candidates should (strongly recommended) file on the last day to file, March 14, 2022 rather than March 7, 2022. Extra week to gather signatures, plus, there is NO advantage to filing on March 7, 2022 - with only one or two candidates for each office, there's no lottery for first position, and really, first or second doesn't matter if there's only two candidates. The reason to file last day is to prevent the machine from having an extra week to review signatures and then create objections - and you can bet Jim Nally will be orchestrating those objections. As for the MWRD, it was created within Cook County, and the boundaries of the MWRD have not changed or been remapped, so that's not a problem from my point of view - it's the same (internal) boundaries within Cook County. And its commissioners are elected countywide, not by district. So again, no change based on redistricting. LPI should similarly be authorized to run candidates for MWRD based upon Nov. 2020 electoral success. If we prevail upon the preliminary injunction, then it's smooth sailing going forward - a judgment on the complaint, and possibly, the Clerk might even agree to entry of a consent judgment to save money on attorney fees. That's not likely right now, but if Judge Gettleman grants motion for preliminary injunction then maybe (to minimize exposure to attorney fees). If the LPI is recognized as established by the court for all offices, then the LPI would need to have candidates ready for township committeepersons - and suggest that you solicit names now, and prepare to file nomination papers. Township Committeepersons (and Ward Committeepersons in Chicago) would then vote to fill vacancies from the primary election and file nomination papers later - and remember that's also a signature gathering endeavor, have to gather as many signatures as would've been required for primary election, but during the summer (after primary election results are certified). Do you have statements of candidacy and statements of economic interests for all candidates? The SEI form must be the Cook County Clerk's template/form, and filed with the Clerk's office. The Receipt is the portion with the name, address, office sought typed in, and the round stamp or seal of the Clerk in the box. Jim Nally (and Jaconetty) have been consistent about cutting off the rest of the SEI, and only submitting to portion of the SEI which contains the foregoing info only, and not submitting the answers to questions. The answers to questions do NOT need to be submitted. The new form has the Receipt separate on the first page of the packet - and that's the only part Nally would submit, so he's revised the form. Suggest that the LPI similarly submit only the Receipt portion of the (new) SEI form - attached. Also, must be bound with two hole (or three ring) punched hole/binding system, or wire/string. Pages numbered at the bottom consecutively. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

3 5

Re: [LPIL - Board of Directors] LP IL v Cook County Clerk - Ruling pending
by treasurer＠lpillinois.org 24 Feb '22

24 Feb '22

Jim, Jason and Brian, Only the receipt page needs to be turned in with your petitions. Jason has already done so and it may be worth traveling to the courthouse he used as there may be a friendly there. As to the number, I thought it was 47 once it was reduced but I may be incorrect on this. I am going off memory. To all, If you haven’t been through the signature challenge process, we have a number of party members who have. Please make sure you are validating addresses on the petition with the voter, as best you can. If you need assistance with this, other than Cook, please let me know and I can provide the voter roll we have which is a March 2021 roll. There is no 2022 roll available yet for statewides or Cook as the Cook County Clerk has not released it. For Cook County candidates: Cook County is too big to use a spreadsheet so we will need to use my Power BI file. The search function is not great for identifying individual voters BUT it can be made to do so. It is actually easier to get a voter roll by ward, precinct or city, generate the roll in a spreadsheet and then validate using the search function in Excel. Remember, you may cure (ie edit) all information other than the signature so that it matches the voter roll. If we need more signatures, I recommend looking up LP members in the Cook County area in CiviCRM. A simple search shows over 5,000 members in Cook County. If you contact them, they should be willing to at least sign a petition to put you on the ballot. Set up a time and place to meet or to go their home for a signature. These will be “iron clad” valid signatures for you so it is best if you can get them now if you haven’t already. Justin or I can help you get the list of names, addresses and emails if you need them. Russ Clark Treasurer Libertarian Party of Illinois From: Jason Ross Decker <jasonrossdecker(a)gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2022 9:06 AM To: Jim Humay <jhumay(a)gmail.com> Cc: Justin Tucker <executivedirector(a)lpillinois.org>; Russ Clark <treasurer(a)lpillinois.org>; LPIL-BOD(a)lists.lpillinois.org; bsizelo(a)yahoo.com; Adam Balling <adamballing(a)hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [LPIL - Board of Directors] LP IL v Cook County Clerk - Ruling pending For the SEI you need to read it clearly but as long as you haven't made any money from government contracts, and you don't have any assets over $7,500.00 then you need to write "none" in each section. When you bring it in, they'll take it and give you the first page stamped, which serves at the receipt which gets filed with your statement of Candidacy and loyalty oath. Luckily for me, I was able to get it done at the Markham courthouse as there's a county clerk office in that courthouse, and the woman who took mine pointed out that I needed to write "none" in all the sections. On Thu, Feb 24, 2022, 8:42 AM Jim Humay <jhumay(a)gmail.com <mailto:jhumay@gmail.com> > wrote: To be clear, we do not need to turn in the answers to the questions on the SE!? Just the first page? There is an area for a stamp on the first page of questions. Also, the number of signatures required was reduced by 1/3 for 2022, because of the shorter petitioning time. We calculated that means 33 signatures required for a Commissioner district. If and when the Clerk gives us a number we need to make sure that is taken into consideration. Jim Humay On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 8:23 AM <executivedirector(a)lpillinois.org <mailto:executivedirector@lpillinois.org> > wrote: For us in 2020, it was a gambit and it paid off. In 2022, it's a different story. Though we are stronger now than we were in 2020, we still will need help. Having no experience with defending petitions against challenges, is there a resource that walks us through the process? Are there resources, if needed, that we can utilize to defend petitions? -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

1 0

Re: [LPIL - Board of Directors] LP IL v. Cook County Clerk - LP IL rebuttal
by treasurer＠lpillinois.org 20 Feb '22

20 Feb '22

Sorry, wrong address again. From: treasurer(a)lpillinois.org <treasurer(a)lpillinois.org> Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2022 7:59 PM To: 'Members of the Board of Directors' <bod(a)lpillinois.org>; 'jasonrossdecker(a)gmail.com' <jasonrossdecker(a)gmail.com>; 'Jim Humay' <jhumay(a)gmail.com>; 'bsizelo(a)yahoo.com' <bsizelo(a)yahoo.com> Subject: LP IL v. Cook County Clerk - LP IL rebuttal Here is our rebuttal. It is a short read but it is a good one I think. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

3 2

Fwd: Meeting with Rep. Lauren Underwood
by Donny Henry 17 Feb '22

17 Feb '22

If you all can make this, please jump on and support!!! -Donny Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Donny Henry <vicechair(a)lpillinois.org> > Date: February 17, 2022 at 5:28:15 PM CST > To: Eve Wasche <evewasche(a)icloud.com> > Subject: Fwd: [LPIL - Board of Directors] Meeting with Rep. Lauren Underwood > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: executivedirector--- via Lpil-bod <lpil-bod(a)lists.lpillinois.org> >> Date: February 17, 2022 at 5:14:16 PM CST >> To: Kelly Liebmann-LPIL IT Operations Director <itoperations(a)lpillinois.org> >> Cc: Lpil Bod <lpil-bod(a)lists.lpillinois.org> >> Subject: Re: [LPIL - Board of Directors] Meeting with Rep. Lauren Underwood >> Reply-To: executivedirector(a)lpillinois.org >> >> https://us02web.zoom.us/j/5432258601 >> >>> On 2022-02-17 17:12, Kelly Liebmann-LPIL IT Operations Director wrote: >>> Sales have ended. Is there a link to join the zoom directly? >>> KELLY LIEBMANN >>> _"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its >>> government." -Thomas Paine_ >>>> On Feb 17, 2022, at 3:58 PM, executivedirector--- via Lpil-bod >>>> <lpil-bod(a)lists.lpillinois.org> wrote: >>> https://www.eventbrite.com/e/14th-district-libertarians-meeting-w-rep-lauren-underwood-il-14-tickets-267778381347 >>>> Still time to join in. >>>> On 2022-02-11 12:26, executivedirector(a)lpillinois.org wrote: >>>>> Team - 14th District Libertarians and BOD members are invited to >>>>> join >>>>> this meeting with Rep. Lauren Underwood on Feb. 17th at 5:30 PM. >>>>> Details here: >>> https://www.eventbrite.com/e/14th-district-libertarians-meeting-w-rep-laure… >>>>> Please RSVP if you can make it and provide me with some questions >>>>> you may have. >>>>> Best, >>>>> Justin >>>> -- >>>> Lpil-bod mailing list >>>> Lpil-bod(a)lists.lpillinois.org >>>> http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpil-bod >> -- >> Lpil-bod mailing list >> Lpil-bod(a)lists.lpillinois.org >> http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpil-bod

2 1

Meeting with Rep. Lauren Underwood
by executivedirector＠lpillinois.org 17 Feb '22

17 Feb '22

Team - 14th District Libertarians and BOD members are invited to join this meeting with Rep. Lauren Underwood on Feb. 17th at 5:30 PM. Details here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/14th-district-libertarians-meeting-w-rep-laure… Please RSVP if you can make it and provide me with some questions you may have. Best, Justin

2 3