[Lpk-rules] Operating Rules

[Chris Wiest]

It is possible.  If the district did last week in February and you had venue cancel or weather emergency.

Options:  (1) give districts and counties first three weekends, and leave fourth for emergencies; or (2) do districts and state in last three weekends of feb and March.

Don’t care either way.  

Do care about making sure there is some reasonable flexibility (3-4 weeks) and that emergencies are dealt with appropriately and do not mess us up.

-CW

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 12, 2019, at 10:24 AM, Cristi Kendrick via Lpk-rules <lpk-rules at lists.lpky.org> wrote:
> 
> Apologies. Can I get clarification on convention notices?
> 
> Is there a possibility that District/State Conventions could overlap under Wiest's proposal?
> 
>> On 2/12/19 9:24 AM, Cristi Kendrick via Lpk-rules wrote:
>> 700.1.2 - Aye for the 2nd (Wiest's language)
>> 700.1.2.5/7 - Aye 
>> 700.1.10 - Aye for the 2nd (Wiest's language)
>> 
>> My vote for Wiest's language is b/c we can't predict the future, and there may be mitigating circumstances. Also, regarding 'events' 3 weeks of convention planning is better than 2 (weeks). 
>> 
>>> On 2/11/19 3:38 PM, chris.wiest--- via Lpk-rules wrote:
>>> Folks:
>>>  
>>> I am attaching the Operating Rules draft that we got through Saturday (in pdf).  The stuff in red was stuff in dispute/contention.  Black and underlined was items of agreement.
>>>  
>>> I am also attaching a revised constitutional proposal that came out of our meeting (I think this was unanimous, please confirm).
>>>  
>>> In term of procedure:
>>>  
>>> I think if either Mr. Hicks or Mr. Capano would like to vote on the competing proposals in 500.0 related to dues, they can do so.  Same with the 500.2 proposal.  And the 600.1.3 related to at-large.  And 600.5.2.5 related to minutes for committees.
>>>  
>>> I need votes from everyone on the 700.1.2 provisions related to conventions and scheduling of them.  Mr. Moellman’s proposal is first, and my alternative proposal is second.   If anyone has any alternatives, those are also in order.
>>>  
>>> Please take a look at the 700.1.2.5/7 language about affiliate dissolution.  I tweaked Ken’s, and it is red, but I think we are really close.
>>>  
>>> I need votes on 700.1.10 regarding mandating an agenda, particularly at affiliate conventions.  Mr. Moellman’s is first, my alternative is second.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> We need proposals on the following:
>>>  
>>> 1000.1: in kind donations
>>> 1000.2: ethics, nepotism, conflicts of interest
>>> 1000.3: party records / open records
>>> 1000.4: financial controls and party assets
>>> 1000.5: default standing convention rules
>>>  
>>> I was going to take a stab this evening, and looked at Ken’s proposals as well.  We may have agreement on a good bit of it (maybe 85%), but are likely to have some disagreement on some as well.  If anyone else has ideas, those are also in order.
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> -Chris
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lpk-rules mailing list
>>> Lpk-rules at lists.lpky.org
>>> http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpk-rules
>> -- 
>> Cristi Kendrick
>> 4th District, Chair
>> Libertarian Party of Kentucky
>> 502-457-6765
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lpk-rules mailing list
>> Lpk-rules at lists.lpky.org
>> http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpk-rules
> -- 
> Cristi Kendrick
> 4th District, Chair
> Libertarian Party of Kentucky
> 502-457-6765
> _______________________________________________
> Lpk-rules mailing list
> Lpk-rules at lists.lpky.org
> http://lpmail.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpk-rules
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lpmail.lp.org/pipermail/lpk-rules/attachments/20190212/be5afaf4/attachment-0001.html>