The final meeting before the National Convention. This was the meeting at which the Tuniewicz censure motion was passed. Thanks to a long-standing member, I obtained access to a video tape of the meeting.
Called to order at 3:10 PM. Attendance was taken.
Public Comment: No non-LNC-members had comments. Richard Brown hoped it would be a good convention.
Moved to approve minutes of the last two meetings. Passed without objection.
Hagopian: $300,000 in stripe donations, plus convention income for this month. Revenue expected to be over $500,000 total for the month. We got to this day without taking a loan. Questions about convention income were asked. Convention income was over $432,000 at this time.
Dr. Lark submitted two reports. Region Report from Region 2.
New business with notice was approving the minutes.
New business without previous notice. Mr. Malagon made his motion to censure Mr. Tuniewicz, as reported previously. Harlos seconded. Chair repeated the motion.
In the debate (following), no one asked if Tuniewicz had been notified of the motion.
Redpath: What was said? Malagon said there were several. He was not immediately prepared with the alleged Tuniewicz statement. Compressing: Tuniewicz noted that the credentials committee was asking for state meeting minutes, asserted that this was outside the scope of the credentials committee, and further such requests might provide fodder for litigation. Harlos quotes another message from Tuniewicz: I’ve sought such advice privately on the topic and feel strongly about these conclusions…I strongly recommend that the credentials committee proceed cautiously for their own protection…It would be wise,for example to see if the LNC’s D&O insurance covers the credentials committee. I doubt it but it would be wise to check.
Harlos claims this is not a disciplinary motion, which would require a trial.
Redpath..I do not see that language as being particularly strong. I will be voting no. Nanna: This is feeding the fire to be feeding the fire. I will be voting no.
Harlos expresses concerned that individual credentials committee members were being threatened with being sued.
Hagopian: Perhaps the Credentials committee member who abstained on advice of attorney found that there was something there, so I will be voting no.
Harlos says list should have been handled in executive session.
Nekhaila: Tuniewicz message was not a good look. Should have been done privately.
Hagopian: Question if the second message was public or private?
Benner: I think what Tuniewicz did was wrong. But I think this flame should be allowed to die down.
Ford: What is the practical impact of a censure. McArdle:goes on the record. Ford: The censure is appropriate.
Blankenship: A stern warning, not a threat. Inappropriate, not censurable.
Watkins: Should not have been on the public list.
Question called. Motion passed 9-6, Chair abstaining.
Malagon moved to approve the Secretary’s acceptance of the Region 1 formation.
Nanna: This is not in the purview of the board. Chair consulted with the parliamentarian. Harlos proposed that by passing the motion, we triggered the rights of the members to appeal to the Judicial Committee. Concern that we are voting on the formation of the next body. Secretary: Current process puts too much power in the hands of the Secretary. Not clear that Secretary decisions can be appealed to the Judicial Committee. Our vote allows members to appeal to the Judicial Committee.
Redpath: Concern that the agreement has creates a financial obligation on states and the Wisconsin chair did not have the authority to commit funds.
Hagopian: I will support this because it gives them more rights.
McArdle: Because Secretary has already approved it we are involved. Harlos claims that the vote only matters by creating an appeal right.
Mr. Benner: Asked if Parliamentarian said the motion is in order. Chair: You aren’t allowed to ask him. Mr. Benner: Not clear that this is consistent with the bylaws. I suspect that it might not be in order.
Harlos: claims agreement does not obligate actually funds greater than zero.
Nanna: Issue is whether the state chair of Wisconsin had the authority to sign the agreement. We should take the vote, because it gives them a route to an appeal.
Nanna: Wisconsin Board met and unanimously voted, Chair abstaining, that their Chair did not have the authority to sign the document.
Harlos claims that the vote was not valid. Harlos claims there was not adequate notice.
Question called. No objection. Vote was 10-4-1, Chair not voting.
Redpath, ballot access: Darryl Bonner has been seriously ill, has had a major stroke, prognosis is unfortunate. He is not conscious. Motion to acknowledge Bonner’s many contributions to the party passed unanimously.
Harlos: Moved to end the session with the LNC to be at the call of the chair for an emergency meeting, and to adjourn finally at the end of the National Convention.
