LNC Meeting May 18, 2025

They start. Presentation by Debbie Mason of Strategists.  Rather hard to hear. We seem to lose the lower frequencies.  Condemns having the Board Chair being also the CEO. She is challenged on the Bylaws issue, which she did not know. She says she will recognize best practices. Says Executive Director should be CEO; Board Chair should be moderator.

Proposes ED should work in partnership with collective vision of entire board. Execution: Staff with board – supported committees.  Says LNC is overstaffed(?). Wants 3-year plan for collective vision. You have a fundraising emergency.  Says whole board should do phone fundraising. Notes 2024 convention and Kennedy money obscured financial difficulties. Redevelop credibility and trust by showing board coming together in a single vision. Try to find areas of commonality.Speaks favorably for PDR. Reports staff thinks well of the Executive Director. Says LNC is understaffed.Staff is grateful to ED for setting metrics and keeping people in line.  For more staff, need more money. Speaks of importance of fundraising.  Says Executive Director is extremely efficient and effective.

Recommends a collective vision for the next 3-5 years.  Fundraising will not work until LP is a functional group.  Once board is settled and commonality found fundraising will improve.   Claims there were nearly complete projects that were cancelled or put on hold, an extreme waste of resources.

Martin: choices of path. Direction 1 pass rules on what we should do.  Direction 2 have operators on the ground across the nation.  Believes that you can identify winnable races and concentrate resources. Says that states of Region 1 see LNC as an obstacle. Mason apparently said that Regional Representatives should be eliminated. Says LNC needs to build trust. LNC needs to send information to members.

Someone says we need money to fund projects and increase staff.  To raise money, donors need to see vision and action.  Need job description for board, time and fundraising commitments, and behavioral aspects.

Comparison with strong and weak mayor systems. Mason: Board may do things, but under the direction of the staff. In today’s world, an effective chair is a facilitator.

Mason is hard to hear.

Someone: There is a lack of credibility. Half of membership thinks board did not do what it was elected to do. Standard proposal can be seen as effort to weaponize rules and maintain control.  How do we get credibility and maintain trust? Censoring board members damages credibility.   Mason: Board members must support board decisions once they have been voted. Concern that in next board election board members who disagreed with board decision lose to people attacking the decision.

Someone notes that the report went up on X.com. What do you think of this.  Mason: Totally unacceptable

Chadderdon: Concerned with board members who discuss publicly proposals under consideration. What do we do about board members who continually violate standards of behavior.

Mason: Need to call them out every time.

Thompson: We are here to represent  our members.

Mason: Disagreement makes a group stronger.  Disagreement needs to be expressed in the right place.

Someone: We have no idea who leaked the report. Explaining no votes can be used as a claim that a  board member is undermining board.  Libertarians are unique.  Mason answers.

Extended conversation, but acoustics are not picking up Mason’s voice properly.

Return from recess. The Bylaws Committee was elected.  Sound keeps dropping out.

Advance to Second Malagon motion, to create a Financial Standards Committee to approve all spending and review all financial actions.  Committee is LNC Treasurer and two other LNC members. Redpath – not a bad idea, but all new expenditures would e.g. include a few dollars for office supplies. Scheduling is awkward.  Should be a lower dollar limit below which permission is not needed. Malagon – we are in dire straits.  Approval in real time like APRC.

Question about what should be approved by the committee. The point of approval is that we are in such bad circumstances that we cannot have the chair simply spend money and tell us. Motion to remove the word ‘approve’.  Malagon claims that critics haven’t read the amendment or do not understand it.The objective is to have a committee that understands our finances.

Ford: Where does this committee fit in the time line. Malagon: Committee is supposed to report whether or not we have the money. Someone proposes that the LNC has not being the job that it should to review finances, so we create a committee to review. Vote to end discussion passes.  Confusion on what they are voting on. Amendment fails.  Replace ‘approve’ with ‘review for all expenditures totaling over $100’.  Discussion: Extended remarks that amendment does not solve the problem with the motion namely that it puts a committee over the LNC.  Harlos proposes to divide the main motion. Concern that committee will usurp the authority of the board, but I don’t think this keeps the board from voting. Comment: This proposal will jam up progress; we should trust our staff. This is unnecessary bureaucracy. We need to know what is happening, but should trust our staff.  All questions moved. Passes.  Motion to divide. Malagon asks for roll call votes. Passes.  Harlos moves to divide to allow a review committee but not an approval committee. Division passes. First item passes 8-3. Chadderdon (I think) points out that motions yesterday needed roll calls.  His comment will be minuted, but yesterday’s work was not invalidated.

Malagon proposal 3: Discussion of discretionary chair spending.  If the LNC later ratifies the spending,  is it still chair discretionary spending? Hard to follow. Comment; Tension between carefully restricting everything and being very accepting, and we need policies that address these issues. Parliamentary disputation. Some question as to whether or not a vote passed.

We reach motion 4. Malagon: This is DC law and the auditor’s report.  The intent is to add oversight of contracts. Requirements on the contents of contracts are added. Motion passes.

Motion 5.  Move material from one part of the policy manual to another. Roll call. Passes.  Malagon appeared to vote against his own motion but perhaps not.

The microphone is sufficiently good that the person clicking his pen every couple of seconds is sending us loud clicks.

Harlos argues that a regular meeting cannot recess to an electronic meeting.  Debate on this point is spending time they do not have.

New motion: people who owe the LNC money cannot do business with the LNC.  Debate is incoherent. concern that rule interferes with selective response. Concern that proposed rule has mandatory requirements. Harlos: LNC would have to determine there is a violation.  Some idiot is clicking his pen loud enough to interfere with my hearing of what is being said.  They are attempting to edit the motion on the floor. Historically, the LNC did by direct motion what is being proposed for the policy manual. An amendment was defeated. Concern as to the level of due process needed for reviews. Discussion emphasizing that outside contractors are not subject to our conflict of interest rule. Malagon: The LNC should decide what is appropriate as a resolution to an issue. There is a debate as to whether or not striking a section of the motion has any effect.

They are rearrange the agenda to discuss a rule on LNC members doing consulting for pay. They rearranged. The motion was amended.  Roberts ponderously advances the meeting.  Member: This is an attack on my region. Other member complains that it would be inconsistent with their contract with a state or with a regional agreement.  The objective is to prevent LNC members from providing services, paid or unpaid, to states other than their own, where the LNC might be seen as meddling in the affairs of particular states.  Redpath notes that the rule could keep him from providing ballot access support.  Martin speaks vehemently against the motion. Other member: You are kneecapping my income.  I do consulting. Secretary proposes people who provide services to other states need to disclose what they are doing, so the LNC can respond. Malagon: If the amendment passes, there is no point to the motion.  He moves all previous questions. passes. Harlos amendment passes.  Motion defeated 0-13-1.

Malagon motion 7:  Click. click. click. click. Voices in the background. Instead proposes December in-person budget meeting in California in the Bay area, date would be December 6-7 or December 13-14.  Mumbled discussion.  Arguing about which way to put off  doing this business, recess, postpone, or adjourn. Complaint because ‘recess must be to the same place.’ Meet on June 1 at 7PM. Harlos keeps arguing.  It also turns out that a half-dozen members missed this meeting.  The amoutof time wasted due to Roberts was amazing. They somehow ended the meeting.