Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 22:33:45 -0000 From: auvenj@mailcity.com Subject: [lpaz-govcom] =?iso-8859-1?B?UkU6ICBBoHByb2JsZW2gd2l0aKB0aGWgQUxQoEdv?= =?iso-8859-1?B?dmVybmluZ6BCb2FyZA==?= To: lpaz-govcom@yahoogroups.com Reply-To: lpaz-govcom@yahoogroups.com
Liz/Powell,
I appreciate the difficultty of the situation I have placed you in. My position certainly presents an interesting situation; one which I'll admit was neither unforseen nor unintentional on my part but nevertheless was undertaken without any malice toward you or the ALP. It presents both ALP and myself with a difficult decision, which I am sure the ALP Governing Committee will assist in resolving. :-) Ernie seems fond of the notion that with many things in politics it's the education of the audience that is important, not the actual outcome. Perhaps this is one of those situations.
Powell wrote: >At some point, however, it becomes
>clear that either we are a separate political party or we
>are not.
I see the ALP/ALP, Inc. split in a similar way to the physical question of the nature of a beam of light: Is light a stream of particles (photons) or is it a wave propagation?
According to my admittedly limited understanding of quantum physics, the scientifically correct answer to that question is "yes".
If the party is defined by its officers and bylaws, then there are indeed two political parties and I am indeed in a conflict of interest.
If the party is defined by its constituents (registered Libertarians) then there is no conflict because in both cases I was elected by registered Libertarians to represent their interests.
So which is it?
Is the party the bylaws or is it the registered Libertarians?
My answer is "yes".
I may be in the minority of the ALP GovCom on that, but I hope you can at least grant me that it's not an entirely unreasonable position.
ALP and ALP, Inc. aren't one organization, but they also aren't in the same relationship as, say, the Republicans and the Democrats (who share no overlapping members).
Regardless, I have no questions in my own mind about where my loyalty lies: to faithfully represent both libertarian principles and the interests of the registered Libertarians in Arizona.
I've made no attempt to hide my personal belief that libertarian principles and the interests of registered Libertarians in Arizona are best served by ending the litigation between the two factions with the current appeal (regardless of who wins), reuniting the party under the bylaws of the winner, and using persuasion rather than litigation and "packing" strategies to effect whatever changes some may feel are necessary in party leadership or bylaws.
I have a concurrent priority of retaining Libertarian Party ballot status for 2002 by means of voter registration.
Those are my priorities:
ending the litigation and retaining ballot status; I have no hidden agenda.
Quite simply, I want whatever happens in this situation to facilitate those two priorities.
If you understand that I bear those goals firmly in mind, perhaps the reasons for my actions will become clearer.
As long as we view ourselves as "ALP vs. ALP, Inc." the feud will never end until one or the other organization is vanquished.
If we view ourselves as Libertarians with two conflicting sets of bylaws competing to be "the" bylaws (as I do) then there's a chance it might end sometime before then.
If I thought that shutting up and resigning from either or both ALP and ALP, Inc. would facilitate my priorities of ending the feud and registering Libertarians, that is exactly what I would do.
The thought has certainly crossed my mind on a number of occasions.
The same goes for getting myself deliberately thrown out of either or both ALP and ALP, Inc. :-)
The point is I don't want either of the two positions I currently hold "for its own sake."
Anyway, with that background let's examine the possible outcomes:
(1) I attempt to remain a member of both ALP and ALP, Inc. governing boards.
The good part about this is that it puts me in the best position to continue to function as a communication link between the two organizations in an attempt to resolve the feud.
The bad thing is that it does present a real conflict of interest under the "bylaws" view of the party.
Sure, I could recuse myself from any votes pertaining to the other organization, but even if I never vote on anything again there will still be those who could accuse me of impropriety due to the conflict of interest.
And trust me when I say that I truly fear ALP, Inc.'s preferred mode of retribution (lawsuit) far more than ALP's (banishment) should either side decide to make an issue of the situation at some time in the future.
Furthermore, this scenario makes it look like ALP is playing favorites, since they kicked out all other ALP, Inc. officers before.
(2) I get kicked off of ALP's governing board.
This ends the conflict of interest.
Some in the Pima County may take it as yet another piece of evidence that "the Maricopa contingent" still hates Pima County.
Much more importantly in my opinion, it severly curtails the amount of communication and persuasion I'll be able to do with you guys.
OTOH it may dispell the notion down here that I'm just some kind of "ALP Agent" sent to stir up trouble within ALP, Inc.
(3) I voluntarily resign from ALP's governing board.
Much the same outcome as (2) except less likely to be used as evidence for ALP hating Pima County.
Unfortunately, it is also likely to be seen as me "choosing" the ALP, Inc. over ALP, which is not the impression I want to give.
(4) I voluntarily resign from ALP, Inc.'s governing board.
This puts us back to where we were before January 27th.
It reduces my ability to attempt to influence ALP, Inc. away from future litigation.
Unfortunately, since I just sought and won election to ALP, Inc.'s board this also makes me look like a flake, or like I really was just trying to take over ALP, Inc. and having failed to do so am taking my marbles back to my true "master", ALP.
The only way it doesn't look that way is if I have a compelling reason for resigning that can be shared with the public.
If I get such a reason, great, but for analysis' sake let's not count on it.
(5) I get kicked off of ALP, Inc.'s governing board.
They don't seem inclined to do that, and as I hinted at I suspect I would be sued long before I'd be kicked off the board. :-)
(6) I voluntarily resign from both governing boards.
Much the same outcome as (4) plus it looks like I'm giving up on the party altogether.
This is further complicated by the fact that once the court rules in April my intent will be to convince the losing side not to litigate further, which is best done from a position on their board.
Anwyay, I'm curious what you guys have to say about all this.
--Jason Auvenshine
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:01:13 Powell E. Gammill wrote: >Elizabeth Andreasen,
>Chairman
>January 31, 2001
>Arizona Libertarian Party
>
>
>
>
>Dear Chairman Andreasen,
>
>
>As a Member-at-Large of the Governing Committee, it brings
>me no pleasure to write this letter. At the 2001
>organizational meeting of the Arizona Libertarian Party, as
>required by ARS 16-826, called by you and chaired by ALP
>Statutory Chair Mike Dugger, on January 27, 2001 at the
>Quality Inn South Mountain restaurant, I heard one of
>Governing Committee members, Jason Auvenshine, state that he
>had been elected to the position of Second Vice Chairman of
>the Arizona Libertarian Party, Inc., a competing political
>party.
>
>This is in direct violation of our Bylaws, SECTION III.
>ORGANIZATION of the PARTY 4) TERMS in OFFICE (d) "No
>member of the Governing Committee or of the State
>Committee, whether elected publicly or in convention, shall
>be permitted to be an officer or member of any other
>organized political party during their term, and such
>membership shall be grounds for termination from the post".
>
>As Mr. Auvenshine himself has pointed out, the Governing
>Committee has been remiss in enforcing our Bylaws
>requirements before. At some point, however, it becomes
>clear that either we are a separate political party or we
>are not. We have been elected by our membership to carry
>out their wishes as given to us through our Party
>Constitution, Bylaws and Resolutions of the Convention. We
>have pledged to carry out these wishes. It is with deep
>regret and sorrow that I must file this letter of complaint
>with you, that this position sought and acquired by Mr.
>Auvenshine in a separate political party represents to me a
>clear Conflict of Interest. I request you call a meeting of
>the Governing board, under the auspices and rules of our
>governing documents, for the purposes of considering this
>matter, and its resolution.
>
>I believe the loss of Mr. Auvenshine would be detrimental to
>our party, but that said, I cannot in good faith reconcile
>this clear conflict with the obligations of my office. I
>don't know how I could represent the interests of one
>political party, while charged with representing the
>interests of another. Particularly if I was a member of
>two party's governing boards that were constantly at each
>other's throats, as ours are.
>
>
>Powell Gammill, Member-at-Large
>Governing Committee
>Arizona Libertarian Party
>
>
>CC: Jason Auvenshine
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~> eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups Click here for more details http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/0/_/_/_/981239629/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: lpaz-govcom-unsubscribe@egroups.com