Friday, 24 April 2015
Some People
It is Spring.
That seems to be when "Some People" come out of hibernation and ask tfhe Executive Committee if we could Please move the LCRCC monthly meeting ot the downtown Library.
This has happened the last two years.
One wonders if it will become an annual event.
The Swallows return to Capistrano,
The Buzzards return to Hinckley Hollow
And the "Some People" try to move the LCRCC meeting to the CR Library
The E Board has a big proffesional production.
A list of alternate sites a break down of expenses slanted to convince us there was only one conclusion
And the Conclusion was the same as Last Year
An overwhelming number want to stay at the Long Branch.
Now the Chair stated in a FB page
there was a discussion brought to the body by
requeat of
members of the body to
discuss alternative locations in light of the cost
increase
for the current venue. To ignore
the request would have been wrong so we shared
our
research, asked for input
Why the need for the E Board to do Research.
I have a idea that if "I" came to them and wanted the meeting moved it would go something like
Well then Mr Kauffman, put a case together and present it to the Body,
I don't expect them to drop everything and rush out to do research for me.,
Which is why I wonder WHO these "Some people" are?
And are they the SAME "Some People" that wanted the Communications Sub-Committee Meeting when we had a Communications Sub-Committee
Moved from Saturday Night at the Starlite
As I recall the At that Time Chair of the Communications Sub-Committee got berated over this by County Chair.
Back then it was as it is now and was last Spring, "Some People" have come to us and want this.
I asked tghe Communications Sub-Committee Chair at the time
Were you given the names and contact information of these "Some People"?
Turns out the answer was NO
So at the time I said let me get this straight, we are asked to move the meeting because "Some People" want it. but we don't know who they are how many they are and when they would prefer the meeting to be?
While we have about 14 members who are just fine with the way things are?
Yes was the answer I got then.
SO despite the fact that this motion was soundly defeated.
I would like to know
Who these people are
How many of them there are that want this
Oh and is the rumour True that someone on the behalf of the LCRCC has reserved a room in the CR Library for the next year?
Thursday, 23 April 2015
Quis Custodiet?
At the April LCRCC meeting the Executive Board presented some interesting things to the Body.
They presented to us that Robert's Rules of Order are part of our By-Laws
That is True
That is also True
They presented to us that therefore the Secretary should be in Charge of the Membership & Meeting Set Up Team
We said wait just a minute.
Just because someone is for instance the Custodian of a Building.
It does not necessarily follow that they Run the Building.
The Secretary is the Custodian of the Membership Records just like they are the Custodian of the Minutes
But in neither case do they generate the information to be stored, they recieve it
The Minutes are the Records of the Meeting Proceedings
As for the Membership Records.
Elected Committee Persons will appear on the Form As filled out at a Caucus. A copy of the each Precinct is to be given to the Secretary
Committee Persons appointed by the Body will appear in the LCRCC Minutes, as will those appointed by the Body to be Assisatant Commitee Persons.
In all cases the Body generates the information and it is stored by the Secretary in Partnership.
For you see, it is the duty of the Exective Board to Advise and Assist the Body
It would therefore IMO be improper for a portion of the Exective Board, the Secretary, to have Authority over a portion of the Body the Membership & Meeting Set Up Team.
Particularly when you consider that the Exective Officers do not have to even BE members of the Central Committee.
Far better to have it the way we handled it at the April Meeting making the Secretary an Ex Officio member of the Team
Robert's Rules of order are satisfied, our By Laws are satisfied, our Constitution is satisfied.
And to answer the Quesiton given by the Title?
Who Guards the Guardians?
the Membership & Meeting Set Up Team for One,.
Wednesday, 22 April 2015
The Difference Between Can And Should
The Image in tonight's Post is The Linn County Republican Central Committee Parliamentarian taking a publicly partisan position by voting.
When I was first appointed to the position the current Parliamentarian holds, I did quite a bit of research on the duties and responsibilites.
One of the First things I learned was that for a Parliamentarian neutrality ie non paritsanship was considered paramount
That a Parliamentarian shoud never vote unless by Secret Ballot.
That was a position I adhered to during my term in office,
Our present Parlaimentarian does not seem to value neutrality as an attribute of their position
When questioned on the propriety of their actions they replied that their opinion was that it was up to the discretion of the Parliamentarian.
While it IS true there are situations where a Parliamentarian may vote, tonight was not one of them.
I source Robert's Rules of Order
Chapter 18 Most Frequently Asked Questions
Voting
Under the questions
Does the Parliamentarian have a vote on motions, can he or she speak to motions
Can you please give me some insight as to how a parliamentarian should act during a meeting?
Unfortunately copy and paste is disabled for that website, so the readers will have to click on the above link and go to almost the bottom of the page
However it turns out that that very same issue was also ansered on the RONR (Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised) Discussion Forum
On April the 17th
Richard Brown
Richard Brown
- Members
- 1,812 posts
Posted 17 April 2015 - 03:06 PM
And if a member of the assembly, the parliamentarian should not be voting. From page 467:
"A member of an assembly who acts as its parliamentarian has the same duty as the presiding officer to maintain a position of impartiality,
and therefore does not make motions, participate in debate, or vote on any question except in the case of a ballot vote.
He does not cast a deciding vote, even if his vote would affect the result, since that would interfere with the chair's prerogative of doing so.
If a member feels that he cannot properly forgo these rights in order to serve as parliamentarian, he should not accept that position.
Unlike the presiding officer, the parliamentarian cannot temporarily relinquish his position in order to exercise such rights on a particular motion."
I do not know upon what basis the LCRCC Parlaimentarian made their decision to vote publicly but the above seems rather clear and to the point.
Maintain the outward appearance of neutrality by refraining from voting with the excpetion of a secret ballot or
Resign
Another example of the difference between what Can be done and what Should be done was the brief flareup between the Chair and Mr Dahlsten over his Photos.
Mr Dahlsten has objected to the LCRCC Webmaster using photos upon which he has embedded Copyright Claims.
The Chair and our Webmaster seem to have taken the position that if Mr Dahslten puts the photos up on Facebook they have every LEGAL RIGHT to avail themselves of the use of those images.
It is True that the Policy of Facebook is to allow that as long as the Images are posted on Facebook. I believe that is in the Terms of Service,
This however does not address the ethical concerns
Since Mr. Dahlsten objects so vehemently to their use of his images why do they insist on doing so?
I suppose it might be true that as long as they insist on only torturing Mr Dahlsten there might not be as many wingless flies stumbling around the area, but besides that , what IS the point?
Tuesday, 21 April 2015
Rand Paul Visits Benton County
APR 25
Rand Paul Visits Benton County
Event for Benton County GOP, Iowa ·
Saturday at 11:30am
American Legion, 105 N R Ave, Vinton, IA
Come see Rand Paul
In Vinton Saturday, April 25th.
Monday, 20 April 2015
First Get The Mule's Attention
They say you can get a Mule to do amazing feats of labor
But you must first get the Mule's attention, usually with a
We have recently been attempting to get the attention of those in the LCRCC who are responsible for our Marketing & PR Team
Most recently it was about Public Premature Announcements of upcoming events when we had been given an advance courtesy heads up.
Also we pointed out that what might be a form page for events that listed the Linn County GOP as the Organizer
Probably should not be used for events that Someone ELSE was organizing
Our last post was about a Rand Paul Event to be held April 25th in Benton County at the Vinton American Legion Hall.
I saw tonight that every mention of Rand Paul on the LCRCC Facebook Pages or at least the recent posts has Vanished,
There does not appear to be any mention of any Rand Paul Event at all.
I don't think they get it.
If they are going to try and pretend it never happened,
It's too late
It is already out on the Internet and other websites have posted the misleading information
Rand Paul in Vinton, Iowa on April 25, 2015
11:30 AM
American Legion
105 N R Ave
Vinton, IA
http://www.linncountygop.org/event/come-see-rand-paul/
Of course the
linncountygop.org/event/come-see-rand-paul/
Just leads to the Linn County GOP Homepage and no information
Oh and this whole mess has come to the attention of the Benton County Central Committee Chair.
I just heard about this yesterday. Could someone from LCRCC please
explain why they are hosting and selling tickets to an event in Benton county,
particularly without communicating with Benton county? Not cool people.
At first glance there is an appearance of correcting the situation in our April Meeting Announcement under Upcoming Events
Upcoming Events
The page you requested cannot be displayed right now. It may be temporarily
unavailable, the link you clicked on may have expired, or you may not have
permission to view this page.
Of course there is always the possibility that this mess has Deep Sixed the event
I suppose we will have to wait for an Official Announcement from the Rand Paul People or the Benton County Central Committee
Some people have accused me of making the LCRCC look bad with the Posts I put up on this website.
To Tell You the Truth
I don't think they need my help to accomplish that
Saturday, 18 April 2015
I Can't Write Stuff Like This
We have new information
LCRCC News!!! Click to read more ...http://www.linncountygop.org/event/come-see-rand-paul/ Come see Rand Paul
Yes according to that announcement
Rand Paul will be in Vinton April 25th
At an event oganized by the Linn County GOP
And not the Benton County GOP?
If you click on the Link you will be taken to THIS page
Come see Rand Paul
April 25 @ 11:30 am
You heard it here first! Rand Paul will be in town. Come hear him speak.
More details to come
Well it proudly proclaims
You heard it here first!
So it MUST be true.
I have to admit. I just can't write stuff like this.
Our County Chair APPOINTED Stuff Like This.
Neither our Executive Board Nor our Marketing & PR Team have done the slightest thing about Stuff Like This.
I don't need to be creative.
My posts write themselves all I have to do is go online and see what these folks are up to.
And When We Were Wrong
Well it has been over 24 Hours
I can understand if the members of the LCRCC who are responsible for the mess up concerning announcemts of Scott Walker and the Ben Carson having events with Congressman Blum
Might not pay attention to what I put on the Internet
But you would think they would pay attention to what THEY put on the Internet and make sure it was correct
Here is a Post on the LCRCC Fanpage as of about 5 AM April the 18th it is the First Post on the page
LCRCC News!!! Click to read more ...http://www.linncountygop.org/…/governor-scott-walker-is-co…/ Governor Scott Walker Is Coming To Cedar Rapids!
WWW.LINNCOUNTYGOP.ORG
Well I guess not there is no change.
when you click on the Link it goes here
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is coming to Cedar Rapids next week!
Governor Walker will be attending a rally for us at the Cedar Rapids Marriott next Friday, April 24th. Get your FREE tickets here.
Do you see who is listed as Organizing the event?
Do you see anywhere to get Tickets for the Event?
I don't either, Maybe we should look at an announcement by the People who are ACTUALLY putting on the Event?
Scott Walker at the 2015 Iowa Ag Summit
Photo credit: Dave Davidson – Prezography.com
(Cedar Rapids, IA) Next Friday Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker will attend a public rally with Congressman Rod Blum (R-Iowa). The event will be open to the media as well. Details are below.
Event: Meet & Greet/Rally with Congressman Rod Blum & Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker
Date: April 24th, 12:30-1:30PM
Location: Cedar Rapids Marriott Hotel
1200 Collins Road Northeast
Cedar Rapids, IA 52402
Those interested in attending can RSVP here:
Friday, 17 April 2015
And Made Amends
There are some Spiritual Disciplines that require an amends be made when someone is wronged.
An Amends is NOT saying that You are Sorry.
It is instead saying I was Wrong and I intend to DO something to make things Right
The LCRCC owes an Amends to Congressman Blum and his people and to the Scott Walker and Ben Carson Campaigns.
We were given Advance Notice as a Courtesy
Of Two upcoming events.
A Visit to Cedar Rapids by Scott Walker and Ben Carson both meeting with Congressman Blum
A very short time after our Leadership was informed of these events these two announcements went up on our Facebook Group Page
LCRCC News!!! Click to read more ...http://www.linncountygop.org/event/dr-ben-carson/ Dr. Ben Carson
What is wrong with this Some might Ask?
Well for one thing it was NOT our announcement to make.
We announced it BEFORE the People who are going to be doing it had a chance to make their own announcement
That is just plain RUDE
But what is even Ruder is this
Gov. Scott Walker
April 24 @ 12:30 pm - 1:30 pm
You heard it here first, Gov. Scott Walker is coming to Cedar Rapids
More details to come!
"
Do you see any mention of Congressman Blum?
Do you see that the Organizer is listed as the
When we are NOT?
The Post on the LCRCC Facebook Group page leads to a page on the Linn County GOP Website which contains what you see above.
The Ben Carson Post leads to a similiar page.
Dr. Ben Carson
May 5 @ 4:30 pm
Dr. Ben Carson and Congressman Rod Blum will be at the Cedar Rapids Marriot on May 5th at 4:30 PM.
Event is free.
You heard it here first!
At least the Ben Carson Page mentions Congressman Blum
The Body needs to be informed HOW this happened.
And WHAT the Executive Board intends to DO to make it right
And equally important HOW they intend to ensure that something like this
NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN!
Thursday, 16 April 2015
The Great Motion Expiration Swindle
Someday someone may explain to me Why anyone bothers lying about something that is public record.
In any event before the Plan for the St Patrick's Day Massacre was presented
The Chair made certain Claims of Fact to the Body
One was
That is NOT True and there is no doubt whatsoever about this Fact because
It seems that on the 28 January 2015 - 08:37 AM someone calling themselves
jknox65
Created This Topic
When do passed Motions expire?
Started by jknox65 , Jan 28 2015 08:37 AM
And asked This Question
Posted 28 January 2015 - 08:37 AM
I was wondering if motions that had passed during a previous Executive boards rein, do these carry over to the new presiding officers? Do motions bind the hands of a new body after an election? I would thing by-law changes would but I am uncertain about motions?
Can someone advise and reference where it may or may not support the expunging of previous sessions passed motions?
On the
For those who might not Know RONR Stands for
Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised
That is THE Officlal Roberts Rules of Order Website.
The Holy Grail. The Fount from which flows ALL recognized Parlaimentary Procedure.
Their answer?
An Emphatic and Resounding NO.
One even posted the page in Roberts Rules of Order 11th Edition where the NO might be found.
"Unless an adopted main motion specifies a time for the termination of its effect, it continues in force until it is rescinded." (RONR 11th ed., p. 111, ** footnote)
It is obvious that I am taking the position that the above jkox65 is the sqme person as the LCRCC's Webmaster James Knox.
Some might disagree, and like those who excused Mr Knox accidental attempt to Vote point out that there might be OTHER people besides him with the Username of jknox65
That IS possible, So despite being the Technological Dinosaur that I am purported to be I GOOGLED the Username jknox 65 and found
Jknox65
Author's details
Name: James Knox
Date registered: September 30, 2012
I I I
I think we have a probability approaching Unity that the jknox65 on the RONR Discussion Forum, the Refounding Father Society and the Webmaster of the LCRCC James Knox are all the same person.
Now I must point out that this does not mean that the Chair and the Rest of the Exective Committee Lied to the Body
But a Valid Question would be
What did they Know and WHEN did they know it.
We know that on the moring of Janurary 28th of this year Mr Knox knew full well that the claim made that
• Under Roberts Rules of Order committees and motions passed during the previous cycle expire
Was NOT True.
Another Valid question would be WHERE did the concept that the above WAS true originate?
If it came from Mr Knox then I believe he should NEVER be allowed to be in ANY position of Responsibilty UNSUPERVISED
If it came from one of the persons from whom Parliamentarian advice was claimed then they should NOT ever be used as Parliamentarians again,
I think this goes way beyond a simple mistake or misinterpretation.
I have not the slightest doubt that Mr Chung would never in a thousand years allow something like this to slip by him HAD he been involved,
In conclusion I know not what others may think but the Executive Committee has a severe credibility gap with me and some things to explain at our Next Meeting
RONR Forum
→ RONR Discussion Board
→ General DiscussionWhen do passed Motions expire?
Started by jknox65 , Jan 28 2015 08:37 AM
Motions Elections 3 replies to this topic
#1 
jknox65
- Members
- 1 posts
Posted 28 January 2015 - 08:37 AM
I was wondering if motions that had passed during a previous Executive boards rein, do these carry over to the new presiding officers? Do motions bind the hands of a new body after an election? I would thing by-law changes would but I am uncertain about motions?
Can someone advise and reference where it may or may not support the expunging of previous sessions passed motions?
#2 Hieu H Huynh
- Members
- 613 posts
- LocationSoutheast Florida
Posted 28 January 2015 - 08:45 AM
"Unless an adopted main motion specifies a time for the termination of its effect, it continues in force until it is rescinded." (RONR 11th ed., p. 111, ** footnote)
#3 Edgar Guest
- Members
- 3,095 posts
- LocationUlster County, NY
Posted 28 January 2015 - 08:57 AM
jknox65, on 28 Jan 2015 - 08:37 AM, said:
Do motions bind the hands of a new body after an election?
No. The board is free to rescind (or otherwise amend) motions previously adopted by the board (assuming, of course, that the actions authorized by the motions have not been completed). There is no "expunging".
It's best not to think of "the old board" and "the new board". It's just "the board" (with occasional changes in membership).
Everything I know about RONR I learned from Mr. Mountcastle. And everything he knows about RONR he learned from this forum.
#4 Gary Novosielski
Wonk
- Members
- 7,256 posts
Posted 28 January 2015 - 01:51 PM
No, they don't bind the hands of a future body any more than they bind the hands of the current body.
--
=GPN
Unless otherwise indicated, responses are based upon the current edition of RONR as of the date of posting. The rules in your bylaws supersede those in RONR.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." -Margaret Mead
Again I just don't understand why someone would lie about something anyone can bring up on a computer and see.
Wednesday, 15 April 2015
They're Baack
The Vanished March Minutes seemed to have returned,
They seem unchanged but I have not checked every little bit of the present one to the original
There are still a few things that raise my blood pressure for instance
(Note I have used a link to the minutes section of the Linn County GOP website but if the March Minutes Vanish again I have a Clone Copy on my Server)
• The Chair explained that the Iowa Code, the Republican Party Constitution and Bylaws and the
Linn County Republican Party Constitution and the Linn County Republican Party Bylaws require
that the committee re-organize by April 1st following each general election.
• Under Roberts Rules of Order committees and motions passed during the previous cycle expire.
• The Chair explained that David Chung, Paul Pelletier and Richard Bice had been contacted
in regard to parliamentarian review.
In the Spirit of the Last Shall be First let us look at that last Statement
• The Chair explained that David Chung, Paul Pelletier and Richard Bice had been contacted
in regard to parliamentarian review.
I call something like this a "Michael Moore" because it leads those who hear or read it to think one thing, but if pressed the author can honestly(?) claim that is not what they said at all.
I would wager that most who heard this the Night of the St Patrick's Day Massacre came to the conclusion that one of the Foremost Parliamentarians not only supported the Executive Committee's Plan but had ruled that the
Linn County Republican Party Constitution and the Linn County Republican Party Bylaws require(d) it
That was NOT the Truth
How do I know this?
First because I knew the basis of their position and considered it fallacious
Second because I had every confidence that he would find it that way too
Third because I ASKED him that night
I know I am supposed to be a Technological Dinosaur but I was able to stumble to my new lap top while the Slaughter of the Sub-Committees was ensuing open Facebook and call him up in Chat.
I got this reply
So you know me what do you think?
Do you think I gave a definitive ruling?
But if I had I would have been man enough to be there to defend it.
Now as to their claims that all this was required?
They are based on the Sections of the Constitution and the Bylaws that discuss the OFFICERS
And in fact discuss the requirements for organizing the Officer's elections before April 1st following each General Election.
If they referred to a massive overhaul of the Committee then this would be mentioned in the Section on the Commitee
Constitutuon
V. OFFICERS
The officers of this Central Committee shall be a chairman, co-chairman, secretary and
treasurer, and such other members as the County Central Committee in its by-laws may
provide. The Central committee shall organize following each general election, but no later
than the following April 1.
Bylaws
V. OFFICERS
The officers of the Central Committee shall consist of a Cahir, Co-Chair, Secretary and
Treasurer whose terms shall be for a period of two (2) years and the same shall be elected
immediately following each general election, but no later than the following April 1.
They also mentioned Sections of the State Constitution and Bylaws and Election Code but were lacking on details
But they DID follow a Pattern of Behavior that we have seen before
We have a CRISIS we MUST ACT NOW in this case before April 1st
OH and one of the Foremost Parliamentarians in the State Says we HAVE to do this or OMG The SKY WILL FALL.
That last bit was as True this time as it has been True other times it has been used in point of Fact
Not True At All
SO
If your vote the Night of the St Patrick's Day Massacre when 4 years of hard work and every single Sub-Committee we had established and all the members of those Committees went down the tube.
Was swayed because you BELIEVED that one of the Foremost Parliamentarians in the State of Iowa Said that this was REQUIRED?
YOU GOT PLAYED
But they did everything from the BEST of Intentions because we all SO need Guidance
Newer | Latest | Older
