Libertarian State Leadership Alliance Schedules Executive Board Meeting

On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Brett Bittner wrote:

Please find below the proposed agenda for tonight’s call.
Here is the call-in information for those wishing to participate:
Dial-in number: (559) 546-1200
Meeting ID: 118-921-788
Meeting link:
Libertarian State Leadership Alliance
Executive Board Meeting (via teleconference)
November 10, 2013 – 8 PM Eastern/5 PM Pacific
I. Call to Order & Quorum Confirmation
II. Approval of Agenda
III. Reports & New Business
A. Treasurer’s Report 2 Min
B. Set Date for Filling At-Large Vacancy 2 Min
C. LPO State Chair on LSLA List 10 Min
IV. Set Next Meeting Date & Time (Bittner) 1 Min
Proposed: November 24th at 8 PM Eastern/5 PM Pacific
V. Review Minutes (Starr) 5 Min
VI. Adjourn ~ 8:20 PM Eastern/5:20 Pacific (Any)
Live Free,

Brett C. Bittner

Executive Director
Libertarian Party of Georgia

Libertarian State Leadership Alliance

84 thoughts on “Libertarian State Leadership Alliance Schedules Executive Board Meeting

  1. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Hmmm, it looks like the major topic of discussion is the LPO. Could that possible be the Libertarian Party of Oregon? I wonder what they could have to discuss here? 😉

  2. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Odd. There’s no button to post the comment after I’ve typed it. I’ve had to go into dashboard to post this. Is it okay on your end, Paulie?

    I have no idea if this is open to the public to call, or if I should even have published the agenda. I found it on an email list, though, and decided it would probably be okay to.

  3. paulie

    Minutes of Teleconference Call of Libertarian State Leadership Executive Board

    The conference call regular meeting of LSLA Executive Board came to order at 5:04 PM
    Pacific Time on November 10, 2013.

    Chair Brett Bittner Y
    Vice Chair Patrick Dixon Y
    Secretary Aaron Starr Y
    Treasurer Alicia Mattson Y
    At-Large Vacant

    Invited guests in attendance: Mary Buzuma, Richard Burke, Ken Moellman, Vicki
    Kirkland, Leigh LaChine

    Treasurer’s Report
    The Treasurer has seen almost no financial activity since the LSLA event, except for some
    interest income. We have just over $8,000 in the bank.

    Setting a date for the filling of the vacancy
    Without objection, we set the next meeting as the date for filling the vacancy. The deadline
    for applying will be three days before the meeting.

    Discussion of Next Annual Meeting
    LNC Convention Management Committee Chair Nancy Neale believes that space is
    available at the 2014 convention site hotel to host the LSLA, but is unsure as to what time
    might be available for our annual meeting.

    Alicia Mattson has provided information to the board as to what dates and times are
    reserved in the hotel contract.

    Aaron Starr was asked to make tentative inquiries from people in Ohio about getting
    someone to handle the sales of booths, contingent upon an agreement with the Convention
    Management Committee.

    Alicia Mattson assembled some ideas for speakers on a document that is available for board
    members to review.

    Set the next LSLA meeting date and time
    Without objection, the next meeting was set for 24 November 2013 @ 2000 Eastern Time,
    1700 Pacific Time.

    Approval of minutes and adjourning of meeting

    The minutes were approved without objection at 5:28 pm, whereupon the meeting

    Aaron Starr, Secretary

  4. Wes Wagner

    Well I can report that I haven’t been added back to the LSLA State Chairs mailing list yet… though I have not been holding my breath.

  5. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Well, Ohio was mentioned, so they clearly scheduled ten minutes to talk about Ohio. That’s not inconceivable.

    Of course, that doesn’t explain why Richard Burke was an “invited guest”.

  6. Wes Wagner

    Except the agenda item was “C. LPO State Chair on LSLA List 10 Min” … that is clearly about the mailing list controversy which has extended since May of 2011.

  7. paulie

    Well, Ohio was mentioned, so they clearly scheduled ten minutes to talk about Ohio. That’s not inconceivable.

    Doesn’t sound like the same agenda item. “C. LPO State Chair on LSLA List 10 Min” …there is no controversy about Kevin being on the LSLA list; and the Ohio item was “Aaron Starr was asked to make tentative inquiries from people in Ohio about getting
    someone to handle the sales of booths, contingent upon an agreement with the Convention
    Management Committee.” …which has nothing to do with a state chair being on a list.

  8. Mark Axinn

    It was Oregon, not Ohio.

    The matter was not reached, so remains open for a future meeting.

    I am sorry this matter has not been resolved, and expect that it will be soon.

  9. Brett Bittner

    My proposed agenda was divided, having Item III.C. voted on separately. The vote, as you can imagine, was 2-2, meaning that item did not make the approved agenda. A discussion item regarding Ohio was then added for a 5 minute discussion.

    As you can see in the minutes, the next meeting will include filling the vacancy at the At-Large position, which brings the matter before a full board with an odd number of members at some point in the future.

  10. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    With all due respect, Brett, what needs to be discussed? If this organization is for state chairs, then shouldn’t it include all state chairs? Wagner is one.

  11. Stewart Flood

    And since the organization is for state chairs (leadership), why are three of the four members of the executive committee not either a state chair or vice chair? (I based this statement on my understanding that only Pat Dixon a currently a state party chair)

    Will the at-large be a state chair? This is not intended to be a slight against Brett, since he appears to be actually trying to do the job he was elected to do, but this is not my understanding of the intent of this organization…

  12. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I don’t mean to be bitchy, either, but I’m baffled: is this group for state chairs, or not? If not, perhaps a name change is in order.

  13. Wes Wagner

    Jill — the name did change, to the “Libertarian State Leadership Alliance” and the name is as Orwellian as you would expect like all good names created by apparatchik politicos.

  14. paulie

    Actually, several of the LSLA officers are not even on their state exec comms at all right now. I once tried to inquire about filling an LSLA vacancy and was told they are only looking for people that are members of their state party leadership. I didn’t think of it at the time, but the person who told me that is not one himself presently. True, he has been before, but then I have been on my state exec comm a few times also.

  15. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    My mistake then. Sorry. I guess it isn’t about state chairs, just state leadership.

  16. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Aaron hasn’t been part of CA state leadership for at least 6 years. Was Tim Reeves a state leader prior to now? Just curious.

  17. paulie

    Same with the rest of his committee, except Burke (I can’t remember whether Burke holds any official title with them though) and maybe one other person.

  18. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Brett Pojunis was talking about the At-Large opening on a Facebook page, so I asked him a while ago what the organization does, simply because I’m curious. This is how he answered me:

    Brett H. Pojunis “Jill Pyeatt the LSLA? If so here is what I drafted when I was on the LSLA, it might have changed…

    We are organized exclusively for educational purposes, more specifically to coordinate activities and share knowledge among Libertarian Party State Chairs and Affiliate Parties.

    While voting members consist of the state chairs of affiliate state Libertarian Parties, LSLA functions are enjoyed by a wide variety of national, state and local Libertarian leaders and their family members at an annual conference.

    Traditionally, we have an interesting speaker lineup as well as training workshops to help the LP affiliates. It’s a great place to run into old friends and to meet some new ones. Not only is it beneficial for the growth of our party, it’s also a lot of fun.

    Whether you are interested in education or networking, food or fun, speakers or social activities…”

    So, it doesn’t seem to be an exclusinve organization as far as participating. I guess you have to be a state chair to vote, though. Perhaps things have changed.

  19. From Der Sidelines

    The confusion over whether “LPO” was either Oregon, Ohio, or even Oklahoma simply goes to show why the LPUS and the LSLA both need to pull their collective heads out and use the 4-letter designation of “LP”+, where is the same 2-letter initial used by the USPS and the rest of America.

    Yet another example where the LP and LSLA are out of touch with reality…

  20. paulie

    I guess you have to be a state chair to vote,

    You have to be a state chair (or designated substitute in the absence of the state chair) to vote at the yearly meetings. In between the yearly meetings, any votes that take place are held by the board of LSLA, most of whom are not currently state chairs. So, for example, the 2-2 vote on whether to put who from Oregon should be the recognized state chair on the list was a vote of the board, not a vote of state chairs.

    The confusion over whether “LPO” was either Oregon, Ohio, or even Oklahoma

    From context it was clear that it was Oregon, regardless of the validity of your larger point.

  21. Stewart Flood

    Of note: the “interesting speaker lineup” featured Wayne Root at the 2012 convention. This was AFTER he endorsed Mitt Romney and AFTER I subsequently commented on LNC-Discuss about the issue of his continuing to be a member of the LNC while endorsing a candidate from another party.

    Remember, he violated the ByLaws BEFORE the LSLA “featured” him as their top-billed speaker…

  22. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    It’s really none of my business, I guess, I’m just trying to figure out what the group is for and what they’re accomplishing. How many state chairs are involved ? Most of them, or very few? Just curious.

  23. Stewart Flood

    Very few. There is a conference about once a year. I hosted one here in Charleston back in 2009. Usually less than half of the state chairs attend.

    There isn’t anything for the group to do. It has no purpose or agenda — unless the Starr Chamber is now attempting to give it one. They control the LNCC and the LSLA, but not the LNC.

  24. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I am highly curious (nosy, frankly) as to why Richard Burke was an invited guest. The Reeves group must have some plan. 😉

  25. Jose C

    The genie is out of the bottle. Nothing was done when Ron Paul endorsed the Constitution Party Presidential candidate two presidential elections ago. This statement, continuing to be a member of the LNC while endorsing a candidate from another party. , could have been said about Ron Paul.

  26. Mark Axinn

    Stewart is mistaken.

    LSLA, which should change its name back to LP State Chairs Alliance, is an active forum for LP Chairs to share ideas and information about our affiliates.

    It is an educational organization of the state chairs, not a political organization with any agenda whatsoever.

    Mr. Starr is not a voting member of LSLA.

  27. paulie

    Mr. Starr is not a voting member of LSLA.

    It is true that, unless he becomes a state chair again or unless he is the designated replacement in the absence of his state chair, he does not get a vote at the annual meeting.

    However, as Secretary of the LSLA it is Aaron Starr that has made (and thus far continues to make) the determination that Burke and Reeves represent Oregon on the list, and that Wagner may only join under conditions he would never agree to. And the board, not the chairs, votes in between annual meetings. It is the board, not the chairs which cast the 2-2 vote to keep the issue of who represents Oregon off this call. Starr was one of those votes; I haven’t checked how he voted, but I’m pretty sure I know. It is the board (including Aaron Starr), not the chairs, that will vote on who will fill the current vacancy on the board, and on who filled past such vacancies.

    However, it is the state chairs who will elect the board and vote on the bylaws of the organization at the next annual meeting, which I believe will be in Columbus around the time of the national LP convention.

  28. Mark Axinn

    Paulie is correct on all points above.

    I understand the vote was 2-2 (Bittner and Dixon in favor, Starr and Mattson opposed) to addressing the issue of the Oregon rep.

    Those state chairs who have expressed an opinion have in general held the same position as I do: I don’t give a fuck who the Oregon rep. is and I don’t want to be part of the decision since I have too much work to do and my own flame wars to deal with in my own state so let’s leave it to Oregon to decide, oh they had to have a lawsuit, okay that’s their business, not mine, oh the lawsuit has been decided, good, then let’s go with the person the lawsuit decided since it’s up to Oregon to work out its own internal matters and not up to anyone on the LSLA Board or the other state chairs to do so.

    I take no position on the merits of the Oregon dispute as I really, really, really, really don’t care about them. As a state chair, I want my committee to move on and appoint Mr. Wagner not because his position was right or wrong, but because it has been determined and that matter is closed.

  29. Wes Wagner

    If the LSLA is in any way an organization that represents the State Chairs of the official affiliates of the LNC Inc. (aka the National Libertarian Party), then the “who is the chair” issue was resolved almost 2 years ago by its judicial committee.

    The LSLA has been the long hold out that entire time organizationally, and I am not sure Starr of Mattson will ever acquiesce to reality.

    The fact that this situation has persisted for so long at their personal insistence is, in my opinion, cause to purge them from all things libertarian in perpetuity. With friends like those, we would never need enemies.

    Of course there is no official method of purging anyone, so it is incumbent upon all good people to give them no support, no quarter, no assistance, and to not be bothered to stop and piss on them even if they were on fire.

    Those who continue to associate with them after everything they have done will likely be judged by others by the company they keep and share their fate in the end.

  30. Mark Vetanen

    There are thousands of Leadership PAC’s in this country. Just about every elected official runs one or is part of one, and with in a party there are many of these PACS. They exist mostly as a means to funnel money to pay for things that by law a candidates PAC cannot and act as an “legal slush fund”. A candidate PAC can donate to a leadership PAC and the PAC can pay the candidate for speaking engagements, coaching, or other services.

    The 60 Minutes probe in to the Leadership PAC’s work and why they are coveted.

    Anyone can create a club and invite who they want and make what ever rules they want. I guess that is “freedom of association”, but to create a club and say “that because a person holds a particular position or office – They are a club member” is absurd. This would me like me creating the Presidents Club, electing myself as chair and state that all current and past presidents are club members because it is in the rules. That is exactly what the LSLA has done, they created a club made the rules, said who the members are and are not, and have held court to adjudicate the membership.

    Back to my presidents club, it would only have meaning IF THE CURRENT AND PAST PRESIDENTS ACKNOWLEDGE MEMBERSHIP IN MY CLUB. With out the member accepting the membership and agreeing to the rules, then my claim of them being a member is FALSE. One cannot also claim a particular class of person as part of their club either. The KKK cannot say All white people are members, and the Black Panthers cannot say all Black People are members of their clubs. Membership has to be offered and accepted specifically for that club. You cannot say that if you join X you also join Y and Z…that is also absurd to say.

    Claims of false members can lead to lots of trouble. If someone created a hate club, then named people they wanted revenge on as members of this club, then published the list – well you can see why there are Defamation laws in this country.

    So, the LSLA can be whatever club it wants, choose its members in whatever fashion they want, and create rules and procedures. However, they cannot claim members who do not accept membership or are unaware they are members. To do such is foolish and absurd, and who would want to be part of such a club that does that or with such people who do such.

    If Wes Wagner joined the LSLA or accepted membership then his membership as in GOOD STANDING or not is up to the organization bylaws. The organization itself though cannot determine if Wes Wagner can be Chair or whatever of any other club, it can only determine if he can be part of their club. To do otherwise is absurd and silly, and who would want to associate with such people who do such?

    So the real question is:

    1. Did Wes Wagner join or accept membership in the LSLA?
    2. If so, then did the LSLA engage in their bylaw process to remove him as a member?

    As for myself, I am not a member of the LSLA nor a member of the LNC or current supporter of it.

  31. paulie

    I’m not aware of the LSLA being a PAC, much less a slush fund. They have a very tiny budget, put on a yearly conference for LP activists, and run an email list. That’s about it.

  32. Stewart Flood

    As verified by Paulie, I am not wrong. I mentioned the annual conference, which is of course for “educational purposes.” The low level of involvement I pointed out has also been acknowledged. Mr Starr and Ms Mattson are not state party leaders, but are still voting members of the board of an organization who’s membership is limited to state party leadership!

    As I said in the past, I believe both sides of the “Oregon conflict” should step down. But even though he has previously admitted to violating his own state party’s ByLaws and changing the ByLaws, Mr Wagner remains the dictator of the day and is therefore the state chair that the LSLA should be recognizing.

    Mr Wagner won, regardless of whether or not he deserved to win either legally or morally. The LSLA board really has nothing to vote on since their ByLaws don’t allow them to remove state parties as members. It is the state party that gets a vote, represented by the state chair or his or her proxy. Oregon is a member and that ends it. There is nothing to decide.

    If they want to “remove” Mr Wagner from the LSLA then they will have to remove him as chair of the Oregon affiliate. The LSLA does not have the authority to do that, so they have to recognize him.

    Remember, even the dictator of Germany was recognized as the leader of his country and everyone showed up when he hosted the 1936 Olympic Games.

    But Mr Wagner is not in charge of Germany, and Mr Starr does not represent leadership of anything other than the Starr Chamber (with four members still on the LNC). Mr Starr does, however, partially control two organizations that give him the appearance of legitimate leadership: the LSLA and the LNCC.

  33. Wes Wagner

    Stewart apparently has not read the evidence in the legal filings if he still holds those false opinions of my status as a dictator.

  34. Wes Wagner


    Who is or is not state chair is not as important as people coming to realize that there are aggressive individuals out there who will attack us who simultaneously attempt to call themselves our friends, and then blame the victim for defending themselves.

    Unless we can fix that inside our own organization, we have no hope of winning the battle against the larger political apparatus.

  35. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    It appears that California is under a fairly serious attack of Republicans trying to take over our party. I had thought most of them left when Root threw them under the bus, but apparently not. The Republican Party is very weak in CA. I wonder if there’s a concerted effort to get Libertarians to join their ranks against the Democrats? Maybe.

    I’ve just begun to fight! As someone famous once said–or something like that–

  36. paulie

    Voting Members shall consist of the State Chairs of affiliate State Libertarian Parties.

    I would have taken that to mean parties recognized as affiliates by the LNC, which would mean Wagner. I guess Aaron is taking it to mean that LSLA determines its own affiliates, and determines who those are separately from the LNC.

  37. Stewart Flood

    My comment is based on being present on the conference call where Mr Wagner stated that his executive committee had decided to change the ByLaws. That was a coup. He admitted it. The state later ruled that it was up to the party, not the state, to decide the matter of who is in charge (cliff notes version of ruling). They did not rule that Mr Wagner is the legitimate chair. They said the party has to figure it out.

    At this point, the improper ruling of the JC, based on overturning a “non-action” of the LNC (find authority for THAT in the ByLaws!) leaves Mr Wagner holding the keys and the bank account.

    But as Paulie pointed out, at this point I have no interest in the matter. When I was on the LNC there was a reason to care, and my opinion that both sides should step away from the table is based on countless hours of my time wasted having to deal with this mess. I also had to deal with their earlier squabble back in 2007. The issue back then was slightly different, and my opinion at that time sided more with Mr Wagner than Mr Burke. But it was still a huge waste of time.

    Right now I am more concerned with the report we just saw from Ms Pyeatt saying that republicans are trying to take over the California LP. If true, this is a serious issue that I hope they can address in time.

  38. Wes Wagner


    I recommend reading the lawsuit materials (mostly the supporting documents) They were not available at the time you served on the LNC and prove up just how much the LNC was lied tyo and manipulated by the Chair, Mr. Burke and Ms. Mattson.

    I had no intention of explaining my conduct to the LNC at the time or the reasons why … we had a state to protect and a corrupt board who was helping assail us.

  39. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    It’s been in bad shape for a while, but I though things were getting better. Apparently not. I may not even want to keep my Chairperson position next term.. We’ll see.

  40. From Der Sidelines

    “even the dictator of Germany was recognized as the leader of his country”

    Uh, he was elected in an actual democratic election–just like the current dictator-wannabe in the White House.

  41. George Phillies

    Flood: “… the Starr Chamber (with four members still on the LNC)…” (I miss numbers for posts).

    I believe you may be a tad bit optimistic. Note the replacement secretarial vote. George.

  42. paulie

    Hitler originally came in second in the election of 1932, but was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg because of a deadlock in forming a government. He then used a false flag operation, the Reichstag fire, to suppress his communist opposition, suspend civil rights and use a combination of campaigning and violence to get a plurality, but not a majority, in the March 1933 election.

    Per wikipedia

    To achieve full political control despite not having an absolute majority in parliament, Hitler’s government brought the Ermächtigungsgesetz (Enabling Act) to a vote in the newly elected Reichstag. The act gave Hitler’s cabinet full legislative powers for a period of four years and (with certain exceptions) allowed deviations from the constitution. The bill required a two-thirds majority to pass. Leaving nothing to chance, the Nazis used the provisions of the Reichstag Fire Decree to keep several Social Democratic deputies from attending; the Communists had already been banned….

    The position of the Centre Party, the third largest party in the Reichstag, turned out to be decisive. After Hitler verbally promised party leader Ludwig Kaas that President von Hindenburg would retain his power of veto, Kaas announced the Centre Party would support the Enabling Act…. The Enabling Act, along with the Reichstag Fire Decree, transformed Hitler’s government into a de facto legal dictatorship.

    The Social Democratic Party was banned and all its assets seized…. On 2 May 1933 all trade unions were forced to dissolve and their leaders were arrested, some of whom were sent to concentration camps. The German Labour Front was formed as an umbrella organisation to represent all workers, administrators, and company owners…

    By the end of June, the other parties had been intimidated into disbanding. This included the Nazis’ nominal coalition partner, the DNVP; with the SA’s help, Hitler forced its leader, Hugenberg, to resign on 29 June. On 14 July 1933, the NSDAP was declared the only legal political party in Germany, although the country had effectively been a one-party state since the passage of the Enabling Act four months earlier…

    On 2 August 1934, President von Hindenburg died. The previous day, the cabinet had enacted the “Law Concerning the Highest State Office of the Reich”. This law stated that upon Hindenburg’s death, the office of president would be abolished and its powers merged with those of the chancellor. Hitler thus became head of state as well as head of government, and was formally named as Führer und Reichskanzler (leader and chancellor). This law violated the Enabling Act—although it allowed Hitler to deviate from the constitution, the Act explicitly barred him from passing any law tampering with the presidency. In 1932, the constitution had been amended to make the president of the High Court of Justice, not the chancellor, acting president pending new elections. …. With this law, Hitler removed the last legal remedy by which he could be removed from office.

    As head of state, Hitler became Supreme Commander of the armed forces. The traditional loyalty oath of servicemen was altered to affirm loyalty to Hitler personally, rather than to the office of supreme commander or the state. On 19 August, the merger of the presidency with the chancellorship was approved by 90 per cent of the electorate voting in a plebiscite.

    So, it’s somewhat deceptive to say that Hitler won a democratic election.

  43. paulie

    Even if you think the worst of Wes Wagner, though, I think it is a bit overly dramatic to compare him to Hitler. Godwin’s law and all that.

  44. Wes Wagner

    I can be removed by a simple majority vote of the board … who was elected earlier this year by mail ballot to every qualified libertarian voter in oregon.

    I serve at their pleasure and can be more easily replaced than the chair of the LNC and probably most every other state affiliate.

  45. Mark Axinn

    Wes wrote:
    >I serve at their pleasure and can be more easily replaced than the chair of the LNC and probably most every other state affiliate.

    Wes, I am still trying to figure out how I can be replaced as a state chair. I even made an impassioned speech for that do-nothing guy NOTA, but then I was the only one to vote for him! 🙁

  46. Stewart Flood


    Optimistic? I didn’t follow the vote. By my count, there are four puppets that have the Starr Chamber’s hands up their b*** controlling how they raise their hands to vote. Others may vote with them at times, but that does not mean they are controlled.

    Remember, the analysis you did of voting blocks showed that I voted with them only 20% of the time! Look at the 80-90% (or 100% in the case of two former LNC members) voting patterns. Four of them are still on the LNC.

  47. Stewart Flood

    I know that Chuck keeps a spreadsheet that is vote based. What I saw showed intersecting circles of common “voting blocks” that I thought was created by George Phillies. I may have been misinformed regarding the author, but the data analysis [he did] was accurate.

  48. Stewart Flood


    Not the one with the all the arrows. I mean the one with names and intersecting circles.

  49. George Phillies

    There are three sets of analyses. There was the 2008 analysis with names and arrows where I did rough graphs and James Oaksun did fancy graphs. There was Chuck Moulton’s data, on which he and I did two different analyses, getting much of the same answers. The pretty graphs were Chuck’s. I agree with Stewart’s count of holdovers. I was counting people who supported Alicia Mattson for replacement National Secretary.

    There are graphs in my book Libertarian Renaissance. amazon DOT com/Libertarian-Renaissance-Essays-Liberty-ebook/dp/B00E1SVGAK

  50. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    There’s another meeting this evening, with the LPO on the agenda:

    On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Brett Bittner wrote:
    Please find below the proposed agenda for tonight’s call.
    Here is the call-in information for those wishing to participate:
    Dial-in number: (559) 546-1200
    Meeting ID: 118-921-788
    Meeting link:
    Libertarian State Leadership Alliance
    Executive Board Meeting (via teleconference)
    November 24, 2013 – 8 PM Eastern/5 PM Pacific
    I. Call to Order & Quorum Confirmation
    II. Approval of Agenda
    III. Reports & New Business
    A. Treasurer’s Report 2 Min
    B. Filling At-Large Vacancy Election 15 Min
    C. LPO State Chair on LSLA List 10 Min
    IV. Set Next Meeting Date & Time (Bittner) 1 Min
    Proposed: December 8th at 8 PM Eastern/5 PM Pacific
    V. Review Minutes (Starr) 5 Min
    VI. Adjourn ~ 8:35 PM Eastern/5:35 Pacific (Any)
    Live Free,

    Brett C. Bittner

    Executive Director
    Libertarian Party of Georgia

    Libertarian State Leadership Alliance

  51. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    And this just came through:


    For tonight’s item III.C I will make the following motion:

    “Wes Wagner will be added to the state chairs email list with equal posting privilege as Tim Reeves”

    Yours in Liberty,

    Pat Dixon
    Chair, Libertarian Party of Texas

  52. Wes Wagner

    I have sent a message to Pat regarding his proposal and that it will be deemed unacceptable.

    These people really should stop acting like feudal lords who think they can make these decisions in a vacuum without causing resentment among people. (What was the attendance in Colorado again?)

    They blew their own feet off when they allowed Aaron Starr and M Carling to use their organization in an attempt to take over a state affiliate with external force and influence (and the help of the Oregon Republican Party’s general counsel) … but when you lose spectacularly in a coup attempt and try to pretend you didn’t lose for over 2 years, you need to back peddle much more effectively than _this_.

  53. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    So, Wes, would you accept if Tim Reeves remains a member, but you’re called the chairperson of Oregon? The reason I say that is that other people are in this group who aren’t state leaders.

  54. Wes Wagner


    Given that I was removed from the organizations list by M Carling as part of an aggressive attempt at a coup by an outside body, the following would need to occur before Oregon would participate in the LSLA again:

    1) we are assured that our credentials are certain if we were to attend an event
    2) the people involved in the past misdeeds are out of the organization
    3) The LSLA admits what was done publicly

    Anything short of that and I will continue to do my best to ensure that the organization continues to erode due to the weight of their own transgressions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *