In cases where Libertarian Party of California practices currently allow for *less* openness and transparency than government agencies are required to practice under state law, yes, I *would* like to emulate State of California meeting protocol! Better to emulate open meeting laws, than to emulate the politicians who resist such attempts to make them more accountable and their actions more transparent to their constituents!
Really, Libertarian Party leaders should adhere to a *higher* standard of openness and transparency than government officials. We ought to be setting a positive example for those who conduct the public's business.
Sadly, our bylaws do not currently require the chair or anyone else to prepare an agenda (an oversight that I hope convention delegates will fix). But they do empower the chair to preside over meetings, which means that in practice the chair tends to arrive at meetings with a specific list of items he wishes to cover. If this list is shared with other Executive Committee members in advance, it allows us to more effectively prepare for and productively participate in meetings. I know I'm not the only one who feels this way.
Ordinary party members also deserve the opportunity to know in advance what we plan to discuss. As ExCom members it is our responsibility to attend meetings, so most of us will likely show up regardless of what's on the agenda. But this is not true for ordinary LPC members. A party member who is able to see an agenda in advance might notice an item of interest to him or her, and decide to attend a meeting that he or she otherwise would have skipped.
As for quibbling, if making motions and other official business transparent, and allowing time for input and discussion before items are voted on via email is so meaningless, why not just approve the resolution rather than quibbling about it?
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))