Lauren,
Thank you for promptly posting the results of this vote, including how each committee member voted. It looks like the vote squeaked by to barely get the two-thirds needed (since Mike Paster is an alternate, and all regular members voted, his "abstain" vote did not count). However it does appear there was some confusion about what we were voting on. Armando Romero told me "it is my understanding that we are just voting on the 'price'", whereas I assumed the vote was to approve the entire document. This confusion illustrates one of the problems that can arise when there is no public discussion of a proposal, and no formal motion. Indeed the lack of a formal motion makes me wonder whether the vote was in fact properly conducted, even setting aside open governance/accountability issues.
In the future, our email voting should be done publicly as each member votes. I believe that this is the intent of our bylaws, as well as what is necessary to be in compliance with sound governance and accountability to our members. Please state publicly how you intend to conduct future email votes, so I can know what kind of motion I may need to make on this, if any.
As previously requested and restated in my recent email, please do not copy me "bcc" on any messages you send. I believe you agreed to that request when you and I spoke in person. In fact, NO email business of the Libertarian Party of California Executive Committee should be conducted using "bcc". Party members have a right to know what their leadership is doing, and not only members of our committee, but members of the party generally, should be able to see how committee members are voting at the time they vote. Secret balloting is for the public, not for representatives.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))