18 Comments
deletedAug 18, 2023Liked by Robert Valenta
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
author

Certainly, that does raise other challenges.

But, not knowing the rules guarantees that you or your fellow members won't know or understand that your chair is ignoring them. So, it is step one.

As I wrote in the article, there are steps you can take to educate your fellow members, and bring in new blood. Keep the faith. Don't lose hope. Stay in the fight. And, PRAY. This is definitely a spiritual war.

Expand full comment
author

Deleted comment by user:

"Knowing the governing docs does nothing because chairs, like the one in St Johns ignore them anyway."

Expand full comment
Dec 21, 2022Liked by Robert Valenta

Thank you, Robert & Dr. J.

Expand full comment
Dec 22, 2022·edited Dec 22, 2022Liked by Robert Valenta

"This effort required a lot of team work and greatly benefited by the fact that most of our conspirators did not want to be on the board." Yes this is very true.

Expand full comment

Or they acted like they didn't want to be on the board while they used you to get into the position they wanted all along. Have you managed to remove their knives from your back yet?

Expand full comment
author

Can't reach.

Expand full comment
Dec 22, 2022Liked by Robert Valenta

THE CONSTANT POWER

OF GOLD & DIAMOND

FACETED PRAYER

A Christmas Tale Told

~ She Thinks [On] Liberty

https://open.substack.com/pub/shethinksliberty/p/my-mothers-ring?r=11r0co&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

Expand full comment

Excellent strategy outline for success!! Honesty, transparency, courage and virtue are the ingredients mandated by our creator that will produce a bountiful harvest for all involved. God bless Bob & Joe

Expand full comment
Aug 18, 2023Liked by Robert Valenta

Wonderful. Thx for sharing!

Expand full comment

Thank you for an excellent article. I have two things to add.

1: Nobody can keep you from associating with other members of the REC. We started having regular monthly meetings of Precinct Strategy members and those trying to join our REC beginning over a year ago. That's when things really started to happen. We talked to each other at the REC meetings (before and after) and invited people we knew to join us. By sharing information, we identified the ways the old regime was keeping new members from joining and actually encouraging activist members to quit. The meetings were NOT official REC meetings, so we could invite only those we wanted. I was told I wasn't allowed to do it and I had a district chair demand to be invited. I ignored them. At our meetings, we planned motions to make at meetings and met new America First candidates. We also helped build campaign teams for our candidates.

2: Try to avoid personal attacks. A separate group of activists from us have been engaging in particularly nasty attacks on those of us experiencing some success infiltrating the local party. The character assassinations, lies, smears, and mis-characterizations are damaging to everyone involved. Even when I agree with those guilty of this nastiness, I will not talk with them because they have established a pattern of attacking with no cause. There have been times they were treated with respect and helpfullness, but they turned and attacked and tried to make it look otherwise. I don't know that any of us will ever be able to work with those attack dogs. Now some of them appear to be working with the old establishment.

Expand full comment
Sep 14, 2023Liked by Robert Valenta

I am currently in a dispute with my local REC and need advice. One of the elements of my dispute is the local Chair's insistence that motions be provided to him in advance. He NEVER opens the floor for motions unless it's things he has like approving minutes, financial reports, etc. I do not feel members are required to submit motions to him in advance and at Tuesday night's REC meeting he shut down my attempt to offer a motion. When I have read the RINO HUNTER posts, you continually refer to "resolutions". It is my belief that "resolutions" and "motions" are two different things. Both the RPOF Constitution and the County Model Constitution address submission of RESOLUTIONS. Motions are not addressed in either document and, as such, fall under the authority of Roberts Rules of Order (for all issues not addressed in the Constitution and Rules). It is my contention that RESOLUTIONS and MOTIONS are two different things. In layman's terminology (and according to a previous RPOF Grievance Committee Chairman and current Rules Committee member), a RESOLUTION is an item of policy and the rules clearly state they must be submitted in advance, MOTIONS are an item of action, and may be made from the floor at any time. Item 4:4 of RRO presents a distinction between a resolution and a motion. RRO addresses making motions in many places and none of them specify advance notice, in fact, RRO makes clear motions are a right of the member and can be made at any time. Our Chairman's exact words when I attempted to make the motion were "a motion is not in order at this time". Keep in mind, this is an REC Chairman who has not produced an agenda in advance in at least 5 of the past 6-7 meetings and NEVER has New Business in the meeting. No agenda was produced on Tuesday evening, so there was no way to know what was coming. I am desperate for advice, responses, perspectives. I am pursuing answers from parliamentary experts also.

Expand full comment
author

I'm going to give you as short an answer here as possible...

A resolution is an official public statement of belief; a declaration. The Lee Resolution is a good example, AKA The Declaration of Independence. Typically a set of "Whereas" statements of condition(s), followed by a "Be it resolved" solution. In politics, it is meant to motivate and encourage elected, and electors, alike. A motion is the request of the body for their consideration.

Think of it like this, if a Resolution is like a house, a motion is the front door... how you get in the house. You have to make a motion to adopt the resolution. So, every resolution needs a motion to put it in play, on the floor. But, not every motion ends with a resolution. "I move to adjourn", for example. The REC isn't going to run a press release over the news-breaking decision to adjourn, obviously.

Expand full comment
author

So, you (and the CMC) are correct. A resolution must be submitted 14 days in advance. If you have a fair-minded board, they simply check its form and flow for understandability, not whether they agree with it, or not. They put it on the agenda, and the EC debates it on the floor. If the board publishes it to the full membership ahead of time, the author can field questions from members, which saves a lot of debate time on the floor, and maybe even convinces the author to amend it before the motion is made. Unfortunately, the RINO establishment believes in a top-down structure, where a select few decide what the official platform of the party will be, and you just stick to door knocking for their hand-picked candidates in August, while they sit in the AC. "Stay in your lane". And, as half of the 'Uniparty' coin, the RINOs only put out feckless platforms that push back just enough to keep the $$$ flowing. "Pay me, elect me, I'll save you from the big bad democrat".

So, keep those resolutions coming, fight back against your board, if they dont let them come up or they try to run them through a 'Resolutions Committee'. Make sure they are effective, specific, well written, understandable, etc. My favorite is our Ban the Jab resolution that we passed in Feb, and have now passed in 10 FL RECs, and the state party of ID.

https://josephsansone.substack.com/p/ban-the-jab-resolution-f6f

Expand full comment
author
Sep 14, 2023·edited Sep 14, 2023Author

As for your Chair's other behavior regarding not publishing agendas 10 days in advance, I would say that you have an authoritarian fascist at the helm. I have been there, and done that. If you don't have a majority of like-minded members in the room already, you need to start now, and change your board in 16 months.

I would note that there are times when it is appropriate to force a motion, and there are times when it is not without merit that the presider rules a motion at that time as "Out of Order". The problem is, most chairs don't know which is which, and so they just rule any interruption to their meeting as "Out of Order". Again, if you have a simple majority in the room, you can "move to overrule the decision of the chair". You need a second. There is no debate allowed, and a simple majority will force the chair's hand regarding whatever behavior or action it was you were overruling.

Expand full comment
Sep 15, 2023·edited Sep 15, 2023Liked by Robert Valenta

Bob - thank you so much for your response. We are working on several fronts.....getting more like-minded members into our REC.......and working to understand the procedures, etc. But we're working in baby steps in our situation because the Chair's behavior....and his predecessor's, who he was a student of.....has been tolerated for so long. So these baby steps involve simply working to get motions presented on the floor, something that has never been allowed to happen. So I want to be absolutely sure on one thing.......that we are not required to provide advance notice of MOTIONS if they are stand alone motions....no resolution involved or intended. Per Roberts Rules of Order, a motion can be offered at any time and DOES NOT REQUIRE ADVANCE NOTICE TO THE CHAIR. (It is my belief that the Chair is pushing this erroneous notion so he could stack the meeting to insure the result he wants) As far as I can see, this Chair is in violation of numerous Roberts Rules of Order rules and we want to start to assure his compliance.

Expand full comment
author

Yes, I agree. All you need to make a motion, is someone to second it. If the chair rules it out of order, simply move to overrule the decision of the chair, and get a second. No debate. Simple majority.

Our State Committeeman tried purporting that "motions" are for anything that lasts through that meeting, and resolutions live on until amended or reversed. This is not true, but you may hear it, since the RINOs all belong to a borg.

Expand full comment

Thanks Bob. This is exactly what we were all set to do at this weeks meeting. I had several seconds scattered around the room. In calling on me the Chair said "For what purpose do you rise", to which I responded "Since we are on membership (remember, no agenda and he hasn't had a New Business item as long as anyone can remember) I rise to make a motion regarding membership." As I started to read the motion, he said "Your motion is not in order at this time" I stated that a motion can be made at any time as long as it's relevant to the topic and he said "But I am not entertaining motions at this time" and repeated his insistence that a motion be presented to him in advance. So my seconds never got a chance to act on the motion, but did on my Appeal to the Decision of the Chair. We lost the vote 82 - 65, so we have some work to do getting more like-minded members into our REC. In addition, I could have handled the time he gave me to speak on my appeal because I think the reason for my motion could have swayed some members to our side and I failed to adequately state that during my comments. But, bottom line, I am correct that a motion does not have to be presented in advance and will continue to work under that premise. Thanks for your help.

Expand full comment
Aug 17Liked by Robert Valenta

Doris and the SJC REC Blake, Linda t. and those libby people constantly voted to removed real patriots from the SJC REC . In her own words she says how a part of the committee splintered off to strategize on how to take over the REC with Blake P and membership blocker Linda Thomson at the helm. Doris and those same people she admits in her letter they all had shadow meetings ,picked their own liberal candidates and talking points and they shoved those candidates and their left tactic slogans down 3/4 REC members throats. This same group Doris runs with were against : "BAN THE JAB" resolution I wrote with Dr. Sansone. The problem they had was the truth, it is a "bioweapon". This took 6 months of bs with these people. This same group have called cops on patriots 4X and try to keep good local long time republican citizens like myself, Jamie the VP of the board and many others out of the REC. Doris and the people she is with REC and Denver Crook are currently suing the SJC TRUMP CLUB for using the "REPUBLICAN" name on their candidates flyers. News Flash- The Trump Club has more members the REC because the REC ran out the Real Republicans. The people they chose as candidates are using the developer slogan but those same candidates all just moved here and they live in those same developments. Hypocrites.

Expand full comment