LP Nevada Executive Committee Responds to Brett Pojunis Announcement of Convention Still Being Held this Saturday

Thanks to David Colborne for posting the following on the LP Nevada Facebook group: 

This message is being sent to all Libertarians in Nevada (email on file) and LNC representatives.

As previously announced, the 2013 Libertarian Party of Nevada Convention has been postponed until later in the year. The reason for the postponement is the unethical use of National Libertarian Party resources to influence the outcome of the elections for State Chair and other Executive Committee positions by Brett Pojunis, one of the Region 4 Representatives of the Libertarian National Committee and candidate for State Chair. All convention fees have been refunded to those who registered. In addition, the Libertarian Party of Nevada announced that it is removing itself from Region 4 effective immediately.

Although his own unethical behavior led to the postponement of the convention, on Wednesday, April 24, 2013 Mr. Pojunis announced via a Facebook discussion group titled “Libertarian Party of Nevada”, a group which was created by Mr. Pojunis while serving as Secretary for the LPNevada, but which he did not hand over control of after the Executive Committee voted for him to do so, nor when he resigned in December of 2012, that the Executive Committee is holding a “secret” convention. He is urging LIbertarian Party members to show up to crash this fictitious convention.

These irresponsible activities of people like Mr. Pojunis have held back the Libertarian Party for decades. The firm stand by the Executive Committee against unethical behavior and the decision to postpone the convention as a result of it has received many positive responses via email. There were many words of encouragement for taking a strong stand against outside interference in the affairs of a state party.

There will not be a convention this Saturday. The new convention date will be announced in accordance with the State Party bylaws, as previously stated. We will review these bylaws for you now:

Article IV, Section 3.

-The Executive Committee shall publish the time, date, and location for the Annual State Convention as soon as possible, but no later than 60 days before the date of the State Convention. This publication will be sufficient if it is prominently placed on the LPN’s official website. However, if at all possible, the Executive Committee is encouraged to send, via USPS mail, notice to all members at least 30 days before the date of the State Convention.-

One accusation we find troubling is that the convention was postponed because the National Libertarian Party was going to send an “impartial observer”. While we are aware that Mr. Pojunis sent a letter to the LNC Chair in which he signed many names, the overwhelming majority of which were not Party members, which requested an observer be sent, we never received any confirmation from the LNC that they were sending someone. However, the convention was open to the public and non-member/non-delegate registration was available prior to the postponement, and will be available again when the convention is rescheduled. These kind of false statements intended to stir up outrage demonstrates that Mr Pojunis has no regard for the well being of the Party.

The Libertarian Party of Nevada also reserved a professional certified parliamentarian to ensure the convention was conducted in accordance with the bylaws and Robert’s Rules of Order. We had a professional videographer and photographer reserved as well. Per Article IV, Section 4, Part B of the bylaws the convention must be video recorded.

Mr. Pojunis stated publicly on Wednesday that, “In addition, there have been so many irregularities and infractions of our bylaws from the Executive Committee, we wouldn’t put anything past them.” The Executive Committee would like to point out that not a single bylaw has been infracted. Such gratuitous and self-serving comments by Mr. Pojunis whose sole intention seems to be to turn the Libertarian Party into a profit making venture for his private company are destructive and have nothing to do with the spirit of Libertarianism.

Sincerely,

The Executive Committee of the Libertarian Party of Nevada

76 thoughts on “LP Nevada Executive Committee Responds to Brett Pojunis Announcement of Convention Still Being Held this Saturday

  1. Judd Weiss

    They are squirming!

    I love their claim of outside interference. Endorsements are a normal part of campaigning. If I were Geoff, I would explicitly endorse Brett right now, in light of the current behavior. That would not be against any bylaw, and it wouldn’t be unethical. In fact, it would be the most ethical course to take right now, in my opinion. However, Geoff, explicitly DID NOT endorse Brett or anyone, so the ExCom’s stated reasons for postponing the election aren’t just a stretch, they are a fabrication. It’s nakedly obvious that they postponed this election because they knew they’d lose. That precludes them from ever discussing the topic of unethical behavior with any right to moral superiority.

    “These kind of false statements intended to stir up outrage demonstrates that Mr Pojunis has no regard for the well being of the Party.”

    Oh…. the irony……….

  2. Rod Stern

    I don’t think the issue would have been so much if Geoff endorsed – he still has individual free speech rights even though he is the chairman – although if he had, he should make it clear that he is speaking as an individual and not as the chair.

    It was more that the email went out from national’s official email address using their “stationary” and their list, which could be interpreted as endorsing Brett. But they clearly corrected that this was a mistake, and furthermore there was nothing even in the original version that was explicitly endorsing him. All it said was that he could be contacted for more info, which is true; it did not even mention that he is running for chair. As the region rep there is nothing wrong with saying he could be contacted for more info. But given how it took up a big chunk of the email, I can see why there were concerns, hence the correction.

    Cancelling the convention was an extreme over-reaction.

    And why didn’t Silvestri send the email himself? He could have had his own picture and “contact me for more info” in there, and I don’t think that would have been inappropriate. The reason why the email went out from national was the lack of adequate notice from Silvestri and friends. They did a lot more to publicize the cancellation than they did to publicize the convention to begin with.

  3. Rod Stern

    Silvestri’s Junta of course has nothing but the highest interests of the party only in mind.

  4. Jill Pyeatt

    Silvestri is about to overtake Richard P. Burke and Dr. Tom Stevens in his hubris. Pathetically hilarious, really.

  5. Rod Stern

    What if both sides claim to be the winners, since Pojunis may claim to have won the election whereas Silvestri will say that there was no election?

  6. Rod Stern

    Posted on FB

    Brett H. Pojunis
    NEWSFLASH… So Jason Smith contacted the Suncoast to reserve meeting space for us. All was good, we reserved a room that would hold 40 people (seated) and ordered coffee, tea and water all for $380! They asked the name of the room and he said Nevada Libertarians. He then received a call from a supervisor who said that room was no longer available, the only room they had was for $750, Jason Smith called me up and we agreed that we would get the room anyway. When he told this to the supervisor she put him on hold for a few mins and came back and said that she could not reserve a room for our group, he then asked if there was other space available and she said “we don’t have to do business with people we don’t want to do business with.”

    This is getting out of control… Stay tuned, we are working on anther venue which we will have by mid-day tomorrow in the same general area. We were going to try to get space under a different name for the group, but we wouldn’t put it past them to have security waiting for us.

    Message to current Executive Committee: Keep putting up obstacles and we will keep knocking them down! No matter how hard you try, we will try harder. Nothing will get in the way of us growing the party in Nevada.

  7. Winner Party

    If both sides claim to be the winners, then our position is that it’s not all said and done. Not being all said and done does not preclude membership in the Winner Party.

  8. Avens O'Brien

    “As previously announced, the 2013 Libertarian Party of Nevada Convention has been postponed until later in the year. ”

    How late is it allowed to go? We need to be able to vote on our leadership. An ExComm that stays in power because it does not allow a new election to take place is not a legitimate one.

    “The reason for the postponement is the unethical use of National Libertarian Party resources to influence the outcome of the elections for State Chair and other Executive Committee positions by Brett Pojunis, one of the Region 4 Representatives of the Libertarian National Committee and candidate for State Chair. ”

    There is no proof of this. An ill-advised email, not endorsing a candidate but simply telling membership they can contact the LNC Rep to Nevada for more info about growing the party/attending the convention was sent out. It was apologized for. There should be no postponement. This is unreasonable action.

    “that the Executive Committee is holding a “secret” convention. He is urging LIbertarian Party members to show up to crash this fictitious convention.”

    What? That… isn’t what was said nor what happened.

    “There were many words of encouragement for taking a strong stand against outside interference in the affairs of a state party.”

    A state party is made up of the participants within the state. I believe there’s a whole lot of people like myself who are waiting for the chance to exert our inside influence, and are being deprived of that chance.

    “There will not be a convention this Saturday.”

    Nope, there will simply be a number of voting members meeting to discuss what it is like to be disenfranchised by the people previously elected to represent us.

    “While we are aware that Mr. Pojunis sent a letter to the LNC Chair in which he signed many names, the overwhelming majority of which were not Party members, which requested an observer be sent, we never received any confirmation from the LNC that they were sending someone.”

    I would’ve signed it, and I am a party member. I think having an impartial representative from National is an excellent idea.

    “These kind of false statements intended to stir up outrage demonstrates that Mr Pojunis has no regard for the well being of the Party.”

    Well, people want to figure out why the convention was postponed. The ExComm’s official reason isn’t good enough.

    “Such gratuitous and self-serving comments by Mr. Pojunis whose sole intention seems to be to turn the Libertarian Party into a profit making venture for his private company are destructive and have nothing to do with the spirit of Libertarianism.”

    How exactly would the LP become a profit-making venture for Brett? This statement is as conspiratorial as the ones they’re denouncing from the other side!

    I am not impressed with the ExComm. And I had every intention at the Convention (before postponement) of hearing EVERYONE out and making the most fair vote possible.

    I am not a happy constituent.

    This needs to get resolved, quickly.

  9. Rod Stern

    “If both sides claim to be the winners, then our position is that it’s not all said and done. Not being all said and done does not preclude membership in the Winner Party.”

    So would both sides be in the winner party then…or neither one?

  10. Jill Pyeatt

    I’m almost willing to bet at this time that the convention is rescheduled for 9:00 PM 12-31-2013.

  11. Wes Wagner

    So… has no one realized that there just may never be any convention?

    Short of picketing his house and place of employment and making his life a living hell… you can’t force him to do the right thing.

  12. Rod Stern

    If he doesn’t hold one at all in 2013, he would be in clear objective violation, at which point it would be easier to prove and thus get intervention from the state government and/or the national LP.

  13. Wes Wagner

    RS @18

    Have you considered that neither of those two agencies is able/willing to do anything?

    You may want to consider how to clean your own house without running to a government that won’t help you and a national party that has literally zero authority.

  14. Wes Wagner

    RS @20

    I could not get the government to intervene when an E.D. was embezzling party funds and there was prima facie evidence of it and other financial problems.

    You think they are going to care about “our chairperson won’t run a convention!”?

  15. Rod Stern

    I’m not going to comment about your financial problems from whenever, as I am not sufficiently knowledgeable about them. I don’t believe a state party would ignore a bylaw and/or state law about holding a convention in the calendar year, with active opposition to them organized in the state, and get that by both the state government and the national party.

  16. Rod Stern

    Or you may simply be wrong, which I believe you are in this case. First of all I don’t believe Silvestri will postpone it past the end of December. And second, if he somehow does, I believe the state government and/or national party will intervene.

  17. Rod Stern

    I’m not interested in discussing any personal details of my experience. You’ll have to find others for penis-measuring contests. If I had any interest in having you know anything about me, I’d bet on it, though. Let’s just call it a nonmonetary wager. When one of those two things happen, I’ll remind you about your prediction.

  18. Wes Wagner

    I sure do hope Rod Stern is not in any decision making capacity in Nevada…. he will get innocents slaughtered for his hubris.

  19. Rod Stern

    I’m not in any decision making capacity in Nevada. But no hubris here; I’ll merely remind you that you made an incorrect prediction when it proves to be the case.

  20. Rod Stern

    “National Party will intervene…How?”

    Disaffiliate Silvestri and pay for a ballot drive for a reconstituted affiliate if Silvestri refuses to turn over the keys.

  21. Wes Wagner

    RS @30

    That is probably the only tactic that national could employ that would work.

    The Silvestri possessed party would eventually wither away and cease to exist.

    This requires the: 3/4 vote to make it happen (possible in this case)
    The Money
    A leadership team in NV that is willing to rebuild from ground zero.

  22. Rod Stern

    Are you presuming that Silvestri will push it that far? I am more inclined to guess that he will in fact have a convention at some point this year.

    Presuming he doesn’t, it is possible that the state government would rule against him in a dispute.

    And if neither of those things happen, yes, I believe all three of the requirements you posit @31 would be met.

  23. David Colborne

    Wes: We’d love to handle things internally using party resources and mechanisms. Trouble is, the only way to replace the Chair in Nevada is at a convention, and in case you haven’t noticed, they are going through great pains to avoid calling one.

    What do you suggest we do? At this point, the only options I’m seeing all involve appealing to the entities that grant the LP Nevada legitimacy (notably, our SoS, and possibly the LNC) and demand that they take that legitimacy away.

  24. Rod Stern

    “What do you suggest we do? ”

    Well, you could wait until January 1, and if they still haven’t had a convention, then appeal to the SOS and/or LNC. I’m not saying you should do that, or not, just that this would be one thing you could do.

  25. Wes Wagner

    DC @33

    Public shaming… picket their houses and places of employment until life becomes so unbearable that they give up.

  26. Rod Stern

    That too, but more productive activities may be in order, such as building the infrastructure of a party in all but name, ready to be turned over to the party with minimal letterhead changes once you have the party under your leadership.

  27. Wes Wagner

    RS @36

    My method teaches people how to deal with intransigent apparatchiks… which is a vital political skill as well.

  28. David Colborne

    @35: That’s called “stalking” and is against the law, even in Nevada. The worst thing we could do is earn a set of restraining orders – it would make it impossible for us to attend the convention.

    @36: That’s what we’re doing now, hence why we keep pushing our… whatever it is we’re doing this Saturday.

    @34 (yes, I know it’s the same person as 36): That ultimately may be what this comes down to, though that’s very much a worst case scenario. Ideally, we want 2014 focused on fielding and supporting solid midterm election candidates, not getting into the meat of an intra-Party political death match. That’s why we wanted to get this convention over and done with sooner than later in the first place, so we could get to work on the future and get rolling.

  29. Rod Stern

    Well, yes, that would be better, and honestly as I said before – I don’t expect Silvestri to push it that far.

  30. Wes Wagner

    DC@39

    Take a closer look at what happens once they voluntarily make themselves a public political figure and willingly chooses to retain that status.

    Just make sure you stay on public property.

  31. George Phillies

    @29 To whom were you responding?

    The LNC has come close to disaffiliation twice, once in Arizona in 2000 and once in Oregon in recent years. They might do it again, though they appear to be hesitant to advance in this direction based on past experiences.

  32. George Phillies

    @30 and @31 are, however, correct; if the LNC did this the problem would perhaps be solved, though the assumption that the other side would go away might be problematic. You would need a party name for ballot access.

  33. Rod Stern

    ” they appear to be hesitant to advance in this direction based on past experiences.”

    Different circumstance. More likely this time. Two of the members of the state dissident slate are LNC members.

  34. Stewart Flood

    But you have to have grounds for disaffiliation. I am not sure that postponing a convention, regardless of how stupid an act it is, would qualify.

    I would not expect to see 3/4 of the LNC supporting disaffiliation for something like this.

    Oh wait…isn’t this almost EXACTLY WHAT OREGON DID? And Mr Wagner’s comments above would indicate that he might think it is a good idea. Interesting…especially since his side of the Oregon debacle CANCELLED THEIR CONVENTION ALSO. Of course in their case it was clearly in violation of their own bylaws since the convention was in recess to be recalled on that date.

    There. Eat that Wagner. Chew it real slow. You’ve indicated you support doing to them what you didn’t want done to you.

    Everyone else who seems to think that Wagner’s side is completely innocent…look closely at the comparison between the two state’s events. Both executive committees cancelled a convention.

    Look at it closely. I do not believe that the other faction is entirely in the right either, just as I have serious concerns about Nevada electing Mr Pojunis. But the situations are very similar and some people commenting here who supported those “in power” in Oregon are supporting those “not in power” in Nevada. Very interesting…

    But I still say disaffiliation won’t happen. It didn’t in Oregon, and it won’t in Nevada. Not a chance. Remember, the LNC did NOT vote to disaffiliate Oregon.

  35. Rod Stern

    “But you have to have grounds for disaffiliation.”

    Not holding it in 2013 would violate bylaws, and perhaps state law. That would be grounds for disaffiliation.

  36. Rod Stern

    Some differences between NV and OR:

    1) Oregon bylaws, at least as interpreted, made having a convention with a quorum impossible, or practically impossible at least. No such problem in Nevada.

    2) See @46.

  37. S Rowan Wilson, MBA

    Geeesh… how many turds have to be lain in order to get on w/ the convention, get Joe & Kurt out and get on w/ building the party growing the state….

    Sad sad sad and the comments by those of you rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic from other states!

    GET ON W/ THE RUMBLE!!!!!

  38. Rev fatsax

    Rowan, how about let the members choose…why have brett withdraw when joe is the only one breaking faith with the members. Have the convention, let the members vote. All we want is a vote, but that is the one thing joe fears, a fair vote. I believe joe would sacrifice the party before giving up his little business card with his name on it.

  39. Wes Wagner

    SF @47

    Not true… I went to the judicial committee because what the LNC did was recognize a different set of leaders through an improper process.

    I actually conceded in my judicial committee hearings that the LNC Inc might have a reason to consider disaffiliating us, but they need to do it right and through a proper process.

    So in both cases I actually advocated disaffiliation hearings. I fail to see where the hypocrisy is on that point.

    Refer back to the filings and hearing testimony if you can’t remember what happened.

    (FYI — I wanted a disaffiliation hearing to actually have a proper forum to vet out the truth and embarrass the hell out of the 3/4 who voted in favor of it — but I had to hold onto all my evidence that Burke/Starr/Carling planned an illegal bylaw switch of their own w/ the help of LNC officers and Dan Karlan until trial… oh well.)

  40. Thomas L. Knapp

    If the LNC is smart, it will stay completely out of the matter until and unless it has no choice but to become involved — and if it reaches that point, handle it with a legitimate disaffiliation vote, followed by recognition of a new affiliate, instead of with slimy bullshit like the executive committee tried to pull on Oregon.

  41. Stewart Flood

    @49,

    While that might be grounds for action, we are a long way from the end of 2013 and it isn’t cause now.

    @50,

    Nearly impossible does not justify throwing out the rules and canceling the convention. Their term of office was over, by their ByLaws, so they committed a coup by writing new ByLaws outside of the convention.

  42. Stewart Flood

    @54, yes they should stay out of Nevada’s situation. I certainly agree with Ms Wilson that they need to get their convention going. But I do not believe we are rearranging deck chairs.

    How long has Silvestri been the state chair?

  43. Stewart Flood

    @53,

    I do not recall you saying disaffiliation was a viable option. If you did, then I stand corrected on that one point. But the similarities remain.

    I was on the conference call when the LNC heard from both sides. I still stand by the position I took then. Mr Karlan had no evil intent. I had many discussions with him. I did not have any personal discussions regarding Oregon with Mr Burke or others outside of the LNC who were/involved so I cannot comment on their motives or on those of members of your faction.

    But this situation in Nevada does not have to turn into anything that the LNC or the national JC needs to address. There is still an “out”. All they have to do is follow their ByLaws and give proper notice and hold the convention.

    Hopefully that will happen…soon.

  44. wes wagner

    Sf @57

    There was evil intent on the part of the lnc … read the lawsuit filings and the accompanying packs of documents.

    Oregon was a raw blatant attempt at establishing a vassalage by the people you call the hooded key holders. They lied to the lnc … Tyler Smith … who is the Republican party lawyer in oregon … gave the lnc a materially false opinion paper that does not match the letters the Oregon SoS sent him … and there was a plot on the part of Burke Mattson et.al. to use the manufactured quorum problem they created to cram new bylaws in without consent of the governed.

    After the litigation is over I will disclose why they did thus and why the LNC was truly involved.

  45. Stewart Flood

    You start by saying that there was evil intent on the part of the LNC, then you claim that the LNC was lied to and given false information.

    If we were lied to, and we based our position on false information, then how can you say that our decision had evil intent?

    If you can PROVE (which based on what I’ve seen I still seriously doubt) that we were lied to, then prove it. Write it all up, and mail/email it to every member of last term’s LNC. See what reaction you get.

    I doubt opinions will change, because you can fake documents just as easily as anyone else. And by your own admission you disregarded your own ByLaws, claiming the state was the sole authority. I heard you say that during the conference call.

    How can a Libertarian say that?

  46. wes wagner

    SF @59

    Since you claim I can and would fake documents … you will need to request the SoS send you the packet of communications they had with Tyler Smith directly.

  47. Rev fatsax

    Thanks for turning this into the circus thread of oregon lp. I am sure the rest of us were done discussing this nevada issue, and i appologize for being a distraction to your clearly unresolved issues. We also have facebook posts you guys are free to hijack as well.

  48. Rod Stern

    “If the LNC is smart, it will stay completely out of the matter until and unless it has no choice but to become involved — and if it reaches that point, handle it with a legitimate disaffiliation vote, followed by recognition of a new affiliate”

    Agreed.

    And that’s what I think will happen.

  49. Rod Stern

    “While that might be grounds for action, we are a long way from the end of 2013 and it isn’t cause now.”

    True. The LNC does not have sufficient grounds for disaffiliation yet. Give them til the end of 2013, and if they still haven’t had a convention then proceed to disaffiliate.

  50. Rod Stern

    “How long has Silvestri been the state chair?”

    I think ten years is what I have seen said on FB.

    “But this situation in Nevada does not have to turn into anything that the LNC or the national JC needs to address. There is still an “out”. All they have to do is follow their ByLaws and give proper notice and hold the convention.

    Hopefully that will happen…soon.”

    Agreed. And I am even willing to give Silvestri this much credit, I think he will have a convention this year. I don’t think he would be so blatant as to just ignore such a clear requirement, knowing it will get him disaffiliated.

  51. Jill Pyeatt

    I think that Silvestri somehow thought the pedophile discovery could be used against Brett. He also thought the mail incident could be used against Brett. It doesn’t appear that either has done much to take votes from Brett to give to Silvestri. Joe will probably keep looking for some way to destroy Brett’s chances before he sets up another convention date. The man who says very little to the public is blatantly transparent, IMO.

  52. Nino Bonaventura

    I think Silvestri is cooked, but if there is an attempt to hold a convention after it had been scheduled he could use that to deny voting rights at a subsequent convention to anyone who participated in the unauthorized one. The rebel forces need to show some patience, his game is up if they hold on.

  53. Jill Pyeatt

    Yes, I just saw it on FB within the last 5 minutes: JW Marriot on Rampart. I’ll post it as soon as I get an address and confirmation.

  54. Rod Stern

    What do you want the LNC to do exactly? If it is disaffiliation, you need clear grounds.

  55. Stewart Flood

    @60,

    I said could, not would. You are the one who claimed your opponents lied, but you have yet to show proof, saying it will be disclosed after the litigation is over. Why not now? If they lied, and you have proof, how can it hurt your case to prove it?

    But back to Nevada…

    Ten years as chair? That doesn’t sound right. I remember being at an LSLA event in 2008 in Vegas and Jim Duensing was the state chair.

  56. LibertarianGirl

    Jim like myself , like Rev, like most everyone realized Joes shit and quit being his ally as well as opposed him after the fact. But at one time all of us while his friends went along with at least soe of his bullshit

Leave a Reply