Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
[Editor: Let's be perfectly clear here: the PCs in every district are the ones who ELECT their boards. These boards stay in place unless removed according to the Bylaws. PCs cannot group up and stampede the sitting board because they don't like the Chairman or the Secretary or the entire board. There is a process for removal and it was NOT followed in Navajo County. Sylvia Allen and Jonathan Lines have usurped the authority of the sitting Board of the Navajo County Republican Committee for only one reason: that board favored the RECALL OF AZGOP CHAIRMAN JONATHAN LINES and Allen didn't. She gets to have her opinion but she DOES NOT GET TO HAVE THE ENTIRETY of the NCRC. Of all the shameless activities we have seen from Robert Graham and Jonathan Lines for the past five years, this takes the cake. If they get away with this, every district is in peril of having Lines or future Chairmen do the same to YOUR district. STAND UP, DISTRICT CHAIRS. Show some backbone. It doesn't matter whether you were for or against the election of Lines or the recall of him. This goes well beyond that issue. This goes to TYRANNY. It sets a precedent and if you stand for this, the Republican party in Arizona is no better than the democrats - are worse - and no better than any third world dictatorship.]
We challenge the statement by Chairman Lines and AZGOP General Council, recognizing the new NCRC leadership:
Let’s get this cleared up once and for all: because the AZGOP, their lawyers (McCAIN) and Sylvia Allen have decided (emphasis added) that the illegal meeting that was held to remove the existing NCRC officers ….. was indeed, legal.
The NCRC Bylaws were clearly violated in this meeting Call and continue to be, no matter what their conclusion is. We have stated many times, and put in writing, a copy of the Bylaws [what] the meeting procedures [are] that the committee MUST follow. That includes the AZGOP and its Chairman and Executive Committee.
Because the AZGOP and Chairman Lines have refused to hand over records to the duly elected secretary and treasurer, since January 2017, and have gotten away with it because the AZGOP members have not stood up and demanded (emphasis added) the AZGOP committee follow the law, they’ve clearly been given a mandate to do whatever it is they deem necessary to achieve their goal and that is to purge the party of all conservative gop members. After all, we are not McCain supporters. [Get rid of Trump by any means necessary - same tactic.]
We will continue this fight on the principle of the rule of law…. that no man is above the law, certainly not Chairman Lines, a puppet of McCain and his council, the real power behind the AZGOP, who have withdrawn their financial support due to the recent recall effort to remove Lines.
This is as corrupt a committee as you’ll ever encounter, so who would, in their right mind, want to be a part of it other than supporting our President, who truly encompasses our passion for American values and is willing to fight for us all. We will do the same here in Navajo county.
STEVE SLATON, CHAIRMAN NCRC
[Well, District Chairs, what are you going to do about this? Those who turn their heads away are no better than Lines and Allen. If you need Chairman Slaton's contact information, please email us using the Contact Us tab.]
I'd suggest since at this point it seems as though the AZGOP isn't carrying out its' duties to the Membership and Office holders that the PC's who attend the January meeting should all Stand Up and Demand Publicly that Lines Resigns and hold a Special Election to replace him, that is if it's allowed by the Rules to do so, or does it really matter since the Rules seem to be Toothless. The LD that Allen pretends to represent must find someone to run and support to remove her and this I suggest happens through out the State. God Bless You All; Clair VAN Steenwyk
It most certainly IS allowed by the bylaws, and I quote: "An elective officer of the state committee may be removed at any time by a vote to that effect by the membership of the state committee..."
That means that any member of the state committee may move that the membership vote to remove any elective official at any meeting of the state committee.
(Do not confuse that with the special meeting I was organizing from March to September of this year. A special meeting must be called by the membership, in order to remove the chairman between regular meetings of the state committee, and it requires the signatures of more than 20% of the membership of the state committee to authorize such a meeting.)
Regular meetings do NOT require signatures. Just be there and get up and move to remove the elective officer -- OR officers! -- of your choice. And the motion must be seconded.
By the way. Any members of the state committee who does not understand why anyone would want to remove the current chairman need only look to the bylaws change that the current chairman recently submitted. It increases the number of signatures required to guarantee a special meeting to remove from 20%+ 1 of the total membership of the state committee to 50%+1 of the total membership. That number would make it very very difficult to organize a special meeting. In my view, shamelessness doesn't get any more barefaced than a current chair submitting a bylaw change to help himself stave off any future attempts to remove him or her.
Question: What type of chairman do you want for our state party? Do you want one who would do anything he or she can to prevent a large portion of the state committee from removing him or her? Or would you prefer a person whose sense of honor would not permit him (or her) to do anything but step down in the face of persistent cries for his (or her) removal?
That is really the question, here. No writer of bylaws ever envisioned a chairman maintaining an adversarial position against the membership. That is not the intended spirit of any organization. By laws are there to simply lay down patterns of behavior that the body believes will best order its activities. the writers of bylaws assumed, in writing the bylaws, that all elective officials would understand that they are elected as the servant of the membership, to do a creditable job of representing the membership to the outside world, to oversee the administration of the party's offices. In other words, to handle things for the true masters--the members of the state committee. Any chairman who does not act accordingly, needs to be removed posthaste.
That is why the bylaws stipulate removal "at any time" by a vote to that effect by the membership of the state committee. In other words, no other requirements need be met. The only requirement is that the membership wishes to hold a vote to remove. The simplicity of this requirement makes clear that the state party never envisioned the state chairman as the indispensible person, or as a hegemon. NO. The party envisioned chairmen as interchangeable persons who can be elected and UNelected, at will, by the state committee membership.
Just thinking. In the NCRC bylaws Slaton said it takes a proper call (which he claims was not done because they bypassed the NCRC Secretary just as Lines is doing) and at least one member of the NCRC Board must be in attendance which Slaton in his earlier letter said none attended. Therefore, it seems to me those were the bylaws in effect at the time and they were violated.
2. Removing a chairman at the district level is not necessarily the same as recalling the state chairman (see #1) Apparently, the NCRC bylaws did not have the same removal or recall language as you quote and I never saw such language in bylaws for political districts. You are writing about state bylaws but they were working under district bylaws.
3. If Sylvia Allen violated the bylaws of NCRC, whether anyone agrees they were proper or not (the district PCs had to have voted them in so they were the bylaws) then I hardly see how Lines could bow down and kiss her feet on what she wanted.
4. I agree that this sets a precedent that will not be good for party politics in the future. It's inherently wrong and dishonest. I'd look at state statute to see if there is any language about this which I just thought about while writing this.
I hope my new reply corrects the misconception I created by not specifying what I was referring to in Van Steenwyck's post. I agree that it's clear Sylvia Allen violated the bylaws of the NCRC. As I said in my new reply, I see it as a hijacking of the committee. Yes, it sets a precedent which takes us to a new low in state AZGOP politics, in my view. If anyone doubts that purging of conservatives is going on, one need look no farther, in my opinion, than NCRC's purging of Steve Slaton and Karen McKean. If the membership of the state committee takes this lying down, it's going to be Katie bar the door!,I believe.
In my opinion, actions such as this one are signals of even worse actions to come, and the only people who can stop the slide are the ones kept busy taking the brunt of the punishment.
At this point, that group appears to me to be getting larger. At least I think so, because I believe that actions such as this one should now unite not only the beleaguered conservatives in the state committee, but the many others who have been voting with the leadership, because they could not bring themselves to believe it when conservatives complained of ill treatment. After this, in my opinion,it would be hard to imagine what more one would need, in order to conclude that the leadership has taken leave of all propriety and is operating as an entity completely independent of any constraints in the by laws.
I believe it's time to just remove those in office who've violated the Rules / By Laws and use them to do it at the State meeting, however don't do it in such a way as to attract so much attention they block the effort, believe this can be done just need a good strategy to do it. God Bless You; Clair VAN Steenwyk
I HAVE TO CORRECT A POSSIBLE MISCONCEPTION I CREATED IN MY REPLY ABOVE. I WAS RESPONDING TO A SINGLE LINE IN VAN STEENWICK'S POST: He said, "PC's who attend the January meeting should all Stand Up and Demand Publicly that Lines Resigns and hold a Special Election to replace him, that is if it's allowed by the Rules to do so..." I agree with that sentiment. To me, what happened in Navajo County can only be described as bullying and a hijacking of the county committee with the approval and assistance of the leadership. This simply HAS to be the final straw, perched atop what in my view is an entire haystack of transgressions. We all know about them. We've all watched, as repeated affronts have become more egregious, over time. This situation would be farcical, if it were not so serious. I have felt, for a long time, that far too many people are being treated as fools--not just conservative state committeemen and PCs, but every single person involved in the party, and--most of all--the Republican voters, who are becoming independents in droves, because they can't figure out what is happening to the Grand Old Party.
So I was answering that YES, the bylaws make clear that chairmen, like all elective officers, are interchangeable. They can be removed "at any time" by a vote by the state committee. There is plenty of cause for us to want to do this, in my view. But, thankfully, we don't need cause, because the by laws save us from the necessity of fighting to remove elective officials. That would be a nightmare piled on top a nightmare.
I apologize for my lack of clarity. I hope my initial post reads more cogently, now.
Thank you, Marianne. That does clear up quite a bit of confusion. We agree 100% that state committeemen should rise up and demand a resignation from Lines and if he doesn't proffer one, and he won't, vote him out of office!
The Republican Party is made of Voters and of course those who do all the Volunteering such as PC's and without the Volunteers there really is no Party, so consider who has the Real Power in this Dispute and Exercise It. God Bless You All; Clair VAN Steenwyk
Lawlessness and greed seems to run right through the Allen family in Snowflake. The total lack of integrity is atrocious. Which district is next? Clair has the right idea: state committeemen organize and hold a revolt in the name of decency which seems to be a foreign concept among some in the republican party. Esp. the elected ones at any level. I no longer tell anyone I'm a republican and soon, it may be that I'm not. I hear there is another party starting: the MAGA Party. If all of Trump's supporters started that he would be our next president again and I wonder what the Constitution says about term limits for those who change parties mid-stream.
What more need be said folks? Undoing this Establishment Elite Ruling Class power grab in Navajo County might be challenging but since when has anything that stands against tyranny been easy? And what is being attempted in Navajo County is blatant tyranny.
If we are to take back the Party, we have to do it county by county. Then the State Party will follow.
Hi Tom; Don't believe you have the time and in some counties the support to do it and therefore removing the Head at the State will do two things one send the message out to those who are presently violating the Rules & Two give those within those area some encouragement knowing they have the support from the Top to get it done.
God Bless You; Clair VAN Steenwyk