Document:LNC Minutes 1 September 1993

From LPedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Minutes of the Meeting of the
Libertarian National Committee
1 September 1993
Salt Lake City, Utah
   Members present:
	Chair	 	Mary T. Gingell
	Vice-Chair 	Steve Dasbach
	Secretary 	Joseph W. Dehn III
	Treasurer 	Bill Redpath
	At Large 	Tamara Clark
			Don Ernsberger
			Steven I. Givot
			Geoff Neale
	Region 1 	Dave Schumacher
	Region 2 	Thea McLean
			George O'Brien
	Region 3 	William W. Hall
	Region 4 	Ron Crickenberger
	Region 5 	Dan Karlan
	Region 6 	Vicki Kirkland
	Region 7 	Maggie Kohls
	Region 8 	Gary E. Johnson

	At Large 	Ken Prazak

   Alternates Present: 
	Region 4	Bobby Emory 

   Also Present:
	National Director 	Stuart Reges
The regular meeting of the Libertarian National Committee was called to order by Chair Mary Gingell at 1:35pm on Wednesday, 1 September 1993 at the Marriott Hotel in Salt Lake City, Utah.
LNC members were invited to have their pictures taken and to attend a Virginia Liberty PAC fundraiser.
Dehn reported that since the last meeting Clay Conrad had resigned as representative from Region 6, with alternate Vicki Kirkland therefore becoming the representative; no new alternate had been appointed.
Karlan pointed out that his name was misspelled in item 30. Redpath pointed out that Laura Stewart's name was misspelled at one location in item 18C. Givot said that during the discussion of answering services (in item 19), Ernsberger had said that Answer America was more expensive than ATS. Givot pointed out that "pejorative" was misspelled on line 384 of the transcript of item 30C. Neale pointed out that the words following line 640 of the transcript were spoken by Givot, not Gingell. There was no objection to making these changes.
Givot moved that the word "bizarre" be deleted from the introduction to item 30C; the motion passed on a voice vote.

The minutes as amended were approved on a voice vote.

Crickenberger asked that Sal Gazetta, a campaign consultant, be permited to address the committee immediately following the setting of the agenda. Karlan asked that consideration of an item regarding records be added as item 12A for 10 minutes. Givot asked for 5 minutes to be allocated out of the Marketing Area report as item 18A for a resolution recognizing people who worked on the shadow cabinet; for an additional 10 minutes as item 18B for a motion to provide reimbursement of expenses; for 5 minutes as item 17A for a discussion of the analysis of 800 number calls; and for 10 minutes as item 11A for a discussion of inappropriate reimbursements. Ernsberger asked that 10 minutes be allocated as item 25A for discussion of a "persuasive language task force". O'Brien asked for time for a resolution concerning a court case involving Libertarians; Gingell suggested adding it at the end as item 27 for 5 minutes. These changes were made without objection.
Givot moved to add a discussion of the performance of the Secretary as item 10A; the motion failed on a voice vote.

Gazetta said he was involved with campaigns to win, and said there were many things the national LP could do if we wanted to help our candidates win. He said from what he had been hearing from LP members the national party needs to do a better job of communicating with candidates about such support. He said unless we can convince people we are working to win they will not support us, and we should concentrate on winning first and then educating people about our ideas.
Gingell reviewed the paperwork that had been distributed up to that point.
Dehn provided a written report [Attachment A].
There was a discussion of distribution of Executive Committee minutes. Ernsberger and Givot said they were not useful if they were distributed in batches just before the LNC meeting. Dehn pointed out that although the policy manual specifies that minutes be kept of the meetings, and that the EC report in writing to the LNC, there is no requirement for the minutes themselves to be distributed to anybody. O'Brien suggested that reports of EC activity could be posted separately from actual minutes.

Givot moved to amend LNCPM VII.4.A to add, after "Minutes shall be kept of Executive Committee meetings", ", shall be reviewed and approved by the Executive Committee, and shall be distributed to all LNC members and alternates within one week of such approval". In reply to a question from Johnson, Givot said the review and approval of minutes would most likely be done at the following meeting, but that he trusts the EC to do it in a timely manner. Clark moved to add "and area managers" after "alternates"; there was no objection. Givot noted that it is still not specified who should be doing the minutes, but that this motion will make it clear that it is the responsibility of the chair of the EC to see that someone does them. Givot's motion passed on a voice vote.

Gingell offered to answer questions; there were none.
Dasbach had no separate report as Vice Chair.
Dehn had no separate report as Secretary.
Redpath provided financial statements for June and July [Attachment C]. He reported a book balance immediately prior to 30 August of about $3,000; he said that after taking into account money being deposited, current accounts payable, and amounts past due the balance would be about negative $21,000. Redpath and Reges commented on the performance of current fundraising letters. Dehn pointed out that subtracting accounts payable from current cash does not give a projection of a balance at any actual time. Redpath thanked Reges for making the financial statements possible. In reply to a suggestion from O'Brien regarding better cash forcasting, Redpath said he would pass it on to the next Treasurer.
Givot moved to censure the Chair for approving reimbursement for printing of brochures that were to be used during the Marrou/Lord campaign; he said the brochures were printed too late to be used as intended. Dehn said that it was he who had requested and received the reimbursement, that he had paid for the printing of 15,000 brochures, that he had delivered 5,000 to various representatives of MLC who seemed happy to have them at the time, that he was reimbursed for only the 1/3 of the printing bill attributable to the copies delivered to MLC, and that he had donated the other 2/3 to the Colorado LP which also seemed happy to use them.
Givot said that since it now appeared that Dehn was reimbursed for money he spent on items that were put to use by the party, he would withdraw his motion; he commented that if the EC did not have a policy of restricting access to reimbursement records this would not have come up.

No separate report.
Karlan moved:
All records of the Party shall be made available to any LNC member upon written request to the N.D.
Each request shall identify the items or category of items being requested.

The N.D. shall notify the appropriate area manager or the Chair (if the ND cannot identify the appropriate area manager) of each such request within 5 working days of its receipt.

The N.D. shall not begin to process any such request until 5 working days of such notification, so as to facilitate communications between the individual making the request and the appropriate Area Manager or the Chair.

Such requests may only be met with copies of records -- never with originals.

In the event that the National Director determines that the cost of duplication and delivery shall not exceed $10.00, the N.D. shall provide the requested items at no charge.

In all other cases, the N.D. shall provide the individual making the request with an estimate of these costs and the required items shall be provided only if the requesting party agrees to pay all costs in excess of $10.00. Only one copy of any requested item will be provided.

There was a discussion of the meaning of this, points including that it might allow access to contributor information and that it could impose excessive delays in getting simple information.
Dehn explained that the current policy, which was codified by the Executive Committee in response to a specific controversial request, was that requests are directed to the manager in charge of the type of information involved, as that person is in the best position to judge how to effectively answer the question while balancing such considerations as cost and confidentiality. If the inquirer is not satisfied by this, he or she can appeal to the Executive Committee; since controversial cases are so infrequent, the EC felt that this procedure would make more sense than setting up detailed rules in advance.

In reply to a question from Crickenberger about the request which triggered the policy, Dehn explained that it was a request from Givot for access to the Chair's expense reports for telephone bills. Under the policy, Givot was directed to the Treasurer, who was able to provide the information needed without providing actual copies of the bills. He said this showed that the current policy was working and did not need to be changed.

Reges said it was his understanding that the office was allowed to provide LNC members with financial information at the accounting system account level. Dehn said that the office can provide LNC members with any normal reports; the policy in question is intended to deal with extraordinary requests without putting the burden on the office staff of deciding which requests should be honored.

Dasbach moved to refer the question to the next LNC; the motion to refer passed on a voice vote.

Reges provided a written report [Attachment D]. He reported that he was now working 3/4 time, that Bill Winter had been hired as Director of Communications, that Renee Thompson was switching to the data entry position, that Tonya Hamilton had been hired for the front office position, and that Steve Gallant understands that he may or may not have a position under a new Director. He reported on new and replaced hardware and software, including a line printer, address correction and ZIP+4 bar coding system, and a Macintosh for Bill Winter. He reported that the office lease had been extended two months to the end of February 1994 to allow time for the new Director to take charge of the office move. He noted that he is distributing an "open letter" to convention delegates .
There was no report from the Auditor.
Hall reported that he had worked on various contracts, including ones for petitioners and for the talk show placement activity. He reported that funds had been expended on two lawsuits: the Delaware case which the state party now wants to drop but on which $2,000 in expenses, the amount we agreed to provide, have already been incurred, and a case in South Carolina.
Neale said that things were going well with the current convention. He explained that Tamara Clark had been substituted as keynote speaker because Russell Means had gone incommunicado.
Karlan provided copies of the bid specifications for 1996 [Attachment E]. He reported that three bids were received, for Dallas, Jacksonville, and Reno/Sparks, but that only the first, submitted by Bob Waldrop, was complete and "professional". He moved that the LNC accept this bid, and recommended that the new LNC reaffirm this decision after the convention.

There was a discussion of whether this should be decided at this meeting. Points in favor included that it was announced that the decision would be made at this meeting, that there is no point in deferring a decision if we already know who is interested and one is clearly the best, and that it is necessary that the date and location be set to allow ballot access lawsuits to be filed. Points against included that LNC members had not had a chance to review the material, that after the convention it will be clearer what kind of job Waldrop can do, that the proposal had not been discussed with Dallas area Libertarians, and that the bid is not actually for Dallas but for a suburb with bad transportation.

Givot moved to substitute that the question be referred to the new LNC with a strong recommendation that a selection be made at their first meeting. The motion to substitute passed with 8 in favor and 5 opposed; the main motion passed on a voice vote.

Neale reported that 523 preregistration packages had been sold for the current convention, that it looked like it would be a success for Waldrop, that C-SPAN was planning to record three talks, that insurance had been purchased, that there was interest in a convention "highlights" video, and that there has been some attention from the media. In reply to questions about finances, Givot explained that we should be getting about $8,000 from Waldrop under our contract and that fundraising is done by and for the benefit of the party, and Neale estimated that Waldrop had incurred about $4,000 or $5,000 in expenses that would be charged to us.

Karlan said that bidders for 1996 had been reassured that a decision would be made now, and that Waldrop was concerned about the possibility of new bids being accepted after his proposal has been seen. Neale said that if the bidding process was reopened anyone including Waldrop would be allowed to submit a completely different bid.

Ayres provided a written area report [Attachment B] and a report on surveys to new and lapsed members [Attachment F]. McLean showed a sample of bears we are selling for $20.
In reply to comment by Ernsberger about a mailing which promised a "Libertarian budget" document which was never produced, Reges reported that an apology letter had been sent out. In response to a comment by Ernsbergre that the "Penny bill" mailing arrived too late for action concerning the hearing, Reges said the letter was actually distributed on schedule but the problem was that the letter made the hearing appear to be the main point when actually it wasn't.

Redpath moved that the Development Area manager appoint someone to start soliciting money from PACs. Various members commented that area managers should not be directed in such a manner and that this might be something more appropriately done by candidates. Redpath withdrew his motion.

There was a discussion of the small amount of direct mail prospecting that has been done recently. Ernsberger said that at each meeting there is a report about possible outreach mailings but that nothing ever is actually done, and this is hurting our membership numbers.

Givot said that Ernsberger had stated at the previous meeting that no analysis had been done of 800 number calls, but he had in fact done such analysis during the Marrou/Lord campaign, finding spikes in activity corresponding to times when the candidates were on the air and when we advertised on Headline News, and that he was willing to keep doing such analysis if the data about calls and appearances was provided to him.
Ernsberger responded that his comments at the April meeting were concerned with the lack of tracking at that time, in particular of response to the people placed by our talk show contractor.

Clark provided a written report [Attachment G]. She said that with Bill Winter in the office a lot of new things were being implemented and adjusted. She said we are still learning how to use the shadow cabinet: sometimes cabinet members are not available when we want them, sometimes they are not experts in the particular topic we want to address, sometimes their comments are not completely libertarian; there has been mild interest from the media so far.
She reported that Winter is working on a new media database and on literature. She said that although there had been some controversy resulting from differences in the way people work, she was happy with the job that Winter has been doing.

She said that we need to find another member of Congress to sponsor the "Penny bills" since Penny is retiring.

She reported that the new talk show contractor was now starting up after some trouble getting names of possible guests; a report from the contractor was distributed [Attachment H].

She showed a prototype of a new media kit and said that once it is completed and approved it would be test marketed in selected areas.

Ernsberger said that Winter would be needing a scanner.

Givot moved:
Whereas, the selection of the Shadow Cabinet is an critical task for the Libertarian Party, and
Whereas, Jo Jorgensen and Michael Tanner did an excellent job in advancing that task from December through April, and

Whereas, Bill Evers did an excellent job in advancing that task from February through June, and

Whereas, Tamara Clark did an excellent job in advancing that task from April through June, and

Whereas, the Libertarian Party, through LP News, has acknowledged the contribution of Tamara Clark and Bill Evers but failed to mention any contribution of Jo Jorgensen or Michael Tanner, and

Whereas, LP Chair Mary Gingell has written, "Let's not point out failure, but reward success. Let's be grateful for the work that does get done by the small but dedicated cadre of national LP activists." And,

Whereas, providing recognition is an appropriate way to reward success and to express gratitude, and

Whereas, all four of these individuals deserve full recognition and praise for their efforts in bringing this project to completion,

Be it resolved that the Libertarian National Committee acknowledges the contributions of Tamara Clark, Bill Evers, Jo Jorgensen, and Michael Tanner to the successful selection of the Libertarian Party Shadow Cabinet and that the Committee expresses its gratitude to each of these individuals for his or her invaluable contribution to this effort.

Dasbach moved to delete the fifth paragraph.
Without objection, Evers was permitted to address the committee. He said he was pleased to have had the opportunity to work on this project and that although he was always glad to be thanked it was more important to give encouragement to Bill Winter who is now responsible for it.

The motion to delete the fifth paragraph passed with 9 in favor and 3 opposed.

Kirkland moved to change "an" to "a" in the first sentence; there was no objection.

Dehn said the reason that Evers was acknowledged in LP News was that he was the one who actually put the cabinet together. He said if Givot was really interested in acknowledging everyone involved in the project he would have included Geoff Neale who was first assigned to it after the December meeting and who did more than Tanner. He said Tanner and Jorgensen had basically failed on the project, coming up with a list of people who were not qualified or who clearly would not accept the appointment; the only names included in Tanner's list that were possible were obvious ones that anyone could have thought of. He said Evers had saved the project by stepping in and taking over, identifying new possibilities, doing the work of actually recruiting the people, and then working with Bill Winter on the initial releases. He said if Givot wanted the record to show that Tanner had not been mentioned in LP News, everyone should also remember the messages that Givot publicly posted on LPUS belittling Evers' contributions.

Dasbach said that the procedures that Tanner and Evers had been asked to work under were different and that this could explain some of the difference in results. Givot said that Dehn could not know how things would have proceeded if Jorgensen and Tanner had continued on the project and that Evers had thanked Jorgensen and Tanner for their work.

The resolution as amended passed on a voice vote. Dehn asked that his "no" vote be recorded, saying that the resolution unfairly treats the work of Tanner and Evers as comparable.

The meeting was recessed at 4:31pm and reconvened at 4:43pm.

Givot moved:
Whereas, the LNC has a long-standing policy for reimbursement of volunteer's out-of-pocket expenses for budgeted items which are authorized by the overseeing area manager, and
Whereas, from January, 1993, to April, 1993, Steven Givot was assigned to various projects by Jo Jorgensen, his overseeing area manager, and

Whereas, Givot incurred out-of-pocket expenses relating to these authorized and budgeted projects, in the amount of $870.90, and

Whereas, Givot submitted detailed itemization of these expenses for reimbursement on May 2, 1993, and

Whereas, Givot's overseeing area manager, Jo Jorgensen, was never consulted to determine whether these expenses were appropriate or authorized and, after a delay of more than two months, on July 7, 1993, Givot was given a partial reimbursement of $349.42, authorized by Tamara Clark, and

Whereas, Tamara Clark had then (and has now) no knowledge as to whether the expenses submitted by Givot were authorized by his area manager, Jo Jorgensen, and bona fide, and Tamara Clark made no attempt to contact Jo Jorgensen to obtain such knowledge which would be required to properly review Givot's reimbursement request, and

Whereas, in making the partial payment to Givot, Tamara Clark invited Givot to provide such additional information as might be available to justify a more complete reimbursement, and

Whereas, on July 16, 1993, Givot sent Tamara Clark the additional information in response to her request, to which Tamara Clark never responded, and

Whereas, in response to certain concerns expressed by Tamara Clark, Givot proposed to reduce his reimbursement claim by $67.50, leaving a balance due of $430.98, and

Whereas, LP National Director Stuart Reges has informed Givot that Tamara Clark's decision may be appealed to either the Executive Committee or the LNC, and

Whereas, Givot has elected to appeal Tamara Clark's decision to the LNC, and

Whereas, Givot has submitted a notarized statement from Jo Jorgensen which indicates that the amounts claimed by Givot (1) were spent on budgeted items, (2) were within his budget authority granted by her, and (3) appear to her to be reasonable and appropriate expenditure for Givot to complete his assigned tasks, and

Whereas, payment to Givot should have been made months ago,

Be it resolved that the LNC directs the LP National Director to issue payment to Steven Givot in the amount of $430.98 no later than September 15, 1993.

Givot said there actually is no notarized statement and that Clark has informed him that she never received his message of 16 July so her lack of response to it is not an issue. He said the issue is whether a volunteer working on a project should be reimbursed for budgeted expenses. He said if there is objection based on poor performance, that should be handled by dismissing the volunteer but that as long as the volunteer is still working on the project with the approval of the area manager he deserves reimbursement.
Clark moved to delete the sixth paragraph; there was no objection.

Clark explained that Givot had submitted the request to her after she took over as area manager from Jorgensen, that the request had not made clear what projects the expenses were for and the purpose of the phone calls included in the request, that she had contacted Jorgensen to get more information, and that Jorgensen had said she didn't know. In response to a question from Dasbach she said that even after seeing Givot's message of 16 July she would stand by her recommended reimbursement amount.

Schumacher moved to table this item; the motion passed on a voice vote.

O'Brien moved to suspend the rules to consider this item; the motion passed on a voice vote.
Clark moved:

The Libertarian National Committee hereby resolves to investigate, support, and assist in the defense of Libertarian Party members Karen and Scott Scarborough, in their efforts to overturn by appeal their unjust conviction for perjury and conspiracy to obstruct justice, after asserting to the grand jury that they had no knowledge of the events regarding an incendiary device placed in the mail bin at the Royal Oak, Michigan post office on April 16, 1990. The foundation of the government's case against Karen and Scott consisted of manufactured and illegally obtained evidence, and rested primarily on the Libertarian objections to the income tax and the IRS. Thus All Libertarians stand accused of approval of such acts if the conviction of the Scarboroughs is allowed to stand.
Without objection John Robertson was permitted to address the committee. He said he had attended one day of the trial and that it was clearly biased. He also noted that Karen Scarborough is ill and imprisonment could cause her death.
There was a discussion of the appropriateness of such a motion. Points in favor included the desirability of acting to support individuals who are working for liberty and of taking a stand against miscarriages of justice. Points against included that we don't really know the facts of the case, that there should be review by our legal counsel before we get involved in something like this, that the resolution implies financial expenditures that we are not in a position to afford, that the actions such as investigation are not the job of a political party.

Clark withdrew her motion.

Hall said he was familiar with the case and that if we do anything it should be on the basis that people were targetted as part of a witchhunt against the LP.

Without objection Karen Scarborough was permitted to address the committee. She said she and her husband were convicted on the basis of testimony of a convicted felon who was under pressure from the government. She said the government used as evidence fabricated transcripts of an unintelligible tape. She said one of the major reasons they were being persecuted is their involvement in the LP of Michigan, and that her main concern now is that the government is going to try to get them to implicate other Libertarians.

Givot moved that the matter be referred to our general counsel for a recommendation to the new LNC; the motion passed on a voice vote.

Givot moved to take this item from the table; the motion passed on a voice vote.
Givot noted that his request excluded any time over 15 minutes on calls to Jo Jorgensen, and that he had reduced his request to account for a certain amount of non-party business in calls to access LPUS.

Schumacher moved to substitute simply:

The LNC directs the LP National Director to issue payment to Steven Givot in the amount of $430.98 no later than September 15, 1993 for expenses.
The motion to substitute passed on a voice vote.
In response to a question from Dehn, Clark said she still stood by the original amount.

Redpath moved to reduce the amount to $215.49, noting that Givot did burn some of his work. Givot said that what he burned was not really important. Clark said she did not receive any of the material Givot had been working on when she took over.

The motion to reduce the amount passed with 8 in favor and 4 against.

The main motion passed on a show of hands, with Givot abstaining.

Kohls reported that the committee had failed to produce a Program. She said the committee would pass on its initial draft to the next Program Committee if and when one is appointed.
Evers reported that the APRC has been reviewing new literature including the revisions to Liberty Today and that the committee was keeping up on its work. Gingell said that the APRC was performing beyond the call of duty, often providing 24 hour turnaround.
No separate report.
No separate report.
Redpath reported that Arizona has about 5500 registered Libertarians and needs about 7500 more; 51-96 has been talking about doing a registration drive but doesn't seem to be functioning and may be disbanded.
He reported that the Indiana petition drive is about half done with 25,000 gross signatures; that Maryland has been collecting signatures but we are not involved because the petition won't actually qualify anyone for the ballot; that about 28,000 signatures have been collected in Michigan with about 20,000 to go; that the bill recently signed by the governor in Nevada, thanks to Tamara Clark, will give us essentially permanent status; that New Mexico is doing an all-volunteer drive; that the lawsuit in North Carolina is dragging on but that the state expects to lose in the end; that a lawsuit is in progress in West Virginia concerning the deadline for the petition for governor; and that Richard Winger has offered $4,000 toward a Wyoming ballot drive if we pay the remainder of what is needed to qualify for 1994 and someone runs for governor, Wyoming being the only state other than Florida where no third party candidate has been able to qualify for governor in recent years.

He reiterated the importance of establishing the date and location of the 1996 convention so that lawsuits concerning various problem states can be undertaken.

He outlined a number of opportunities for establishing ballot status in 1994, saying that if everything goes right we could wind up with 27 states qualified for 1996. If so, of the remaining states only five would be "hard": Florida, Illinois, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia.

He said he would not be running for another term on the LNC and would be resigning as ballot access chair.

Joseph Knight provided a written report [Attachment I].
Crickenberger provided a written report [Attachment J].
Givot reported on the "Equalizer Project". He received demo packages which he passed on to other volunteers but little time has been available for evaluation. Given that funds do not appear to be available to allow the purchase of the hardware he originally envisioned for this project, and the desireability of allowing a new Director to get into place before a decision is made to offer additional services out of the office, he recommended that the project not proceed at this point. He said that if a new Director is in place and the cash available by December a decision to go ahead could be made; otherwise it will be too late to do for the 1994 election.

Crickenberger reported that he has a campaign manual in the works. He also suggested that the office might take on the task of evaluating PACs that could be approached for campaign contributions.

Dasbach noted the importance of making sure that the office is performing its basic functions before adding new ones.

Givot moved to suspend the rules to consider a motion concerning strategic planning. The motion failed on a voice vote.

Ernsberger moved:
Be it resolved by the Libertarian National Committee that a Persuasive Language Task Force be appointed. The sole purpose of said task force is to be to propose changes in language to the existing Libertarian Party Platform in order to give the text a more persuasive, positive ring without in any way changing the existing meaning. The task force is to convey its recommendations to the next national convention's platform committee at least four months before the next national convention. The task force will consist of three members.
Neale moved to delete the word "existing" and change "ring" to "emphasis"; there was no objection. Neale moved to delete "sole" and insert "solicit, review, and" before "propose"; the motion failed on a show of hands. Karlan moved to delete "to be"; there was no objection.
The main motion failed on a voice vote.

Schumacher (Region 1) had no report; his dog ate his homework.
McLean (Region 2) provided a written report [Attachment K].

Hall (Region 3) provided a written report [Attachment L].

Crickenberger (Region 4) said his region was doing so well it would probably have to give up a state.

Karlan (Region 5) had no report.

Kirkland (Region 6) reported on the appointment of Miriam Luce to the NH liquor commission, and on candidates running in New York.

Kohl (Region 7) said that Schumacher's dog ate her homework too.

Johnson (Region 8) had no report.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:30pm.
Respectfully submitted,

Joseph W. Dehn III,

Attachments distributed prior to the meeting
A. Administration Area Report
B. Development Area Report
Attachments distributed at the meeting
C. Financial Statements
D. Headquarters Report
E. Bid Specifications for 1996
F. Report on Surveys to Members
G. Marketing Area Report
H. Report from Talk Show Contractor
I. Field Organizing Report
J. Campaign '93 Report
K. Region 2 Report
L. Region 3 Report