Most, if not all, of us have heard about charges made against our Chairman, Mr. Jeff Frederick, although very few mave actually seen the charges. Understandably, people are beginning to line up for or against a vote to remove Mr. Frederick on April 4th. State Central members will undoubtedly be lobbied to vote one way or the other between now and then. Unfortunately, most people will be making up thrir minds about the seriousness and the veracity of the charges with very little factual evidence to guide them. I therefore propose the following steps we can all take in order to come up with a solution that takes fairness to individuals into account and at the same time the long term health of the Party.
1. Pray and urge members of State Central to pray, that this decision will be undertaken with the highest of motivations and seriousness.
2. Urge the State Central to find a truly unbiased man or woman of stature who can look into the charges and independently resolve any differences of views on what the facts are and how they relate to Party rules, State law, or any other ethical or legal standard. This is not an issue that State Central members should take lightly or with any doubt in their mind. There is a reason that those who wrote the Party Plan required a 3/4 supermajority to remove. They obviosly had in mind that it would be used only in the most serious and clear-cut cases. Like impeachment or recall, removal is the political equivalent of the death penalty.
Some might think that there is not enough time to have an outside, independent look. It is true that time is short and any effort would have to be made very, very soon. On the other hand, whatever documentation there is to support the charges must be readily available. Presumably those who signed the letter urging Mr. Frederick to resign have looked over the documentation and have verified it to their satisfaction. Handing it over to a third party seems to be something that could happen in a matter of a few days at most. Both sides to this dispute would presumably be willing, even eager, to have all facts brought out into the light of day, because they both believe presumably that they are in the right.
I urge everyone is reading this to respond either supporting the two recommendations listed above or explaining why they are unworkable.