UPDATE: Oregon Republican Party Must Conform to State Law
ORP Legal Counsel Admits Negligence in His Own “Dismissal”
By Thomas K. Armstrong
SALEM, Ore. – Oregon Republican Party (ORP) legal counsel and Congressional District Chairman Tyler Smith has unknowingly admitted to the colossal blunder of ORP Chairman Allen Alley in his “dismissal” of the Oregon Republican Delegation article “Oregon Republican Party Must Conform to State Law – Chairman Alley Booted Off State Central Committee by Own Negligence.”
On a private Facebook group for Oregon Republican precinct committee persons administered by Alley, Smith posted the following comment at 9:34 a.m. July 17:
Smith: Relax people. This guy does not know what he is talking about. This “phony” press release by this guy Kevin Renfrow is stupid and is a farce. He attached only part of the correspondence the ORP had with the Secretary of State. Brandon Danz took care of that long before Allen, or Tyler or Greg were on the job. My August e-mail to them was confirming that it was already done.
Smith asserts that a proper filing was made under Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 248.007 (4) and (5): “[Renfrow, article contributor and press release creator] attached only part of the correspondence the ORP had with the Secretary of State. Brandon Danz took care of that long before Allen, or Tyler or Greg were on the job.”
As a result of a request to the Secretary of State, we received Smith’s complete correspondence. That’s what we posted.
One can only imagine the state of the ORP record keeping for filings required by law. When Smith refers to “only part of the correspondence,” Smith is referring to something separated by many months of which Smith has no personal knowledge – thus his inquiry: “Can you send me a copy of whatever notice Brandon Danz … sent to elections … He told me it was done last summer [2010] but I wanted to have a copy of that for my files as he is now gone.” Isn’t that what lawyers call hearsay?
According to ORS 248.007(5), in order for the ORP to opt out of ORS 248.012 to 248.315, it would have had to file sometime between May 21, 2011 and August 15, 2011. In Smith’s own words, he made it clear – 14 days late – on August 29, 2011, “Please consider this the ‘formal’ written notice/re-notice.” If the notice to the Secretary of State was filed “long before” the Alley administration was “on the job,” then it would be impossible for the proper notice to occur; Alley and his regime took over in January, 2011 – well before May 21, 2011.
Why is the May 21, 2011 significant? Because ORP Bylaws were amended on May 21, 2011; thus, Brandon Danz could not have taken “care” of the notice in accordance with ORS 248.007(5), which requires “…at the same time notice is given under this subsection, a copy of its organizational documents setting forth the manner in which its officers and managing committees are selected or any other manner in which it conducts its affairs.”
(5) Not later than the 274th day before the date of the primary election, a major political party shall notify the Secretary of State in writing whether or not the party intends to be subject to the provisions of ORS 248.012 to 248.315 or whether the party intends to elect precinct committeepersons under subsection (4) of this section. If the major political party does not intend to be subject to the provisions of ORS 248.012 to 248.315 or intends to elect precinct committeepersons under subsection (4) of this section, the party shall file with the Secretary of State, at the same time notice is given under this subsection, a copy of its organizational documents setting forth the manner in which its officers and managing committees are selected or any other manner in which it conducts its affairs.
In Smith’s email, August 29, 2011, to the Secretary of State, he wrote, “[Brandon Danz] told me [the notice] was done last summer but I wanted to have a copy of that for my files as he is gone now.” Brandon Danz may or may not have filed with the Secretary of State in the summer of 2010, but any such filing would not have been in accordance with ORS 248.007(5); it would have addressed the provisions of ORS 248.007(6) – another filing required in even-number years [2010].
In each even-numbered year, a major political party shall file with the Secretary of State a statement indicating that the party is operating subject to ORS 248.012 to 248.315 or a copy of current organizational documents setting forth the manner in which its officers and managing committees are selected or any other manner in which it conducts its affairs. Material described in this subsection shall be filed on the 274th day before the third Tuesday in May of each odd-numbered year.
Mr. Alley, we have the – in the words of your counsel – “formal” notice intending to opt out under ORS 248.007(4) and (5). It was filed late.
Smith is a lawyer. Smith probably studied evidence in law school. You know, things like documents and physical objects that one can see or touch.
Smith probably also studied burden of proof. He who asserts a claim has the burden to prove it. Based on our admittedly limited knowledge of lawyering, we have made a claim and provided documentary evidence of the purported, and admittedly late, filing obtained directly from the Secretary of State. Smith, in a demeaning and condescending manner, claims that we don’t know what we’re talking about and that a timely filing was made to opt the ORP out of the statutory scheme under ORS Chapter 248.
Mr. Smith, if you have the goods, produce them. The burden of proof is now on you.
And while you’re at it Mr. Smith, please disclose the fees you charged the ORP in connection with your purported filing.
—–
Thomas K. Armstrong is an Oregon Republican precinct committee person and House District Captain 45.
Allen Alley has convinced Tyler that we are the enemy, so he is acting accordingly,, we have to show him we are not the enemy, we are just wanting justice and the rights that we deserve. If he can open his eyes and see we are not the enemy then things will change for all of us..
HI,, I talked to Tyler Smith the other week on the phone. I feel that Tyler is a good man. I feel that Allen Alley has an influence on him that is not good, and is distorting his point of views. I dont know Tyler much at all besides the convention and our phone call, but he did strike me as a man with good intentions and that he acts on what he believes to be right. As far as I can tell, Allen Alley is a huge manipulator so I cant fault Tyler for being convinced by Allen about Allens delusions of a conspiracy. I think if we all talk to Tyler, and not behind his back, that we would be more successful in sharing what happened to us, and I think he would then be able to understand our point of view. But right now I bet he feels very attacked and betrayed and that is never a good feeling. You all might know more about Tyler than I do, and maybe I am wrong, maybe he is one of the bad guys, but I would like to think that I am not wrong, and that we should reach out to Tyler.
Remember, the truth shall set us all free. I say we give Tyler a chance.
Thanks so much for letting me rant.. I hope everyone has a wonderful day!!!
FTR: I stopped into the SoS office yesterday and asked for any filing for this current 2-year period. Candy (sp?) pulled the paper file and went through it with me watching. There was only a printout of the 2 emails from Tyler, as far back as 2008. She then told me that the way they operate is that any notification they receive is treated as remaining in effect until the next time they get a notification. So... their office evidently is not going to be looking for notifications about this during each period, and presumably wouldn't take any action against a party if no notification is received. I'm still somewhat confused by the relevant statutes. I'd like to see them rewritten to be clearer.
Thanks Jamie! I wish that this minor (yet major) detail would have been investigated before the publication. I personally have nothing but respect for Tyler Smith, as well as his dad, and will admit that front and center. I was HORRIFIED at first, w. some of these accusations, but now see that Tyler was most likely correct. Either way, talk to the SOS office if you have a "beef", it really has nothing to do with Tyler. L
I am -- and have been -- in communications with the State Elections Office. The fact is, Elections is conferring with the Deputy and the Director. Like I wrote in the article, "This may be a case of first impression in Oregon, so what the ORP must do and when it must do it is somewhat open to interpretation." This is not a routine situation, but shutting down Congressional District Conventions, having unlawful meetings to appoint alternate delegates in place of the duly elected, having these appointed alternates override the majority of the the actual delegates, electing the person who unlawfully appointed them as delegate chair is quite out of the ordinary, too. Although I'm not a lawyer, I researched this for weeks, conferring with a parliamentarian, a lawyer and other experts. If you can find a provision in the ORS that permits a relic notification to be accepted under ORS 248.007, I would be very interested in reading it. For the record, It doesn't matter to me whether the ORP operates under the provisions of ORS 248.012 to 248.315 or ORP Bylaws; I just want Alley and his regime to follow the rules.
Hey, just to clarify: I was only reporting what happened with my visit and expressing my own perception of *why* there might not be an existing expectation by the SoS of a filing every 2 years. I wasn't arguing whether or not that practice was statutorily correct (frankly, the statutes in question seem rather confusing to me) or what ought to be done if it's not. I await further info from the ongoing investigations/discussions. Now I'm off to the SoS office again, this time to obtain a copy of whatever the last actual filing was that they do have. (I wish I'd thought to ask for that last time; I was too focused on "this cycle" and not thinking broadly enough.)
Jamie, you however posted the assumptions of the secretary as if it was the official position of the Oregon Secretary of State. Please do not spread misinformation. As Tom said, we've been researching for weeks and in contact with the Secretary of State's office for some time. They are formulating their official position now.
OK, so here is the "raw data" which I found today: they have no filing of any notification per se, going back to the first file which is 2007. What they have is the bylaws, which have been filed at various times over the years, plus of course the 2 emails from Tyler. The bylaws (at least, the 2 copies at which Candy and I looked today) do contain a statement that the party is not going to comply with the ORS statutes we're discussing here. I will leave it at that and not include any speculation this time. :-X
Conversation from Facebook
So what does the above mean? This:
Tyler Smith correctly points out that Brandon notified SoS shortly after the State Central Committee meeting held in May 2011 of our intention NOT to comply with ORS 248.012-315 AND filed a copy of our newly-amended (and still-current) organizational documents, i.e. our By-Laws. That was well ahead of the deadline of 15 August. The ONLY item that SoS would have in her file regarding the notice is the copy of the By-Laws since that is the only required filing. On 21 August of this year someone, perhaps Mr. Smith himself, will file with SoS another copy of our By-Laws as required of those major political parties who have chosen not to comply with ORS 248.012-.315. Presumably, SoS will discard the copy now on file since she likely is not interested in keeping irrelevant paper on hand.
1) Tyler
Much ado about nothing. To the extent required, ORP has complied with ORS 248. Tyler Smith's memo notwithstanding, your analysis, and the companion "analysis" (more a rant than anything) of Richard Michael, are completely off-base. ORS 248 requires of any major political party only two things: 1) notice of intent to comply(optionally not comply) with 248.012-315 and 2) statement of status or current operational documents. (1) is given on OR BEFORE the 274th day before the biennial primary held in even-numbered years. The statute is silent as to the mode of notification, leading one to infer that notice can be oral or written. IF the major political party gives notice that it intends NOT to comply with the pertinent sections of chapter 248, it must along with the notice FILE a copy of its organizational documents. (2) is given ON the 274th day before the third Tuesday of May of each odd-numbered year.
Excellent work gathering all of this intel!! You guys did so much!
[...] Update (July 17, 8:11 p.m.): ORP legal counsel Tyler Smith comments on this story and admits negligence in his own “dismissal.” His comments and a full rebuttal are posted here: UPDATE: Oregon Republican Party Must Conform to State Law [...]
[...] There is a rebuttal posted as a hyperlink in the article: Tyler Smith’s rebuttal . [...]