I have recently read the thread initiated by Mr. Pavlik on the issue of a “tainted election”. I have also received an email previously containing the same same basic allegations, as ell as an attachement containing an email from Travis Lewin. I have also read the report tendered on the club board regarding the underlying incident.

I have thought a great deal about this, which may be an indicator that I have to much free time. That as it may be, I wish to share my thoughts (my fellow attorneys may call it an analysis). As a matter of full disclosure, I publicly supported Wayne Thompson for President, but I have also maintained a cordial relationship with Joe Pavlik since joining the CCGTCC.

There seems to be a consensus that there was an error in the process of providing the lists to Mr. Thompson with the DNP information. The current board is looking to insure this does not occur again. It is an unfortunate mistake, but there is clearly no malice intended. I find it interesting that the focus has been on the alleged ‘harm’ done to the candidates. Since Mr. Pavlik sent no mailers whatsoever, he was not harmed by the error. The only persons with a valid complaint would be those persons who received a mailing, but were on the DNP list. However, it appears that only three raised the issue. I don't see how Mr. Pavlik has standing to onject or was in any way put at a disadvantage.

Mr. Pavlik filed a claim regarding this issue. It should be noted that there is a specific series of events, including a very specific form that must be completed in the filing of the claim. The email provided to me by Mr. Pavlik, suggests that the claim lacked the necessary specificity, however it was considered nonetheless. By interpreting the rule broadly, perhaps a bit to broadly, they provided Mr. Pavlik greater access to the system then he would otherwise be entitled.

While there are specific references to ethical obligations in both the Constitution and the By-Laws, I think it is sufficient to examine the specific Code of Ethics. There are three relevant provisions that I feel Mr. Lewin could have considered:
(2) To conduct myself so as to bring no discredit to the Club or to impair the prestige of the Club or its members.
(3) To base all of my dealings on the highest plane of justice, fairness and morality.
(5) To take immediate steps to correct any error I make in any transaction.

Since it was an unfortunate error, I don’t think the actual act of using the the address list with the DNP information violated any of these provisions itself. It appears that Mr. Thompson acted in a forthright manner, accepted responsibility, cooperated in the investigation, and did everything that could be reasonably expected to meet these provisions. I would go so far as to say that he met not only the letter, but the spirit of the Code of Ethics.
I agree with Mr. Lewin that there is no need for any further action on this claim. I also agree with Mr. Lewi that unless directed to do so, he has no authority as Ethics Director to examine any alleged violation of the election rules. It is also worthy of note that the limited elections rules outlined in the Constitution or By Laws do not suggest any grounds for a violation or an investigation.

I hope the Board accepts the recommendation of Mr. Lewin. I am confident that Mr. Rosenblum has properly advised Mr. Skelton as to the issues of conflict which may exist for one or more members of the Board.

I do not know the outcome of the election, but I am do not find any support for the suggestion that the election itself has been tainted.

This may be a good time for every member of the CCGTCC to re-read the Code of Ethics. They are a sound set of rules to guide us in our dealings and interactions. After reading many of the posts, I feel it is warranted to remind some among my fellow members of one particular provision:
(11) To refrain from making any unjustified, false, or slanderous comments about other members.

Thank you for your time and patience.