Article archive / June 1, 2011
Originally published: . Volume 2, No. 10. Source pages: 2.
Times publisher received an email on May 23, from an anonymous individual containing a letter from LPA Executive Council to LAMP. The sender acknowledged using a pseudo name but did not explain the reason for the email.
The letter, dated May 19, was addressed to John Bolter, PhD, MP. In the text of the letter, signed by the Executive Council of the LPA, the authors wrote that LPA is having “an unfortunate and very troubling experience” in its legislative efforts and “humbly requests political assistance from LAMP.”
The authors also wrote that they recognize the strained relationship between LAMP and LPA, and “LPA would be most appreciative if we could move forward, putting the disagreements behind the organizations.” Authors noted they recognized the loss of the “political infrastructure” developed by LAMP and Courson Nickel. And the authors noted that they “recognize the vast importance” of “political networks…” The letter was copied to James Quillin, PhD, MP.
Criticisms about a number of issues arose on the LPA listserve after the turn of events with SB 268, and the letter was posted. Based on sources, not all of the EC members approved of the letter, especially the tone.
Some LPA members have reported to the Times that when offering to be involved in legislative efforts they were ignored. The President recently told members to be careful not to interfere with the legislative committee or lobbyists.
This article is part of a historical newspaper archive. Read the original issue for its original layout, photographs and graphics.