Sergeant at Arms

“At each level of government and with respect to the public offices… limitations are set and functions are assigned.”

(Anna von Reitz, “…Fourth Branch…”, pg 1)

Resources: Black’s Law, Arizona Assembly Protocols (Rules of Order); Robert’s Rules of Order (cheat sheet) Cornell, “…Fourth Branch… (Grand Juries)” (AVR);

A use of the search engine at annavonreitz.com yields five (5) articles with the keyword “sergeant” in the body of text. None of it addresses the role of the “sergeant at arms” during meetings of the General Assembly or the other assembly segments. “Sargent at arms”, however, produces more profitable results for article selection, but none mention “sargent at arms” nor review the qualifications or duties for this important post:

• Jural Assembly Handbook: sargent: 0 hits, sergeant: 0 hits
• General Civil Orders: sargent: 0 hits, sergeant: 0 hits
• Arizona Assembly Protocols: sargent: 0 hits, sergeant: 1 hit
  • Sargent at Arms enforces “property of the Assembly”
  • no information on the role of this post at meetings

Since there is no established standard operating procedure (SOP) in the usual repository of information from trusted sources to whom we very often turn to for guidance, then we shall begin the conversation, explore the information we can find, and see if we can together establish a number of observations that might make sense to one who is tasked with such responsibility… shall we? Remember, you are reading my online notebook; always a work in progress.

The job of “Sergeant at Arms”.

SERGEANT AT ARMS – the name that is given to a person who is appointed by a body like the House of Representatives, the Senate or other organization to keep order at meetings. [Black’s Law]

from: Arizona Assembly Protocols (Rules of Order)

[download the .pdf] Version 6, April 18, 2021

• conduct affairs in a mature and business-like way
• questions addressed in a forthright manner and resolved
• we conduct business “in honor”
• creations brought to the assembly, become the “property of the assembly”¹
  • this is the point that the “sergeant at arms” is specified to “enforce”.
• members in attendance must have status corrected by one of two methods:
  1. 928 Basic Package of editable forms (Anna von Reitz)
  2. The One Pager (Declaration of Naturalization 1779)
• those in attendance who don’t have paperwork are considered “guests”
  • must declare their presence and status as “guest” at roll call
  • cannot participate until discussion period following meeting
• State Citizens who are voting members must be cognizant, capable of deliberation
• All assembly members have equal rights
• All assembly members have equal obligations²
• full and free discussion of every motion is open to nationals and citizens
• the “floor” is observed and enforced:
  • a moderator can be assigned, or is coordinator, county chair, or committee chair
  • assembly members must be recognized to speak
  • are given a 3-minute time limit
  • open or request to speak as follows: “may I…”
    • [announce name] and [state your county for state level assembly]
  • close address or comment with: “I yield.”
• one question or motion at a time is considered and discussed
• assembly members have a right to know and consider the matter at hand:
  • matters or questions should be clearly stated or “clarified” through discussion
  • matters and questions should be “restated” before the matter or motion proceeds
• disruptive behavior will not be tolerated in assembly meetings
• disputes, infractions, concerns, and questions should be direct to county chairs first
• county business should be handled at the county level (?) [not specified]
• state business should be elevated to the state level (?) [not specified]
• infractions to be reviewed and discerned by the Rules and Oversight Committee³
• the moderator for the Arizona Assembly can mute or remove disruptor’s from a call⁴
• interrupters and provocateurs will be added to a list⁶
• to be eligible, elected positions of the assembly require
  • a written bio be submitted demonstrating competency for the position
  • verbal quiz demonstrating knowledge of assembly and our state (required)
  • an expression of their desire to serve in such position
  • forward these to the State Coordinator
  • (county chair on county business, unless running for county chair?)
• all elected positions have a 90-day probationary period¹¹
• the moderator should always remain impartial

NOTE: I did not see specification in the Arizona Protocols that indicated the International Business Assembly for the state is to only be attended by “State Citizens”; that is, however, the proper procedure. It is required that participating members of the “Business Assembly” be voting members who are qualified jurors and “state citizens”.

---

Infractions and Enforcement

In my mind, if these are the procedures and the order that the Sergeant at Arms is responsible to enforce, then the rules should be (and need to be) very, very clear. As you can see, a read through this document with more than a casual review leads me to several questions and pondering more than a few inconsistencies.

Just as with the Administrative Judicial Process, organized around the rules of banking and contract law, the first responsibility you have in dealing with a trespasser is to notice them “I feel I’m being trespassed…” and give them the terms and time to “cure”. We have a problem. Here’s how I will accept we solve this problem.

In similar fashion, if someone interrupts several times during a meeting, the Sergeant at Arms can simply “mute” them (if in a net meeting), or invite them outside quietly, or even usher them outside asking for a “pause in business” and perhaps some backup to “cordially invite” the disrupter outside for a brief education session. Or perhaps you think a .22 round behind either ear is simply less fuss, less interruption, and less to clean up. I’m Italian, I get it… but “NO”… that’s not how we do things! 😀 We treat people the way we hope they would treat us, and we all come from different backgrounds. So, a little patience is a good thing.

I would therefore expect to see “the door” and the logistics of a meeting room set up or overseen by the Sergeant at Arms so that a disrupter can be easily escorted out if the situation calls for such. If we’re still running meetings on the internet, the Sergeant at Arms should be hosting the meeting (or administering) so that they have the “mute buttons” and the “boot switch”. That’s their job… The moderator is concentrating on the procedure of the meeting. They shouldn’t have to concern themselves with such “distractions”. That’s why we have a “Sergeant at Arms”…

I would also expect that the Sergeant at Arms could ultimately bring charges against a man or woman who repeatedly brought disruption to the assembly meetings, or assaulted, or battered someone. Though, in cases where there is assault, verbal abuse, or libel, other attacks charges should be brought by the man or woman trespassed. What the Sergeant at Arms certainly should do at that point is to prepare a statement of “what they were witness to” which may potentially constitute a help, assistance, or support of either side of the argument. The job of the Sergeant at Arms being specifically “to keep an eye and watch what’s going on during the assembly meeting”. They would be a most credible witness.

NOTES: Rules and Oversight Committee

1. Rules and Oversight Committee is formed from the County Chairmen or designated proxy
2. review infractions, consider consequences, and make recommendations
3. report of findings at the next (general?) assembly meeting
4. appeals to be submitted in writing (email is acceptable)
5. the committee will review the appeal, deliberate, and present a final determination⁵
6. members holding offices cannot participate in assembly business until issues clear
7. a two-thirds vote of the county chairs is required for “final determination”
   • votes can be levied by email, phone, voicemail, text, or designated proxy if not present
   • to be submitted to the State Coordinator (?) prior to the meeting⁷
   • see set schedule of consequences and suspension periods in document
8. The oversight committee maintains oversight over all other committees⁸
9. Decisions made by the oversight committee are final⁹
10. participants of the Oversight Committee are “by invitation only” in “May”¹⁰

Questions and Concerns

Reading through the Arizona Assembly Rules of Order, I must admit, I’m left with a few questions which did not seem to be adequately addressed in the document:

• how does the “assembly membership” become familiar with
  • matters at hand? only in discussion in the assembly meeting?
  • proposals? are written proposals made available to assembly members to read, review, and consider prior to assembly meeting?
  • when are agendas required to be published? is there a deadline to submit a proposal giving assembly members sufficient time to read, review and consider prior to a meeting where an issue might come to a vote?
  • If a proposal is submitted and introduced, in what order do things proceed?
    • is a written proposal read as written?
    • is it presented by the issuer of the proposal?
    • is an opportunity then offered to the membership for questions and clarification?
    • is the matter then put to a vote as “proposal” and “second”
    • is the matter then voted on?
    • what if there are more questions that cannot be addressed?
    • what structure is in place to clarify and address such questions?
    • if sent to committee, what deadline is assigned by which the committee reports?
    • are there disqualifications to sitting on such a committee? [conflict of interest]
    • how are conflicts of interest introduced, managed, and decided?
    • once an issue or matter returns from committee, at what step is it inserted?

---

Deference to “Anna”

It is mentioned that questions or concerns can be directed to “Anna” as the common source of information for the Assembly structures and procedures. But the “Rules of Order” also specify the “Anna is not a part of the Arizona Assembly and cannot make any decisions regarding The Arizona Assembly”.

While it isn’t mentioned, I would imagine this is because, while she is a good source of information, Anna is not an inhabitant, a populent, one of “the people” of the state. The Assembly structure is a “bottom-up” structure where the authority of law stems from the rights of the people and all law, organization, and government exists only to protect and ensure the sanctity of the rights of the people.

By that pattern, it can be assumed that the people of each county elect those who will serve the people in that county and those elected to serve answer to no other higher power. Our civil servants serve at the “will of the people”. The same goes for the state. Those serving the people at the state level answer only to the people of the state, etc… So, while Anna might be a source of applicable information, it is up to the people to implement and follow proper procedure and policy, even if they are determining such procedure and policy themselves; they are then bound in honor to follow what they have established.

---

FOOTNOTES:
¹ – As a writer, author, photographer, graphic artist, and musician, I am intimately acquainted with “intellectual property”; and therefore take issue with this statement. If I wrote it, created it, secreted it out of an orifice… it belongs to me unless you have a title, deed, or contract that specifies it is sold, surrendered, or licensed for your use. I believe this particular point needs some further discussion and editing.

² – For the “Business Assembly” segment of the General Assembly, this would be an incorrect statement. Business Assembly meetings are only to be attended by qualified jurors as “State Citizens” qualified to vote on the matters at hand. While “state nationals” having declared their status can attend any other meeting, they are not vetted, qualified, or cleared to vote on such higher matters of the “international business of the assembly”.

Quote: “Checks and Balances are not only supposed to operate between the separate branches of government, but at every level of government. The county has its inherent powers which cannot be overstepped by the state, the state has its powers which cannot be overstepped by the federal government, and the united States of America have powers in common that cannot be usurped upon, either.” (Anna von Reitz, “…Fourth Branch…”, pg 1)

⁴ – Those involved in the discussion shouldn’t be the one’s officiating the discussion. To proceed “in order” may be the moderator’s task, but the call of whether something is in order or disruptive should be the prerogative of the Sergeant at Arms. The “game official with the whistle and flags” who can influence “the game”, shouldn’t be both an official and a player.

⁵ – This seems to be in conflict with the earlier statement from the same pg 3 paragraph. Either the Rules and Oversight Committee 2) reviews infractions, considers consequences, and makes recommendations report of findings at the next (general?) assembly meeting” or they 5) “review the appeal, deliberate, and present a final determination”. If they “report findings”, is the matter then put before the assembly membership as a proposal? For example: “We propose this member be corrected, fined, or suspended due to these circumstances…” and then there’s a vote? Is it then voted on by the general assembly? …the state citizens? Or is the committee the judge, jury, and executioner? Who is permitted to sit on the Rules and Oversight Committee? (later reading revealed this is a “council of state chairs) The Sergeant at Arms who called out the error in procedure in the meeting in the first place… Sounds like a great deal of power to give one man. Or perhaps should certain positions incur an obvious conflict of interest so that one man or woman isn’t “railroading” the issues when the people should be running their own organization as well as their own government… (I think I overheard that in a coffee shop)

⁶ – “interrupters and provocateurs will be added to a list“… seriously? What are we, democrats? I would suggest this be handled with a bit more more discretion; or perhaps whoever penned this document missed specifying a few details. This certainly shouldn’t be publicly available information unless you’re in attendance during a meeting where “determinations” are reported. A note added to their file with their county recorder, or county chief recorder, so that if reapplying before the deadline on a suspension, or similar, the county recorder catches the oversight and can advise them when their suspension is concluded.

⁷ – If the Rules and Oversight Committee is a “council of County Chairpersons”, what’s the State Coordinator have to do with this procedure? Seems to be an oversight…

⁸ – This sounds very odd. The committees, when enjoined for a purpose of deliberation, serve “the will of the people” who were not ready to vote and pass an issue, or who assemble to address work too complex or time consuming to do “in assembly”. Outstanding questions? Unclear details? More work than practical? A matter not “vote ready” gets assigned to a committee to “iron out the wrinkles” and “return a vote ready matter” back to the people. What does the oversight committee have to do with this when there isn’t a obvious problem or infraction?

⁹ – “decisions are final…” So, no appeal process with the “Rules and Oversight Committee”? No second opinion? Smells a bit Gestapo to me. So when “a council of county chairs” hoarding a majority vote tend to agree on an agenda, they can abuse and railroad whoever they damn well please without recourse? “Good work if you can get it” I suppose.

¹⁰ – Okay, now this is just embarrassing. The Rules and Oversight Committee are a council of county chairs, according to the information presented earlier in this document. If the members of this deliberation council are “county chairs”, they are ELECTED by the people of their respective counties. Who writes this shit? And we want people to come and join us in this clown show?

¹¹ – How do “elected by the people” positions carry a “probationary period” of 90 days as determined by a Rules and Oversight Committee; a council of county chair-people? How does this apply to county business? What right do 14 other county chairs (Arizona) have in the business of another county?