12/19/2025
Validity of Removal:
For those of you who do not know me, I have been a Vice-Chair for CD7 for the past three years. In my professional life I have been a practicing attorney for 29 years, covering a wide range of law, from family law to bankruptcy to real estate. For the past 23 years I have been the County Attorney for Traverse County, as well as the City Attorney for seven cities. I have also been involved in the federal lawsuit to overcome the face mask mandates and attempted to intervene in the Ramsey County abortion case when the Attorney General refused to appeal the outrageous decision invalidating our pro-life laws.
Additionally, I wrote every word of the six-page petition used to remove former Chair Bret Bussman, after receiving help verification on the factual grounds. No one affiliated with Rep. Fischbach had any hand in this. In fact, I supported Steve Boyd at both the endorsement convention and in the primary and I am also a strong supporter of the Otter Tail County grassroots, which is why I ran for Vice-Chair. So comments that I am somehow a biased Fischbach supporter are not accurate.
There have been a lot of e-mails going around from former CD7 Chair Bret Bussman and people who opposed his removal. The purpose of this e-mail is to verify to you that his removal was done properly, and satisfied the CD7 constitution and bylaws. In addition to my own review of these documents, I have also acted in accordance with guidance from the state party's legal counsel.
To start with, the meeting was validly called. Mr. Bussman received the required detailed statement of the charges against him at least ten days prior to the meeting, pursuant to Con. Art. V, Sect. 6(C). Art. V, Sect. 3 states that a meeting may be called "by any five (5) Officers of the Executive Committee. On the original meeting notice were the names of three Vice-Chairs and two Senate District Directors (SDDs). Mr. Bussman has been claiming that SDDs are not "Officers of the Executive Committee." That is a lie, for the following reasons:
1. Our Constitution defines two types of Officers: Officers of the Seventh Congressional District Republican Party and Officers of the Executive Committee.
2. Article IV deals with Officers of Seventh Congressional District Republican Party, which is defined in Section 1 as being the Chair, Deputy Chair, State Party Rep, Treasurer, Secretary, and six Vice-Chairs.
3. These Officers are not Officers of the Executive Committee, which is what Mr. Bussman claims.
4. Article V deals with Officers of the Executive Committee, which are defined under Section 1(1) as being Seventh Congressional Officers and Senate District Directors.
5. Art. V, Sect. 2 states that the duties and responsibilities of Executive Committee Officers are found in Bylaws Art. I, where SDDs are specifically listed.
6. Finally, Art. V, Sect. 5(B) and (C) specifically refers to members of the Executive Committee as Officers.
While it would have been helpful to have the word "Officers" in the caption of Article 5 or in Section 1(1), it is clear that any member of the Executive Committee is an Officer of the Executive Committee.
After speaking with the State Party attorney, it was decided that since there was a dispute by Mr. Bussman over who is an Officer of the Executive Committee, I should amend the meeting notice to include two other Vice-Chairs. That was done the day prior to the meeting. Aside from the legal notion that amendments dating back to the time of the original document, there is nothing in the CD7 constitution or bylaws that states when the meeting notice needs to be sent out. And Robert's Rules 1:7 merely requires the notice be sent a "reasonable time in advance." Since nothing substantively changed in meeting notice (all notices were about removing Mr. Bussman as Chair), two days before the meeting was deemed reasonable. The State Party attorney agreed with my conclusion.
I will state that if the State Party attorney had told me that I had done something improper, I would have recommended to the rest of the Executive Committee that the meeting should have been cancelled. I fully agree that any removal needs to be done correctly. I am confident that it was done correctly.
Mr. Bussman then tried to cancel the meeting, citing Con. Art. V, Sect. 3, which allows the Chair to cancel a meeting "(i)n emergency situations, such as severe weather." He cited severe weather conditions as his basis. First off, the meeting notice specifically said that if someone could not show up to the meeting, they could appear via Zoom or phone. Secondly, as we all know, the weather last Thursday was perfectly fine for an average December day. This is aside from the gross conflict of interest in a Chair attempting to cancel a disciplinary meeting about him. The main point is that Mr. Bussman flat out lied, again, in an attempt to disrupt the removal proceedings.
In summary, the removal of Mr. Bussman from his position from CD7 Chair was procedurally sound and is valid, as recognized by MN GOP when they refused to seat him at the State Central Committee meeting last Saturday and they have removed his name as Chair on the State GOP website. It is unfortunate that he has chosen to act in the manner he has, which has included issuing bullying e-mail threats and attempting to intimidate party officials, unilaterally removing validly appointed Senate District Directors, and trying to create a shadow Executive Committee. These are yet more reasons why his removal was necessary.
Matthew Franzese
