[Lnc-business] [Lnc-discuss] Mark Hinkle's alternative motion to buy a bu...

SAM8074 at aol.com SAM8074 at aol.com
Mon Dec 17 10:44:07 EST 2012


Maybe everyone should wait to see if the Secretary actually does anything  
before co-sponsoring  or voting on various motions.
 
Sam
 
 
In a message dated 12/17/2012 10:39:49 A.M. US Eastern Standard Time,  
vickilp12 at gmail.com writes:

I will co-sponsor the modified motion as well.
VK



On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Daniel Wiener <_wiener at alum.mit.edu_ 
(mailto:wiener at alum.mit.edu) > wrote:

Mark has modified his motion, by changing the requirement  to say that the 
monthly payment will not exceed 75% of the Watergate lease  amount.  He 
telephoned me and I agreed to co-sponsor the modified  version as well, but I 
have not yet seen that version in writing.   While I presume that the other 
co-sponsors will also agree, I do not know  that for a fact.  The Secretary 
has not yet put anything out for a  vote.  When she does, I will be voting 
against Mark's  motion.

Dan Wiener  
 


On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Vicki Kirkland <_vickilp12 at gmail.com_ 
(mailto:vickilp12 at gmail.com) > wrote:

I believe Mark posted the co-sponsors for his  motion.
VK
 
 



On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 1:35 AM, Daniel Wiener  <_wiener at alum.mit.edu_ 
(mailto:wiener at alum.mit.edu) > wrote:

Starchild,

The Secretary has not yet put forth  the motion to be voted on.  We don't 
even know if there are four  co-sponsors at this point.

Dan Wiener  
 


On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Starchild <_sfdreamer at earthlink.net_ 
(mailto:sfdreamer at earthlink.net) > wrote:

I vote "no" on this  motion, for reasons I previously discussed below. I 
had hoped that  Mark might revise it and give me grounds to consider 
supporting it,  but this has not happened.

Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
At-Large Representative, Libertarian  National Committee



>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Mark Hinkle <_mark at garlic.com_ 
(mailto:mark at garlic.com) > wrote:
>> Dear  LNC,
>>
>> I'm seeking co-sponsors for this  motion:
>>
>> Moved, that the LNC approve the  purchase of an office in the greater 
Washington, D.C. area, to be  named in honor of David F. Nolan, contingent on 
the following  conditions:
>>
>>      • A minimum of  20% of the down payment shall be raised from 
dedicated contributions.  If a portion of that is in the form of pledges, the 
pledges must  be converted to cash before a purchase contract and mortgage 
agreement  are finalized.
>>      • The monthly payment  of principle, interest, and OTM (Overhead, 
Taxes, and Maintenance)  shall not exceed our current lease payments at the 
Watergate  complex.
>> This motion will constitute authority to incur a  mortgage if the above 
conditions are met and if this motion passes by  the necessary two-thirds 
vote as specified in the Libertarian Party’s  Bylaws.
>>
>> The final decision on what property to  buy shall be ratified by the 
LNC's Executive Committee by a majority  vote once the above conditions are met.
>>
>>  RSVP................Mark Hinkle,
>> LNC At-Large &  Retired LP Chair
>> Tel: _408-779-7922_ (tel:408-779-7922) 
>> --
>> "It  does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless  
minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of  men."
>>                 - Samuel Adams




On Dec 3, 2012, at 6:48 PM, Starchild wrote:

>  Dan,
>
>       What is the cutoff point of  equity below which one cannot sell a 
building? If there is such a  fixed point, and if we buy, it does seem to me 
it would make sense to  plan any proposed purchase in such a way that we 
meet that minimum  threshold quickly, so that if our purchase plans don't end 
up coming  to fruition, at least we do not have to walk away from money we've 
 already sunk into making mortgage payments, but have at least the  chance 
to recoup them by selling. However I don't claim to have any  particular 
expertise about real estate transactions, so maybe I'm  missing something here.
>
>       What I  told Mark Hinkle when he called me last night to lobby for 
my vote for  his alternate motion, I'll say here as well -- I'm potentially 
open to  voting for a motion including language addressing the issues and  
concerns raised in the document copied below about how to get the most  out 
of a Libertarian "brick and mortar" space. The more of these  concerns a 
motion to buy a building addresses, and the more strongly  it addresses them, 
the more likely it is to get my support.  Conversely, a motion that offers 
nothing to address these concerns is  unlikely to get my support.
>
>       One  of my inspirations in terms of what a more functional and 
effective LP  headquarters could look like is the "Freedoms Phoenix" workshop in 
 Phoenix, Arizona. Here is a 9-minute video from 2010 where Ernie  Hancock 
(LP member and former candidate for national chair, and the  guy responsible 
for the "Ron Paul r3VOLution" meme, for those who  don't know him) gives a 
tour of the space and explains what they do  there -- 
_https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFeeB41UpI8_ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFeeB41UpI8)   .
>
>       I'm not saying the Freedom's  Phoenix space is perfect -- in the 
video, Ernie touts its *lack* of  external visibility as an advantage, which 
makes little sense to me  since he goes on to say how they have lots of 
events there, and  obviously the video and other information about the space is 
out there  on the Internet as well so it's not like they're really hiding 
from  anyone. I think almost any libertarian brick-and-mortar space is  missing 
an opportunity by not seeking to expose passers-by to  libertarian graphics 
and information. The Freedoms Phoenix space also  feels a bit cold and 
uninviting; it could use more of a homey touch,  imho. But there is a heck of a 
lot to like about the impressive work  they've done down there. It is a 
functional space where people (not  just a few insiders, but lots of freedom 
supporters) can come in and  work and get stuff done. It doesn't look like a 
corporate office, and  has a significant feel of being a community space, a 
place where  libertarians can hang out, bond, network, etc., a place to which  
people can contribute in various ways without a lot of bureaucracy or  
hassle.
>
>       Since what a building  offers is often considerably more important 
than specifically where it  is located, and therefore we shouldn't 
automatically eliminate  excellent spaces from consideration simply based on their 
location, I  will also be more open to a motion that does not limit our 
building  search to the Washington D.C. area. That being said, so far I've  really 
only heard two options for relocating outside D.C. that seem  like they 
could potentially outweigh the advantages of being located  in or very near the 
U.S. capitol district:
>
> (1) Basing  our national HQ in New Hampshire, both to support, and be 
supported  by, the Free State Project. I think the FSP is something that is  
likely to continue building over time, and therefore it's sort of an  
investment in the future. I think we should also try to work with and  support other 
libertarian groups to the extent that we practically  can. Not only does it 
increase the solidarity and strength of the  libertarian movement as a 
whole, but they may return the favor by  trying to do more to help and support 
the LP. In practical terms, New  Hampshire offers not only the freest 
political climate in the nation,  but a strong base of liberty-minded activists who 
could potentially  volunteer at headquarters and help out with projects.
>
>  (2) Having a mobile office based out of a large RV, which could  
hypothetically be parked in the D.C. environs most of the time,  perhaps moving 
around a bit to show up at D.C. protests on the  national mall, important press 
conferences, etc., but go on the road  during campaign season to make 
appearances with presidential, state  and local LP candidates, at other 
(L)ibertarian events, etc. This  option could be considerably cheaper than either 
buying or leasing a  building, and would allow us major public visibility 
compared with a  fixed location via having our "office" plastered with 
Libertarian  propaganda like the Gary Johnson vans that were driving around, as  well 
as the flexibility to quickly relocate to different areas if  desired by 
this or future LNCs. (Thanks to California LP member Mike  Seebeck for this 
idea)
>
>       During  this whole discussion about what to do about the LP's 
national office  (indeed, in lots of other LNC discussions too!), it's important 
we  keep in mind that the "options on the table" are whichever options we  
choose to put on the table.
>
>       To  the extent we make a habit of assuming that people won't 
support an  idea just because it's new or unfamiliar, we may be shooting ourselves 
 in the foot by precluding consideration of fresh new ideas and  
perspectives.
>
>       "Why should I vote  Libertarian when everybody knows that 
realistically it's going to be  Obama or Romney?" We know how that kind of thinking 
hurts the LP and  the freedom movement out there in the real world. We know 
how the  unwillingness to truly consider doing something differently because  
people don't think others will consider it, and therefore assume "that  
will never happen", can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. We also  know that 
some of our opponents realize this too, and deliberately  encourage "that 
will never happen" thinking in the hopes that it will  become a self-fulfilling 
prophecy!
>
>      So it's good to be similarly aware of these dynamics within our  own 
organization, and to understand when the main reasons for not  giving 
something a chance are "political" rather than factual. Many  individuals may be 
privately thinking, "Boy, that actually doesn't  sound like such a bad idea, 
but I don't want to be the one to stand up  and say so." This is where 
being vertebrates comes in!  :-)
>
> Love & Liberty,
>       ((( starchild )))
> At-Large  Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
>
>  The Ideal Libertarian “Brick & Mortar” Space
>
> When  Libertarian Party or other pro-freedom groups reach a certain size 
and  have a certain amount of money at their disposal, talk inevitably  
turns to procuring some kind of office. The national Libertarian Party  has an 
office, as does the California LP (circa 2012).
>
>  Unfortunately, our party is not getting as much benefit from these and  
other similar spaces as it could. Indeed, the term “office” itself may  be 
part of the problem, in that it can prevent people from thinking  outside 
the box when it comes to the potential of brick-and-mortar  spaces!
>
> Here are some questions to ask about a  proposed – or existing – 
brick-and-mortar location, roughly in order  of importance. The more questions you 
can answer with a “Yes”, the  more of an asset the space is likely to be to 
the LP and to the  libertarian cause.
>
>  _______________________________________________________________
>  • Does the space function as a kind of libertarian community center  
(i.e. users have a sense of it not just being the private space of  party 
officers or paid staffers who work there, but belonging to the  whole party and 
to some degree the whole libertarian movement) that is  important to the 
local LP chapter, pro-freedom activists, and friendly  community groups as well 
as to people in the party?
>
> •  Is the space economically sustainable and cost-efficient (i.e. does it 
 have cheap rent or overhead)?
>
> • Can activists make  lots of things (meetings, speakers, workshops, 
parties, etc.) happen  at the space with a minimum of advance notice and  
bureaucracy?
>
> • Is the space located in a  high-visibility location such that messages 
and materials can be  displayed which will be readily seen by passers-by?
>
> •  Is the space readily accessible (i.e. centrally located, in a walkable 
 neighborhood, in proximity to mass transit and convenient/affordable  
parking, accessible to people with disabilities)?
>
> • Is  the space a friendly, welcoming place for locals and out-of-towners 
to  drop in and visit, sit down and have a cup of coffee, read some back  
issues of party newsletters, chat with other libertarians, get online  to do 
some activism, use the bathroom, take a shower,  etc.?
>
> • Is the space geared toward providing things  for interns and volunteers 
to do, both long-term and on a drop-in  basis?
>
> • Does the space serve as a distribution hub  for activist materials 
(free literature and other items which  activists can stop in and pick up in 
bulk for distribution or  passers-by can peruse or take with them to learn 
about  libertarianism)?
>
> • Is the space transparent in its  operations so that people can readily 
discover how to fully make use  of it and get things done (e.g. are there 
easily learned procedures  for scheduling events or using equipment, posted 
office hours during  which specific named staffers will be on hand to answer 
questions,  etc.)?
>
> • Is the space in proximity to centers of  political power (U.S. or state 
capitol, city hall), and public spaces  (plazas, parks, and other gathering 
places) to serve as a ready base  camp for protesting, lobbying, and other 
outside political  doings?
>
> • Does the space have a participatory feel to  it (e.g. are activists 
easily able to contribute their own  decorations, materials, and so on to 
enhance it), and do its users  have a say in how it is run?
>
> • Does the space have a  minimum of rules and restrictions (e.g. are 
eating, drinking, smoking,  animals, bicycles, rollerblades, etc., allowed?)
>
> •  Does the space have an “organic” feel to it, a sense of being a place 
 with a soul (e.g. is it comfortable, is it aesthetically pleasing, is  
there art, is the lighting friendly, is it neither too messy nor too  pristine, 
etc.)?
>
> • Does the space offer temporary to  long-term storage for protest signs, 
banners, button-making machines,  audio/PA equipment, and other materials 
people might not readily be  able to store at home or might desire to 
maintain in a shared,  accessible group space?
>
> • Does the space serve as an  effective workshop for activists to get 
things done (making signs and  banners, filming and recording, creating art, 
etc.)?
>
> •  Is the space accessible 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to trusted  
activists, and does it have places for people to crash if  necessary?
>
> • Does the space include a store where  people can buy pro-freedom 
merchandise and supplies?
>
>  __________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>  On Dec 3, 2012, at 11:12 AM, Daniel Wiener wrote:
>
>>  I'm replying to this suggested motion on  LNC-Discuss.
>>
>> I for one am not willing to vote  for Mark's motion, and I strongly 
doubt that there is a two-thirds  majority of the LNC which will do so.  I am 
very leery of  imposing long-term obligations on future LNC's which could mire 
the  Libertarian Party in a financial quagmire, and this applies to both  
long-term leases and mortgages.  I will only vote to purchase an  office if 
there is a sufficiently large down payment that I can be  confident our 
mortgage will not sink under water, and if we commit to  paying off the mortgage 
in a short time span.  These are very  uncertain economic times, and I 
believe there are significant risks in  the commercial real estate market in 
Washington, D.C. (and elsewhere).  But if we have a large enough equity, we can 
at least sell the  building as a last resort if we're forced to by future 
financial  exigencies.
>>
>> Dan Wiener


> _______________________________________________
>  Lnc-discuss mailing list
> _Lnc-discuss at hq.lp.org_ (mailto:Lnc-discuss at hq.lp.org) 
> _http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-discuss_hq.lp.org_ 
(http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-discuss_hq.lp.org) 




_______________________________________________
Lnc-business  mailing list
_Lnc-business at hq.lp.org_ (mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org) 
_http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org_ 
(http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org) 








_______________________________________________
Lnc-business  mailing list
_Lnc-business at hq.lp.org_ (mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org) 
_http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org_ 
(http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org) 







_______________________________________________
Lnc-business  mailing list
_Lnc-business at hq.lp.org_ (mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org) 
_http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org_ 
(http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org) 







_______________________________________________
Lnc-business  mailing list
_Lnc-business at hq.lp.org_ (mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org) 
_http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org_ 
(http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org) 






_______________________________________________
Lnc-business  mailing  list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20121217/3fe44cd6/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list