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

[Daniel Wiener]

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> 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> 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
> >> --
> >> "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 .
> >
> >       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
> > http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-discuss_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/20121216/29b503d4/attachment-0002.html>