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

Mon Dec 17 10:35:05 EST 2012

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> 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>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>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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at 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/20121217/1cded7dd/attachment-0002.html>