[Lnc-business] Financial woes

Wed Aug 13 09:53:59 EDT 2014

I don't think I can be blamed for the lack of a motion on New Orleans,
seeing as how I can't make one and specifically said that, in my opinion,
when we're scouting for the convention.

Usually early check in is not a problem if a room is empty, specifically a
large suite. I think the cost you quoted, including an extra day, is about
one third the cost of the meeting room.

As for arranging chairs and setting up a screen, yes, I'm happy to arrive
early and do so.

Joshua Katz

Ps. Again, I think we should use the potential convention hotel and meeting
room when scouting locations. I'll happily arrange that room too.
On Aug 13, 2014 9:31 AM, "Daniel Hayes" <danielehayes at icloud.com> wrote:

> Joshua,
>
> Your idea of using a suite is not so cut driedt.  Just checking the Hilton
> Riverside in NOLA, it has an Executive Parlor with no bed which makes it
> more suitable for our needs if we did do that. One thing about renting a
> “suite” instead of a meeting room is that suites tend to have check in
> times after noon.  With that in mind we would likely have to rent the suite
> the day before so staff can prepare it for our needs as well as to insure
> we have the room for 9am when the meeting starts. The Executive Parlor
> costs $300/day taxes not included.  With the 3 days needed to rent the room
> for, that comes to over a $1000 for the trip for a room that won’t fit 25
> people in a fashion suitable for conducting business. Add in staff and
> guests and your going to have some cramped irritated people…
> So you say dump staff for traveling to the area, since its your idea, I
> suggest you spearhead the effort to rearrange the room to be suitable to
> our meetings… Also, if we stop allowing guests to attend the meeting then
> it gets to be more doable.
> The amount of productivity lost arguing this is probably in the realm of
> thousands of dollars already. But being serious..while we fiddled on
> this..we may lose the rates  that Robert had managed to negotiate for us.
> He did request we make a decision on a hotel by yesterday. We didn’t even
> start a motion to pick the hotel yet.  Hopefully this doesn’t result in our
> having to pay increased rates in NOLA because we engaged in dilatory action.
>
> Daniel Hayes
> LNC Region 7  Alternate
>
> On Aug 12, 2014, at 11:31 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I was provided with a copy of the email in question.  It appears below.
>  My reply appears above it.
>
> I don't believe my loan idea was a borrow and spend idea.  I believe it
> was a "get out of a dangerous but temporary hole while watching spending
> carefully" idea.  I don't have much enthusiasm for tax and spend solutions.
>  I'm all for voluntary contributions, though, and I'm happy to join in an
> LNC fundraising call effort - just not to raise money aimed at a "building"
> fund.  For a general fund, absolutely.  However, Starchild last term, and I
> this term, have suggested what I think is a better model for getting things
> done - allowing our members to set our priorities by establishing a system
> whereby much of what we do, minus necessary operations, is broken into
> categories, with members able to donate to each category as they see fit.
>
> So, no, revenue enhancement is not off my table.  I do think, though, that
> it's irrelevant.  If there is a way to save $10, do it - don't increase
> your income and then decide to waste the $10 you could have saved.
>  Ideally, of course, save the money and increase your income.
>
> Suggesting a spending freeze is not, in my opinion, using my LNC
> colleagues as nails.  Nor is suggesting that staff could potentially
> provide written reports for meetings rather than traveling.  I have never
> before seen the novel idea that proposing a motion is direspecting
> knowledge, skills, or rational thinking abilities, nor has it ever been
> suggested to me before that proposing a motion is as arrogant as you
> suggest.  The EC is a committee assigned duties by the bylaws and the LNC,
> and I see nothing wrong with the LNC, if it so chooses, limiting the
> actions of the EC.
>
> I find it odd to suggest that proposing a spending freeze is equivalent to
> believing that all problems can be solved by passing a law.  If I find
> myself in a financial hole, and try to get out of it by  imposing
> restraints on myself, or by "paying myself first" and making it difficult
> to withdraw the money, am I passing a law or simply exercising good
> financial sense?
>
> A proposal to act is just that - not an insult or a threat.  Sometimes, I
> expect, I'll think of things first.  Other times, others will think of
> things first, and they'll propose them.  As it turns out, there is little
> enthusiasm for my ideas.  So be it.  That's part of the point, in my view,
> of a committee - checks and balances.
>
> I of course will argue against all unnecessary spending.  Some spending
> remains necessary, and I believe that, before committing to bringing
> hundreds of people to a facility, it is appropriate to actually hold a
> meeting there.  If doing so is too expensive, then it's probably not a good
> place for a convention.  As it turns out, that particular meeting is not
> unusually expensive (unfortunately) and ways can be found to reduce the
> costs - such as bringing less or no staff.
>
> I will study Archimedes.  I have heard you praise it, I have heard others
> damn it.  I need to investigate for myself before having an opinion.
>
> Of course growing the party should not be ignored while cutting costs -
> but neither, I'm arguing, should cutting costs be ignored while growing the
> party.  They are not mutually exclusive.
>
> As it turns out, I've pointed out a few times that I have located suitable
> meeting facilities in every state and city that can be rented for a few
> hundred dollars per day, with internet access and plenty of space, and is
> available in most hotels - that is, a large suite.  In most hotels, we'd
> even have a kitchenette allowing us to not break for lunch, or to break
> only briefly for lunch.
>
> By the way, donors to the building fund, who probably thought they were
> supporting the idea of buying, I don't know, a building, didn't necessarily
> get us into this trouble.  As Dan points out, we have a plan for the
> balloon payment and for reducing debt.  As much as I dislike the purchase,
> we have a lower monthly required payment than we did before, which is a net
> benefit in allowing us to squeeze by when we're in trouble.  The problem is
> that we, as our Secretary pointed out, have already spent those savings.
>
> Joshua Katz
>
>  Josh,
>     You answered part of your own question.  We can't replace any of paid
> staff's fundraising duties with your volunteer effort.  When you floated
> your temporary loan idea, you discovered that there are few borrow and
> spend Republicans amongst our group.  Our money printing press is broken
> and we don't have the money to fix it.  You don't seem to have any
> enthusiasm for Democratic tax and spend solutions, even when the "taxes"
> are voluntary contributions.
>     You're right.  If all methods of revenue enhancement are off your
> personal table, then spending cuts are the only hammer that you have in
> your toolbox.  Remember please, though, that your colleagues on the LNC and
> our staff are not nails.
>     Respect our knowledge, skills, and rational thinking abilities.  Some
> of us are as smart as you, maybe even smarter.  We don't need gimmicks that
> try to trick us into becoming spendthrifts overnight.  You remind me of a
> politician, no, a typical American.  You think that every problem can be
> fixed by passing a law.(or motion)
>     You can't control us, you can only control yourself.  If you want to
> pledge to not propose any ideas that involve additional spending before
> November, we will support you and help you to keep that promise.
>     Better still would be to join with me in arguing against all
> unnecessary spending and let's keep up the pressure on paring down all
> spending to the lowest practical level always, because "the fact remains
> that saving money remains good, even if more is taken in, so more can be
> spent on our core mission, or saved."  (this may  include resisting the
> argument that it is OK to spend more than $5,000 that we don't have on an
> LNC meeting because we are also checking out a possible convention site and
> impressing the bellhops and desk clerks)  We can handle the occasional
> ridicule that comes with that territory.
>     Pull back for a second and look at the big picture.  If we ignore
> revenue enhancement, (otherwise known as growing the party) those charts
> that we saw recently depicting membership and revenue trends will
> inevitably reach zero.  I don't care how perfectly you tighten belts and
> pare down expenses, I'm expecting you to be the volunteer who turns out the
> light in the borrowed tent headquarters in a needle park when the last
> member doesn't renew.
>     I'm floating two proposals for revenue enhancement from my last
> message.  One is to bring back Project Archimedes as a direct mail campaign
> with new mailing lists and freshly written solicitation letters. (funded by
> dedicated contributions)  The other is to get LNC members to make personal
> fundraising appeals to the people who have recently contributed to the
> building fund.  We would be asking them to contribute a much smaller amount
> into the general fund to help us get through the temporary squeeze caused
> by buying the building (because it was their fault!)
>     Please study project Archimedes and help us to redesign it using tools
> from this millennium.  The original doubled our resources in about six
> years.  If you put your mind to it, I'll bet you could have young people
> transmitting billions of bitcoins into our bank account from their smart
> phones while they are driving and smoking pot.  Or maybe you could hack in
> to the Federal Reserve.
>     Oh, here's another opportunity for you to volunteer that you forgot to
> comment on: "Maybe you could locate a suitable meeting facility within
> walking distance of headquarters that could be rented for a few hundred
> dollars per day."  Then do the same for NOLA.  (is that the same place as
> "N'Orlinz"?)
>     Please try to be part of the solution.  Don't try to convince us that
> we have to be restrained because we are part of the problem.
>
>
>
> Joshua A. Katz
> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:11 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Ok, for some reason, I can only see the first line of Ron's posts.  I
>> know that he wrote something about me answering my own question.
>>
>> Joshua A. Katz
>> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Our bylaws require our permission to borrow. We certainly can wait for
>>> staff requests, but I also see nothing improper in a board acting
>>> proactively.
>>> On Aug 11, 2014 4:18 PM, "Norm Olsen" <region1rep at donedad.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We have a competent Executive Director who is certainly monitoring this
>>>> situation.  I am confident that he will implement appropriate policies to
>>>> address this issue as necessary.  If he decides obtaining a loan is an
>>>> appropriate action, I’m sure he’ll advise the chair and we’ll soon after
>>>> have a motion to vote upon.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We as a governing board should not be trying to micro-manage these
>>>> affairs from afar.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Norm
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Norman T Olsen
>>>>
>>>> Regional Representative, Region I
>>>>
>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>
>>>> 7931 S Broadway, PMB 102
>>>>
>>>> Littleton, Colorado  80122-2710
>>>>
>>>> 303-263-4995
>>>>
>>>> Norman.Olsen at lp.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you,
>>>> then you win." -- Gandhi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On
>>>> Behalf Of *Joshua Katz
>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, August 09, 2014 11:21 AM
>>>> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> *Subject:* [Lnc-business] Financial woes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Since I had only one person join me in my call to authorize additional
>>>> debt, and that was qualified with the idea of waiting another month, I now
>>>> float the following three motions and seek sponsors.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1.  The LNC shall authorize no expenditures other than those necessary
>>>> for activities already authorized by vote or bylaws to be undertaken (to
>>>> include votes which closed before the effective date but which have not yet
>>>> been reported on the effective date, if any.)  No money shall be expended
>>>> by the party until November 1, 2014, other than that which has already been
>>>> authorized or encumbered, exempting expenditures from restricted funds.  No
>>>> additional expenses shall be undertaken, and no agreements with vendors
>>>> entered into requiring payment before November 1, 2014.  In addition, the
>>>> LNC shall direct the Secretary to write official notices of apology to all
>>>> vendors whose payments are delayed via negotiations by staff, or via
>>>> non-payment or extension of terms, on behalf of the LNC.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2.  Prior to the December meeting in New Orleans, staff shall be
>>>> requested to issue all necessary reports in written form, to be presented
>>>> at the meeting (as specifically required, or traditional.)  Staff presence
>>>> at the LNC meeting shall be restricted to the Executive Director and one
>>>> additional staff member, to be chosen by the Executive Director following
>>>> consultation with the Chair.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3.  The LNC directs the Executive Director to issue a report with all
>>>> specific staff responsibilities, estimated hours required per week, and
>>>> skills needed to perform staff functions.  The Executive Director then
>>>> shall issue a report indicating potential to replace staff functions with
>>>> volunteer efforts, after conducting a member survey for skills and
>>>> willingness to volunteer.  The LNC requests that the Chair, after
>>>> consulting said report, reconsider all staff arrangements and contracts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I favor the first, but am looking for all ways to stem costs.  We have
>>>> a balloon payment hanging over our heads, currently are bankrupt, and have
>>>> continued to vote to authorize expenditures.  I believe these operations
>>>> must be reconsidered.  I understand that our financial hole is a temporary
>>>> phenomenon, and that our bankruptcy is a matter of accounting, but we are
>>>> still in dire financial straits.  I do believe that we need to bring in
>>>> more money, but a financial crisis is also an opportunity to reconsider our
>>>> spending habits, which should be restrained, and mostly aimed at our core
>>>> mission, at all times, regardless of circumstances.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Region 8 (Region of Badassdom) Alternate
>>>>
>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Chair, Libertarian Party of Connecticut
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20140813/7bb98d34/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen Shot 2014-08-12 at 11.57.47 PM.png
Type: image/png
Size: 23894 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20140813/7bb98d34/attachment-0002.png>