[Lnc-business] LP National's dilemma Re: DenverPost Voter's Guide contact information

Thu Oct 2 14:38:14 EDT 2014

Non-responsive state-affiliates is a very visible symptom of a much deeper
problem.  Most of our affiliates consist of a mailbox, maybe a phone number,
and a dozen or two  activists which keep it alive, mostly with their own
personal contributions.

A simple document (doesnt need to rise to the level of an agreement) which
states what the state affiliates can expect (and possibly not expect) from
national and what national expects from the affiliate is all that is
necessary and would be a step in the right direction.  I find the idea of
requiring anything of the affiliates (other than what is spelled out in
the by-laws) to be totally naïve.

The lack of organizational strength of our affiliates is the underlying
problem of which non-responsiveness is only one of the many visible
symptoms.  Building organizational strength at the state, and county,
affiliate level is where future success lies.

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
Scott L.
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 2:42 PM
To: lnc-business at lp.org
Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] LP National's dilemma Re: DenverPost Voter's
Guide contact information

Some might construe this idea as off-topic, but I dont think it is.

This has probably been implemented before, but since we are again facing the
problem of non-responsive state-affiliates, perhaps this would work:

Most state affiliates do not have enough money to hire anyone full-time, or
perhaps even part-time.  However, in unity there is strength.

I did a very, very rough back of the envelope calculation, and came up with
a figure of $10 per National LP member per year to have a full time employee
whose sole job would be to act as a remote office-manager for the 30
smallest state affiliates.  I understand that due to FEC regulations this
would probably have to be organized by the states, and that state LP
membership is likely to be a smaller number than National LP membership in a
given state.  I am hoping that we have enough fund-raising expertise in our
party to teach our affiliates to be able to raise this amount of money for
that purpose.

This full-time employee would essentially be working full-time for 1 ½ weeks
each year for each state that they were working for.  The 30 smallest state
affiliates all have fewer than 200 National LP members, so my guess is that
1.5 weeks per year is enough time to keep up the states database, make sure
the web site is kept up to date with logistical content (contact info, event
info, etc), and answer the phone for that affiliate.  I assume the next
largest 15 states could hire another employee to perform a similar function,
and I assume there are 5 states that can take care of these functions on
their own.

Perhaps the National LPs contract with affiliates should include a
provision that affiliates must have a live person available to answer the
phone from 8am until 8pm local time (phone trees would be permissible for
this purpose), and that this office manager would fill that requirement.

So  when a media call came in for a given state, this employee would call
each person on the list in a given state until they reached someone.  This
might require enabling the Chair, Vice-Chair, and one other person the
authority to answer media inquires, but that would help guarantee that media
inquires would be answered by an in-state LP official.  Of course, you dont
need an employee to have a phone tree, but I would guess that it is always
better for the media person to be able to initially reach a live person
within one minute.

Obviously the goal is to grow all of our affiliates to the point that all of
them can afford to have at least one full-time employee, but the above
suggestion is the first step towards that goal.

Volunteers are great, but if you absolutely, positively do not want stuff to
fall thru the cracks, you need to pay someone to get that kind of service
year in and year out.

   Scott Lieberman

  _____  

From: Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] On Behalf Of Norm
Olsen
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 12:07 PM
To: 'Wes Benedict'
Cc: lnc-business at hq.lp.org
Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] [Statechairs] LP National's dilemma Re:
DenverPost Voter's Guide contact information

Hello Wes . . .

With regard to your message:

1>     National is capable of supporting a full time staff of 6(?).  State
Chairs and other affiliate officers  are all volunteers.

2>     Maybe two or three affiliates have a full (or even part time)
employee which is not a volunteer.

3>     National should respond to all reasonable requests in this very busy
time of year in a reasonable manner.

4>     Affiliates where the requested information is not easily accessible
to media are in no position to complain.

5>     The judgment of the Executive Director and the Political Director
should be trusted.

6>     More frequent contact between national and the affiliates would
establish some report and thus reduce substantially this type of paranoia
which is hurting us.

7>     Yes, staff has a lot to do, but general elections only occur once
every two years.

Norm

--

Norman T Olsen

Regional Representative, Region I

From: Statechairs [mailto:statechairs-bounces at hq.lp.org] On Behalf Of Wes
Benedict
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 2:56 PM
To: Chuck Plunkett; statechairs at hq.lp.org
Subject: [Statechairs] LP National's dilemma Re: Denver Post Voter's Guide
contact information

Perhaps you can imagine the dilemma we face at LP National. Do we help
expedite coverage for our candidates in a quick efficient way, or put
another thing on the plate of the state chair, or engage in a sometimes
time-consuming cumbersome permission process with the state chair?

It's quick and easy for us to make a list and send it to a reporter. It's
even quicker simply to forward a note like this to a state chair. It's time
consuming to contact the state chair, wait for a response for hours or days,
then decide what to do if a response is not forthcoming.

Based on participation rates on recent IT Committee surveys, LP News
affiliate submissions, and responses to requests for updates to things like
State Chair contact lists, I think most state chairs are quite busy and
don't have time to respond to lots of things like this. 

I don't think sending a list of contacts to a reporter violates state
affiliate autonomy. I think telling a state affiliate they are required to
send a list to a reporter DOES violate state affiliate autonomy. 

In this particular case for Colorado and the alleged Denver Post contact,
I'm going to pass the buck and ask our political director Carla Howell to
use her best judgement (meaning to judge whether or not the contact is legit
and is a legit and important enough media outlet to warrant a list, is it
important enough for us to send a list, should the state chair be contacted
first for permission, etc.)

I've heard from one person "it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission"
and also "don't talk to any media in my state." 

LP Colorado, please speak up if you have an opinion on this in the mean
time. I know some states are quick to respond and some almost never respond.
Thanks,

Wes Benedict, Executive Director

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20141002/d6082d9d/attachment-0002.html>