[Lnc-business] Completing agenda for the upcoming meeting

Tue Jul 7 19:36:32 EDT 2015

I will be driving to the meeting, so it is no skin off my back if I go home
earlier.  I expect that others, though, might not be thrilled about
traveling for a one-day meeting, and likely have booked flights leaving
later on Sunday in anticipation of meeting.  I do see a logistical issue
with meeting until 6:30 when we have an event at 7PM, which will not allow
people time to have dinner.  That could be resolved, I guess, with a
working dinner.

I do want to point out that, back when the plans for this meeting were
first sent out, I raised a concern about meeting on Sunday in the office.
I pointed out at that time that, when I had suggested meeting at the office
for a previous meeting, I had been told (correctly, as I surmised when I
looked around the basement) that the LNC, let alone spectators, would not
fit in the basement.  I suggested at that time that, either we had decided
we could meet there, in which case we might as well meet there on Saturday
and Sunday, or we had come to no such decision, in which case it seemed
rather silly to plan to meet there.  The response I got then, which seemed
reasonable, was that the idea had been reconsidered (not using the
parliamentary meaning here) and that the fact of the hotel meeting room
being available for only one day presented an opportunity to experiment.
However, if we enjoy having this opportunity to experiment, why are we now
trying to avoid that very experiment?  If, in fact, meeting in the basement
is a bad idea and no such experiment is indicated, why didn't we rethink
this plan and use a different hotel?

It is an entirely separate matter, yet one worth reminding ourselves from
time to time, that the previous LNC didn't think that having sufficient
meeting space was a necessary parameter for an office (and that they called
it a building, and told donors they were buying a building.)

All of the foregoing, of course, would be irrelevant if we legitimately had
nothing to talk about.  We could hear reports read, do something regarding
a logo (I hesitate to say finish the selection, since we have believed so
many times that would happen only to be disappointed,) and choose a General
Counsel in one day.  However, we are the board of a corporation which has
been steadily bleeding members, donors, and money.  If I could afford to be
a major donor, and I knew that fact, and then I read on this transparent
email list that all we need to discuss at our meeting is these three
things, I can assure you that no money would flow from my pocket.  It is
the job of a board to provide a strategic vision to an organization and to
diligently conduct its governance, while staff fulfills the management
function (except that we make our Chair our CEO as well.)  I do not believe
we are fulfilling these responsibilities.  I do not believe we are
effectively governing the affairs of this organization, transmitting a
successful vision, and translating that vision into success.  We strove, at
our first meeting, also in Virginia, to provide goals and metrics for their
achievement.  If the results we see are not pleasant, I would suggest that
we need to revisit our priorities, design a different strategic vision, or
find a different way to turn it into action.  First, though, we need to
identify where the problem is.  I am not basing this conclusion on my
personal opinion:  as a libertarian, I believe in markets, and I see
markets speaking to us.  Our members and donors are either not inspired by
our vision, or not convinced that our governance will lead to successful
execution.  I think this is more important than spending yet more time on
our logo, and than ending our meeting early.

Speaking of which, regardless of my own feelings on our logo (to summarize
- I am not a graphic designer, so I have no real opinion except that I like
Rosie, and that the model for Rosie recently died in my own state of
Connecticut) I was disappointed that we did not choose a logo last time.  I
say this not because I'm in a rush to choose a new logo or to rebrand all
our materials, but because it did not inspire a feeling in me that we were
successfully leading.  We had reached out quite a bit to our members at
that point, from the time of soliciting suggestions to the time of  seeking
opinions prior to our in-person meeting in Phoenix, and I felt (as I said
on that call) that it was time for the leaders to lead and make a
decision.  Going back to the members was, in my opinion, a mistake - a very
small one, but an example of us, as a board, being too nice, too
solicitous, too afraid of overstepping or doing something wrong.  If the
first Libertarian-controlled Congress is in office when a meteor is heading
towards the Earth, I hope that Congress will not fail to act because it
needs to consult, yet again, with constituents, thus wiping out all chance
for future freedom along with all chance for human life.  I hope that the
first Libertarian Congress will not be responsible for an apocalypse of any
kind, whether zombies are included or not.

Now, hemorrhaging supporters and members would be serious at any time, but
it is, in my opinion, far more serious at the present moment.  I will
enumerate the things that make it more concerning now than it would be at
other times.  First, every major poll shows, when not inflamed by the
passion of the moment (such as the call for regulations on fireworks
because someone set one off on his head, or the passage of any law with a
child's name in it) that the American public is veering more libertarian.
I do not regard libertarianism as a binary, and even if I did, it would
probably be false to say that more libertarians now exist, but there are
more libertarian feelings roaming around looking for hosts.  The American
people are uncharacteristically angry - at large corporations that spend
their bailout money designing weapons for unprovoked wars of aggression, at
a government that insists on inserting its blue-shirted, latex-gloved hand
into their bedroom, their bakery, their bathroom, their wallet, and their
healthcare, at being coerced to purchase products then being taxed on the
subsidy provided to enable them to do so - and most of all, at the
Republicans and the Democrats.  John McCain quipped that there are only two
groups in politics that are unpopular - the Republicans and the Democrats.
This is the moment, the opportunity - and yet we are shrinking.  This means
we are not falling because we are getting swept under in a tide of
unpopularity - it is our organization specifically that is faltering.

Second, we are heading into a Presidential year.  We did not budget a
surplus this year to provide for that Presidential year.  If we were to
fall below budget, this would be doubly troubling.  It is true that we are
equipped with our best-ever starting ballot access - but that makes it all
the more embarrassing if we do not achieve a good amount of ballot access
in December.

So what needs to be discussed?  I would suggest:
1.  A simplified strategic vision, with metrics
2.  Finding the hole
3.  How to plug it
4.  A serious talk about our goals for ballot access and how best to
achieve them - one that is not mired in "more is better."
5.  Optimal staffing levels

I applaud the Chair, by the way, for making calls and encouraging us to do
the same.  My next email will be to Mr. Benedict on that topic.  I do hope
that we can come up with a better plan to reassure our donors, bring back
donors and members, and display our successful vision than making a point
of asking for money more.  Certainly, it is good to ask, and we should be
asking more than we currently are - but we also need to provide more
reasons to say yes, in my view.

Joshua Katz

Joshua A. Katz
Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)

On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org> wrote:

> All,
>
> I should be sending the proposed agenda out to the list tonight.  If you
> have agenda items you would like added, please email the list or myself
> directly.
>
> The major items other than reports that I anticipate for the agenda are:
>
> - Final logo selection
> - Selection of a new General Counsel
>
> Due to our not having the meeting room at the hotel on Sunday, I have been
> asked to try to complete the business by the end of the Saturday session.
> Suggestions include starting at 8:30 am, having a working lunch, and
> adjourning as late as 6:30 pm.  I'm open to any or all of these ideas, but
> will defer to the body if anyone has strong objections.
>
> Also, please get your reports to the Secretary and Mr. Kraus if you would
> like them to be included in the binder.
>
> -Nick
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150707/ea3ae662/attachment-0002.html>