[Lnc-business] April LNC meeting location - David's motion

Mon Jan 16 01:53:26 EST 2017

Well, I can get flights cheaper to Alaska right now then Pittsburgh (yes it
is a search I did as I am planning on making the Alaska convention if I
can).  I am not a very happy camper.  It is not particularly fair to
committee members that are not on the east coast to have us schelp all the
way back there. While yes this is what we signed up for, I think some
courtesy to balance our costs is in order.  Two in row in the same vicinity
is patently *not balanced.*

- Caryn Ann

On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:

>
> I think we're still waiting for Nick to respond to the concerns we raised
> (see thread below).
>
> And I realize that I forgot David had offered a motion regarding the
> meeting. I will co-sponsor, David.
>
> Love & Liberty,
>                                    ((( starchild )))
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>                                 (415) 625-FREE
>                                   @StarchildSF
>
>
> On Jan 15, 2017, at 10:21 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
> So is the decision final for PA?  And Pittsburgh?  I need to make
> arrangements with my work which depend on my flight schedule.
>
> --
> *In Liberty,*
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
>
> On Jan 7, 2017, at 8:33 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
> I agree with you David.  I would co-sponsor but I have no time to
> wordsmith unfortunately.
>
> The self-funded sacrificial travel costs of over 15 persons (and what
> affiliates have been neglected) should be considered.
>
> Two on the east side is not fair.  Perhaps the Region 1 alternate could
> come this time if we didn't require across the country travel?  Alternates
> closer can attend easily now two meetings giving those regions two voices-
> due to distance - Region 1 is at a disadvantage.
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 9:19 AM David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I have absolutely no concerns about Nick's and Robert's abilities to make
>> a
>> wise decision (or recommendation) on the meeting location. I also
>> understand
>> the need for a reasonably prompt location decision so we can get on with
>> travel and lodging arrangements. However, in addition to Starchild's
>> legitimate transparency concerns on proposal specifics, this top-down
>> approach makes a mockery of asking LNC members where they would like to
>> hold
>> meetings. It suggests that meeting location criteria are driven primarily
>> by
>> LNC staff preferences and travel costs paid from the LNC budget rather
>> than
>> LNC member preferences and self-funded travel expenses. Further, I
>> strongly
>> suspect that some LNC member location suggestions were expediently ignored
>> because no 2020/22 convention cost and suitability information had been
>> gathered for those locations.
>>
>> I would add that the essence of Libertarianism is to empower our leaders
>> to
>> lead by example rather than the expediency of exercising authority. That
>> is
>> not Nick's fault. We LNC members are to blame if we cave in to the
>> temptation to default our responsibilities to Nick when not appropriate
>> and
>> put Nick in a lose-lose dilemma. Nick handles it well but it is unfair to
>> both Nick and the full complement of LNC members. I would agree that the
>> meeting location is not a high-priority issue. Nevertheless, it presents
>> an
>> excellent opportunity to set an example by empowering LNC members to
>> select
>> meeting locations. Or we can call this discussion nitpicking and continue
>> our top-down failings that fly in the face of our criticisms of the broken
>> two-party system.
>>
>>
>> I offer the following motion:
>>
>> "Hold a simple LNC email write-in approval vote to narrow down our
>> personal
>> meeting location preferences followed by a second simple approval vote on
>> the top 3 to 5 choices considering the astute finance and logistics
>> recommendations by Robert and Nick."
>>
>> Robert and Nick, thank you for your location research diligence, wise
>> recommendations and ability to shoulder our defaulted responsibilities.
>> The
>> above motion could be simplified to one approval email vote if sufficient
>> location cost and site suitability details and recommendations were
>> available. Any interest in co-sponsoring this motion? If so, who would
>> like
>> to wordsmith this motion into the proper language? Or, do we want to move
>> on
>> to more critical LNC issues and address the meeting location selection
>> method at a more convenient time?
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> ~David Pratt Demarest
>> Region 6 LNC Representative
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> From: Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] On Behalf
>> Of Starchild
>> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 7:52 PM
>> To: lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] April LNC Meeting location
>>
>>         So what IS the proposal, Nick? May we see the full terms? You
>> present this as if a decision has already been made. Isn't it up to the
>> full
>> LNC to decide where to meet? To be clear, I have no pre-existing objection
>> to Pittsburgh or preference for another location. I am simply concerned
>> about process.
>>
>>         Has any effort been made to use official communications (email,
>> direct mail, website, LP News, Facebook, etc.) to let our membership know
>> that we're looking for free or low-cost venues suitable for an LNC
>> meeting?
>>
>> Love & Liberty,
>>
>>                                    ((( starchild )))
>
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>>                                 (415) 625-FREE
>>                                   @StarchildSF
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 6, 2017, at 3:46 PM, Nicholas Sarwark wrote:
>>
>> > Dear All,
>>
>> > Robert Kraus has done some excellent work getting proposals from
>> > numerous locations around the country, some that would be suitable for
>> > a potential 2020/22 convention, others not.  Based on a combination of
>> > overall cost, accessibility, site suitability, and having a meeting
>> > where we haven't lately, it came down to Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, or
>> > Oklahoma City.
>>
>> > Of the three, Pittsburgh had the best overall proposal, so I intend to
>> > have Robert negotiate a contract for the April meeting to be held in
>> > Pittsburgh at the Wyndham Grand Pittsburgh.  Indianapolis was overly
>> > costly on the venue side and Oklahoma City overly costly on the travel
>> > side.
>>
>> > Don't purchase tickets or make reservations until Robert has final
>> > details.  Also, there will likely be a hotel/meeting space tour,
>> > either on Friday prior to the meeting or on Saturday or Sunday after
>> > the meeting.
>>
>> > Yours in liberty,
>>
>> > Nick
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>

-- 
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
<http://www.lpcolorado.org>
Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170115/bbd12a1b/attachment-0002.html>