[Lnc-business] April LNC Meeting location

[Nicholas Sarwark]

Dear David,

I'm fine with an approval vote on meeting locations based on the cost
and other logistical information Robert gathered.  I'm not sure if
that could be done in a reasonable time with the options that Robert
researched for the April meeting, but I'm happy to use that procedure
for the second LNC meeting this year.

Taking the decision on this meeting location was done because I did
not get any sense of clear consensus from the LNC when asking people
which locations they preferred.  In retrospect, asking for an approval
vote on the 3-5 best options may have worked better, assuming such a
vote could be done in a shorter timeframe than our typical 10-day
email vote.

-Nick

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 9:18 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>