<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16421"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>Maybe everyone should wait to see if the Secretary actually does anything
before co-sponsoring or voting on various motions.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sam</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 12/17/2012 10:39:49 A.M. US Eastern Standard Time,
vickilp12@gmail.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV>I will co-sponsor the modified motion as well.</DIV>
<DIV>VK</DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR> </DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Daniel Wiener <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A title=mailto:wiener@alum.mit.edu
href="mailto:wiener@alum.mit.edu"
target=_blank>wiener@alum.mit.edu</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>Mark has modified his motion, by changing the requirement
to say that the monthly payment will not exceed 75% of the Watergate lease
amount. He telephoned me and I agreed to co-sponsor the modified
version as well, but I have not yet seen that version in writing.
While I presume that the other co-sponsors will also agree, I do not know
that for a fact. The Secretary has not yet put anything out for a
vote. When she does, I will be voting against Mark's
motion.<BR><BR>Dan Wiener
<DIV class=HOEnZb>
<DIV class=h5><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Vicki Kirkland <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A title=mailto:vickilp12@gmail.com
href="mailto:vickilp12@gmail.com"
target=_blank>vickilp12@gmail.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV>I believe Mark posted the co-sponsors for his
motion.</DIV><SPAN><FONT color=#888888>
<DIV>VK</DIV></FONT></SPAN>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR> </DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 1:35 AM, Daniel Wiener
<SPAN dir=ltr><<A title=mailto:wiener@alum.mit.edu
href="mailto:wiener@alum.mit.edu"
target=_blank>wiener@alum.mit.edu</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>Starchild,<BR><BR>The Secretary has not yet put forth
the motion to be voted on. We don't even know if there are four
co-sponsors at this point.<BR><BR>Dan Wiener
<DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Starchild <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A title=mailto:sfdreamer@earthlink.net
href="mailto:sfdreamer@earthlink.net"
target=_blank>sfdreamer@earthlink.net</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote> I vote "no" on this
motion, for reasons I previously discussed below. I had hoped that
Mark might revise it and give me grounds to consider supporting it,
but this has not happened.<BR>
<DIV><BR>Love & Liberty,<BR>
((( starchild )))<BR>At-Large Representative, Libertarian
National Committee<BR><BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV>>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Mark Hinkle <<A
title=mailto:mark@garlic.com href="mailto:mark@garlic.com"
target=_blank>mark@garlic.com</A>> wrote:<BR>>> Dear
LNC,<BR>>><BR>>> I'm seeking co-sponsors for this
motion:<BR>>><BR>>> Moved, that the LNC approve the
purchase of an office in the greater Washington, D.C. area, to be
named in honor of David F. Nolan, contingent on the following
conditions:<BR>>><BR>>> • A minimum of
20% of the down payment shall be raised from dedicated contributions.
If a portion of that is in the form of pledges, the pledges must
be converted to cash before a purchase contract and mortgage agreement
are finalized.<BR>>> • The monthly payment
of principle, interest, and OTM (Overhead, Taxes, and Maintenance)
shall not exceed our current lease payments at the Watergate
complex.<BR>>> This motion will constitute authority to incur a
mortgage if the above conditions are met and if this motion passes by
the necessary two-thirds vote as specified in the Libertarian Party’s
Bylaws.<BR>>><BR>>> The final decision on what property to
buy shall be ratified by the LNC's Executive Committee by a majority
vote once the above conditions are met.<BR>>><BR>>>
RSVP................Mark Hinkle,<BR>>> LNC At-Large &
Retired LP Chair<BR>>> Tel: <A title=tel:408-779-7922
href="tel:408-779-7922" target=_blank
value="+14087797922">408-779-7922</A><BR>>> --<BR>>> "It
does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of
men."<BR>>>
- Samuel Adams<BR><BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>On Dec 3, 2012, at 6:48 PM, Starchild wrote:<BR><BR>>
Dan,<BR>><BR>> What is the cutoff point of
equity below which one cannot sell a building? If there is such a
fixed point, and if we buy, it does seem to me it would make sense to
plan any proposed purchase in such a way that we meet that minimum
threshold quickly, so that if our purchase plans don't end up coming
to fruition, at least we do not have to walk away from money we've
already sunk into making mortgage payments, but have at least the
chance to recoup them by selling. However I don't claim to have any
particular expertise about real estate transactions, so maybe I'm
missing something here.<BR>><BR>> What I
told Mark Hinkle when he called me last night to lobby for my vote for
his alternate motion, I'll say here as well -- I'm potentially open to
voting for a motion including language addressing the issues and
concerns raised in the document copied below about how to get the most
out of a Libertarian "brick and mortar" space. The more of these
concerns a motion to buy a building addresses, and the more strongly
it addresses them, the more likely it is to get my support.
Conversely, a motion that offers nothing to address these concerns is
unlikely to get my support.<BR>><BR>> One
of my inspirations in terms of what a more functional and effective LP
headquarters could look like is the "Freedoms Phoenix" workshop in
Phoenix, Arizona. Here is a 9-minute video from 2010 where Ernie
Hancock (LP member and former candidate for national chair, and the
guy responsible for the "Ron Paul r3VOLution" meme, for those who
don't know him) gives a tour of the space and explains what they do
there -- <A title=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFeeB41UpI8
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFeeB41UpI8"
target=_blank>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFeeB41UpI8</A>
.<BR>><BR>> I'm not saying the Freedom's
Phoenix space is perfect -- in the video, Ernie touts its *lack* of
external visibility as an advantage, which makes little sense to me
since he goes on to say how they have lots of events there, and
obviously the video and other information about the space is out there
on the Internet as well so it's not like they're really hiding from
anyone. I think almost any libertarian brick-and-mortar space is
missing an opportunity by not seeking to expose passers-by to
libertarian graphics and information. The Freedoms Phoenix space also
feels a bit cold and uninviting; it could use more of a homey touch,
imho. But there is a heck of a lot to like about the impressive work
they've done down there. It is a functional space where people (not
just a few insiders, but lots of freedom supporters) can come in and
work and get stuff done. It doesn't look like a corporate office, and
has a significant feel of being a community space, a place where
libertarians can hang out, bond, network, etc., a place to which
people can contribute in various ways without a lot of bureaucracy or
hassle.<BR>><BR>> Since what a building
offers is often considerably more important than specifically where it
is located, and therefore we shouldn't automatically eliminate
excellent spaces from consideration simply based on their location, I
will also be more open to a motion that does not limit our building
search to the Washington D.C. area. That being said, so far I've
really only heard two options for relocating outside D.C. that seem
like they could potentially outweigh the advantages of being located
in or very near the U.S. capitol district:<BR>><BR>> (1) Basing
our national HQ in New Hampshire, both to support, and be supported
by, the Free State Project. I think the FSP is something that is
likely to continue building over time, and therefore it's sort of an
investment in the future. I think we should also try to work with and
support other libertarian groups to the extent that we practically
can. Not only does it increase the solidarity and strength of the
libertarian movement as a whole, but they may return the favor by
trying to do more to help and support the LP. In practical terms, New
Hampshire offers not only the freest political climate in the nation,
but a strong base of liberty-minded activists who could potentially
volunteer at headquarters and help out with projects.<BR>><BR>>
(2) Having a mobile office based out of a large RV, which could
hypothetically be parked in the D.C. environs most of the time,
perhaps moving around a bit to show up at D.C. protests on the
national mall, important press conferences, etc., but go on the road
during campaign season to make appearances with presidential, state
and local LP candidates, at other (L)ibertarian events, etc. This
option could be considerably cheaper than either buying or leasing a
building, and would allow us major public visibility compared with a
fixed location via having our "office" plastered with Libertarian
propaganda like the Gary Johnson vans that were driving around, as
well as the flexibility to quickly relocate to different areas if
desired by this or future LNCs. (Thanks to California LP member Mike
Seebeck for this idea)<BR>><BR>> During
this whole discussion about what to do about the LP's national office
(indeed, in lots of other LNC discussions too!), it's important we
keep in mind that the "options on the table" are whichever options we
choose to put on the table.<BR>><BR>> To
the extent we make a habit of assuming that people won't support an
idea just because it's new or unfamiliar, we may be shooting ourselves
in the foot by precluding consideration of fresh new ideas and
perspectives.<BR>><BR>> "Why should I vote
Libertarian when everybody knows that realistically it's going to be
Obama or Romney?" We know how that kind of thinking hurts the LP and
the freedom movement out there in the real world. We know how the
unwillingness to truly consider doing something differently because
people don't think others will consider it, and therefore assume "that
will never happen", can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. We also
know that some of our opponents realize this too, and deliberately
encourage "that will never happen" thinking in the hopes that it will
become a self-fulfilling prophecy!<BR>><BR>>
So it's good to be similarly aware of these dynamics within our
own organization, and to understand when the main reasons for not
giving something a chance are "political" rather than factual. Many
individuals may be privately thinking, "Boy, that actually doesn't
sound like such a bad idea, but I don't want to be the one to stand up
and say so." This is where being vertebrates comes in!
:-)<BR>><BR>> Love & Liberty,<BR>>
((( starchild )))<BR>> At-Large
Representative, Libertarian National Committee<BR>><BR>><BR>>
The Ideal Libertarian “Brick & Mortar” Space<BR>><BR>> When
Libertarian Party or other pro-freedom groups reach a certain size and
have a certain amount of money at their disposal, talk inevitably
turns to procuring some kind of office. The national Libertarian Party
has an office, as does the California LP (circa 2012).<BR>><BR>>
Unfortunately, our party is not getting as much benefit from these and
other similar spaces as it could. Indeed, the term “office” itself may
be part of the problem, in that it can prevent people from thinking
outside the box when it comes to the potential of brick-and-mortar
spaces!<BR>><BR>> Here are some questions to ask about a
proposed – or existing – brick-and-mortar location, roughly in order
of importance. The more questions you can answer with a “Yes”, the
more of an asset the space is likely to be to the LP and to the
libertarian cause.<BR>><BR>>
_______________________________________________________________<BR>>
• Does the space function as a kind of libertarian community center
(i.e. users have a sense of it not just being the private space of
party officers or paid staffers who work there, but belonging to the
whole party and to some degree the whole libertarian movement) that is
important to the local LP chapter, pro-freedom activists, and friendly
community groups as well as to people in the party?<BR>><BR>> •
Is the space economically sustainable and cost-efficient (i.e. does it
have cheap rent or overhead)?<BR>><BR>> • Can activists make
lots of things (meetings, speakers, workshops, parties, etc.) happen
at the space with a minimum of advance notice and
bureaucracy?<BR>><BR>> • Is the space located in a
high-visibility location such that messages and materials can be
displayed which will be readily seen by passers-by?<BR>><BR>> •
Is the space readily accessible (i.e. centrally located, in a walkable
neighborhood, in proximity to mass transit and convenient/affordable
parking, accessible to people with disabilities)?<BR>><BR>> • Is
the space a friendly, welcoming place for locals and out-of-towners to
drop in and visit, sit down and have a cup of coffee, read some back
issues of party newsletters, chat with other libertarians, get online
to do some activism, use the bathroom, take a shower,
etc.?<BR>><BR>> • Is the space geared toward providing things
for interns and volunteers to do, both long-term and on a drop-in
basis?<BR>><BR>> • Does the space serve as a distribution hub
for activist materials (free literature and other items which
activists can stop in and pick up in bulk for distribution or
passers-by can peruse or take with them to learn about
libertarianism)?<BR>><BR>> • Is the space transparent in its
operations so that people can readily discover how to fully make use
of it and get things done (e.g. are there easily learned procedures
for scheduling events or using equipment, posted office hours during
which specific named staffers will be on hand to answer questions,
etc.)?<BR>><BR>> • Is the space in proximity to centers of
political power (U.S. or state capitol, city hall), and public spaces
(plazas, parks, and other gathering places) to serve as a ready base
camp for protesting, lobbying, and other outside political
doings?<BR>><BR>> • Does the space have a participatory feel to
it (e.g. are activists easily able to contribute their own
decorations, materials, and so on to enhance it), and do its users
have a say in how it is run?<BR>><BR>> • Does the space have a
minimum of rules and restrictions (e.g. are eating, drinking, smoking,
animals, bicycles, rollerblades, etc., allowed?)<BR>><BR>> •
Does the space have an “organic” feel to it, a sense of being a place
with a soul (e.g. is it comfortable, is it aesthetically pleasing, is
there art, is the lighting friendly, is it neither too messy nor too
pristine, etc.)?<BR>><BR>> • Does the space offer temporary to
long-term storage for protest signs, banners, button-making machines,
audio/PA equipment, and other materials people might not readily be
able to store at home or might desire to maintain in a shared,
accessible group space?<BR>><BR>> • Does the space serve as an
effective workshop for activists to get things done (making signs and
banners, filming and recording, creating art, etc.)?<BR>><BR>> •
Is the space accessible 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to trusted
activists, and does it have places for people to crash if
necessary?<BR>><BR>> • Does the space include a store where
people can buy pro-freedom merchandise and supplies?<BR>><BR>>
__________________________________________________________________<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
On Dec 3, 2012, at 11:12 AM, Daniel Wiener wrote:<BR>><BR>>>
I'm replying to this suggested motion on
LNC-Discuss.<BR>>><BR>>> I for one am not willing to vote
for Mark's motion, and I strongly doubt that there is a two-thirds
majority of the LNC which will do so. I am very leery of
imposing long-term obligations on future LNC's which could mire the
Libertarian Party in a financial quagmire, and this applies to both
long-term leases and mortgages. I will only vote to purchase an
office if there is a sufficiently large down payment that I can be
confident our mortgage will not sink under water, and if we commit to
paying off the mortgage in a short time span. These are very
uncertain economic times, and I believe there are significant risks in
the commercial real estate market in Washington, D.C. (and elsewhere).
But if we have a large enough equity, we can at least sell the
building as a last resort if we're forced to by future financial
exigencies.<BR>>><BR>>> Dan Wiener<BR></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>> _______________________________________________<BR>>
Lnc-discuss mailing list<BR>> <A title=mailto:Lnc-discuss@hq.lp.org
href="mailto:Lnc-discuss@hq.lp.org"
target=_blank>Lnc-discuss@hq.lp.org</A><BR>> <A
title=http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-discuss_hq.lp.org
href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-discuss_hq.lp.org"
target=_blank>http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-discuss_hq.lp.org</A><BR><BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>Lnc-business
mailing list<BR><A title=mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org
href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org"
target=_blank>Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</A><BR><A
title=http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org"
target=_blank>http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</A><BR></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Lnc-business
mailing list<BR><A title=mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org
href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org"
target=_blank>Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</A><BR><A
title=http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org"
target=_blank>http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</A><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Lnc-business
mailing list<BR><A title=mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org
href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org"
target=_blank>Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</A><BR><A
title=http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org"
target=_blank>http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</A><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Lnc-business
mailing list<BR><A title=mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org
href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</A><BR><A
title=http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org"
target=_blank>http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</A><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Lnc-business
mailing
list<BR>Lnc-business@hq.lp.org<BR>http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>