<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div>Fair enough. Thanks for pointing me to that. I will read over all of those minutes.<br><br></div>Provided what you're pointing me to answers that question then perhaps what we lack is simply documentation organizing these strategies. I know we have some reports being generated, but a simple mechanism to steer ourselves seems like it would be of value rather than having to sift through minutes. Still, I'm happy to do it and perhaps will propose a better system at our next LNC meeting.<br><br></div>Thanks again.<br></div>Kevin<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Wes Benedict <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank">wes.benedict@lp.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
The LNC discussed, debated, and adopted specific goals this term,
not the "implied goals" Mr. Olsen refers to. It was probably before
you joined the LNC. I realize you joined to replace another member
that resigned. <br>
<br>
They're in at least one of the minutes here:
<a href="http://www.lp.org/leadership/lnc-meeting-archives" target="_blank">http://www.lp.org/leadership/lnc-meeting-archives</a><br>
<br>
You might want to read all of the minutes for this term, because
they have a lot about ballot access in them, as well as other
things. <br>
<br>
<div>Wes Benedict, Executive Director<br>
<small><small>Libertarian National Committee, Inc.<br>
<b>New address: 1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314</b><br>
<a href="tel:%28202%29%20333-0008%20ext.%20232" value="+12023330008" target="_blank">(202) 333-0008 ext. 232</a>, <a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank">wes.benedict@lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://facebook.com/libertarians" target="_blank">facebook.com/libertarians</a> @LPNational<br>
Join the Libertarian Party at: <a href="http://lp.org/membership" target="_blank">http://lp.org/membership</a></small></small><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>On 12/11/2015 11:59 AM, Kevin Ludlow
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Wes,<br>
<br>
</div>
No, I definitely did not know that. It seems like it
would be the case as presumably we would get more
efficient with our efforts over time, but I've not seen
any data to illustrate that point.<br>
<br>
</div>
In case I've come across poorly, I don't want to seem as if
I object to the idea or anything like that. I just want to
encourage the body to have specifically defined strategic
goals rather than the "implied goals" that Mr. Olsen was
referring to. As an advocate of the devil, while ballot
access may be cheaper, one could still ask what it's end
goal is. I would argue that getting a single person elected
to a partisan office would have a far greater impact than
simply allowing others (who will realistically never win an
election) to run for office through our ballot access
measures. I concede one affects the other and am not making
a case for either, but just illustrating how the strategy
could differ if it were defined that way.<br>
<br>
</div>
For the time being, I'm delighted to see the party working so
hard to help Oklahoma, am totally behind the effort, and hope
that it provides the party with a big morale boost and helps
boost the party throughout the state.<br>
<br>
</div>
-Kevin Ludlow<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Wes
Benedict <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank">wes.benedict@lp.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Kevin, did you know
that ballot access has gotten easier and cheaper, year
after year, as a result of our decades of sustainable
efforts?<br>
<br>
<div>Wes Benedict, Executive Director<br>
<small><small>Libertarian National Committee, Inc.<span><br>
<b>New address: 1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA
22314</b><br>
<a href="tel:%28202%29%20333-0008%20ext.%20232" value="+12023330008" target="_blank">(202)
333-0008 ext. 232</a>, <a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank"></a><a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank">wes.benedict@lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://facebook.com/libertarians" target="_blank">facebook.com/libertarians</a>
@LPNational<br>
Join the Libertarian Party at: <a href="http://lp.org/membership" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://lp.org/membership" target="_blank">http://lp.org/membership</a></span></small></small><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>On 12/10/2015 10:57 PM, Kevin Ludlow wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>I appreciate the variety of
voices responding to my questions.
And to Mr. Olsen, 6 paragraphs were
most certainly welcome :)<br>
<br>
</div>
I apologize for not being on the call
on Monday. Unfortunately work does
occasionally take precedent over my
extra-curricular activities -
political or otherwise. I was also
fairly confident the vote would pass
and of course it did. So regardless
of anyone's position on the matter,
here we are.<br>
<br>
</div>
The gist of what I was getting at was
simply to have the cost/benefits
explained to me. Mr. Tomaso nailed one
simply by citing the overall morale
boost that ballot access provides.
While perhaps difficult to measure,
there is no doubt relevance to the
claim. Mr. Olsen, however, adds a tick
to the "con" side in that he cites the
difficulties with the sustainability of
ballot access.<br>
<br>
</div>
In most any business model one would
likely be advised to stray AWAY from
something that is unsustainable. It
becomes difficult to predict costs, there
is always an element of being
unsuccessful, and meanwhile there exist
goals that actually ARE sustainable should
one direct their effort that way.<br>
<br>
</div>
Perhaps I'm still just too new, but it
simply struck me that I could not really
weigh the cost/benefits of the financial
decision we were about to make in any
practical way. I have since been informed
of 1 or 2 costs and 1 or 2 benefits, but it
still seems the Libertarian party should
really be making decisions almost
exclusively upon this kind of analysis and
having a specifically defined strategy
rather than an implied one as Mr. Olsen
points out.<br>
<br>
</div>
Anyway, thank you all for listening and for
responding to my questions / concerns. I
appreciate your time.<br>
<br>
</div>
-Kevin Ludlow<br>
</div>
Region 7<br>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at
2:44 PM, Scott L. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:scott73@earthlink.net" target="_blank"></a><a href="mailto:scott73@earthlink.net" target="_blank">scott73@earthlink.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">I
am very glad that the Regional
Representative from Colorado is
asking us to look at and evaluate “</span></font><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">This implied
goal, or objective if you prefer, is
50+ state ballot access for the
Libertarian party</span></font><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">.”</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">Unfortunately,
now is not a good time for a
full-blown analysis of the issues
that the Regional Representative is
asking us to look at.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">We
are only 6 months away from the end
of our LNC term, and only 6 months
away from the beginning of the
General Election portion of the 4
year Presidential Election Cycle. I
think we have a moral commitment to
our members to maximize the number
of states that the <b><span style="font-weight:bold">2016 </span></b>Libertarian
Presidential Nominee is on the
ballot, obviously constrained by how
much money we have available to pay
for signatures.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">However
– the next LNC <b><span style="font-weight:bold">should
</span></b>start discussing the
topic of ballot access at their very
first full-weekend meeting of the
next LNC term. That way, they have
at least 6 months before they even
have to begin collecting signatures
to get a candidate on the ballot for
vote test purposes for the Nov. 2017
elections (VA, NJ, and a couple of
others).</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">That
being said, I disagree with the
Regional Representative’s statement
that “</span></font><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">Since
specific strategies and or
objectives have not been
established, the vacuum is filled
with the implied objective of
achieving 50+ state ballot access.
While a noble and legitimately
political objective, it suffers from
several problems; the most
significant of which is the problem
of being unachievable on a
permanent, or even semi-permanent,
basis .”</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">The
Republican and Democrat Parties have
permanent ballot status, because
they understand that if they removed
ballot access for the other major
party in even one state, that
“accomplishment” could be turned
into a nationwide scandal. But
until the LP becomes a major party
(1) the Libertarian Party will not
have “permanent” ballot access in
any state.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"><br>
However, we CAN achieve
semi-permanent ballot access in 50
states, or darn close to that
number. To do that, the LNC needs
to stop focusing on October ballot
access, and instead focus on
December ballot access. That
probably means sacrificing ballot
access in a few states BEFORE an
election in an even-numbered year,
and using the money saved to lobby
or sue for lower vote tests in
states that have ridiculously high
vote tests (Alabama and Connecticut
come to mind).</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">
Scott
Lieberman</span></font><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">1.
Defined by the FEC, for example, as
receiving 25% of the vote for
President</span></font><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center" align="center"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%"> </span></font></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold">From:</span></font></b><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma">
Lnc-business [mailto:<a href="mailto:lnc-business-bounces@hq.lp.org" target="_blank"></a><a href="mailto:lnc-business-bounces@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">lnc-business-bounces@hq.lp.org</a>]
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">On
Behalf Of </span></b>Norm
Olsen<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b>
Monday, December 07, 2015 11:50 AM</span></font></p>
<div>
<div><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b>
<a href="mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b>
Re: [Lnc-business] report on
Oklahoma visit</font></div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">Hello Kevin .
. .</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">>></span></font>
why we should be focusing so many
efforts on Oklahoma?<font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">I’d like to
take a shot at answering your
question. I have been asking
similar questions for five years
now. I could write a book in
response. But alas; you ask for
a paragraph. And a short one at
that. Would I be unreasonable
to supply five or six
paragraphs?</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">The LNC does
not have a specifically defined
strategy; nor does it have a
stated set of objectives. The
indisputable result is that it
does not have a list of tactics
(i.e. well defined activities)
to pursue to achieve any of
these undefined objectives.
While attempts have been made, I
am unaware of any meeting that
has established such
strategies/objectives or any
writing in the bylaws or policy
manual that establishes such.
(The policy manual lists a set
of “core activities”, but that’s
about it.)</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">Nevertheless,
the LNC is not totally
rudderless. There exists an
implied basic goal and implied
tactics to achieve the implied
goal. I became aware of this
implied goal (although I did not
immediately recognize the
significance of it) at my very
first LNC meeting in November of
2010 in New Orleans. At that
meeting, the following motion
was adopted:</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d;font-style:italic"><a href="https://www.lp.org/files/2010-11-20-LNCMeetingMinutes-NewOrleans.pdf" target="_blank"></a><a href="https://www.lp.org/files/2010-11-20-LNCMeetingMinutes-NewOrleans.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.lp.org/files/2010-11-20-LNCMeetingMinutes-NewOrleans.pdf</a></span></font></i><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">
(printed page 17, .pdf page 17):</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><font face="Century Schoolbook" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span>.
. . moved to authorize the
Executive Committee to encumber
expenses for ballot access,</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><font face="Century Schoolbook" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span>notwithstanding
the provisions of section 1.05
of the Policy Manual, for the
year 2011.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="1"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">[Section 1.05
of the Policy Manual is that
section which limits Executive
Committee encumbrances to that
which has been budgeted.]</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">This motion
was made, seconded, <b><span style="font-weight:bold">and
the question called</span></b>
in a time frame of about 35
seconds. It was approved by a
11-1 roll call vote. This
implied goal has been
recertified, implicitly, in
every budget resolution pass by
the LNC in the last 5 years.
The Ballot Access Petitioning
Expense line typically receives
65% to 85% of the budgeted
discretion funds in each year.
You participated in the budget
discussions of the 2016 budget
where Ballot Access Petitioning
Expense was allocated 70% of the
funds available for allocation
among the Policy Manual’s “core
activities”.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">This implied
goal, or objective if you
prefer, is 50+ state ballot
access for the Libertarian
party, with some added emphasis
on Presidential elections. On
the surface, this appears to be
a noteworthy objective.
However, it has been adopted
implicitly rather than
explicitly. That is why the
question you asked comes up from
time to time. Gaining ballot
access in all 50 states is the
primary focus of the LNC, and
remains a primary focus in
fundraising efforts. (It’s hard
to raise funds to purchase
office supplies, much easier to
raise funds for ballot access.)
And so, given the improved
chance to gain ballot access in
Oklahoma, even if it is for a
single election cycle, it is not
surprising that the effort is
getting a large share of our
attention and resources. Given
that this has been the primary
focus of what the LNC does, and
has been doing for at least two
(if not four) decades, it is
something we must demonstrate
success at or we begin to lose
the respect of our members and
donors.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">That answers
the primary question, but the
leaves the follow up questions
begging for an answer.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">Since
specific strategies and or
objectives have not been
established, the vacuum is
filled with the implied
objective of achieving 50+ state
ballot access. While a noble
and legitimately political
objective, it suffers from
several problems; the most
significant of which is the
problem of being unachievable on
a permanent, or even
semi-permanent, basis . Thus,
the LNC has a single
overpowering objective which is
absorbs most all of its
resources to achieve, and
continued consumption of these
resources to maintain to the
degree achieved. In other
words, a pleasant way of saying
an enormous, perpetual, drain on
resources which precludes most
all other possible uses of
financial resources.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">I have been
suggesting for some time now
that expending most all of our
discretionary funds on ballot
access petitioning may not be
the best use of the financial
resources entrusted to us by our
members and donors. For that, I
have been unofficially dubbed
the “nattering nabob of
negativity” of the Libertarian
Party. However, things are
looking up. Thanks to efforts
of the Chair and Executive
Director, the 2016 budget
includes $45,000 for Affiliate
Support, up 4,500% from where it
was in 2014. Our Affiliate
Support Specialist contractor
appears to have made more
progress in just three months
than the LNC has in the previous
six years (since the formation
of the Affiliate Support
Committee). I look forward to
the time when the “core
activities” other than the
Ballot Access Petitioning
activity are allotted equivalent
amounts of the financial
resources entrusted to us. At
that time, the primary question
and the follow up questions will
both, hopefully, be moot.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">We have
ballot access in 28 states; and
ballot access is reasonable
(e.g. ~1,000 signatures) in
another 10 states. The low
hanging fruit in the ballot
access arena has been picked.
It’s time to start producing
political success in the 38
states where we have ballot
access or can reasonable obtain
such.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">Norm</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">--</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">Norman T
Olsen</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">Regional
Representative, Region 1</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">Libertarian
National Committee</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">7931 South
Broadway, PMB 102</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">Littleton</span></font><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d">,
CO 80122-2710</span></font><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"><a href="tel:303-263-4995" value="+13032634995" target="_blank">303-263-4995</a></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Calibri" color="#1f497d" size="2"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1f497d"> </span></font></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold">From:</span></font></b><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma">
Lnc-business [mailto:<a href="mailto:lnc-business-bounces@hq.lp.org" target="_blank"></a><a href="mailto:lnc-business-bounces@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">lnc-business-bounces@hq.lp.org</a>]
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">On
Behalf Of </span></b>Kevin
Ludlow<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b>
Wednesday, December 02, 2015
2:21 PM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b>
<a href="mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b>
Re: [Lnc-business] report on
Oklahoma visit</span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Wes,</span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Thank you for this update. </span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I would like to make a request of the LNC
body. Is
there a member
that could, in
a short
paragraph or
less, explain
why we should
be focusing so
many efforts
on Oklahoma?
As the
Region-7 rep I
find myself in
an interesting
position with
this issue.
On the one
hand I am
biased to see
Oklahoma get
additional
resources, but
on the other
hand I am a
practical
business
person who
sees numerous
flaws with
pouring money
into this.</span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Do
we want ballot
access across
the country? Of
course! This
doesn't even
need to be
discussed. But
at what cost are
we willing to
attain that
goal?</span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times
New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">What
is the actual
downside of us
losing Oklahoma
ballot access? I
don't fully
understand the
loss would affects
others running in
the state, but
even if it
entirely prevented
their own
candidacy, how
much do we lose
with that? This
isn't meant to be
antagonistic, but
rather something
the LNC should be
tasked with
carefully
analyzing. There
was a lot of
conversation that
it hurts our brand
in Oklahoma (a
similar argument
was used in
Oregon). No doubt
this is true, but
in Oklahoma
specifically, by
how much does it
hurt us? Do we
raise an
exorbitant amount
of money in OK
each year that we
might not see in
2016 if we cut our
losses? </span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times
New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I
will refer back to a
point I've made
before. Would any
of you personally
spend tends of
thousands of dollars
of your own money on
this cause? I
remain extremely
frustrated we
couldn't even get
our own body to
commit to $50 /
month as top
representatives of
the Libertarian
Party and yet here
we are cavalierly
about to discuss
whether to spend
$10s of thousands of
additional dollars
on a cause which by
all accounts we
simply may not
succeed in. I feel
very strongly this
is the kind of
difficult decision
the LNC **should**
have to make and it
strikes me that we
haven't really
analyzed the
cost/benefits of
it. Rather we
relying upon the
notion of: "we
believe in ourselves
so let's pour more
money into this."
...a la every
government pep-talk
ever.</span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I
will also concede that
I fully appreciate and
understand the
position the party
(specifically the
Chair) is in for
having raised certain
monies specifically
tied to us making this
effort. I do get
that. But I'm merely
wanting us to consider
how much more useful
that money could
possibly be in other
areas. Are we not a
political party?
Could we not politick
donors into
understanding WHY the
money they donated was
ultimately moved to a
different state
cause? Since everyone
is a philosopher here,
there is very basic
Aristotelian logic at
play here regarding
donation
distribution. In the
famed question, "There
is a surplus of
flutes, to whom do
they go?", they go to
the flutists as those
are the only people
who can use them. My
point being that there
is simply no sense in
us pouring money into
a cause we cannot win
when that money could
be given to
states/people who can
actually improve the
overall results of our
Party - rather than
MAYBE catch us up to
the status quo.</span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">So
to conclude, I am in no
way saying we SHOULD cut
our losses. But I would
really like somebody to
quantify for me
specifically what we
lose (objectively) if we
don't chase this goal.
Or for that matter if we
chase it and fail. I am
asking that because I
believe the "goal" right
now is far too broad; of
course we all want
ballot access. I want
to know if what we would
lose is tolerable to the
body. That question
seems far more relevant
in the decision process.</span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Please
feel free to
email/call/text me any
time of day at <a href="tel:512-773-3968" value="+15127733968" target="_blank">512-773-3968</a>
with any questions /
comments.</span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Thank
you much for your time.</span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Kevin
Ludlow</span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Region
7 <br>
<a href="tel:512-773-3968" value="+15127733968" target="_blank">512-773-3968</a></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times New Roman" color="black" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black"> </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Verdana" color="black" size="2"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:black">BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB</span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span></font></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">On
Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:47 PM,
Wes Benedict <<a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank"></a><a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank">wes.benedict@lp.org</a>>
wrote:</span></font></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> I
went to Oklahoma for two
reasons: first, to help
with the petition drive,
but second, to get a
closer look so I could
decide if I thought we
should just shut it down.
We are spending about
$2,500 a week there, and
we're about to double that
rate, so if we are going
to cut our losses and end
it, the sooner the better.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">My
bottom line report to the
LNC executive committee is
that I'm confident we can
ramp up our signature
collection rate enough to
finish the drive before
the March 1 deadline, but
we are going to have to
exceed the $65,000 budget
for Oklahoma by $15,000 to
$25,000 to finish the
drive.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I'm
recommending we try to
finish the drive, but it
wouldn't be so
unreasonable to end it now
if that's what you decide
to do. Things have gone
worse than we had
originally planned. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">We
initially hoped that we
could do this drive for $2
per signature and that we
could finish it by early
fall. Recent petition
drives in places like
Arkansas have gone well,
and with stories of
petitioners fighting over
turf and demanding the
opportunity to work for us
in some places, it seemed
like we might actually be
exceeding the market rate
for signatures in some
cases.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">But
things have been harder
than expected in
Oklahoma. On October 27,
we raised the rate in
Oklahoma from $2 to $2.50
per signature, and even at
that higher rate, finding
enough people to work has
been a challenge. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Before
we started the Oklahoma
drive, stalwart
libertarian petitioner
Andy Jacobs warned us that
petition drives for
initiatives in other
states in the fall would
be competing with us for
workers and would drive up
our costs, so we needed to
get it done over the
summer. Unfortunately, we
didn't start until the end
of the summer. And while
Andy did good work for us
in Oklahoma for several
weeks, he, as well as
other petitioners, have
indeed left Oklahoma for
the higher paying
non-Libertarian Party
Petition work in other
states that he warned us
about. Although Andy is
out of Oklahoma now, he
does continue to stay
interested in our progress
and has been generous with
suggestions for
improvement. I'm sure he'd
be happy to share his
thoughts on our Oklahoma
effort with any of you
directly if you reach out
to him. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">One
suggestion from Andy is
that we should pay more to
entice petitioners back
and possibly even pay $5
per signature for door to
door petitioning. Our
petitioners have had hard
times finding good
locations with lots of the
kind of foot traffic that
makes for productive
petitioning. Door-to-door
petitioning can give very
high validity signatures,
so the $5/signature rate
for 100% validity is not
so far off from $2.50 per
signature for around 65%
validity. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">In
hind sight, I wish we had
started this drive
earlier. But I don't think
right now we need to offer
a higher pay rate (not
that we could afford it,
anyway). Instead, we need
to focus on recruiting
more petitioners, and we
are already seeing success
from that. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Projections
I've sent to Bill Redpath
and Nick Sarwark show that
with the new workers we've
already recruited, we will
likely finish the drive on
time. But we also have
several more petitioners
saying they will probably
be here soon to help, and
if just a couple of those
pan out, we could finish
in January. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I've
heard lots of complaints
from petitioners that it's
been very hard to find
good locations in Oklahoma
to collect signatures.
Petitioners have told us
the grocery stores won't
let them petition, public
places like universities
and festival grounds have
been hostile, and the
Oklahoma Driver's
licensing places are too
numerous to have
significant people at any
single location. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">My
uncle lives in Oklahoma
City. I visited him
Saturday night briefly and
was surprised when he told
me he had seen petitioners
lately at the grocery and
post office and he assumed
they were ours. I asked
him exactly which
locations because I
wondered about the
conflicting reports. He
specified by name the
Crest grocery, Buy For
Less grocery, and post
office near his home. I
had hoped to find time to
visit those stores myself
to ask why they might be
letting petitioners for
other efforts work there
but not libertarians
(assuming that was the
case). </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I
didn't find time for that,
but LPOK vice chair Tina
Kelly has since told me
that even she had been
personally told by those
chains she couldn't
petition there, only to
find out later that one of
the petitioners she
recruited somehow did get
permission at a location
of both chains. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I
think some of our stalwart
petitioners like Andy are
used to finding locations
where they occasionally
hit the jackpot and
collect over 500
signatures on a single
day. That makes up for the
more common slow days.
Petitioners who come from
out of town usually have
transportation and motel
expenses they pay out of
pocket. Locals don't have
the travel overhead and we
are getting a few locals
working. They may be
slower than someone like
Andy, but they can go
slower and still make the
economics work. Locals can
spend more time asking for
permission at more places
and can afford to get
chased away from more
locations. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I
personally saw the entire
batch of petition forms.
That was reassuring. In
fact I pulled an
all-nighter Monday and
scanned all 2,000 sheets
in case we need help
remotely with validation,
and because while often
hearing anecdotes of
certain petitioners
routinely getting better
validity than others, I
wanted the opportunity to
see for myself. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">LP
vice chair Tina Kelly has
been indispensable to this
drive. Petitioners turn in
signatures to her, she
gives us the counts, we
wire funds, she writes
checks, and pays the
petitioners. She also
visits with the elections
authorities to find out
important rules and
procedures for our
petition drive. She has
worked to get cooperation
from a couple single-issue
groups doing ballot
initiatives. Although
results from those
cooperation efforts have
been lower than hoped,
we’ve gotten a couple
thousand signatures from
the cooperation. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">Tina's
son recently put the
Oklahoma registered voter
database online in a
searchable format to
assist with validity
checking. That will be
hugely helpful. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">While
Tina has done lots of
work, it's hard for one
person to do all that she
does plus respond to all
the complaints from
current petitioners and
inquiries from prospective
petitioners, not to
mention answering frequent
questions about progress
from Bill Redpath and me.
We recently decided to
have Paul Frankel help
with some of the local
management assistance. I
had gone to Oklahoma with
the expectation that I
might recommend removing
Paul to save money, but
right now I think we
should keep him at least
for a month to make sure
new petitioners have
someone they can reach
quickly any time of day.
Later we can reevaluate
the cost of having him
there. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> Tina
invited me and the LPOK
officers and activists to
a nice restaurant Tuesday
night. I asked who would
be a candidate if we got
ballot access. Out of
about ten people, at least
3 indicated interest,
including one who was
against attempting this
daunting petition drive
originally (because it’s
so much work), but would
run if we made it. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I
told the prospect who
might be interested in US
Senate I'd give $200
towards the $1,000 filing
fee if he runs in 2016,
and someone else quickly
offered another $200. I
think we’ll get several
people to run for office
in addition to having our
candidate for President on
the ballot if we get
ballot access.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">(My
plane, where I'm writing
most of this note, just
landed in DC. Final
thoughts below from the
office.)</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I’m
not counting on legal help
to make a difference in
time for us. However, if
our counsel or the
Oklahoma ACLU is
successful in time, of
course that might make
things easier. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I’m
also mindful of keeping
alive the dream for 50
state ballot access, and
the negative impact giving
up in Oklahoma now might
have.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">A
Libertarian from Austin,
Texas, Michael Chastain,
donated $4,000 last week
to help the Oklahoma
petition drive. That’s in
addition to the five
thousand or so we raised
online recently: </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"><a href="http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/serious-help-needed-for-oklahoma-petition-drive" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/serious-help-needed-for-oklahoma-petition-drive" target="_blank">http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/serious-help-needed-for-oklahoma-petition-drive</a></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I
rushed out to Oklahoma
Saturday partly so I could
be back in the office
Wednesday to meet Mr.
Chastain in person (he was
visiting the D.C. area and
was interested in visiting
the headquarters
today--Wednesday).</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">I’ll
have more good news about
support from Mr. Chastain
soon. </span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">The
LNC-EC is schedule to meet
Monday 12/7/2015, to
decide whether or not to
continue the LPOK drive.
I’m sending this info to
all of you know in case
you’d like more
information before that
meeting.</span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">cc'ing
Richard Winger.</span></font></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><font face="Times New
Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt">--
<br>
Wes Benedict, Executive
Director<br>
</span></font><font size="1"><span style="font-size:7.5pt">Libertarian
National Committee, Inc.</span></font>
</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times
New Roman" size="3"><span style="font-size:12.0pt"> </span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>========================================================<br>
Kevin Ludlow<br>
<a href="tel:512-773-3968" value="+15127733968" target="_blank">512-773-3968</a><br>
</div>
<div><a href="http://www.kevinludlow.com" target="_blank">http://www.kevinludlow.com</a><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a>
<a 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>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all"><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<br>
-- <br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>========================================================<br>
Kevin Ludlow<br>
<a href="tel:512-773-3968" value="+15127733968" target="_blank">512-773-3968</a><br>
</div>
<div><a href="http://www.kevinludlow.com" target="_blank">http://www.kevinludlow.com</a><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</font></span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
<pre>_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a>
<a 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>
</pre>
</font></span></blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>========================================================<br>Kevin Ludlow<br>512-773-3968<br></div><div><a href="http://www.kevinludlow.com" target="_blank">http://www.kevinludlow.com</a><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>