Re: [Lnc-votes] [Lnc-business] April LNC Meeting location

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

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-bu...@hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org


_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-bu...@hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org

_______________________________________________
Lnc-votes mailing list
Lnc-...@hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-votes_hq.lp.org

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

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

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

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

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

Dear Starchild,

Robert Kraus has a spreadsheet with all of the proposals broken down
by city, room cost, A/V cost, staff travel cost, etc. I'm sure he'd
be happy to send it to you.

Decisions on meeting location are up to the Chair unless the LNC
decides to make that decision directly. There have been instances in
the past where the LNC has taken that authority and not been able to
make a decision with enough time to get reasonably priced flights,
etc. Consensus is difficult in a group of our size and all meeting
locations have pros and cons and will be an inconvenience to some
members. For example, Pittsburgh is a long flight for me and I will
be in Pennsylvania just a couple of weeks prior, but the average
flights to Pittsburgh are lower than Oklahoma City and the hotel costs
for the meeting are significantly lower.

I have not made an effort to solicit locations to the membership. We
have the dates set for the second meeting of 2017 and could do so
and/or use a different method to choose the location.

-Nick

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

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

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

Dear Nick,

Excellent idea. Pittsburgh is fine with me In the interests of accommodating
Easter weekend travel and lodging arrangement time constraints. My interest
is in improving the procedure going forward. I will proceed with my request
for co-sponsors with the location of the August meeting in mind.

~David

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

Two east coast meetings that double or triple the costs for region 1 if we both were to attend is certainly not fine to me.  It disadvantages those of us not on the east coast and privileges others.  I am most definitely not fine.

- Caryn Ann

--

In Liberty,

Caryn Ann Harlos

Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.org

Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado

Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

Nick,

Good to hear from you. If we go along with your choice to meet in Pittsburgh this time, will you direct Robert (or perhaps a staffer more amenable to the idea) to look first for free meeting locations in the future, publicize to our members (email, direct mail, website, LP News, Facebook, etc.) that we are looking for such locations (particularly in the west for the next couple meetings, to address Caryn Ann's understandable concern about two east coast meetings in a row), and ask him to keep a spreadsheet of the suggestions we receive?

That way when you have staff share their spreadsheet with us before we set the next meeting spot, it should contain a better range of options than I expect it has now.

Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
(415) 625-FREE
@StarchildSF

On Jan 16, 2017, at 6:52 AM, Nicholas Sarwark wrote:

> Dear Starchild,
>
> Robert Kraus has a spreadsheet with all of the proposals broken down
> by city, room cost, A/V cost, staff travel cost, etc. I'm sure he'd
> be happy to send it to you.
>
> Decisions on meeting location are up to the Chair unless the LNC
> decides to make that decision directly. There have been instances in
> the past where the LNC has taken that authority and not been able to
> make a decision with enough time to get reasonably priced flights,
> etc. Consensus is difficult in a group of our size and all meeting
> locations have pros and cons and will be an inconvenience to some
> members. For example, Pittsburgh is a long flight for me and I will
> be in Pennsylvania just a couple of weeks prior, but the average
> flights to Pittsburgh are lower than Oklahoma City and the hotel costs
> for the meeting are significantly lower.
>
> I have not made an effort to solicit locations to the membership. We
> have the dates set for the second meeting of 2017 and could do so
> and/or use a different method to choose the location.
>
> -Nick
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Starchild <sfdr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

As an FYI I have an agreement for Pittsburg and will send info on reserving rooms by end of this week. I have also already notified other properties that we no longer need them to hold rooms.

Gun shot approach (multiple cities) usually not the best way to get offers. In this case the Chair helped by narrowing the field which allowed me to go back and get very much improved bids.

The April meeting is early enough in the process to get feedback from you all on cities to consider. I can then get bids based on those cities (and I hope DC is included as we may have an opportunity for some "free" or almost free space compliments of a member in NoVa).

I can then proceed to get bids on the cities you all finalize and then send a spreadsheet of the best options to you all for approval voting.

Live Free!​​​​

Robert

Robert S. Kraus - Dir of Operations
Opera...@LP.org
Libertarian National Committee
Ph: 202.333.0008 x 231

Join today: https://www.lp.org/membership
LP FB Page: https://www.facebook.com/libertarians

Dear David,

-Nick

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

Where did Houston rank on the list for April once you got the bids back?

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

If DC is in consideration, Region 1 gets the short end of the stick AGAIN.  We are 9 states here.  I would hope our self-funding gets taken into consideration.

- Caryn Ann

[lnc-...@hq.lp.org]

I just ran a search for my travel expenses and that of my alternate.  It will cost an additional ~$500 for us to attend a Pittsburgh meeting if we both came.  And the same for any other east coast area.  It it fair to Region 1 and other west situated people to do this, precisely how?  Never mind the distinct advantage of virtually ensuring that alternates from the west can't come?  I am sorry but this is really unacceptable unequal burden to place on some.

-Caryn Ann

On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Whitney Bilyeu <whitn...@gmail.com> wrote:

Where did Houston rank on the list for April once you got the bids back?