GPUS SC Conference Call
Sunday, February 7, 2009
8:00 p.m. EST
Co-chairs:
Mike Feinstein, Jill Bussiere, Sanda Everrette, Craig Thorsen, Jason Nabewaniec, Farheen Hakeem; David Strand had a work schedule conflict, and joined the call after 9 p.m. EST
Secretary: Holly Hart
Treasurer: Jody Grage
Staff: Brian Bittner, Brent McMillan
Facilitator: Charlie Pillsbury
Several members requested various changes in the order of the agenda.
All were agreed to.
I. STAFF REPORTS
a. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR – Brent
Washington, D.C. is in the middle of “snowmagedden,” which has shut down much transportation and work in DC. He expects things to be shut down tomorrow, but back up by mid-week.
Added 1 more candidate to the list of current candidates this week.
Fundraising: from a new mailing, too in over $2000 in the first 3 days. Brent is working on setting up a phone bank with the Georgia GP, with training and calls later this month. He is continuing work on major donor list, and currently in conversation with or of our large donors.
Sanda noted that there is a proposal to limit calls to two hours, and suggested we could just read the staff reports and not have them on the call. SC spent 15 minutes discussing whether this should be done. Mike asked if Brent could send reports earlier; Brent suggested sending on Friday.
b. OFFICE MANAGER – Brian
Sent report to the SC. Brian is working with the new intern and volunteers.
############################################################
II. TREASURER’S REPORT – Jody
Jody sent a report on Friday; since then, we have taken in $600 more on the web account. We have $36 in the general account. Jody paid the Media Coordinator, and sent a list on Friday of things to be paid (Pair, media contact list, phone bill). Staff has been paid for the end of January.
Holly asked about the question that had been raised of prioritizing staff salaries. Jody replied pay was up to date: she had paid rent, then Brian, then merchandise order (from loan funds), then Brent, then Scott McLarty, then independent contractors.
Tamar Yager has written a letter to the SC. Jason responded to a letter after the call before last, but there was no decision about who would respond and no response sent to her follow-up. Another letter was received by the SC a few days ago. SC agreed that the secretary will convey the letter. Jason agreed to write a draft.
############################################################
III. Fundraising – DISCUSSION OF strategy, ideas – Jody, Holly
—-
Jody spoke with FundCom co-chair (sic, one co-chair, “a unique Green party office”) Karen Young how FundCom can gain more knowledge and skill, how the SC can facilitate this. General agreement is that there is a need for more communication. Jason said he had offered to be portfolio manager, but Sanda had been interested so he stepped down. Sanda stated this was not correct. Jody said that FundCom tends to focus on the expense side of the budget; we need them to focus on the income side.
MIke proposed that the SC set up a joint call with the goals of planning for the ANM, 2011 budget, and short and long term fundraising, to involve the SC, FundCom, AnmCom discussion. Holly pointed out that there was no proposal on the agenda, so technically (according to the rules) a decision couldn’t be made (or, possibly, one could be made with a 2/3 SC vote to do so, but that remains an open question). Mike stated that he agreed that this was accurate.
Jason said that a portfolio manager should be involved. (Static prevented secretary from hearing further comments.) Farheen suggested Jason communicate with the FundCom and see what involvement they would like. Agreed, that Jason will follow up with FundCom.
############################################################
IV. SC strategic plan – DISCUSSION of strategic plan notes posted to SC recently; how to move forward, implement ideas – Jody, Holly
—
Jody – again, the question of “how do we get to this?” One suggestion was a couple extra calls on subject. This affects a lot of things, including fundraising. Mike and Jody volunteered to work with Brent to move forward on work already started last year.
############################################################
V. VOTING QUEUE, and misc. secretary items – Holly
a. Brief run-down of current voting queue items.
b. CCC/GSCC/GHCC – to go out tomorrow (nomination message to follow).
1 week discussion, 1 week vote; ranked choice votes; Jason will be floor manager
–There were a handful of nominations for GSCC, 1 for GHCC and none for CCC (or possibly an ambiguous nomination that was never answered).
c. Forum Managers (we need to find two or three new); Holly asked for input and suggestions. Craig suggested putting out a call to the NC list.
d. ANM proposal – they had expected it to go out tomorrow. Jody had some questions; she will follow up with Hillary Kane, ANM co-chair, and work out a resolution. SC agreed to address the proposal online and plan to send this to the voting queue to go out Monday 2/15, barring any unexpected problems. Jody offered to be floor manager. Craig felt it wasn’t ready.
Holly explained, as an FYI, that she was waiting to insert the platform committee proposals into the bylaws (document on the website) until they were all finished. This was a unique instance, where what was one proposal had been broken down into segments. Because this is actually one proposal and because it takes several steps and additions to the table of contents, which would look weird, she decided to make it one update.
Mike began to state in an agitated tone that he had a comment on a voting queue item, and interrupted the facilitator several times. In a high pitched, loud and rapiid-fire tone, he shouted that he wanted he minutes to reflect his concern that “the secretary isn’t doing her job, she unilaterally decided not to do her job, the web manager had never complained about this (bylaws updates) taking too much time.” Holly noted that she had just explained this was a unique situation, as an unprecedented situation she believes in her purview to make such a decision. She said also that the issue had nothing to do with the web manager and she hadn’t mentioned it. Further, that this is from a hostile agenda and practice of bullying and is inappropriate. She stated that if it is to go on the minutes, she would include her comments, and does not believe that this had been a concern until just now. [you can check the accuracy on the recording – hh]
############################################################
VI. PROPOSAL – To confirm an online/between calls decision-making process for the SC – Holly
Holly sent a description of the steps the SC has followed:
The SC may need to address an item in a timely manner, which can’t wait until the next upcoming conference call;
An item on a call may be tabled: due to lack of time; due to desire to have more information before making a decision.
SC members may post something to the SC email list with the request it be addressed within 2-3 days; if necessary, 24 hours. An SC member hall take responsibility for watching for and counting online responses, and for contacting by phone (or skype, email, chat, etc) any who haven’t responded by close to the time of the deadline. Usually, this is done by the person who submitted the item or the secretary, but can be done by any SC member so designated by the committee. A good faith effort will be made to get responses from all SC members. A quorum of 5 responses is needed to take any action/provide response, etc.
Results of such decisions will be posted to the NC, included as special notes in the nearest set of SC conference call minutes. Results will also be posted to the NC at the time they occur.
++++++
Mike and Craig made several objections. Holly suggested clarifying the final sentence by having all results of online SC decisions posted online at the time they occur. Mike stated he accepted that as a friendly amendment (although this was not his proposal). There were further objections. Holly asked Mike for suggested language, but it was not clear. The facilitator, then MIke, suggested the proposal be taken up on the next call. Holly withdrew the proposal, stating she does not believe the objections were in good faith and is not willing to spend more time on this. She believes the stalling is deliberate, and planned. Mike said he would send the GPCA process to the SC.
############################################################
TABLED to NEXT CALL
IV. PROPOSAL on SC call length
Proposal: To keep SC calls to 2 hours, unless previously agreed; if needed, to decide whether items on a call agenda can be tabled, handled online or dropped.
############################################################
V. PROPOSAL eliminate the SC personnel subcommittee – Sanda Charlie suggested tabling this. Holly asked to go to a vote, since it sounded like all of the SC agreed, and it could be taken care of quickly. However, Farheen said she did not agree with it, so it would need to go to a vote or wait until a following call. Several people began to speak, mostly confusing comments, as to whether Farheen should state her concerns and the Sc deal with this now, or whether it should be tabled. The facilitator, then Holly asked that it be tabled, as originally suggested. Mike stated she could not do this, it was up to Sanda. Although originally willing to wait, Sanda said she wanted to go to a vote, and if it didn’t pass, she’d take it up up on the next call.
Farheen (in the midst of repeated interruptions demanding we “go to a vote,” “move,” ” call the question,” “vote”) stated that her understanding is that the whole purpose [of the personnel subcommittee] had to do with an instance of a breach of confidentiality by a past SC member. She stated, “If we are going backwards to remove this, we don’t have this insurance. We do need to put people on personnel that are good at personnel issues.”
VOTE on ELIMINATING THE PERSONNEL SUB-COMMITTEE
Holly – Abstain
Jill – Yes
Farheen – No
Jason – couldn’t hear response
David – Yes
Craig – Yes
Sanda – Yes
Mike – Yes
Jody – Yes
PASSES – 6 Yes, 1 No, 1 Abstain, 1 not heard
Next Call – Sunday, February 21, 8:00 p.m. EST
2/7/10
Holly Hart
Secretary, GPUS