January 15, 2004
SC Call Notes — January 15, 2004
SC members: Greg Gerritt, Ben Manski, Badilli Jones, Jo Chamberlain, Anita Rios, Jake Schneider (Marnie Glickman came in slightly later)
Staff: Emily Citkowski
From the BRPP: Andy Parks HI, Holly Hart IA, Jonathan Lundell CA, Tom Sevigny CT
Facilitator Ben Manski, Jo Chamberlain took over later
Timekeeper Jake Schneider
Note taker Greg Gerritt
AC = Accreditation Committee
BRPP = Bylaws, Rules, Policies and Procedures Committee
BC = Black Caucus
CC = Coordinating Committee
CCC = Coordinated Campaign Committee
CG SC = Campus Greens Steering Committee
DC = Diversity Committee
FC = Fundraising Committee
FEC = Federal Election Commission
GP = Green Party
GW = George Washington University
IC = International Committee
ICA = Institute for Cultural Affairs
LC = Lavender Caucus
LG = Lavender Greens
PEC = Presidential Exploratory Committee
SC = Steering Committee
[Brackets denote editor’s suggested corrections. Some punctuation corrections done with no content change. -ed.]
Agenda Review, set Facilitator, timekeeper
OLD BUSINESS AND REPORTS
Welcome, introductions 10 minutes
SC restructuring: Discussion with BRPP 45 minutes
Voting Queue 5 minutes
Andy Parks makes first presentation to open discussion. Noted how long BRPP had worked on it and its great flexibility. Asked SC for concerns
Jo C: Generally supportive of the idea of portfolios, wanted to see a proposal that was much tighter and more structured. Wanted the elections of the various parts of the the SC more structured, a description of how portfolios would actually be created and selected.
Anita: does not like the proposal. believes it is too corporate and hierarchical. Would like to see a restructuring that was much more in tune with Green values and bringing in the grassroots.
Tom: responding to a comment on the size of the SC. BRPP supports adding two members to 7 co chairs, or however that will be named, as incremental change, and because do you imagine what it would be like to work as a body of 20.
Andy: there is pretty much a consensus that portfolios work. the issue of how to elect, BRPP offers maximum flexibility. Also thinks we can separate a vote on how to do it and then figure out how to elect it. One step at a time. Define responsibilities based on what committees they are working with.
Jo: would like to see elections for portfolios right after election of SC by the CC. Let folks choose portfolios and if more than 1 wants a particular portfolio, then a CC vote.
Also wants a separate vote on alternates and a defined role for them. SC should not be in charge of dividing itself up or making its own rules.
Tom: rules on election are being done separately and should stay that way.
Andy: Election is next project, after the proposal process. And the SC really ought to develop its own policies and procedures, just like any other committee.
JO: conflicts in the SC ought to go to the CC. Wants real clarity on how portfolios will be selected and the election of the SC. CC should define the roles of the SC more.
Anita: too hierarchical
Jo: spell out elections and terms
Jake: the SC should just allow this to go to the voting page and the CC can discuss it as a proposal rather than just send it back to committee and give it to the CC informally.
Jonathan Lundell: send it to the CC as a proposal, do not send it back to the brpp
Things to add and think about:
Make the SC less hierarchical
More checks and balances
This does not give anything back to the other greens
funnel resources to the grassroots, this does not
elect SC by regions
this keeps too much info in too few hands
SC then accepted the idea of this going to the voting page for a normal procedure. Some members just felt it was ready to go out, others felt that the SC, while it has the ability to slightly delay resolutions going out so that the floor does not get too crowded and for other administrative reasons, could no longer delay this going out. Greg will floor manage, goes on for discussion on Monday.
Members of the BRPP signed off, members of the CCC Juscha Robinson, Masada Disenhouse, Gray Newman, and Brent McMillan signed on.
Operations Director Report
Fixed technical problem with credit card donations
Need to send out Green Pages, need to allocate $1500 to mailing costs. Also looking for innovative ways to get people to buy bundles. Send suggestions
Need computer monitor for computer for Director of African American Affairs. That will cost $100. Approved expenditure by SC consensus
Computers for new Fundraising Director and Political Director. This $1400 expenditure has been approved previously; it was decided to delay the buy until just before the FD and PD are ready to start in the office, which is mid-February.
Agreed that if Emily found appropriate student interns at no cost she was welcome to welcome them.
At about 10:40 PM, following the office report and votes on expenditures, the SC and members of the CCC convened with Brent MacMillan to discuss the Political Director’s hiring. The SC did this in open session, but in retrospect it is quite clear that talking about contracts with individuals MUST be done in Executive Session. I did take notes, but I am not going to publish them openly; I will treat them as Executive Session notes. If you have questions about this, we can discuss it, but rather than publish them I expect that the results of the negotiations will be made apparent soon (i.e., when the Political Director position has a signed contract and work begins). You will most definitely be informed.
The session discussing the Political Director position ended about 11:45 PM EST. There was still one more item on the agenda, the budget, but I excused myself as it was too late and I had to get up in the morning. I assume that notes were taken by someone else after I signed off. — Greg Gerrit
Minimally edited and HTML formatted by Charlie Green