September 12, 2009

Co-chairs: Sanda Everette, Jill Bussiere, Mike Feinstein, Jason
Nabewaniec, Farheen Hakeem, Craig Thorsen; David Strand had a work conflict and joined 2 1/2 hours into the (nearly 4-hour) call. Outgoing co-chair Budd Dickinson was also on the call as an observer.
Secretary: Holly Hart
Treasurer: Jody Grage
Staff: Tamar Yager, Brent McMillan

Observers: Julia Aires (FLA); Theresa El-Amin (NC)

Facilitator: Farheen

Requests for additions:
Holly: Sign-on to UFPJ’s “Out of Afghanistan” petition
Eco-Action request – GPUS endorsement of principles
SC agreed to take these up on line, as one came in very late, and there is already a full agenda.

Brent sent a report to the SC. Held a staff meeting on Friday.

Hillary Kane (AnmCom co-chair) has requested a staff liaison; Brian Bittner was appointed

Online fundraising: Sent out a 9-11 alert written by Brian, which was picked up by Independent Political Report. The next online appeal is scheduled to out on 9/18; they are thinking of a single-payer action alert, but may change depending on what’s happening in Congress. The next issue of GreenLine will go out on 9/25 The next appeal will go out on 10/2.

Staff is working on a budget and fundraising plan, with the goal to have preliminary numbers for the Finance Committee within a couple of days, and a more complete report at the end of the month.

Staff is looking at “speed issues” with Drupal.

Brent attended a U.S. Supreme Court hearing dealing with campaign finance reform. The potential outcome does not look good in terms of reigning in corporate campaign contributions.

Transpartisan Citizens Tool Box (dialogue guide): Brent is working with this group and will review.

International: Brent met with Japanese professor of political science, interview. He was invited to hear Johnnie Carson, Assistant Secretary of State for African affairs on Tuesday, 9/15.

Campaign recruitment: Numbers have now dropped below 2005 at this time; recruiting numbers are down. We can no longer say that this is a record year, although that may change in the next couple of weeks. This week was flat. Discovered that a couple candidates have become Democrats.

Legal issues: 9/23, deposition in FLA to try to find out mystery Republican operatives who ran as Greens. Briefing was filed on 9/10 regarding the situation in PA where individuals become personally financially accountable on ballot challenges.

Budget – income projections: Brent asked that staff have a chance to look at it first, and then send the Finance Committee, then to the SC. Updating who has access to fundraising wiki.

Tamar sent a report to the SC. She noted some efforts or practices that are getting results; some types of envelope layouts are bringing in more regular sustainer contributions.

Fundraising and sustainer projects:
Jill, Mike, David and Sanda have offered to help. Online: single-payer e-blast has gotten $385, some sustainers. 9-11 alert brought in $177. Tamar is waiting for a Congressional bill # for another action alert, because these do better when tied to a particular piece of legislation. Empower started calling re-solicitation list, but we have stopped them for 2 weeks so we can catch up with payment, and because direct mail is working well. They are getting at least 3-4 sustainers a week, a good result.

Working on database. They are trying to make sure everything works and is developed before they move all to DiA.

II. ORIENTATION, PART III – voting page, voting queue, email – Holly (see
notes from Jody)
Trouble on lists-Pair
Voting page – process (on calls; on page)// directory/updates 9 eventually committees in directory and own portion

a. Review current items
– #414 – Endorsement of October 17th Peace Actions – currently passing, should pass if it reaches quorum
Farheen proposed that Brent write a letter to inform the organizers of GPUS endorsement.
Mike stated he was not willing to participate on any item he feels is not properly agendized (choosing which person to write the letter).
JIll stated she does not want to bog down the SC with detailed rules when we are going ahead and things are fine.

VOTE: to approve Brent to write a letter.
Jill – Yes
Holly – Yes
Jody – Yes
Farheen – Yes
Craig – No
Mike – not voting for reasons stated
Jason – Yes
Sanda – Yes
***** APPROVED. Brent will write a letter to the October 17th organizers to let them know that GPUS endorses their actions.

b. Question of timeline for #413, Amendment to email list policy
Craig had had to re-post the proposal. He duplicated the original timeline, apparently inadvertently adding more discussion time. SC agreed it is too late to try to correct this now, as the proposal will go into the voting phase in a few days.

a. Day and time for SC conference calls:
SC AGREED to continue with same day and ime for conference calls

b. SC Call facilitators
SC had drawn up a list of four individuals to call on to facilitate SC conference call. Jody has reservations about asking for facilitators before we have had a chance to have them facilitate and know how they work out. She suggested we ask proposed facilitators, see how they work, then draw up a list of approved facilitators. She proposed we contact the four individuals we had listed and see if they could facilitate a future call, then see who they facilitate.

Craig will contact the four individuals to arrange for each to facilitate a call. Mike stated he would not be included in this decision as it was not properly agendized, and because there had been no call for outstanding concerns.

(see proposal submitted by Mike)
This proposal is to clarify a difference between email communications involving NC proposals and discussion of other business. “Natlcomvotes” email list (the official NC business list) has problems both with traffic and focus. Many aren’t reading the “votes” list. This proposal would set up a list for other SC business, so more NC delegates will read more of the business. The proposal would essentially split the “votes” list so that “votes” would include communications only about proposals; “biz” would be for communication on other items, for instance actions and finances.

Sanda asked that the possibility of using a forum or web-based means of supporting this type of discussion be included, noting some delegates had expressed an interest in this . Holly asked for clarification about whether delegates would need to subscribe to more than one list in order to follow NC business.

Mike added as a friendly amendment subtracting reference to the “announcement” list (a clarity issue), removing reference to #186; also mended to ask the newly formed [sic] IT committee to research and make recommendations on a possible web forum (in lieu of another email list).

VOTE: to send this proposal to the voting queue, as amended:
Mike – Yes
Craig – Yes
Jill – No
Jason – Yes
Holly – No
Sanda – Yes
Farheen – No
Jody – Abstain
David – Yes

PROPOSAL PASSED, and will go to the voting queue, to go out next Monday (9/21). Mike will submit an amended version to the SC list , and Holly will send on to the voting queue.
Two weeks discussion, 1 week vote
2/3 threshold
Floor Manager: Mike

V.a. Reflector Site – Jason
Several years ago, the GP of New Jersey set up a reflector that takes emails from “natlcomvotes” and sends them to a yahoogroup, ostensibly for members of the GP of NJ to view. Over the years, there have been problems with people from other states receiving messages, distributing them and sometimes creating problems. Jane Hunter, the administrator, explained to the SC about a year ago that there is a vetting system and only GP members in NJ who have requested to be on this list are approved. However, there have been several recent examples of individuals who are subscribed to the reflector list who are not in NJ and who were not approved by their state party to be an official observer (i.e. not approved to be on “natlcomvotes”), and whom we have been tld were not on the reflector list. The questions are what kind of control GPUs has over our work list; and whether the GP of NJ is going to be allowed to continue to distribute NC business beyond the approved members.

There was general agreement that this is a problem, that there should be some attempt to limit or eliminate the possibility of automatic forwarding of all messages from the NC list (natlcomvotes). Mike suggested an amendment to list policy (in proposal #186) to make clear the expectation that messages would into be taken off the list. Holly suggested further discussion, and that IT people might take up the issue to see if there is some way to address this.

VI. PROPOSAL for SC Retreat – Sanda
(See proposal submitted by Sanda)
Sanda proposed that the SC meet in Minneapolis in November. Those who can get there would go; those who couldn’t make the meeting would be brought in by teleconference. The assumption is that this would be at no cost to the party, and MN Greens would host guests. There was some discussion about holding this around the time of the MN state party meeting, holding an SC meeting that Sunday, possibly Monday, as well. There was also discussion about the need to have staff present.

VOTE: for SC to meet in Minneapolis, November 7- 9; no cost to the GPUS.
Sanda – Yes
Farheen – No
Craig – Yes
Jason – Abstain
Jill – Yes
Mike – Yes
Jody – Yes
David – Yes
Holly – No


VII. Holly proposed tabling some items for an extra call next week. We will take up Finances, executive session item(s) (if needed) and portfolios. Mike did not agree, because this (possibility of tabling items to a future call) had not been agendized. The rest of the SC agreed.

VIII. PROPOSAL for GPUS representation at upcoming FPVA meeting (Federation of the Green Parties of the Americas) – Mike, Jill & Sanda — The FPVA meeting is in October. One GP delegate is up for re-election, another vacancy is to be filled. Proposal is that the International Committee make nominations for members to be voted upon by NC, one male one female, chosen by IRV in two separate elections. They will be GP delegates to FPVA meeting, and delegates up until the time [ new delegates are elected]. After that election, there will be a conference call with the SC and members of the IC to talk about the FPVA meeting agenda.

Concerns were raised that the proposal just came out, either immediately before or during the call, and most of the SC haven’t seen it. It was, however, properly agendized; although not stated as a proposal, but rather included under Portfolios, because a proposal had not actually been presented before the call.

VOTE: that SC will review and decide on the proposal online within 72
hours. Jill will notify the NC that a vote is coming.
Jason – No
Jill – Yes
Farheen – Abstain
Craig – No
Mike – Yes
Holly – Yes
David – You betcha
Jody – Abstain
Sanda – Yes


NEXT CALL – Sunday, September
20, 2009; 8:00 p.m. EDT

Holly Hart
Secretary, GPUS

VIII. TREASURER’S REPORT – Jody 10 minutes
Jody sent a financial statement.

VIII. FINANCES – Jody, etc 20-30 minutes

IX. PORTFOLIOS – who has what – 15 minutes
IX. a.ANM – update on recent ANM discussion regarding 2010 meeting, ideas –
Holly – 5-10 minutes

X. EXECUTIVE SESSION, if needed and if possible – 15 minutes