September 18 & 19, 2004 in DC
SC Call Notes — September 18 & 19, 2004 in DC
All 9 SC members and Kara Mullen, Emily Citkowski, Brent McMillan, staff of DC office.
Saturday Sept 18 Session
Takoma Park Library
Taking stock of organization
SC was given 11 questions with the intent of discussing as many as time permitted.
First the questions with the SC going around the room commenting, followed by discussion.
1. What is the basic purpose of the SC?
Implement policy created by CC Delegation
Does SC hold onto too much work?
Big picture, overview, coordinate
help committees work together
to drive things
day to day executive work, CC is legislature
Communication in CC, set an example, cut negatives
What is role of national party, then figure out role of SC
To facilitate the development of a vision for the Party
Implement decisions of CC
Facilitate the CC
help CC do more
Outreach to states is lacking
SC more outreach or creat outreach plan
See the big picture
get committees to work together better
work with state parties to get committees fully staffed
get committees to see the big picture
portfolios, help us fill gaps but some gaps not filled yet
part of CC, elected by CC; part of how CC organizes itself
communication between states, work more with states
do more visioning
speed that CC works is slow
encouraging everyone to do more
day to day and time lines
making sure committees are up and running
finding our own replacements, training and transition
concentrations of power in SC, primarily by accident, filling gaps; not by design
2. What more can the SC do to accomplish this purpose?
identify people with skills and ability-retain them
use state parties as a breeding ground for talent
more guidelines and policy needed
Seek legal council on webhosting, listservs and administrators
raise level of professionalism tone of debate,civility
do things differently, not necessarily more
do gap inventory, what else needs filling
make committees more functional
do we do too much?
dealing with disruptive committee members? how
asking why are we here is important
asking how do we get where we are going is, also
leadership is about shared vision
Inspire people with a vision
How can we assist the state parties?
organizing/outreach/recruitment/working with states
vision for the world
After this we had a discussion about growing sustainably – being present and being ready, take on the work when you have the people available.
living our values
vision and plan are different, can we explain the difference
At this point we discussed Participation. How can we get more people involved. Three key words came from this discussion: Recruitment/Professionalism/Vision
show reliability, get things done, come through, builds credibility
success breeds success, but measuring is hard
nothing really to compare what we are doing to
committees function based on their internal leadership, good leadership, more work gets done
Is there too much turnover?
committees need larger vision
need more expertise, fewer disruptions
state parties are key can they send good people to do the work, are we competing with them for the limited pool of talent?
SC is not about power, what power we have comes from filling gaps and vacuums
use the platform more
we are opportunistic, we are activists
building the bicycle, why we ride it; our procedures have to be different
crisis of vision
SC job to facilitate creation of vision
no goals, no vision
What is vision, mission, goals
what sort of power does it take to translate platform into practicalities
short and long term
what will the party do electorally
what does it take to be effective
too early success can lead to problems, no foundation
too slow a growth is also problematic
we are growing 40% a year as a rolling 4 year average (for candidates); 30% growth of registrations in 4 years; 200 elected officials, may reach 300 this year
candidates are much higher quality, more experienced running campaigns
doing work toward goals is as important as goals
figuring out steps is critical
every state has at least one thing they do they should be sharing with everyone else, though they may not realize it
share techniques, goals
not a number to be reached but figuring out how to get there
how to communicate effectively with members of state parties
develop a method of communication that works up and down the tree to states and members, from states and members HOW?
How to help states do this
ask states what they want us to do to help them
Make the national office and party more relevant to state parties
lack of participation by cc delegates is a big issue, some delegates never vote, some state parties have no delegates that vote regularly or if they have a larger delegation, some have only 1 or 2 voting regularly
Present the state parties with lists of who is participating on the CC from their state, and how often
Send a letter, collect a data base, put it on the web/voting page
also collect and publish committee lists and participation by each state on committees, share with the respective states
Create a website spot for best practices and let people know it is there.
Let people send items for it (with a little editing)
In addition to reports to state parties about their participation, get reports from state parties, get them at least yearly
Authority of SC vis a vis committees
what CC does, what committees do
Create a task list and staff it before we leave
Discussion of committees and portfolios
Does SC override committees?
discussion : What control do committees have over their membership, what control does the state party have. Some committees have different rules, but generally the rules are that CC delegates can just join committees unless the state already has its quota on a committee while no delegates must present committee with a note saying x is being sent along as a member. Some states keep more careful watch over who has joined committees than others, depends on infrastructure of state party
Committee chairs, do people have to ask state party for permission to be a committee chair?
not generally States can rotate committee members.
Role of national party in recruiting people for committees. Should we send a letter to the various states asking for volunteers? letting people know of the joys of committee membership?
We should make sure committee lists are up to date and that states know who is on what committees. and where openings and gaps are.
List serve rules
escalating disruption and contention, how to deal with. Marc will send IL guidelines out for review. Who is responsible for fixing this? CC/SC/ state parties? Greg explained BRPP discussions of this topic and discussions around censorship and used Congress as an example. Congress can censure, such as the removal of Adam Clayton Powell and various other forms of censure, even though the delegates/representatives are elected by the home folks and are usually only subject to the will of the home folks until their behavior crosses a line. Steps to take might include: A letter to the state party. 30 day cooling off period. Last resort is removal.
Committees can create rules about membership such as level of expected activity. May ask for more positive statements from each state party about who they want as voting members of a committee. Committees can share rules to keep development efforts down.
Jo will send info on list facilitation. Censorship concerns are expressed, also concerns about the effort of list moderation. Idea of using elders to one on one to help people adapt to list etiquette and productivity. Raise the quality of communications. Issues of disrupters on lists and who can ask for changes continues. Letters to state parties? Maya will draft some suggestions.
Portfolios and Committees
What does it mean to be a Portfolio Manager?
SC seems to have a better handle on what is going on in committees and where gaps are. And have a person responsible for dealing with gaps in specific places. There are still weak spots we have not got a handle on, but we see more. Come back to again.
Looked at most current financial reports. Have about $37,000; have about $30,000 in bills, outflow exceeds inflow right now. Long discussion about how bad the financial situation is, and what to do about it. Discussed phone solicitation results. ABB predominates, some Nader sentiment. some economy sucks. Working on ideas for post election fundraising, and strategies based on who wins for President.
Discussed Morning After Campaign (MAC) for post election. Kara presented a $200,000 plan for post election advertising. Long discussion that can not be done justice to here. SC agreed to give it a try, based on fundraising targets. Project can be scaled. Tie into greenhouse parties. Make it funny and stress relieving. Details elsewhere. Kara will seek pledges for the project and report back in 2 weeks. SC also agreed to take lists and make calls. Kara will provide scripts.
Campus Greens want to place an intern in DC office, asking for a little office space. Agreed pending financial discussions, things like paying phone costs, with Campus Greens.
Kara asked that for GPUS website, we prepare some FAQs, to answer what she gets for questions during fundraising calls. She will send SC questions and we shall provide her background material for FAQs.
Sunday session, starting about 10 AM at Luna Cafe.
Discussion of process for when Camejo and Myerson arrive.
Came up with a few questions about ballot lines, UT, etc, then decided on Jake as facilitator.
South Carolina/Delaware proposal
Agreed to put it on the voting page for discussion/decision. 2 weeks discussion, then a vote.
Did want to see if this was really needed now, so asked Gray to have a discussion with SCGP about whether they had second thoughts or if events since it was sent to the secretary had changed. Agreed it would not go up until Gray had had time to check.
Peter and Dean meet with the SC. They were introduced and then I listened instead of taking notes.
Camejo and Myerson stay for 45 minutes, then quick lunch break and back to work.
Discussed reactions to meeting with Camejo and Myerson. Went around, got quick reactions. Reactions varied.
Discussed idea of getting the 2008 process off to a better start with a more thorough review of what went on this year/cycle. Peter Camejo suggested such an idea, and we modified it to be more productive in our discussions of how to implement. Came up with three working groups we want filled out and put to work.
1. Working Group to Develop the Green Party of the United States Strategic Plan.
Refers to the implementation of the proposal to create an ad-hoc strategy committee passed by the CC in March of 2004.
2. Combined Accreditation Committee / Bylaws Committee Working Group to Review the State Accreditation Bylaws
Refers to a request by the SC to the AC and BRPP to form a working group of members from both committees to review the current bylaws provisions addressing state accreditation expectations to support the national party nominees.
3. Working Group to Develop Recommendations for the National Green Party Nominating Process.
SC would like to see volunteers for working groups, with limitations on size so that they can actually get work done, 9 people per working group, and with careful recruiting to make sure all factions/viewpoints/geographic/diversity criteria are represented.
SC will pull that together and get it out to CC.
Annual national meeting . Mid to late July??? Going to ask for bids from state parties. ANMC will start the process of asking state parties to look at hosting and make a bid.
SC generally finds this process is working, but are not sure the loads are well balanced. SC will discuss an on line rebalancing of portfolios.
Discussion of what portfolios mean, different things with different committees keeping track of active committees, building up weak committees. Process depends on the committee and the portfolio holder and requires knowing how much to do where.
Discussed formalizing lists of who is on what committee from the committee viewpoint and from the state perspective. Ask the State parties for lists of who they believe to be on committees from their states, and for committees to inventory their members. Greg and Jody will work on this project. One aspect is possible development of a committee co chair list serve.
Discussion of UT and VT situations. Would prefer to see discussion lead by Accreditation Committee rather than state resolutions, but will take it as it comes. Deliberative process would be good. Jody will work with AC to make sure they get this done. Gil Obler seems to be helping committee move forward. Discussion of legal versus political decision making and perspectives on these type of issues/events. Agreed to ask BRPP to go through and write clearer rules. Greg will follow up with BRPP.
Gray and Marc will create spreadsheet to report voting records of delegates so state parties have easy access to voting by their delegates.
Greg will follow up with website team about getting a listing of best practices onto the website. This will require some editing as well as technology.
Disruptions to committees and lists Peggy and Maya include compilation of lists already in use.
Maya will draft some suggestions on disruptions in committees and lists
Committee lists from committees and states Greg and Jody
State reports to CC and CC reports to states
Annual national meeting, getting that going Jody
Strategic Plan working group
More info on mutual obligations and expectations GPUS and state parties
Jo will send info on list facilitation.
Morning after campaign Kara
Minimally edited and HTML formatted by Charlie Green