Agenda - 7/15/06 - Eureka Greens
Agenda - 7/15/06
Eureka Greens
a Local of the Green Party of Humboldt County (GPHC) covering Eureka, Myrtletown, Cutten, Pine Hill, Humboldt Hill and Samoa
to be held at Has Beans, 2nd and I Street in Eureka
on Saturday, July 15, 2006
Meeting: 3:30 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
1. INTRODUCTIONS AND PUBLIC COMMENT
2. ANNOUNCEMENTS
3. MEMBERSHIP REPORTS
4. ELECTIONS
5. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
6. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION CONCERNING ATTEMPTS TO OVERTURN GPHC BYLAWS
7. AMENDMENT OF EUREKA GREENS BYLAWS
a. Amendment of Article IV, Section 4 regarding the monthly meeting date
b. Amendment of Article IV, Section 4 defining the computation of quorum and minimum level of membership
c. Amendment of Article IV, Section 7 clarifying endorsement process
8. REVIEW OUTCOME OF STEERING COMMITTEE ELECTION CONCERNS
9. SUBMISSION OF ITEMS FOR GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF SEPTEMBER 17, 2006
10. REVIEW OF DISTRUST YOUR GOVERNMENT DAY
11. REVIEW OF FUNDRAISING EFFORTS
a. Block Sale Parties
b. Tabling Schedule
c. Tabling Materials
d. Benefit Concert
12. ENDORSEMENTS
a. Candidate for Eureka City Council, Third Ward (general election of 7 November 2006)
b. Candidate for Eureka City Council, First Ward (general election)
c. Candidate for Eureka City Council, Fifth Ward (general election)
d. Candidate for Eureka Mayor (general election)
e. Candidate for Humboldt County Supervisor, Fourth District (general election)
f. Write-in candidate for Humboldt County Superior Court Judge (general election)
g. Positions for or against statewide initiatives: Public Financing of State Elections, Diversion of Gasoline Tax to Transportation Fund, Highway Bond, Emergency Shelter Bond, Education Facilities Bond, Flood Prevention Bond, High-Speed Train Bond, Lifetime GPS Montioring of Sex Offenders (general election)
13. DISCUSSION OF EUREKA GREENS VOTER'S GUIDE
14. REVIEW OF POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
15. CONSIDER PROPOSALS FOR LEGISLATIVE AGENDA IMPLEMENTATION
16. OPEN DISCUSSION
17. CLOSING CIRCLE
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Calton, Chair
Eureka Greens, GPHC Local
posted by rumpledcritic @ 7:00 PM
12 Comments:
At 6:38 AM,
Fred Mangels said…
Shouldn't you post the minutes of the last meeting when you post the agenda for the next one? That's what the Taxpayer's League does.
At 8:39 AM,
Fred Mangels said…
Item d under Endorsements: ". Position in opposition to Humboldt Coalition for Community Rights initiative".
In OPPOSITION? Is that in conflict with the Humboldt Greens? If so, I'm surprised and curious as to your reasoning.
At 12:54 PM,
rumpledcritic said…
Well, we voted on a motion at our meeting on the 17th to endorse a position in favor of the Fair Elections & Local Democracy initiative and it failed to receive 75% support (5 yes, 3 no, 1 stand aside).
At our next meeting we will test the support for a different view. If this motion fails as well, then the Eureka Greens will be left with no position on this at all.
With the reasoning behind our recent vote, you'd have to ask each individual since the group didn't make a decision. David Cobb and his friends were in favor for all the reasons they talk about at votelocalcontrol.org. Others said many of the things local newspapers have said in their editorials. One woman asked why all corporate contributions weren't banned.
The Humboldt Greens don't have a position on this initiatve either. A vote at the countywide meeting up at HSU failed too (1 yes, 5 no, 3 stand aside). It will come up again in Garberville when we hold our next General Assembly.
So now you know all the blood and guts of our decisions. What will the Libertarians do to find out where they stand?
At 1:27 PM,
Fred Mangels said…
Hmmm...I just wrote a rather lengthy reply and it disappeared. Pisses me off.
I'll try again: Usually what I do is just come up with my own opinion on local issues and send them out over my e-mail list and see if anyone has a good case for dissent. If so, I might switch the LP decision to No Position, especially if we're really split. We don't have meetings anymore.
As far as this proposal to ban outside corporate money from local elections, I am certainly sympathetic with it but am opposed to it, as I and most other Libs are with most "campaign finance reform" type legislation.
I echo what others, like the Times Standard said, along the lines of the cases used as an examples for this proposal are ones where the corporations, and the people supporting them, lost, most likely at least in part because some didn't like the corporate involvement.
But to take it one step further, the corporation's money represented the wishes of thousands of citizens who might not otherwise been able to present their case as well had they not had corporate money to help make their case. After all, they were the minority, or so it turned out. Corporate money, from inside or outside the county can give a minority a voice it might not have otherwise.
It works both ways, too. There are a number of corporations that pander to left wing interests. What if some left wing group wanted an initiative to put on the ballot but there wasn't enough support locally? Well, some might say since there wasn't enough support, it shouldn't be on the ballot in the first place. Maybe so, but I wouldn't have a problem with Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream pitching in some money to help the lefties make their case.
Besides, think of all the money local media and other companies make doing election advertising. As much as I hate seeing the same commercials over and over again, the media makes a considerable amount of money doing the work.
All in all, I don't like much of this reform stuff at all, although I'm sympathetic to the problems. All it really does in the end is make it harder for people to raise funds and present their case.
At 10:01 AM,
Fred Mangels said…
BTW: My blog post today has links to a couple new articles on government and election "reform" you may or may not be interested in.
At 10:56 PM,
Anonymous said…
The Libertarians should start meeting again, we could use more voices speaking out against government intrusion and police-state tactics.
At 7:01 AM,
Fred Mangels said…
Well, problem is, most libertarians aren't activists in the conventional sense. When we had meetings they were lightly attended. A couple times I was the only one to show up, and many of those that did show up were more or less spectators. Nearly all the ones that were actually foot on the ground activists have moved out of the area.
We do have a few around that write letters to the editor on occassion which is a good thing. Remember: The pen is mightier than the sword. :-)
At 8:22 AM,
Fred Mangels said…
I saw in the Times- Standard, this morning, where the Eureka Greens formally took a position against Measure T. Would you mind if we added the Eureka Greens to the list of organizations opposing Measure T on our No On Measure T web page www.measuretno.org?
As a Libertarian, I'll leave the choice to you.
At 12:29 AM,
rumpledcritic said…
Go right ahead Fred. Just be sure to link us here at eurekagreens.blogspot.com. The press release should be posted here in the near future.
At 6:43 AM,
Fred Mangels said…
Will do. Thanks.
At 9:51 PM,
Anonymous said…
To be considered on June 17, 2006
Resolution of the Eureka Greens
a Local of the Green Party of Humboldt County (GPHC) covering Eureka, Myrtletown, Cutten, Pine Hill, Humboldt Hill and Samoa
Resolution Condemning County Party Bylaws Violations
Whereas, The General Assembly of the GPHC amended its Bylaws on December 3, 2005 to increase the number of at-large seats on the Steering Committee (SC) from seven (7) to twelve (12), in order to be consistent with the ratio set by the California Elections Code for County Council and Central Committee seats of registered political parties in the state; and
Whereas, While this amendment came too late for the June 6, 2006 primary election ballot to reflect this change, the party nonetheless recognized prima facia the existence of these twelve at-large seats as separate and distinct from Local Delegate representation from affiliated GPHC Local organizations which have held elections for officers, those being the Arcata Greens and the Eureka Greens thus far; and
Whereas, This prima facia recognition came in the form of a special election held by the GPHC General Assembly on February 25, 2006, when the five serving at-large members (and the two serving Local Delegates) were joined by seven new at-large Steering Committee members (Harmony Groves, Paul Dillon, James Aaron Busald, Hannah Clapsadle, Kyana Tailon and Budd Dickinson); and
Whereas, The GPHC Steering Committee on April 25 and May 30 twice approved the GPHC General Assembly agenda for June 10, 2006, which specifically cited the requirement under the GPHC Bylaws to conduct a special election for the five remaining Steering Committee seats for the 2006-2008 term; and
Whereas, At the General Assembly of June 10, 2006, and in an illegally released press release drafted without the advice and consent of the GPHC Media Committee, members of the incoming GPHC Steering Committee such as Dana Silvernale and David Cobb illegally changed the number of Steering Committee seats to be elected from five to three, based on an intentional misreading of the GPHC Bylaws which was perpetrated without the oversight required by the GPHC Legal Committee; and
Whereas, As a result of this Bylaws violation, the election of Martha Devine of Arcata and Leo Power of Redway was prevented; and
Whereas, While the outgoing Steering Committee had ample representation (two each) from both the gay and lesbian community and the Sequoia Greens region of Southern Humboldt County, as a result of the Bylaws violation perpetrated by Dana Silvernale and David Cobb these communities are now completely excluded from the Steering Committee in contravention to the Key Values of Grassroots Democracy, Feminism, Decentralization and Respect for Diversity; and
Whereas, These Bylaws violations were further compounded by the failure of the incoming Steering Committee to hold its inaugural meeting on June 12, 2006, another violation of the GPHC Bylaws; and
Whereas, The Green Party must adhere to the rule of law or face a complete loss of credibility. Therefore be it
Resolved, The Eureka Greens condemn the violation of Article IV of the GPHC Bylaws by David Cobb, Dana Silvernale and their accomplices and call for their removal from the Steering Committee. Be it further
Resolved, The Eureka Greens call for the seating of Martha Devine and Leo Power to the two remaining Steering Committee seats. Be it further
Resolved, The Secretary shall transmit this resolution to the GPHC General Assembly and all other GPHC Locals, the Emerald Regional Representatives and all constituent county organizations, the GPCA State Coordinating Committee and Electoral Reform Working Group, County Clerk Carolyn Crnich, Elections Office Manager Lindsey McWilliams, the FPPC, all members of the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors and Humboldt County Election Advisory Committee, the Voter Confidence Committee, Humboldt Voter’s Association, League of Women Voters of Humboldt County and all local media.
At 2:38 PM,
Anonymous said…
To be considered on July 15, 2006
Resolution of the Eureka Greens
a Local of the Green Party of Humboldt County (GPHC) covering Eureka, Myrtletown, Cutten, Pine Hill, Humboldt Hill and Samoa
Resolution Concerning Attempts to Overturn GPHC Bylaws
Whereas, The General Assembly of the GPHC amended its Bylaws on a number of occasions to expand provisions for accountability and grassroots democracy within the Green Party in keeping with the Ten Key Values and the California Elections Code; and
Whereas, The Steering Committee of the GPHC at its June 27 meeting created a Bylaws Ad-Hoc Committee in a manner inconsistent with the current GPHC Bylaws, which grants the Legal Committee the authority to review all amendments to the GPHC Bylaws before they reach the General Assembly; and
Whereas, Claims have been made by GPHC Steering Committee members that this Bylaws Ad-Hoc Committee will be empowered with the ability to overturn sections of the GPHC Bylaws outside of the legal process outlined in the GPHC Bylaws; and
Whereas, These attempts to overturn lawfully adopted GPHC Bylaw amendments through an extra-legal process fall outside the scope of any authority possibly granted to an Ad-Hoc Committee, or even to the Steering Committee; and
Whereas, The Green Party must adhere to the rule of law or face a complete loss of credibility. Therefore be it
Resolved, The Eureka Greens call for complete adherence to Article V of the GPHC Bylaws concerning the powers and duties of the GPHC Legal Committee, with any suggested amendments produced by any Ad-Hoc Committee to follow the proper process of Legal Committee review before consideration by the General Assembly. Be it further
Resolved, The Eureka Greens call for complete adherence to Article VIII of the GPHC Bylaws concerning the proper process of considering amendments to the GPHC Bylaws. Be it further
Resolved, The Secretary shall transmit this resolution to the GPHC General Assembly and all other GPHC Locals, the Emerald Regional Representatives and all constituent county organizations, the GPCA State Coordinating Committee and Electoral Reform Working Group, County Clerk Carolyn Crnich, Elections Office Manager Lindsey McWilliams, the FPPC, all members of the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors and Humboldt County Election Advisory Committee, the Voter Confidence Committee, League of Women Voters of Humboldt County and all local media.
Post a Comment
<< Home