|
Current meeting agendas are posted
on this page several days before the meeting. To make an agenda
suggestion, contact
the administrative committee.
The
GPAC County Council holds a general meeting the 2nd Sunday
of every month, beginning at 6:45pm. The following is the
agenda format currently in use. Items may be moved on, removed
from or added to the agenda as the County Council sees fit.
Location: Oakland
Public Library, Temescal Branch, 5205 Telegraph Ave. (This
meeting only)
Introduction
to decision-making process. Introductions: Sunni Sabini,
facilitator, Kevin Reilly, Laura
Wells, Patti Marsh, Budd Dickinson, Greg Jan
(proxy for Suzanne Baker); Evan G; Leslie
Bonett, Jim Aiken, John Klopf, Kenny Mostern, Martin
Illian, John Selawsky, Bob
Marsh, Kate Tanaka, Lee Amosslee,
Howard Chong. (County Councilors in bold.) Late arrivals:
Leslie Dinkin (proxy for Lisa Stephens),
B Soffer.
Announcements
were made.
Consent calendar:
Endorse the Urban Roots proposal for the Gill Tract; and
the proposal passes by consensus.
Agenda review:
The agenda was reviewed and adjusted. Leslie Dinkin is timekeeper
Action items
- Letter to state Coordinating
Committee regarding Mike Feinstein (Budd). Paragraph four
in the proposal change to "The state CC is about to send
has sent a letter." Concern over "taking a side" and wanting
to ask all the Greens to resolve it internally. Suggestion
that we informally communicate it to State CC via our
representative, instead of making a formal resolution.
Concern that Mike Feinstein has not completed all financial
paperwork, and that the CC may be in the right in writing
about his errs (although they may have not done it in
a manner we would have wanted). Suggested for re-working
the proposal, pass by EMT if needed. Budd, Kevin, Bob,
Laura are willing to work on revising it.
- Budd Dickinson for BART Board
(Budd). Willy Kennedy resigned, and there is a vacancy
for District 7. Budd has applied. BART Board will review
candidates and appoint soon. About 16 people have taken
out application packets, including the son of the Mayor
of Richmond. The term is four years, so it ends November
2004. Budd plans on running for the position in November
2004. Current racial composition: 1 African-American out
of 8, 2 Asian Americans. Concern about having an all-white
county council endorsing a white person to the Board in
a District that is one of the few that could elect an
African American. Four unresolved concerns. Extended for
two minutes. ®Councilors vote 8-2-0 to approve the proposal.
Lee expressed that GPAC shouldn't make decisions about
endorsements based on personal relationships. Budd says
he's running as the progressive candidate. Lee feels this
is cronyism because we don't know who the other candidates
are. Also he feels the group doesn't use the consensus
process properly. (Short stretch break. Lee left the meeting,
and then John Klopf took over minute taking.)
- Support Common Agenda Regional
Network (Patti). Patti's been representing Greens at Common
Agenda (a coalition of peace groups in the east bay who
share how they're doing, etc). It's dues time and she
thinks we should join as a group. The cost is $25.00.
They have no local website. Written material is passed
around. No concerns. ®Proposal passes by consensus.
- Discussion Item Capacity Building
(Sunni): At the end of the last meeting we had a list
of all the different groups that exist in the GPAC. [List
is posted on the wall] she understood that the Outreach
Working Group (OWG) was going to take action on this list
during the last month. Each group was going to become
volunteer-ready and give contact information for new volunteers
to the outreach committee. Goal for leadership: Leadership
functions and structures exist. Work assigned to leadership
structures gets done. Patti: OWG is ready for volunteers
and so are the newsletter and tabling subcommittees. John
K: website is ready as of Monday the 17th (actually a
subcommittee of OWG). Kenny: Media committee is ready
and has needs he'll mention in his report. Greg: finance/fundraising
will be ready within a month (fundraising letter will
be sent out within a month and then they'll be ready).
Bob: finance committee agreed to increase sustainers as
their main goal and get going on this by March. Greg:
Campaigns/voter guide will be ready for volunteers in
April. Bob: Admin committee wants people who want to do
office work (clean up office, send thank you letters,
etc.). Working Group / Committee contacts --- Volunteer
Coordinator: Patti Marsh. OWG: Patti Marsh. Tabling: John
Morton. Newsletter: Suzanne. Website: John Klopf. Media:
John Selawsky. Finance: Bob Marsh. Campaigns/Voter Guide:
Greg Jan. Administration: Martin Ilian. Each group should
develop projects and pass info to OWG later. Groups that
need attention: Council Vacancy. Bob reports that they
started in June or July but hasnÅft done anything yet.
The first task was to decide if we need more council members.
Bob thinks we need additional members, especially women,
on the committee but Lee is not interested in finding
members since he feels we don't need any more Councilors.
Leslie D. and Budd volunteer for the committee. Greg:
in the last 6 months, we have wanted to fill vacancies
but the working group hasn't done so. He feels the directive
doesn't need to be discussed unless we want to decide
to change the mission. Leslie B. thinks we don't have
a choice, because of the law; we must go forward and fill
the seats until there are 13 people. Kevin thinks we really
need to find a councilor from District 4 in Oakland that
should be easier to fill than seat from Fremont or Livermore.
Leslie D. states there are 6 names for the working group.
Kevin opts out. Leslie B. thinks Lisa wanted to convene
the working group. Leslie D. agrees to contact Lisa and
convene the group this month by email. Peter asks about
proportional representation vs. at-large for our group.
Bob says there is an electoral reform committee on the
state level, so this might change. Our by-laws are at-large.
LauraÅfs concern is if three people are against something,
you can have minority rule (three people can kill something
until you have fifteen people on the council). Leslie
B. says our intention was to work with the county registrar
to accept our by-laws or find out why not. John Selawsky
thinks our by-laws do need help - one example is the problem
of standing aside and how that affects voting. Leslie
D will be the placeholder but won't do any work. Peter
volunteers to be on the group. Sunni: what should we focus
on next time? The group discussed the consensus decision-making
process and the 80% super majority vote issue. Greg requests
that we ask the State CC what other counties do and offers
to do that on the national level. Kenny wants to discuss
an increased capacity to do political action for this
group.
Reports (see meeting agenda
for previously submitted written reports).
- Media report (Kenny). For his
press advisory about him being the Green contact wasn't
supposed to contain new information. Gill tract development
- he'd like to do a press release, but when it matters)
contrary to the feeling at the end of the last meeting
that we should do one now). He's going to be writing this
and he'd like to have actual Greens at the council meeting
with a sign to generate press interest. Generally, turnout
at meetings helps, and he'll do press releases when they
matter. Montclarion article - he was quoted extensively,
but decided not to be the "Green Party Spokesperson" because
there was no direction from the group. Question: would
the Green Party like to be recognized when a reporter
calls him? He could have said that and gotten it in the
paper. Laura states he can always identify as a Green
Party activist, give your reply, and possibly refer to
other people in the county for various issues. Kenny agreed.
More discussion. Kenny says he's hearing that he should
state the Green Party position if the party has done something
on the issue in the past or if it's in the ten key values.
Otherwise he will be a "green party activist."
- Treasurer's Report (Bob). Study
the statement of accounts, especially for your working
group, and ask questions if any. Also, there's a statement
of actual expenses vs. budget. See if you're on track
by using 2/3 as a benchmark because we're 2/3 of the way
through the year. Of course that doesn't work for seasonal
items. The minuses on the bottom are debits. It means
we spent more than our income. Bob captures the information
about types of cash or check and tries to keep track of
money from newsletter, Green Sundays, etc. But he hasn't
gotten with people to decide whether/how to do this for
all committees. Our fiscal year is July-June. The credit
card service charge is offset by the gains made by credit
card contributions, but the amount of expenditure is very
high. The previous treasurer signed a 4-year lease at
$40/month and we're locked into it. We can re-negotiate
it in two years.
- Outreach Committee (Patti).
Written report is within the agenda. John Morton wants
to see ten tables going in our county - minimum. There's
potential to get people from many places. Laura is the
only person with a regular table, and there are about
8 people. So if we have 6 per table plus 20 for dropouts,
we need 80 people to do tables. Greg says we had 150 volunteers
for campaigns, and we can get the people needed.
Additional items: Proposed
Oakland anti-loitering law (Kenny). Only two Oakland City
Council members oppose the proposed ordinance. Kenny would
like the GPAC to oppose the ordinance and organize Greens
to attend the City Council meeting on Tuesday, 2/11/03.
Summary of ordinance: if a police officer believes that
any group of four people is loitering with the intent to
sell drugs, they can issue a ticket for $100 (2nd is $250,
3rd is $500, 4th is arrest). This is based on the judgment
of the police officer.
Closing
| Pluses |
|
Improvable |
| |
|
|
|
- Sunni asked if Lee would say something before he
left.
- Prevented people with strong personalities from
speaking out of turn.
- Facilitator kept us moving on even though situation
was tough.
|
|
- We should be holding the group together and promote
consensus instead of falling back on the 80-20 vote.
- People don't respect time limits.
- If we have agenda items that look like they're
going to be difficult, and we need additional information,
please ask for that information ahead of time, instead
of bringing it up at the meeting.
- Same people keep trying to oppose things by finding
extremely valid reasons to object.
- Time constraint mandates against communication.
- Focus on alternatives for consensus (maybe re-read
it before every meeting). We shouldn't fall back on
voting.
- Reports submitted in writing ahead of time didn't
work as well as we thought because people want to
talk during reports.
|
Adjourned
(Kuehl, D-Santa
Monica) Health Care for All Californians, sponsor Health
Care for California (http://www.healthcareforall.org)
& Vote Health, local affiliate (http://votehealth.net);
authorize GPAC to work with authors and sponsoring organizations
to ensure that SB 921 fulfills GP principles, meets the
mandate to eliminate private market health insurance, establishes
a one tiered comprehensive benefit package guaranteed to
all Californians including undocumented residents, and that
campaign promotes grassroots organizing and popular education
about single payer health care. (Kevin) (Text at: http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0901-0950/sb_921_bill_20030221_introduced.html)
(5 minutes,
7:05) items may be moved, added or removed from the agenda
at this time. Action items that have had no prior notice will
be placed at the end of the agenda.
(start 7:10) items appearing here are
resolutions submitted in advance of the meeting on which the
County Council may take action.
1.
The Green Party of Alameda County hereby opposes the recall
initiative against Gray Davis being prepared/circulated
largely by members of the Republican Party (10 minutes,
Lee, 7:10)
GPAC is very disappointed by
many of Davis' actions as governor, but neither are we
surprised by them. We ran a candidate to oppose him, and
we lost in the election. We look forward to the time when
California elects a Green governor.
Davis has not, however, created
acts that deserve his recall. Recalls are on their face
usually not democratic. The turn out in special elections
is generally much lower than in the November elections
that we elect our governor in. This means that, if the
recall were to succeed, the number of votes received by
the winning candidate will undoubtedly be MUCH LESS than
those received by Davis. Thus, the winner will be someone
with the money to run a campaign on an off-year with little
notice. This is money over democracy and grassroots organizing.
We reserve the recall option
not as a means for people to attempt to replace an elected
official mid-term with their own candidate, but rather
for removal of a candidate who has violated the public
trust.
The GPAC also calls on Peter
Camejo, 2002 Green Party candidate for California governor,
and the Green Party of California, to take a position
opposing the recall.
2. Pass
a resolution in favor of SB 17 (Kenny 10 minutes, 7:20).
Tim Marshall, a registered Green and a member of the radical
caucus of the Oakland Teacher¹s Association has asked
me to get Greens involved in a campaign to educate people
about the real sources of the school funding crisis
the failure of corporations to pay their share of taxes.
I wish I had a resolution to suggest at this point, but
the exact outlines of the campaign are not yet clear.
However, there is currently a
bill (SB17) in the state legislature that would change
the definition of corporate ownership of property in such
a way that corporations would be reassessed every time
their ownership changes hands. The effect of this would
be to eliminate the biggest problem with Proposition 13,
which is that because property is reassessed only when
ownership changes hand, corporate property is almost never
reassessed. (Kudos to Laura Wells for first point this
out to me!)
My recommendation is that the
County Council pass a resolution in favor of SB 17 and
any campaign that educates the public about the inadequacy
of corporate taxation. I will then do media work, alongside
the Teachers, when they decide what they want to do.
The full text of the Bill can
be found online at http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sb_17_bill_20021202_introduced.html
San Francisco Chronicle article:
Another lawmaker introduced a bill Wednesday that is designed
to trigger more frequent property tax assessments for
commercial properties, which supporters say could raise
billions of dollars for the cash-strapped state to help
avoid deep spending cuts.
"The current system allows billions
of dollars of valuable business property to be vastly
under-taxed and is in dire need of reform," said Roy Ulrich,
president of the California Tax Reform Association.
Commercial property is reassessed
for tax purposes when a change in ownership has occurred.
That means businesses that have not changed hands in a
number of years pay less than one that has been purchased
even though their property may have the same market value.
Also, critics of the current
system have long argued that it contains numerous loopholes
that allow businesses to evade reassessment. Changes in
partnerships are not recorded on deeds that county assessors
constantly monitor, and companies can use dummy corporations
and leaseback arrangements to transfer ownership without
triggering a reappraisal of the property's worth.
Ulrich said if two partners who
each own half of a shopping mall can sell to two new partners
without triggering a reassessment provided that neither
of the new partners controls more than 50 percent of the
venture.
The bill by state Sen. Martha
Escutia, D-Whittier, would expand the definitions of change
of ownership in commercial and industrial property, but
details of the legislation, SB17, have yet to be worked
out.
The plan is sponsored by Pacific
Institute for Community Organization on behalf of working
families.
The proposal drew immediate opposition
from the California Chamber of Commerce, which questioned
why it's more fair to raise taxes on businesses with low
assessments than to lower taxes for companies with high
assessments. Chronicle staff writer Paul Feist contributed
to this report. / E-mail Lynda Gledhill at lgledhill@sfchronicle.com.
3.
Proposal that the group reach consensus to support several
[4] revenue options (10 minutes, City of Alameda Chapter
/ Kevin, 7:30) circulated by the California Tax reform
Association (CTRA) and that GPAC draft letters advocating
these reforms to Governor Davis, Senator Perata, and Assemblymember
Chan and also urging that GPCA adopt support for these
reforms at the next state plenary in Sacramento. The reforms
are summarized below:
- Re-assess non-residential
property
Proposal: Change the definition
of "change of ownership" as it applies to non-residential
property, to provide for change of ownership when a
cumulative 50% of ownership shares changes hands. This
proposal has been contained in AB 1013 (Leonard, 2001),
AB 2288 (Dutra, 2000), and SB 81 (Kopp, 1991), and Proposition
167 of 1992. The Conference Committee on Local Government
Finance also considered it in 2000.
Revenue: at least $2 billion,
more likely $4 billion or more
Explanation and rationale:
The assessment of commercial property is the most loophole-ridden
hole in the state¹s tax system. Currently, 100% of a
property can change ownership but no change of ownership
is recorded as, for example, when shares of stock turn
over or limited partners sell to new limited partners.
Many publicly traded corporations have never recorded
changes of ownership. This 50% rule can be most effectively
implemented by creating a rebuttable presumption that
a publicly traded corporation changes ownership every
3 years, while establishing closer tracking for partnership
properties.
- Increase the top income tax
brackets to re-capture part of the federal tax break
for the wealthy
Proposal: Restore top income
tax brackets for joint return over 260,000 to 10% from
current 9.3%, and for joint return over $520,000 to
11% (as per SB 1255-Burton).
Revenue: $3.1 billion
Explanation and rationale:
The federal tax relief for the wealthiest taxpayers
far outweighs the amount of this state increase, generating
many thousands of dollars more in tax relief for upper
income taxpayers than this proposal will cost. Meanwhile,
the federal budget will shortchange the state. A taxpayer
earning $350,000, for example, will save over $3000
per year from the federal tax cut, and the new bracket
would cost about $450, net of federal deductions for
state taxes. The $700,000 taxpayer will save over $20,000
from the Bush tax cut, and would pay increased state
taxes of about $3,000, net of federal deductions for
state taxes.
- Require that large corporations
file as corporations, not "s" type partnerships
Proposal: Restrict the use
of the S corporation to companies with total receipts
under $20 million
Revenue: $570 million
Explanation and rationale:
The use of S corporations, which pay only a nominal
corporate level tax, is a benefit intended for small
companies. Federal law liberalized the use of the S
corporation, so that larger companies with a significant
number of shareholders can avoid paying the corporation
tax. Restricting the use of the S corporation to medium-sized
companies and smaller would make sure that this filing
status achieves its intended purpose, and that the corporation
tax fulfills its rationale.
- Enact severance tax on oil
produced in California
Proposal:
Enact severance tax on oil as it is removed from the
ground at 4-6% of sales price
Revenue:
$150-300 million, depending on the price of oil
Explanation
and rationale: California remains the only state in
the country without a severance tax on oil, and virtually
the only place in the world that collects no royalties
or taxes on oil produced on private lands. (We collect
royalties on state land production). This proposal has
been raised many times in the past, last by former Speaker
Antonio Villaraigosa. An appropriate structure would
provide a trigger when oil prices fall below a certain
level, and would exempt the non-integrated oil producers.
Source: http://www.caltaxreform.org/revenue_options_for_the_budget_c.htm.
One half hour is allotted for discussion
on a topic selected in advance by the County Council. This
is intended to get a sense of the council, to get people thinking
and discussing an issue, for special presentations by guests,
or to help an individual or group get input for a future action
item.
(Suzanne - 5 minutes, 7:40): Garrett Brown, a workplace
health and safety inspector for the State of California,
has been asked by the Committee (?GPCA Committee) to consider
a run against Rep. Tauscher in the November 2004 elections.
Brown met with the Contra Costa County Council on February
25th to discuss a possible campaign. The Council passed
a motion at the meeting "encouraging" Brown, who is seriously
considering the idea with his family and evaluating what
it will take to run a serious campaign in the sprawling
district running from Livermore to El Cerrito to Antioch
to Fairfield and Dixon. Brown may be contacted at 510-558-1014
or email at gdbrown@igc.org.
Garrett Brown: A Political Biography
Garrett Brown has been a political activist for peace, social
justice and fundamental social change since he was 17-year-old
high school organizer against the Vietnam War in 1969.
Currently he works as a workplace
health and safety inspector for Cal/OSHA and is a Certified
Industrial Hygienist. In addition to his job safety "day
job," Brown has been the volunteer coordinator of the Maquiladora
Health and Safety Support Network (MHSSN) since its founding
in 1993. The Network has conducted 10 years worth of trainings
and technical assistance with community-based organizations
of women maquiladora workers on the Mexican side of the
US-Mexico border. Since 2000, the Network has expanded its
work to Asia, working with trade unions, human rights and
women¹s organizations, and factory health and safety committees
in Indonesia and China.
For the last decade Brown has been
an activist in the "anti-corporate globalization" movement
and worked with organizations such as Global Exchange, the
Coalition for Justice in the Maquiladoras, and the Campaign
for Labor Rights. He has filed complaints on behalf of Mexican
workers under the "labor side agreement" of the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in an effort to improve working
conditions in maquiladoras operated by US transnational
corporations.
Between 1984 and 1988, Brown lived
and worked in Estelí, Nicaragua, during the years of the
Sandinista revolution. He was one of the organizers of the
"sister city" relationship between San Francisco and Estelí
established in 1989, and was the volunteer coordinator of
the Estelí-San Francisco Health Care Committee between 1990
and 2000. Brown also worked in the Central American solidarity
and South African anti-apartheid movements.
Between 1971 and 1983 Brown was
a member of the Young Socialist Alliance and the Socialist
Workers Party, and was active in political activities in
Los Angeles, Boston, Chicago, Birmingham, Alabama, and Atlanta,
Georgia. During this time Brown worked as a production worker
in iron foundries, garment mills, chemical and aerospace
plants, and was a member of the United Steelworkers, Teamsters
and Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers unions.
Brown also worked as a reported
for a Chicago daily newspaper after graduating from college.
He has a Master in Public Health degree from the University
of California at Berkeley. He is an active member of the
American Public Health and American Industrial Hygiene associations.
For examples of Brown¹s recent
work, please see the website of the Maquiladora Health &
Safety Support Network at: www.igc.org/mhssn.
decision-making process interpretation
of the consensus process (30 minutes Sunni, 7:45) Review
voting clause of bylaws and 80/20 super-majority voting.
Recommend Councilors review http://cagreens.org/grow/governance.html.
(Leslie,
et al, 20 minutes, 8:15)
(Laura, 15 minutes,
8:35)
Whereas,
(1) Our county council meeting March 9 will follow a Green
Sunday discussion focused on the difficult issue of Palestine
and Israel, and
(2) An Oakland Greens meeting on February 24 addressed endorsing
a proposal, which is going to the Oakland City Council in
March, to establish two sister cities, one in Palestine
and one in Israel (a peace village in which Israelis and
Palestinians are living in peace and educating their children
side by side). During the discussion some attendees were
disturbed by what they felt to be anti-Semitism that was
unchallenged by non-Jews in the room.
Further, what I would like to propose
is a straw poll to ask people if there is consensus that
the Green Party of Alameda County might endorse, in principal,
the proposal that Oakland establish sister city relationships
with the two cities. Realizing that people may want more
information, I am attaching the proposals that went to the
Oakland Greens list serve. (Laura)
- 5 minutes are allocated per report. The Secretary will prepare
short synopsis of reports as s/he feels is relevant. Persons
submitting reports that should be in the minutes are encouraged
to submit their reports electronically in writing to the Secretary
before the meeting. Reports can result in actions, but only
if the action is relevant to the report.
(Bob,
et al, read only)
(Kenny, read only) My media activities for the past months
are as follows:
1. The Press Release in regard
to the anti-loitering ordinance. On Tuesday, February
11 I put out the press release approved at the last County
Council meeting. This release has already been sent to
this list. It did not result in direct press for the GPAC,
but the fact that more than 10 Greens turned out as part
of the opposition and that several more made calls to
Jane Brunner¹s office at our urging had a notable effect.
Brunner, after being on the fence, voted against the ordinance,
and there is every reason to believe that this is in part
because she knows she represents a heavily Green district.
The Director of PUEBLO, the main organizers of the opposition,
made it a point to call me and thank us for our activities
in support of them. And two different people, both registered
Greens who do not generally go to Green meetings or organize
with us, called me to thank us after seeing my speech
on Oakland Cable TV. This has resulted in a request for
support for another campaign (which I will describe in
another email).
Important conclusion: presswork
accompanied by coherent activism will be noticed and appreciated
even if we are not actually mentioned in a major newspaper
article.
2. Housing article in Montclarion.
I was quoted as a "Green Party activist" in the Montclarion¹s
February 21 article on Jerry Brown¹s housing record. The
substance of what I said was that the 10K plan is a fine
idea, but that the idea of downtown housing is widely
supported, and was not invented by Jerry Brown. I also
pointed out that the small number of units that have been
completed can entirely be explained by the real estate
boom, not Brown¹s presence. My comments about affordable
housing were not quoted, frankly because I told the reporter
to emphasize the words of Sean Herron of East Bay Housing
Organizations and not mine on this issue, since he¹s the
most knowledgeable person on the issue.
3. "Housing Matters" Poetry Slam
article in the New York Times. Though I was not able to
get my Green Party affiliation in the New York Times,
you should all know that the Berkeley Rent Stabilization
Board, in part at the urging of its Green members, hosted
a poetry slam on February 26 that I participated in. A
New York Times Reporter showed up, and there is an article
in the March 3 Times that quotes from one of my poems.
This is important primarily because it is a sign of the
possibility we can get press by sponsoring a poetry prize,
something I have already discussed with several County
Councilors. And the host of the Berkeley Slam who is
a Green has indicated that he¹d be happy to schedule
a "Green slam" if we are interested.
I have not heard recently from
Carla and Cindy about the Urban Roots proposal, but that
continues to be on my agenda.
I have not heard much from people
in Berkeley, Alameda, Albany, etc., about what they want
me to be involved in. As you all know, my day-to-day work
is in Oakland but I am excited about doing work in other
cities. I await your further instructions.
(Martin, please read only): We set the agenda, discussed
consensus, discussed Green Guide for facilitators, discussed
the office and decided we would keep it as is but it would
be a good idea for office to be open 4 hrs/wk if we could
do this in the future. Next Admin Comm. meeting at Au Coquelot
on University Ave, Berkeley on March 31, 6:30 pm.
(Kevin, just read this, no time): Please submit agenda items
sooner, many items came in after Admin Comm. had already
met and there are too many agenda items submitted, committee
should review these at meeting.
(read only): Vacancy
Appointments Working Group Report
The working group met on Sun. Mar. 2
at 1:00 PM at Au Coquelet. In attendance were John S., Bob,
Lee, and Leslie D. The group decided our first step should
be to survey the current County Council to determine its
demographic and skill makeup. We looked at the list of skills
and demographic information provided as a sample in the
original Vacancy Appointment proposal and added a few additional
categories. The group decided to submit a request for 20
minutes at the March 9 County Council meeting to conduct
a voluntary survey. The Working group will reconvene on
March 30, 5:00 PM at Lee's House to continue the process.
i. Alameda (see minutes previously
submitted)
ii. Oakland (no report submitted)
iii. Campus (unknown activity)
iv. Others (no reports submitted)
(no report)
Green
Party of California Communication (read only)
** Green Party of California Announcement
to Contacts ** This is an official communication from the
Green Party of California to its county and local contacts.
Please ensure this message is forwarded to your local Greens
for appropriate action.
Dear Greens,
The GPCA Campaigns and Candidates
Working Group (C&C) plans to actively assist in recruiting
and supporting Green candidates throughout the state in
2003/4, and to develop a winning strategy for Green campaigns.
We are putting together a work
plan to recruit candidates for partisan (congress and state
legislature) and non- partisan local races (county supervisors,
city council, school board, etc.) If your county has already
identified qualified Green candidates, C&C would appreciate
it if you could let us know about them as soon as possible.
The work plan includes:
1. Budgeting money to help qualified
partisan candidates get their campaigns up and running as
soon as possible. Since these races will require extensive
fundraising and grassroots organizing to be successful,
we need to get them started as soon as possible.
2. Budgeting money to help support
as many qualified local candidates as possible.
3. Developing a screening process
to help identify qualified candidates at all levels.
4. Hosting a series of workshops
and forums designed to get input on green priorities and
strategies. (The San Francisco Bay Area is hosting the first
workshop on Sunday, March 23. For more information, contact
Susan King .415.823.5524)
Our goal is to work with the locals
to create a strategy to dramatically increase the number
of Green Office holders in California in 2004.
Again, we welcome your participation
in the GPCA planning process. If you have already identified
candidate/potential candidates in your county/region, please
let us know. Northern California: Susan King; Southern California:
Magali Offerman.
To join the C&C list serve, visit
http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-ccwg.
Thank you. GPCA C&C Interim Quad-cos
Susan King, Magali Offerman, Larry Shoup, Forrest Hill
8:50
|
county council 