[GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 138 - Approval: Minutes, General Assembly, June 10-11, 2017

[Nicole Castor]

Are we taking amendments for this?

GA was June 17-18, not 10-11.

"Decision: Oppose AB 469 (Feinstein, CCWG)."
**Was ERWG, not CCWG which proposed. This has several incorrect references
to this in these minutes.
On Feb 14, 2018 8:45 AM, "GPCA Votes" <gpca.votes at gmail.com> wrote:

> *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
> <gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>*
>
> Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote
>
> Ranked Choice Vote ID #138
> Ranked Choice Vote *Approval: Minutes, General Assembly, June 10-11, 2017*
> Ranked Choice Vote Administrators: Victoria Ashley, Brian Good, Laura
> Wells, Eric Brooks, Mike Goldbeck
> Discussion  02/12/2018 - 03/25/2018
> Voting  03/26/2018 - 04/01/2018
> Voting ends at Midnight Pacific Time
>
> *Background*
>
> GPCA Bylaws 7-5.6 Minutes state that "Minutes shall include the date,
> time, location and list of delegates in attendance, the subject/title,
> sponsor(s) and presenter(s) of all agenda items heard, the decisions-taken
> (including whether by consensus or by roll-call vote) and the text of all
> proposals, including amendments." (http://www.cagreens.org/
> bylaws/2016-07-03#Section_7-5_Meetings)
>
> The following minutes from the General Assembly, June, 2017 in Sacramento
> are presented below, with links from this page to the text of each proposal
> in question: http://cagreens.org/ga/2017-11/minutes.
>
> *Proposal*
>
> That the following minutes be approved as presented in draft form here on
> the web here http://cagreens.org/ga/2017-011/minutes, and in draft text
> form below:
>
> GREEN PARTY OF CALIFORNIA
> June 2017 General Assembly - Draft Minutes
> Sacramento, June 17-18, 2017
>
> ATTENDEES:
>
> Name County Sacramento Delegate status Present/Absent
> Brett Dixon Alameda Delegate P
> Greg Jan Alameda Delegate P
> James McFadden Alameda Not delegate P
> Jan Arnold Alameda Delegate P
> Laura Wells Alameda Delegate P
> Maxine Daniel Alameda Delegate P
> Michael Rubin Alameda Delegate P
> Pam Spevack Alameda Delegate P
> Paul Rea Alameda Delegate P
> Phoebe Sorgen Alameda Delegate P
> Erik Rydberg Butte Delegate P
> Bert Heuer Contra Costa Not delegate P
> Brian Deckman Contra Costa Not delegate P
> Meleiza Figueroa Contra Costa Not delegate P
> Tim Laidman Contra Costa Delegate P
> Megan Buckingham Fresno Delegate P
> David Cobb Humboldt Delegate/Alt P
> Jim Smith Humboldt Delegate P
> Kelsey Reedy Humboldt Not delegate P
> Kyle Dust Humboldt Delegate P
> Matt Smith-Caggiano Humboldt Delegate/Alt P
> Cassidy Sheppard Kern Delegate P
> Penny Sheppard Kern Delegate P
> Ajay Rai Los Angeles Delegate P
> Andrea Houtman Los Angeles Not delegate P
> Angel Orellana Los Angeles Delegate P
> Angelina Saucedo Los Angeles Delegate P
> Cesar Gonzalez Los Angeles Not delegate P
> Christopher Cruz Los Angeles Delegate P
> Daniel Mata Los Angeles Delegate P
> Doug Barnett Los Angeles Delegate P
> Fernando Ramirez Los Angeles Delegate P
> James Lauderdale Los Angeles Not delegate P
> Jimmy Rivera Los Angeles Delegate P
> Kenneth Mejia Los Angeles Delegate P
> Lisa Salvary Los Angeles Delegate P
> Liz Solis Los Angeles Delegate P
> Marla Bernstein Los Angeles Delegate P
> Martin Conway Los Angeles Delegate P
> Miguel Zuniga Los Angeles Delegate P
> Reed Heisley-Shellaby Los Angeles Delegate P
> Richard Flores Los Angeles Delegate P
> Rodolfo Cortes Barragan Los Angeles Delegate P
> Rohan Sabnis Los Angeles Delegate P
> Rubi Mondragon Avila Los Angeles Not delegate P
> Ruby Gallegos Los Angeles Delegate P
> Shane Que Hee Los Angeles Not delegate P
> Yuliana Miranda Mendoza Los Angeles Delegate P
> Mimi Newton Marin Delegate P
> Ike Heinz Mendocino Delegate P
> Pam Brown Mendocino Delegate P
> Ron Lippert Mendocino Not delegate P
> Audra Walton Monterey Not delegate P
> Dominique Wade Monterey Not delegate P
> Eleanor Lambert Monterey Not delegate P
> Frank Lambert Monterey Delegate P
> Beth Moore Nevada Delegate P
> Pamela Osgood Nevada Not delegate P
> Sue Roberts Emery Nevada Delegate P
> Gloria Bram Orange Delegate P
> Phil Blumenfeld Orange Delegate P
> Bobby Halili Riverside Delegate P
> Lorraine Salas Riverside Delegate P
> Christopher Carlson Sacramento Delegate P
> Eric Frame Sacramento Delegate P
> Farzad Qmehr Sacramento Not delegate P
> James Clark Sacramento Delegate P
> Jared Laiti Sacramento Delegate P
> Lawrence Murray Sacramento Not delegate P
> Nicole Castor Sacramento Delegate P
> Randy Hicks Sacramento Not delegate P
> Carol Bouldin San Bernardino Delegate P
> Vickie Wilson San Bernardino Delegate P
> Ann Menasche San Diego Delegate P
> Nicole Montoya San Diego Delegate P
> Barry Hermanson San Francisco Delegate P
> Eric Brooks San Francisco Delegate P
> Lance Smith San Francisco Delegate P
> Mike Murphy San Francisco Delegate P
> Colt Gonzales San Joaquin Delegate P
> Eric Luna San Joaquin Delegate P
> Jennifer Hall San Joaquin Not delegate P
> Mark Miller San Joaquin Not delegate P
> Gloria Purcell San Mateo Delegate P
> Lee McKusick San Mateo Not delegate P
> Sanda Everette San Mateo Delegate P
> Brian Good Santa Clara Delegate P
> Cheryl McGovern Santa Clara Delegate P
> Mike Gonzales Santa Clara Delegate P
> Nassim Nouri Santa Clara Delegate P
> Robert Latimore Santa Clara Delegate P
> Don Yost Shasta Delegate P
> Lee Macey Shasta Not delegate P
> Quinton Crawford Solano Not delegate P
> Ruscal Cayangyang Solano Delegate P
> David Pittman Sonoma Not delegate P
> June Brashares Sonoma Delegate P
> Susan Chunco Sonoma Delegate P
> Susan Lamont Sonoma Delegate P
> Tarik Kanaana Sonoma Delegate P
> John Schmit Stanislaus Delegate P
> Dalia Gonzalez Tulare Not delegate P
> Fernando Serrano Tulare Not delegate P
> Lauren Mauricio Tulare Delegate P
> Carla Rodriguez Yolo Not delegate P
> Connor Gorman Yolo Not delegate P
> Sadie Fulton Yolo Delegate P
> Walter England Yolo Delegate P
> AJ Hill Alameda ALT delegate A
> Bob Marsh Alameda ALT delegate A
> Patti Marsh Alameda ALT delegate A
> Vicente Cruz Alameda ALT delegate A
> Jessica Montiel Contra Costa ALT delegate A
> Paul Larudee Contra Costa Delegate A
> Richard Gomez Fresno Delegate A
> Ruthi Engelke Humboldt ALT delegate A
> Angelica Dueñas Los Angeles Delegate A
> Henoc Garcia Los Angeles Delegate A
> Matthew Wheeler Los Angeles Delegate A
> Mike Feinstein Los Angeles Delegate A
> Hebard Olsen Monterey Delegate A
> Peggy Koteen San Luis Obispo Delegate A
> Mark Roest San Mateo Delegate A
> Melanie Liu Santa Clara ALT delegate A
> Victoria Ashley Solano Delegate A
> Carolyn Epple Sonoma ALT delegate A
> Donna Phillips Stanislaus Delegate A
>
>
> Saturday, June 17
> 8:00 am Breakfast, registration
>
> 9:00 am Opening, new delegate orientation, quorum count, announcement of
> Standing Committee vacancies
>
> Quorum Count - 63 delegate cards handed out; all 63 delegates were present.
> 9/11 regions present - Los Angeles & Central Coast Regions missing
>
> Agenda approval -
> Changes proposed during June 16, 2017 CC meeting are noted by Tarik
> Kanaana.
> There is a request to switch the IT committee break out session to
> Saturday - the Bylaws Committee Co Coordinator agrees to switch the Bylaws
> Committee break-out session to Sunday.
>
> No outstanding questions or concerns.
>
> The revised agenda is approved by consensus. See: https://docs.google.com/
> document/d/1aq2d92mXc9FTx8EObLUtEq0F3Jv-7zTTwx6VKh46gnc/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> Announcement of Standing Committee vacancies:
> - Bylaws Committee (8 Voting Members, including CC liaison) - currently
> full, no vacancies.
> - Clearinghouse Committee (8 Voting Members, including CC liaison) -
> currently 6 Voting Members, 2 vacancies.
> - Finance Committee (8 Voting Members, including CC liaison plus Treasurer
> as ex officio non-voting 9th member) - currently 7 Voting Members, 1
> vacancy.
> - IT Committee (8 Voting Members, including CC liaison) - currently full,
> no vacancies.
> - Media Committee (8 Voting Members, including CC liaison, plus non-voting
> GPCA Spokespersons) - currently 1 Voting Member, 7 vacancies.
> - Platform Committee (8 Voting Members, including CC liaison) -currently 4
> Voting Members, 4 vacancies.
> - Fundraising Committee (8 Voting Members, including CC liaison plus
> Treasurer as ex officio non-voting 9th member) - currently 3 Voting
> Members, 5 vacancies.
> - Campaign Fund Support Committee (6 Members) - all positions are up for
> appointment per GPCA Bylaw 9-7.2(b).
>
> 9;40 am Designation of General Assembly Roles and Responsibilities:
>
> - Saturday morning Facilitators - Beth Moore, Jared Laiti
> - Notes Taker - Mimi Newton
> - Time Keeper - Eric Brooks
> - Vibes Watchers - Susan Chunco & Gloria Purcell
>
> The facilitators presented a brief overview of the consensus process.
>
> 10:00 am Presentation: Coordinating Committee female and male candidates
> for FY 2017-2019 make statements -
>
> - Sanda Everette
> - Sadie Fulton
> - Erik Rydberg
> - Mimi Newton
> - Deatra Cohen (in her absence, her statement was read)
> - Mica Daniel
> - Mark Miller
> - Eric Brooks
> - Nicole Castor
>
> 10:20 am Explanation of Delegations by Laura Wells - General Assembly,
> Standing General Assembly, GPUS Delegates and Alternate Delegates.
>
> 10:25am Presentation: GPUS Delegation delegate and alternate candidates
> for FY 2017-2018 make statements:
>
> - Sanda Everette
> - Fernando Serrano
> - David Cobb
> - Meleiza Figueroa
> - Erik Rydberg
> - Jan Arnold
> - Matthew David Smith-Caggiano
> - David Pittman
> - Doug Barnett
> - Phoebe Anne Sorgen
> - Kenneth Mejia
> - Carolyn Epple (in her absence, her statement was read)
> - Mimi Newton
> - Angelica Duenas (in her absence, her statement was read)
>
> Sanda announced that the GPUS delegates would have a meeting at dinner on
> Saturday Night.
>
> 10:50 am - Announcements
> - David Cobb announced that there would be a workshop for the Movement
> School for Revolutionaries in Richmond on June 24.
> - The Sacramento Greens announced a raffle of various items to raise funds
> for their County Council.
>
> 10:55 am Proposal: Approval of Budget for FY 2017-2018
>
> - Presentation from Assistant Treasurer/Treasurer-elect, Ruscal
> Cayangyang, who has noted some changes that are not reflected in the budget
> document that was posted - he presents a revised proposed budget and
> narrative of expenses. [PDF File available on request to the Note taker at
> mimi.newton at gmail.com. Text will be inserted before Discussion Period
> begins.]
>
> - A discussion ensued in which numerous questions were raised to which
> Ruscal answered.
> - Affirmation(Brashares) - the funds allocated to the Campaigns and
> Candidates Working Group (CCWG) is not for candidates but rather seed
> money. June invites people to join the CCWG to help focus on raising money
> for candidates.
> - Affirmation (Quentin??) - agrees with Ruscal’s proposal especially his
> ideas for fundraising.
> - Additional questions were raised and numerous individuals encouraged
> people to join the recently established Fundraising Committee.
> - It was noted by Tim Laidman (Finance Committee) that GPCA received $11K
> in donations this year.
> - Ruscal provided responses to questions and comments. He explains that
> there are two options for the upcoming fiscal year and recommends adopting
> option A and when and if the revenues come in, shift to Option B.
> - A proposal is made by Mica Daniel (Finance Committee) for the Finance
> Committee to come back with a 6 month update at the next GA, usually the
> budget undergoes only an annual review.
> - Ruscal discusses the absence of funds to provide training for County
> Treasurers but indicates that the Finance Committee can nonetheless send
> out FPCC manual for County Council Treasurers and Assistant Treasurers. He
> advises that the filing deadline for Treasurers is at the end of July.
>
> Test for Consensus
>
> - Eric Brooks - has an outstanding question about when we would switch to
> Option B. Answer - it would not trigger for 6 months
>
> Outstanding concerns - but willing to stand aside:
>
> - Tim Laidman - The proposed budget Option A is already an aspirational
> budget insofar as it is already over $30K and in the last 5 years we
> haven't come close to that fundraising level on an annual basis. As for
> proposed budget Option B, nothing short of a miracle would make the numbers
> reflected on that budget a reality.
>
> - Doug Barnett - Donations have come to a standstill because no donation
> request letters have been sent out for a year.
>
> No additional questions or concerns.
>
> Budget for FY 17-18 is approved and adopted by consensus.
>
> 11:55 am Announcements
>
> 12:00 pm Lunch, Women’s Caucus meeting during lunch
>
> 1:00 pm Reconvene and Quorum Count
>
> Quorum Count on Saturday afternoon -
> 80 delegate cards - handed out
>
> Delegates Present (78): 1 - 5, 7-33, and 35-80.
>
> Delegates Absent (2): 6, and 34.
>
> 78 delegates present
> 10/11 Regions present (Central Coast Region missing)
>
> 1:05 pm - Proposal Strategic Plan - presentation from Laura Wells.
>
> Copies of the plan were posted at: http://www.cagreens.org/ga/
> 2017-06/strategic-plan
>
> - A discussion ensued in which a number of questions about the plan were
> raised and answered.
>
> - A friendly amendment is offered (Carlson) to add the deadline for GPUS
> delegate applications to the Plan (April 23rd is listed as the deadline for
> candidates for the CC). Friendly amendment accepted (Wells).
>
> - Are there any outstanding concerns?
> - Outstanding concern, but willing to stand aside:
> - Randy Hicks (Sacramento) - Prefers that this be a fluid document as
> opposed to a static document.
>
> - No other questions or concerns.
>
> - Approved and adopted by consensus.
>
> 2:05 pm Break
>
> 2:10 pm Discussion: Report from counties on “What are the counties doing?”
>
> (2:15 pm - Delegate #6 checked in.)
>
> 3:10 pm Presentation and discussion: Gayle McLaughlin and Juan Reardon of
> the Richmond Progressive Alliance: The Story and experiences of the RPA.
>
> 4:30 pm Confirmation of the appointment of Jared Laiti as the GPCA Liaison
> to the Secretary of State.
>
> Affirmations - (Rai, Brooks, Lee, Hicks).
>
> 4:20 pm Breakout sessions for committees and working groups (CCWG,
> Platform, ERWG, IT)
>
> 5:20 pm Confirmation: Standing Committee and Working Group Co-Coordinators
> No new appointments, no new confirmations.
>
> 5:25 Announcements
>
> Reminder for delegates to "deregister" by returning their delegate cards
> if they are not planning to return tomorrow.
>
> 5:30pm Dinner Break.
>
> 7:30pm Evening Social Gathering.
>
> Sunday, June 18
> 8:00 am Breakfast, registration
>
> 9:00 am Convene and Quorum Count
>
> 9:05 am Breakout sessions for committees and working groups (Media, Green
> Issues, Bylaws)
>
> 10:05 am Reconvene
>
> Quorum Count
>
> 63 delegate cards handed out
> 62 delegates present: #3 de-registered (absent) and 1, 2, and 4-63
> present.”
>
> 9/11 Regions present with Central Coast and San Diego/Imperial Regions
> missing
>
> 10:05 - 10:35 am
> Decision Items:
>
> 1. Decision: Ratification of the Coordinating Committee vote to oppose SB
> 775 (Wiekowski - Cap & Trade) (Coordinating Committee).
>
> 2. Decision: Ratification of the Coordinating Committee vote to oppose
> Jordan Cove LNG Export Station(Coordinating Committee)
>
> 3. Decision: Oppose AB 469 (Feinstein, CCWG).
>
> 4. Decision: Oppose Anti-Community Choice Energy Legislation (Brooks,
> Platform, ERWG).
>
> On the item regarding SB 775 -
>
> Currently, there is a statement in the GPCA Platform California Clean Air
> at http://www.cagreens.org/platform/clean-air.
>
> "End the Air Pollution Credit ("Offset") System of the Air Quality
> Management District (AQMD) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
> The current air pollution credit system allows large corporations to
> distribute their air pollution over many emission sites. This causes local
> high air concentration emissions to offset the planned turnarounds or
> maintenance of their individual industrial plants. Air pollution thresholds
> should apply to each individual industrial plant to safeguard local
> communities who live near the emission source. The current air pollution
> credit system also allows large corporations to purchase air pollution
> credits from other corporations that are in compliance. Such
> inter-corporation purchase of credits must also end as it undercuts
> prevention of environmental pollution. Hybrid systems of "trading
> emissions" may be supported as interim measures if there are definite upper
> thresholds for individual emission sources and a plan to lower overall
> emissions relative to the previous 5 years for high polluters. " [PROPOSED
> REVISION NEEDED]
>
> We oppose cap and trade unless certain circumstances are met. That
> platform does not state anything on carbon taxes but the GPCA
> Transportation platform at http://www.cagreens.org/platform/transportation
> states:
>
> "Substantially increase the taxes on gasoline, but allow some compensation
> for low-income drivers. [see Creating the Right Incentives plank.]
>
> Legislate a "gas guzzler" tax on new vehicles that get a lower mpg than
> the CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards and offer "gas sipper"
> rebates for vehicles that get a higher mpg."
>
> and
>
> The GPCA Fair Taxation plank calls for " • A system of carbon taxes on all
> fossil fuels to begin to reflect the real environmental cost of their
> extraction and use." http://www.cagreens.org/platform/fair-taxation.
>
> — Questions? None.
>
> — Affirmations and Concerns -
> - (Hicks) - supports cap and trade measure because it opened the door for
> polluters but this bill is more than that - we need to look at the bigger
> picture - this gives people another door not to do anything - not perfect
> by its something.
>
> - A discussion ensued in which a friendly amendment was made to oppose cap
> and trade but include recommendations about what should be done instead,
> I.e., direct imposition of pollution controls on the utilities themselves.
>
> Friendly amendment accepted (Brooks).
>
> - Outstanding concerns, but willing to stand aside:
> - (Bram) She had heard the bill would extend cap and trade. She wants to
> know if the current law is expiring and thinks, if so, this is a good
> reason not to oppose this bill.
> - (Hicks) Supports cap and trade measure, because if you rescind cap and
> trade, you open the door for more pollution - its been around for years and
> is better than nothing and it would take too long to impose something to
> replace it.
>
> - No other outstanding questions or concerns.
> - Approved by consensus
>
> Re: Ratification of the Coordinating Committee vote to oppose Jordan Cove
> LNG Export Station (Coordinating Committee):
>
> The resolution of GPCA is:
>
> Green Party of California Resolution to Oppose Jordan Cove LNG Export
> Terminal and Pipeline
>
> WHEREAS, there is currently a proposed build of a Liquefied Natural Gas
> (LNG) terminal in Coos Bay, Oregon and a 230 mile pacific connector
> pipeline by Jordan Cove LNG and their parent company Veresen out of Canada;
>
> WHEREAS, use of LNG results in methane emissions. Methane traps heat in
> the atmosphere at a rate 86 times greater than Carbon Dioxide;
>
> WHEREAS, these projects will increase the amount of exported fossil fuel
> to the Asian markets from the United States and Canada, thus increasing our
> commitment to fossil fuel energy for decades and perpetuating the
> production of non-renewable energy at the expense of developing & investing
> in local renewable energy sources;
>
> WHEREAS, the proposed project would conflict with efforts to promote
> increased use of renewable energy;
>
> WHEREAS, the Green Party is recognized as an international leader among
> governments in supporting the reduction of greenhouse gases, combating
> global warming and investing in renewable energy;
>
> WHEREAS, the Green Party of California's reputation as environmental
> leaders in sustainability would be adversely impacted by the approval of
> the proposed LNG and pipeline projects;
>
> WHEREAS, the proposed pipelines would cross hundreds streams, rivers and
> wetlands. This represents a major threat to riparian habitats critical for
> threatened fish, songbirds, amphibians and many other species in Northern
> California and Southern Oregon;
>
> WHERE AS, a pipeline placed underneath Native American watersheds such as
> the Klamath River, Rogue River and Coos Bay would conflict with the efforts
> of the indigenous Tribes of Northern California and Southern Oregon who
> have been working to recover and protect these resources. These Tribes
> include the Yurok, Hoopa, Karuk, Modoc and Klamath;
>
> WHERE AS, less than 1/3 of the 3,500 temporary jobs associated with the
> construction of the pipeline will be given to citizens of California or
> Oregon and none of the projected 200 permanent jobs are required to be
> given to citizens of California or Oregon;
>
> WHERE AS, Veresen the Canadian parent company of Jordan Cove LNG stands to
> make the majority of profit from the export station and pipeline. Secondary
> profit holders come from Companies based out of Texas that produce fracked
> gas in Utah, Wisconsin, Colorado, Washington, Oregon and California;
>
> WHERE AS, rejection of the Jordan Cove LNG Export Terminal would halt the
> export of fracked gas out of Canada, Wisconsin, Utah, Colorado, Washington,
> Oregon and California, protecting the vital water ways of California and
> Oregon and decreasing the production of fracked gas throughout the country;
>
> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Green Party of California
> expresses its opposition to the proposed Jordan Cove LNG terminal and
> associated pipeline; and
>
> BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Green Party of California encourages the
> Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC), California Governor Jerry
> Brown, Oregon Governor Kate Brown and the agencies of their State
> Governments to do everything in their power not to allow the proposed
> Jordan Cove LNG terminal and pipeline in Northern California and Southern
> Oregon.
>
> - Questions and affirmations:
> - (Nouri, Nassim) - affirmation.
>
> - (Gonzales) - proposes a friendly amendment to strike the words “the
> Green Party of” from one of the Whereas clauses and otherwise correct the
> grammar due to the stricken language so that it reads:
> “WHEREAS, California's reputation as an environmental leader in
> sustainability would be adversely impacted by the approval of the proposed
> LNG and pipeline projects;”
>
> - Friendly amendment accepted (Brooks).
>
> - Outstanding concern, but willing to stand aside:
> - (Barnett) - This issue is a HUGE concern and this proposal doesn't
> address the problem. The US currently has 2 export ports for LNG
> nationally, 1 in Alaska and one in Oregon. The Trump administration has
> just approved 13 more new export ports, and approved 5 in Brownsville,
> Texas alone. America is moving to a new approach in which we frack and sell
> to other countries. This has not happened until now.
>
> - No other outstanding questions or concerns.
>
> - Approved by consensus.
>
> Decision: Oppose AB 469 (CCWG, presentation by Cobb, in Feinstein’s
> absence)
>
> C.T. Weber of Peace and Freedom Party’s June 16, 2017 message:
>
> Friends,
> The Assembly passed AB 469 (Cooper) and sent it to the Senate Elections
> and Constitutional Amendments Committee. The bill will be heard on Tuesday,
> June 20, 2017. I will be speaking in opposition to the bill. AB 469 will
> make it even more difficult for candidates with little or no money to
> qualify for the primary ballot. I understand that the Green Party will be
> meeting in Sacramento this coning weekend. I would like to stop by and make
> a short presentation on why the Green Party should join with Peace and
> Freedom Party in opposing AB 469. I will bring a letter of opposition from
> the Green Party. Of course, you can rewrite it but I hope to deliver it to
> the author and members of the Senate Election Committee on Monday. Attached
> please find the letter of opposition. That way you can put it on
> letterhead, make any changes you want and sign a copy for me to pick up and
> deliver to the Capitol, if the Green Party votes to oppose. Thank you.
>
> C. T. Weber
> Peace and Freedom Party of California
> Legislative Committee Chairperson
>
> Text of proposed letter:
>
> The Honorable Jim Cooper
> California State Assembly
> State Capitol, Room 6025
> Sacramento, CA 95814
>
> RE: AB 469 (Cooper) Oppose
>
> Dear Assembly Member Cooper:
>
> The Green Party of California is a ballot qualified party in California.
> Before the passage of Proposition 14, candidates seeking the nomination of
> the Green Party had to collect a maximum of 150 signatures in lieu of
> filing fees. Since the passage of Proposition 14 when partisan primaries
> were eliminated, and its implementing legislation which made it more
> difficult for Green Party candidates to qualify for the primary, the number
> of candidates we have been able to qualify for the primary ballot dropped
> by 85%.
>
> Instead of 150 signatures in lieu of filing fees, current law requires our
> candidates to collect 10,000 signatures in lieu of filing fees to run for a
> statewide office, 3,000 signatures to run for U.S. House of Representatives
> and State Senate, and 1,500 signatures for State Assembly. Now AB 469
> (Cooper)would reduce the number of days that candidates have to get their
> signatures in lieu of filing fees and supplemental signatures in lieu of
> filing fees by 42.8% (70 days to 40 days).
>
> It was pointed out that to the Assembly Elections and Redistricting
> Committee that this reduction in the number of day to collect the
> signatures in lieu of filing fees made a bad system worse. As a result, the
> Assembly Elections Committee reduced the number of signatures in lieu to
> 7,000 for a statewide candidate (a 30% reduction), 2,000 for a U.S. House
> or State Senate candidate (a 33.3% reduction), 1,000 for State Assembly (a
> 33.3% reduction) and Board of Equalization by 25%. However, even with these
> reductions, if AB 469 is signed into law, our candidates would still need
> to gather more signatures in lieu per day than the current law.
>
> Signatures in lieu of filing fees were supposed to be a reasonable
> alternative to filing fees. They are nota reasonable alternative and
> instead of making it more difficult, they should be drastically reduced.
> Therefore, the Green Party of California stands opposed to AB 469 and ask
> for you to vote in the negative on this bill.
>
> cc: Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee
>
> - No outstanding questions or concerns.
>
> - Approved by consensus.
>
> Decision: Oppose Anti-Community Choice Energy Legislation (Brooks,
> Platform ERWG)
>
> - The proposal as presented by Platform and ERWG:
>
> - The Green Party of California will take a "support" position on
> legislation that supports Community Choice aggregation (also known as
> community choice energy programs) with the goals to increase local clean
> renewable energy, reduce greenhouse gases, and provide local environmental
> and economic community benefits and resiliency. The GPCA will take an
> "oppose" position to legislation that undercuts Community Choice energy
> programs with impacts such as: unfairly increasing costs on Community
> Choice customers, overly burdening Community Choice programs and putting
> them at a disadvantage in relation to the monopoly investor owned utilities
> or otherwise impacting the ability of Community Choice programs to meet the
> Community Choice goals described above. Some indicators that a bill may
> create problems for Community Choice programs include bill sponsorship by:
> the monopoly IOUs, electrical trade associations or their agents, or
> Senator Bradford. Any position taken will be copied to the GPCA Legislative
> Committee which is a legislative watch committee that has the authority to
> rescind the position. This proposal is only in effect during the current
> legislative session.
>
> - Outstanding concerns, but willing to stand aside:
> - (Rubin) - Labor councils are concerned about community choice
> aggregation because of the loss of jobs that may accrue and while this is
> not a basis for opposing the position being recommended, our party needs to
> take these issues into consideration.
>
> - (Sorgen) - Proposes a friendly amendment to remove the word
> “aggregation,” so people will be compensated instead of just giving back
> the power to the utilities.
>
> - (Hicks) - The PUC is nowhere in this document and, if you think you can
> regulate energy without the PUC, as the regulators need to be involved, you
> are mistaken. The PUC needs to come into play and needs to be addressed in
> these documents. Because you can't do any of this without them.
>
> - (Bram) - concern about process because we are giving time for concerns
> to be expressed when affirmations are not being expressed. (Facilitator’s
> reply: we are out of time).
>
> - A brief discussion was had about the friendly amendment being proffered.
> Because of the time constraints, the proposers are not accepting the
> friendly amendment or entertaining additional amendments at this time.
>
> - No outstanding questions or concerns.
>
> - The proposal is approved by consensus.
>
> 10:45 am - Workshops focused on Skills Building and/or Training (CCWG)
>
> - Workshop I: Running a Campaign that Grows the Party facilitated by Barry
> Hermanson
>
> - Workshop II: Using Social Media facilitated by Mel Figueroa and Sadie
> Fulton
>
> - Workshop III: Movement School for Revolutionaries facilitated by David
> Cobb
>
> 12:00 pm - Lunch
>
> 1:00 pm - Reconvene and Quorum Count
> Quorum Count on Sunday afternoon - 54 delegates present -
>
> - All delegates between 1 and 64 (last card handed out) were here except
> the following:
>
> 3 - deregistered
> 21 - absent
> 35 - deregistered
> 39 - deregistered
> 45 - deregistered
> 46 - deregistered
> 47 - deregistered
> 48 - deregistered
> 49 - deregistered
> 57 - deregistered
>
> - Regions: 9/11 Regions Present. (Central Coast and San Diego/Imperial
> Regions missing)
>
> - We have quorum.
>
> 1:05 Announcements, including announcement of Standing Committee vacancies
>
> 1:10 pm Proposal: Approval Next General Assembly Meeting Date and Place
> (Coordinating Committee)
>
> - Ventura County proposes to host the next General Assembly during either
> the weekend before or after the November elections.
>
> - Outstanding Concerns, but willing to stand aside:
> - (Brooks) - has a concern regarding scheduling a GA for one of the
> November weekends before or after elections. San Francisco has a Green
> fest, and they will be busy both ramping up for elections, and ramping down
> afterwards.
>
> - (Rydberg) There are plans for a Green New Deal Conference in Eureka the
> weekend after the election.
>
> - A show of hands/poll is taken about whether attendees prefer to schedule
> the GA for the weekend of Nov. 4-5th or 11-12th - per the Facilitators, it
> seems like more hands were raised for the weekend of Nov. 11-12th.
>
> - Outstanding Concerns, but willing to stand aside:
> - (Salas) - both of the dates offered by Ventura County appear to have
> conflicts with a number of different events.
>
> - No other outstanding questions or concerns.
>
> - Approved by consensus.
>
> 1:40 pm Breakout sessions for committees and working groups (Finance,
> GROW, Clearinghouse)
>
> Announcement by Eric Brooks after Finance Committee Breakout session: 7
> people may apply to Fundraising Committee (to be appointed by the CC) but
> most are women and many are named "Eric" or "Erik"! We need more women to
> volunteer for this committee (are there any Erica's out there?)
>
> 2:55 Confirmation: Standing Committee and Working Group Co-Coordinators
> (for any committees or working groups not confirmed in morning session)
>
> [None]
>
> 3:00 pm Presentation: Single Payer Healthcare and SB562 (Green Party of
> Sacramento). Keith McCallum -
>
> 4:15pm Closing session
> Adjourned!
> Resources
> None
> References
> None
>
>
> Full details will be available shortly at:
>
> http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_approval_minutes_GA_June2017
>
> *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
> <gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>*
>
> --
> gpca-votes mailing list
> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.sfgreens.org/pipermail/gpca-votes/attachments/20180216/c0cea9f2/attachment.html>