[GPCA-SGA-Votes] Resignation of SGA Delegacy

Tue Feb 20 13:39:38 PST 2018

No party has a primary in California due to top two. It doesn't just effect
us. That argument does not validate creating an establishment pick, without
letting our voters decide. We should instead be focusing on how to get more
registered voters, thus improving our chances in the future.

This process does not help with gaining more registered greens, and instead
waists valuable time and resources. Instead of campaigning outside of our
inner circle, this causes candidates to compete with each other in an
effort to get the inner circles support. Several candidates have already
stated that they don't even want the endorsement because they would rather
not participate in such a divisive process.

Then there is the fact that this is a centralization of power in the hands
of a few. That means this violates our key values of both Grass Roots
democracy, and decentralization. I fear this will hurt the party in the
long run.

On Feb 20, 2018 1:29 PM, "Ann Menasche" <aemenasche at gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't believe our little Party has the resources to hold our own primary
> of all registered Greens. We have been put into a bind not of our own
> making because of Top Two. And we are obviously not in the same situation
> of those representing the two party duopoly.  We have neither their money
> nor their power.
>
> I support holding a vote for endorsement based on active Greens (the SGA)
> under these less than ideal circumstances so we can focus our energies.
>
> If we are serious about reinstating primaries and protecting the rights of
> registered Greens, there is something we can do now.
>
> Counties can get involved in the effort to put an initiative on the ballot
> to repeal Top Two. We only have a little over a month to gather signatures.
>
>
> Please help with the petitioning effort! https://www.stoptop2.com/
> Contact the campaign and they will send petitions to you.
> Ann
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 20, 2018, at 12:16 PM, james clark <faygodrinkit at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The fact that only the candidates who had prior knowledge of this proposal
> we're the only ones lobbying the SGA s problematic. Also having delegates
> tell voters who to vote for us undemocratic and takes voice away from
> registered greens.
>
> Should we work on an inclusive process for the next election cycle, yes.
> That process should not be where a small group of delegates decides the
> candidates, but should be a vote by registered voters.
>
> On Feb 20, 2018 10:03 AM, "Nicole Castor" <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> SGA delegates are appointed/elected by active County Councils. The County
>> Councils aim to represent the county Greens as "constituents."
>>
>> The general Green population of a county does not have the power to
>> replace the GA/SGA delegates, except in the case of a General Meeting.
>>
>> GA/SGA delegates are the primary decision-making body of the GPCA, so are
>> voting on internal structure.
>>
>> http://cagreens.org/ga
>>
>> http://cagreens.org/sga/2017-2018/delegates
>> On Feb 20, 2018 9:30 AM, "Lauren Mauricio" <lauren_mauricio at hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If the SGA is supposed to represent the Greens in their county, then
>>> it is their job to connect with Greens on the local level (their
>>> "constituents" so to speak).  So campaigning to the SGA is an excellent
>>> strategy for reaching more Greens across the state.  Unless you think the
>>> SGA is not doing their job and are disconnected from or not listening to
>>> the Greens in their county.  In which case, the Greens in their county have
>>> the power to replace them.  But it makes no sense to fault someone for
>>> running a smart campaign.  In fact, we should be encouraging it if we want
>>> to win.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Lauren Mauricio
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* gpca-votes <gpca-votes-bounces at sfgreens.org> on behalf of james
>>> clark <faygodrinkit at gmail.com>
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 18, 2018 11:15 AM
>>> *To:* GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes
>>> *Subject:* Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Resignation of SGA Delegacy
>>>
>>> Erik rydberg, what is forward thinking about violating the key value of
>>> decentralization? Why are fighting so hard for motion that would centralize
>>> power, and essentially be no better than the Democrats and their super
>>> delegates?
>>>
>>> How is putting greens against each other good? Most candidates I've
>>> spoken to personally are working together to support each other's campaign,
>>> yet those in favor of this proposal are running against those greens,
>>> including lobbying the SGA prior to this proposal.
>>>
>>> This has been happening while other candidates that had no idea such a
>>> proposal would be brought forth at the last minute. As such, they were
>>> campaigning outside of the delegates circle to aquire the signatures needed
>>> to be placed on the ballot.
>>>
>>> This is yet another problematic issue. Those who lobbied the SGA did so
>>> knowing about this proposal, and focused on winning over the delegates.
>>> Those who didn't, went and recruited people to sign their petitions from
>>> outside of the circle. That means that a vote by delegates would be
>>> unfairly influenced by those who new ahead of time about this proposal, but
>>> would not acknowledge the work growing the party other candidates put
>>> forth, since they were actually campaigning outside of our inner circles.
>>>
>>> Stop trying to pit greens against greens, we gain more by working as a
>>> team and supporting each candidate in their efforts to reach new people.
>>>
>>> On Feb 18, 2018 6:13 AM, "Chris" <chris at bestofbroadway.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Good afternoon fellow Greens,
>>>
>>> We are presently meeting at Grant High School in Sacramento. I am
>>> posting this notification of my resignation as a delegate to the SGA body.
>>>
>>> Sacramento County has a single vacancy for a FIFTH SGA delegate. At this
>>> meeting, there are two applicants for that role. In order to accommodate
>>> both persons, I have waived my SGA delegacy. Our new delegates are Randy
>>> Hicks and in my former position, Sid Akbar.
>>>
>>> I will be remaining as an alternate, and unsubscribe my myself from all
>>> discussions for the upcoming votes, having said my peace.
>>>
>>> I ask for your support on behalf of Veronika Fimbres in your ranked
>>> choice decisions. It is my wish to see all candidates receive a 2/3
>>> majority endorsement. There is confusion as to whether this vote is to
>>> endorse or select candidates. We need to remember the green pillar of
>>> grassroots democracy and resist the urge to influence the state's mind.
>>>
>>> I have confirmed between Josh, Veronika, and myself that each of our
>>> campaigns will persist if an endorsement is not granted, and there is no
>>> foundation for conflict on this issue. I request of the GPCA councils and
>>> coordinating committee a pledge not to intervene in the campaigns of
>>> unendorsed candidates until June 6th, after the state primary is over.
>>>
>>> We are all greens.
>>>
>>> Thank you all for your time. I remain a registered Green candidate for
>>> Governor and endorse Randy Hicks for Coordinating Committee/Council.
>>>
>>> I wish Sid all the best and know his input will be well heard by this
>>> forum.
>>>
>>> God bless,
>>> Christopher Carlson
>>> 916.704.0058 <(916)%20704-0058>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 17, 2018, at 2:43 PM, Erik <erikrydberg34 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Another huge lack of forward thinking being put forth by people opposing
>>> this new process of endorsement is that we have smaller corporate-free
>>> parties wanting our endorsements and even considering running their
>>> candidates within our party to focus progressive power and limiting the
>>> fracturing of the progressive vote. We need to form an Independent 3rd
>>> Party Coalition with other Socialist Parties.
>>>
>>> The Green Party is the  only Socialist party big enough to run
>>> candidates in almost every state. Our allies in other parties need our
>>> structure and we need their  Numbers and candidates. I’m sure there is some
>>> puritanical secterian argument on why we should continue to do nothing
>>> about that as well. I’m tired of watching the Green Party do nothing or
>>> very little. We need this endorsement process for the future and now so we
>>> can bring Independents and corporate-free Socialist Parties to the table
>>> and exponential grow our membership and candidate selection.
>>>
>>> The Maine Green-Independent Party hyphenated their name while
>>> simultaneously opening up those Ballot Access and they are now running the
>>> most candidates of any state party with 38 compared to GPCA’s 18. They are
>>> also the first State Green Party in American history being formed in 1984.
>>> They clearly have some wisdom that we have yet to realize considering that
>>> our doors are closed to Independents and GPCA has Closed Primaries.
>>>
>>> We need a early Independent 3rd Party Primary System that includes
>>> Socialist Parties and Corporate-Free Independents to focus Power on
>>> corporate-free  Parties.
>>>
>>> If we fail to do this another 3rd Party will like Progressive
>>> Independent Party or Movement for A People’s Party and we will have missed
>>> a golden opportunity that we may never recover from.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 2:14 PM Lauren Mauricio <
>>> lauren_mauricio at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> We really *should* be "pandering" to Berniecrats, though.  I was a
>>> Berniecrat.  I voted for Jill Stein because someone shared a link in Bernie
>>> Sanders' Dank Meme Stash (Facebook group) to a website that showed how her
>>> platform matched Bernie Sanders' by 99%.  So I voted Green and never looked
>>> back.  If whoever-that-Green-was hadn't pandered to me, I would have voted
>>> for Hillary Clinton and I would still be a begrudged Democrat to this day.
>>> I know a lot of people who share the same story.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Lauren Mauricio
>>>
>>> Tulare County
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* gpca-votes <gpca-votes-bounces at sfgreens.org> on behalf of
>>> Nicole Castor <nmcastorsilva at gmail.com>
>>> *Sent:* Friday, February 16, 2018 9:26 AM
>>>
>>> *To:* GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes
>>> *Subject:* Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 145: GPCA endorsement for
>>> Governor
>>>
>>>
>>> Anthony & Others,
>>>
>>> I agree that this process should have been started at least six months
>>> ago. At this point, candidates and their teams have already done the work
>>> to get on the ballot and it is likely there will be more than one Green
>>> candidate for the offices of SOS & Governor.
>>>
>>> If we're not in it to win it, what is the point? There is a point,
>>> actually. We will benefit from having any of the statewide candidates
>>> reaching 2%, thus securing ballot access. In addition, Green Party benefits
>>> by campaigning our platform, Key Values and the type of electoral reforms
>>> which are necessary to empower alternate parties. I do not feel it is
>>> useful to delude ourselves into thinking that we are in fact "in it to win
>>> it," because until these reforms are accomplished, we are severely
>>> disadvantaged in realistically competing to win.
>>>
>>> I also do not feel it is useful to put so much weight on pandering to
>>> so-called "berniecrats," as it dilutes our values in specific ways which
>>> compromises what the party actually stands for. Of course such pandering
>>> has its merit in reaching registration goals, but for a race like this, we
>>> should be careful in pretending we share more in common with that core than
>>> we really do.
>>>
>>> There has to be a party which stands firmly against war, firmly supports
>>> environmental protections, among other issues and Sanders does not reflect
>>> these values in his actions. There are already "progressive" democrats who
>>> will woo voters with compromised ideals and so rather than GP moving to the
>>> right, we stand firm, campaign and demonstrate our values to a growing
>>> population of individuals who agree, and keep our stances so that we may
>>> secure a place for them when they realize the duopoly does not serve their
>>> interests and that these voters no longer wish to compromise their values.
>>>
>>> I will vote against the SGA proposal to endorse candidates at this point
>>> because it was brought in too late, serves little purpose and is proposed
>>> without a strategy which delegates could examine and decide upon.
>>>
>>> -Nicole Castor
>>> GP Sacramento County
>>> On Feb 16, 2018 7:52 AM, "Anthony Krzywicki" <chefkrzywicki at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Another major concern is breaking up our parties voting base.  We need
>>> to all get behind someone and that someone hopefully will reach out and get
>>> votes from independents, progressives and possibly bernicrats.  Otherwise
>>> were not in itvto win it, so then whats the point?  We have a such a small
>>> percentage of green voters to make a win, why should we split that?
>>>
>>> Also i beliwve that this process should be started 6 months ago, so we
>>> could already be backing a unified candidate.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 9:41 PM james clark <faygodrinkit at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> One major concern is that this process would take power out of the
>>> voters hands to decide which candidate best represents their values. It
>>> seems to much the DNC and their delegates picking who people get to vote
>>> for. Not to mention at several candidates already have their names on the
>>> ballot.
>>>
>>> On Feb 15, 2018 11:14 AM, "Victoria Ashley" <victronix01 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Since the vote doesn't start until late March, that would give some time
>>> to send out a list of all the GP candidates on the Inform List.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 8:20 AM, John-Marc Chandonia <jmc at sfgreens.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:25:47PM -0800, james clark wrote:
>>> > I feel it is not in the best interests of the party to follow through
>>> with
>>> > this ill timed endorsement process. If we were to perform such a
>>> process it
>>> > should have been done prior to candidates reaching their ballot access
>>> > goals. To do so at this juncture will only create animosity and
>>> division,
>>> > and will not effect candidates placement on the ballot.
>>>
>>> Don't they have until March 9 to raise funds for the ballot?  If
>>> that's the case, we should know by the time the SGA votes who is in
>>> and who is out.  I agree that we should not make an endorsement before
>>> then, because we haven't had any process for informing Greens about
>>> all the Green candidates running.
>>>
>>> JMC
>>> --
>>> John-Marc Chandonia (jmc at sfgreens.org)
>>> http://sfgreens.org/
>>>
>>> --
>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>
>>> --
>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>
>>> --
>>> Anthony J. Krzywicki,
>>>
>>> * Co-coordinator GROW- Green Party California Co-coordinator Ventura
>>> County Green Party County Council*
>>> www.venturacountygreenparty.com
>>> greenpartyvc at gmail.com
>>> instagram: greenpartyvcc
>>> facebook group: Ventura Green Party
>>> facebook group: Ventura County Green Party
>>>
>>> *It is necessary to help others, not only in our prayers, but in our
>>> daily lives. If we find we cannot help others, the least we can do is to
>>> desist from harming them. *
>>> -Dali Lama
>>>
>>> --
>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>
>>> --
>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *Erik Rydberg *
>>>
>>> *Green Party of California(GPCA) Spokesperson *
>>>
>>>
>>> *erikrydberg34 at gmail.com <erikrydberg34 at gmail.com> 530-781-2903
>>> <(530)%20781-2903> *
>>>
>>>                 cagreens.org
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> gpca-votes mailing list
>>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> gpca-votes mailing list
>> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
>> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>>
>> --
> gpca-votes mailing list
> gpca-votes at sfgreens.org
> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes
>
>
> --
> 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/20180220/d8aea5b7/attachment.html>