[Gpca-votes] State level Green Party

Wed Jan 31 09:08:49 PST 2018

Ok.  In about a week or two I'll write John about making a $10 contribution.  I get all these emails from the Democrats, but rarely anything from Green Party.  In my junk email which I browse every day I just received at least 20 emails from GPCA--lots of stuff I was unaware of.

Yolanda Catzalco

________________________________
From: gpca-votes <gpca-votes-bounces at sfgreens.org> on behalf of F Lambert <boatrocker2 at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 4:56 PM
To: GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes
Subject: Re: [Gpca-votes] State level Green Party

Greens:

I think Thomas Leavitt said it well. As Rocky Anderson, former mayor of Salt Lake City and presidential candidate told Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! several years ago, I like the Green Party but they have "organizational problems."

Please reread what Thomas wrote above.  Our country is more divided now and in my opinion, we could be the hope of the vast majority, and to be taken seriously as a political party but it takes UNITY and MONEY. For close to 100,000 registered Greens in California, we have diddly in the state treasury.

That's my two cents,

Frank Lambert
Monterey County

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 8:41 AM, yolanda catzalco <ycatzalc at hotmail.com<mailto:ycatzalc at hotmail.com>> wrote:

All I know is, with the exception of at the most two or three emails, I have heard nothing about our Green Party candidate for Governor anywhere, not even from Green Party.  Even though we probably wouldn't win, the elections give us an opportunity to speak about Green Party values, program, etc.  Also, why is the Green Party at all levels silent on the immigrants of color pogroms going on locally, statewide, and nationally?  I'm probably going to receive a reply to discuss this at the green party forum email.  Politics moves any party forward.  I think Green Party is too stuck on organization, which is very important also as that is the vehicle to express our politics, but , yes, unfortunately, there are not enough politics, there are not enough Spanish-speaking folks writing flyers, postcards, etc.  I think at least at a state level any further local voting guides should include a line or two on the pogroms (1 line) & on Green Party's position of Amnesty for immigrants.

Yolanda Catzalco

________________________________
From: gpca-votes <gpca-votes-bounces at sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes-bounces at sfgreens.org>> on behalf of J HALL <shallow60 at sbcglobal.net<mailto:shallow60 at sbcglobal.net>>
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 12:04 PM
To: GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes
Subject: Re: [Gpca-votes] State level Green Party

Yes.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android>

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:16 AM, Thomas Leavitt
<thomleavitt at gmail.com<mailto:thomleavitt at gmail.com>> wrote:
The inability of this party, at a statewide level, to conduct itself in a functional fashion, without endless bickering, infighting, plotting and conspiracy mongering (justified and otherwise), over the last TWENTY PLUS YEARS, and clearly replicated on this thread, is exactly why so many sane and reasonable party members view engagement with the party at a non-local level with trepidation, and in many cases, as an act of masochism. This is why I have absolutely, regardless of my personal view of various parties and events, abstained from participation in recent votes since being placed on the SGA, and will continue to do so. This is why the biggest Green Party in the country, by numbers, in the biggest state, apparently operates on a budget which doesn't even amount to spare change by any rational standard... all this infighting is over literal pennies. City council candidates in Santa Cruz, a city of 50,000, raise more money for their campaigns than our entire state operates on (based on the figures I've seen).

Things that should be of the highest urgency and priority, are left unattended.

Look at our budget committee page, it says:

"Current Members (FY2013-2014 budget preparation)"

http://www.cagreens.org/committees/budget

I'm sure it would be effortless to find additional examples.

Regardless of what recent issues we've had, there is NO POSSIBLE EXCUSE for this page to be FIVE YEARS out of date. FIVE YEARS. Do you all realize how totally unprofessional and credibility destroying this is to all but the most motivated folks considering alternatives to the duopoly? How can any of us defend this type of performance and collective conduct?

I've been formally involved with this party since I arrived in Santa Cruz in 1993, and registered since 1990. Tom Hayden sent me a postcard urging me to re-register as a Democrat when I did. I didn't. That's going on a quarter century. I've known some of you for almost that long, know parties on all sides of various internal divisions, I don't claim to be purely objective, but as someone who has deliberately tried to not emphatically plant myself on any particular faction or individual's side, I'm begging you, on behalf of all the other folks who aren't invested in these disputes, to please, figure this stuff out. Resolve your differences, or at least minimize their fallout on the rest of us. Any sane and objective evaluation, based on simple examination of the last twenty years, should make it clear that no absolute and lasting "victory" of any faction is possible - you all HAVE NO CHOICE BUT  TO CONTINUE DEALING WITH EACH OTHER.

Regards,
Thomas Leavitt
--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes at sfgreens.org>
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes at sfgreens.org<mailto: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/20180131/c887f57e/attachment.html>