February 2018 - gpca-votes

Discuss ID 146: GPCA endorsement for Lt. Governor
by GPCA Votes 31 Mar '18

31 Mar '18

*Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>* Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote: Ranked Choice Vote ID #146 Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA endorsement for Lt. Governor* Number of Seats: 1 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 The content of statewide races will depend on which candidates officially qualify to be on the California June 2018 Primary Ballot. Full details will be available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_vote_statewide_races *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

6 6

PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Discuss *ID 157*: Bylaws Amendment: Clarify Notice Requirements and Reset Quorum at a Minimum of 50% For Standing Committees’ Voting Membership
by Eric Brooks 30 Mar '18

30 Mar '18

Proposed Amendment to Item 157 – Resetting Quorum and Noticing for Committees. Hi all, and to the proposers of Item 157, I have a proposed amendment to solve a particular technical problem we have specifically for the Media Committee. Currently the Bylaws state that our two GPCA spokespersons can be ex officio members of the Media Committee, but cannot count toward quorum and vote on the committee. This has effectively made it impossible for the Media Committee to reach quorum. Since the Media Committee has been active, and as long as I have been on it, it has always made decisions by full consensus – and two votes out of a quorum of four does not allow the spokespersons to carry any potential vote by themselves. And regardless the GA/SGA can always override any committee if it ever does make mistakes or show any bias. So I am asking the proposers to amend this proposal to: Make the two Green Party spokespersons voting members of the Media Committee. thanks Eric Brooks SF, CA Media Committee From: gpca-votes [mailto:gpca-votes-bounces@sfgreens.org] On Behalf Of GPCA Votes Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2018 12:45 PM To: gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org Subject: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 157: Bylaws Amendment: Clarify Notice Requirements and Reset Quorum at a Minimum of 50% For Standing Committees’ Voting Membership Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes@sfgreens.org> Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote: Ranked Choice Vote ID #157 Ranked Choice Vote Bylaws Amendment: Clarify Notice Requirements and Reset Quorum at a Minimum of 50% For Standing Committees’ Voting Membership 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 This proposal has been brought forth because in recent years a number of standing committees of the Green Party of California (GPCA) have been unable to conduct any business for lengthy periods of time due to failure to reach quorum. This state of affairs has often impeded the GPCA Coordinating Committee (CC) from fulfilling its own responsibilities per GPCA Bylaw 8-1.7 (“Request and receive reports from Committees and Working Groups, refer matters to them, and monitor and assist their work”). GPCA standing committees are capped, for gender balance, at an even number of members, and currently establish quorum at a majority of voting members. This proposed amendment would establish the minimum quorum at least 50% of standing committees’ voting membership. This proposal would also clarify an ambiguity in notice requirements for calling meetings. The language of GPCA Bylaw 9-3.1 is silent regarding notice requirements for standing committees that establish regular meeting schedules. In practice, most if not all standing committees establish regular meeting schedules for their work year. The proposed language would make explicit that two weeks’ notice is required for meetings that fall outside a standing committee’s regular meeting schedule, should one be set. Proposal That GPCA Bylaw Article 9-3 be amended as follows: That Article 9-3 be amended from its current text: Section 9-3 Meetings 9-3.1 Committees shall meet during GPCA state meetings, on teleconferences and otherwise as necessary to achieve the objectives outlined in its work plan. Meetings must be called with a minimum of two weeks notice to committee members. 9-3.2 The decision-making process for committees shall follow that described for the General Assembly in 7-5.5. Quorum is a majority of the committee's voting membership. To read as follows: Section 9-3 Meetings 9-3.1 Committees shall meet during GPCA state meetings, on teleconferences and otherwise as necessary to achieve the objectives outlined in their work plans. Meetings outside any regular meeting schedule shall be called with a minimum of two weeks notice to committee members. 9-3.2 The decision-making process for committees shall follow that described for the General Assembly in 7-5.5. Quorum shall be at least 50% of the committee's voting membership. Sponsors: The proposed amendment has been endorsed and sponsored by the Green Party of Butte County and the Green Party of Yolo County. Full details will be available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_vote_bylaw_interpretations Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes@sfgreens.org>

7 8

Discuss ID 156: Bylaws Amendment: Procedures for Recall
by GPCA Votes 30 Mar '18

30 Mar '18

*Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>* Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote: Ranked Choice Vote ID #156 Ranked Choice Vote *Bylaws Amendment: Procedures for Recall* 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* Current recall procedures reserve the right to initiate and approve recall petitions to county councils, rather than county organizations themselves. This is an obstacle to fuller participation in party governance by the GPCA, as defined in Bylaw 3-1. In addition to promoting clarity by complying with Bylaws 4-1 and 4-4, revising this provision would also ensure that the GPCA’s own procedures for encouraging oversight and good governance of the party organization are more consistent with two of the party’s 10 Key Values: decentralization and grassroots democracy. This proposal also removes an inconsistency found elsewhere in the bylaws regarding the duties and responsibilities of both the General Assembly (GA) and Standing General Assembly (SGA) (cf., GPCA Bylaw 7-6.2(g)). *Proposal* That GPCA Bylaw Article 8-5.2 be amended as follows: That Article 8-5.2 be amended from its current text: 8-5.2 A Recall Petition must contain the written basis for removal, be approved by County Councils representing 35% of the total number of General Assembly delegate seats, and must be received by the Coordinating Committee before it can be forwarded to the General Assembly for a vote. The written basis for recall must be based upon substantial malperformance of the duties of the Coordinating Committee as defined in these Bylaws. to read as follows: 8-5.2 A Recall Petition must contain the written basis for removal, be approved by 35% of the total number of General Assembly or Standing General Assembly delegates, and must be received by the Coordinating Committee before it can be forwarded to the General Assembly or Standing General Assembly for a vote. The written basis for recall must be based upon substantial malperformance of the duties of the Coordinating Committee as defined in these Bylaws. References: GPUS 10 Key Values, GPCA Bylaws 3-1, 4-1, 4-4, 7-6.2(g). Sponsors: The proposed amendment has been endorsed and sponsored by the Green Party of Butte County and the Green Party of Yolo County. Full details will be available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_vote_bylaw_interpretations *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

3 2

Discuss ID 150: GPCA endorsement for Attorney General
by GPCA Votes 27 Mar '18

27 Mar '18

*Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>* Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote: Ranked Choice Vote ID #150 Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA endorsement for Attorney General* Number of Seats: 1 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 The content of statewide races will depend on which candidates officially qualify to be on the California June 2018 Primary Ballot. Full details will be available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_vote_statewide_races *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

10 9

Discuss ID 151: GPCA endorsement for Insurance Commissioner
by GPCA Votes 26 Mar '18

26 Mar '18

*Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>* Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote: Ranked Choice Vote ID #151 Ranked Choice Vote:* GPCA endorsement for Insurance Commissioner* Number of Seats: 1 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 The content of statewide races will depend on which candidates officially qualify to be on the California June 2018 Primary Ballot. Full details will be available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_vote_statewide_races *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

3 2

Discuss ID 149: GPCA endorsement for Treasurer
by GPCA Votes 26 Mar '18

26 Mar '18

*Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>* Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote: Ranked Choice Vote ID #149 Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA endorsement for Treasurer* Number of Seats: 1 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 The content of statewide races will depend on which candidates officially qualify to be on the California June 2018 Primary Ballot. Full details will be available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_vote_statewide_races *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

3 2

Discuss ID 148: GPCA endorsement for Controller
by GPCA Votes 26 Mar '18

26 Mar '18

*Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>* Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote: Ranked Choice Vote ID #148 Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA endorsement for Controller* Number of Seats: 1 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 The content of statewide races will depend on which candidates officially qualify to be on the California June 2018 Primary Ballot. Full details will be available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_vote_statewide_races *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

3 3

Discuss ID 139: GPCA position on Proposition 68 - California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018
by GPCA Votes 25 Mar '18

25 Mar '18

Ranked Choice Vote ID #139 Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA position on Proposition 68: California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018. SB 5 (Chapter 852, Statutes of 2017), De León.* 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* This is the ranked choice vote for the GPCA to take a position on Proposition 68: California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018. The choices are to rank 'endorse', 'oppose', 'no position' and/or 'abstain.' Delegates can rank as many or few of these options in their order of preference. An 'endorse' vote would mean the GPCA would endorse Proposition 68. An 'oppose' vote means the GPCA would oppose Proposition 68. A 'no position' vote means the GPCA would not take a position on Proposition 68. An 'abstain' vote means the voter is not expressing a preference, but is voting to help achieve quorum. Any of these position that receives 2/3 after all preferences are transferred is the position of the party. If neither 'endorse' nor 'opposes' receive 2/3, the GPCA's position will be 'no position'. The proposition is listed below, along with the Legislative Counsel’s digest and a link to the full text. *Proposition 68* SB 5 (Chapter 852, Statutes of 2017), De León. California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018. Under existing law, programs have been established pursuant to bond acts for, among other things, the development and enhancement of state and local parks and recreational facilities. Existing law, the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014, approved by the voters as Proposition 1 at the November 4, 2014, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $7,545,000,000 to finance a water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvement program. Existing law, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006, an initiative measure approved by the voters as Proposition 84 at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,388,000,000 for the purposes of financing safe drinking water, water quality and supply, flood control, natural resource protection, and park improvements. Existing law, the California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks, and Coastal Protection Act of 2002, approved by the voters as Proposition 40 at the March 5, 2002, statewide primary election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $2,600,000,000, for the purpose of financing a program for the acquisition, development, restoration, protection, rehabilitation, stabilization, reconstruction, preservation, and interpretation of park, coastal, agricultural land, air, and historical resources. This bill would enact the California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access For All Act of 2018, which, if approved by the voters, would authorize the issuance of bonds in an amount of $4,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law to finance a drought, water, parks, climate, coastal protection, and outdoor access for all program. The bill, upon voter approval, would reallocate $100,000,000 of the unissued bonds authorized for the purposes of Propositions 1, 40, and 84 to finance the purposes of a drought, water, parks, climate, coastal protection, and outdoor access for all program. The bill would provide for the submission of these provisions to the voters at the June 5, 2018, statewide primary direct election. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute. *Candidates* Endorse Oppose No Position Abstain Full details are available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/139_gpcapositionprop68 *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

4 4

Discuss ID 138 - Approval: Minutes, General Assembly, June 10-11, 2017
by GPCA Votes 25 Mar '18

25 Mar '18

*Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)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-7zTTwx6VKh4… 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(a)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(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

6 7

Discuss ID 152: GPCA endorsement for Superintendent of Public Instruction
by GPCA Votes 25 Mar '18

25 Mar '18

*Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>* Discussion has begun for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote: Ranked Choice Vote ID #152 Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA endorsement for Superintendent of Public Instruction* Number of Seats: 1 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 The content of statewide races will depend on which candidates officially qualify to be on the California June 2018 Primary Ballot. Full details will be available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/sga_vote_statewide_races *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

2 1