- gpca-votes - list.sfgreens.org

Discuss ID 142: GPCA position on Proposition 71 - Ballot measures: effective date
by GPCA Votes 25 Mar '18

25 Mar '18

Ranked Choice Vote ID #142 Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA position on Proposition 71: ACA 17 (Resolution Chapter 190, Statutes of 2017), Mullin. Ballot measures: effective date* 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 71: ACA 17 (Resolution Chapter 190, Statutes of 2017), Mullin. Ballot measures: effective date 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 71. An 'oppose' vote means the GPCA would oppose Proposition 71. A 'no position' vote means the GPCA would not take a position on Proposition 71. 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 71* ACA 17 (Resolution Chapter 190, Statutes of 2017), Mullin. Ballot measures: effective date The California Constitution provides that an initiative statute, referendum, or constitutional amendment or revision approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect the day after the election unless the measure provides otherwise. Existing law requires the Secretary of State to compile the results of all statewide measures, and to prepare, certify, and file a statement of the vote from the compiled results no later than the 38th day after the election. This measure would instead provide that an initiative statute, a referendum, or a constitutional amendment or revision approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect 5 days after the Secretary of State files the statement of the vote for the election at which the measure is voted on, and the measure clarifies that an initiative statute, referendum, or constitutional amendment or revision may provide that it becomes operative after its effective date. The measure would also make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions. Link to full text: http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/ballot-measures/pdf/aca-17.pdf *Candidates* Endorse Oppose No Position Abstain Full details are available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/142_gpcapositionprop71 *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

3 2

Discuss ID 141: GPCA position on Proposition 70 - Greenhouse Gas Reduction Reserve Fund.
by GPCA Votes 25 Mar '18

25 Mar '18

Ranked Choice Vote ID #141 Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA position on Proposition 70: ACA 1 (Resolution Chapter 105, statutes of 2017), Mayes. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Reserve Fund.* 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 70: ACA 1 (Resolution Chapter 105, statutes of 2017), Mayes. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Reserve Fund. 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 70. An 'oppose' vote means the GPCA would oppose Proposition 70. A 'no position' vote means the GPCA would not take a position on Proposition 70. 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 70* ACA 1 (Resolution Chapter 105, statutes of 2017), Mayes. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Reserve Fund. The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 designates the State Air Resources Board as the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of emissions of greenhouse gases. The act authorizes the state board to include the use of market-based compliance mechanisms. Existing law requires all moneys, except for fines and penalties, collected by the state board as part of a market-based compliance mechanism to be deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and to be available upon appropriation. The California Constitution requires appropriations from the General Fund of the state to be passed by a 2/3 vote of the membership of each house of the Legislature and requires a majority vote to pass appropriations for the public schools and appropriations in the Budget Bill and in other bills providing for appropriations related to the Budget Bill. This measure would create the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Reserve Fund, in which all moneys collected by the state board as part of a market-based compliance mechanism beginning January 1, 2024, and until the effective date of specified legislation would be deposited. The measure would require all moneys in the fund to be available upon appropriation for specified purposes and would require a bill making those appropriations to be passed by a 2/3 vote of the membership of each house of the Legislature. The measure would require all new moneys collected as part of a market-based compliance mechanism after the effective date of that specified legislation to be deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. The measure would prohibit a specified sales tax exemption from being applied until the effective date of that specified legislation. Link to full text: http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/ballot-measures/pdf/aca-1.pdf *Candidates* Endorse Oppose No Position Abstain Full details are available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/141_gpcapositionprop70 *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

4 3

Discuss ID 140: GPCA position on Proposition 69 - Motor vehicle fees and taxes: restriction on expenditures: appropriations limit.
by GPCA Votes 25 Mar '18

25 Mar '18

Ranked Choice Vote ID #140 Ranked Choice Vote: *GPCA position on Proposition 69: ACA 5 (Resolution Chapter 30, statutes of 2017), Frazier. **Motor vehicle fees and taxes: restriction on expenditures: appropriations limit. * 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 69: ACA 5 (Resolution Chapter 30, statutes of 2017), Frazier. Motor vehicle fees and taxes: restriction on expenditures: appropriations limit. 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 69. An 'oppose' vote means the GPCA would oppose Proposition 69. A 'no position' vote means the GPCA would not take a position on Proposition 69. 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 69 * ACA 5 (Resolution Chapter 30, statutes of 2017), Frazier. Motor vehicle fees and taxes: restriction on expenditures: appropriations limit. (1) Article XIX of the California Constitution restricts the expenditure of revenues from taxes imposed by the state on fuels used in motor vehicles upon public streets and highways to street and highway and certain mass transit purposes, and restricts the expenditure of revenues from fees and taxes imposed by the state upon vehicles or their use or operation to state administration and enforcement of laws regulating the use, operation, or registration of vehicles used upon the public streets and highways, as well as to street and highway and certain mass transit purposes. These restrictions do not apply to revenues from taxes or fees imposed under the Sales and Use Tax Law or the Vehicle License Fee Law. This measure would add Article XIX D to the California Constitution to require revenues derived from vehicle fees imposed under a specified chapter of the Vehicle License Fee Law to be used solely for transportation purposes, as defined. The measure would prohibit these revenues from being used for the payment of principal and interest on state transportation general obligation bonds that were authorized by the voters on or before November 8, 2016. The measure would prohibit the revenues from being used for the payment of principal and interest on state transportation general obligation bonds issued after that date unless the bond act submitted to the voters expressly authorizes that use. The measure would also prohibit the Legislature from borrowing these revenues, except as specified, or using them for purposes other than transportation purposes. (2) Article XIII B of the California Constitution prohibits the total annual appropriations subject to limitation of the state and each local government from exceeding the appropriations limit of the entity of the government for the prior year, as adjusted. This measure would exclude appropriations of certain revenues associated with the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 from the appropriations subject to constitutional limitation. (3) Article XIX A of the California Constitution requires the deposit of a specified portion of the sales and use tax on diesel fuel in the Public Transportation Account in the State Transportation Fund, and restricts the expenditure of those revenues to certain transportation planning and mass transportation purposes. Article XIX A prohibits the Legislature from borrowing these revenues and from using these revenues other than as specifically permitted by Article XIX A. This measure would restrict additional portions of the sales and use tax on diesel fuel to expenditure on certain transportation planning and mass transportation purposes and require those revenues to be deposited in the Public Transportation Account. The measure would prohibit the Legislature from temporarily or permanently diverting or appropriating these additional revenues for other than certain transportation planning and mass transportation purposes, or from borrowing, except as specified, these additional revenues *Candidates* Endorse Oppose No Position Abstain Full details are available at: http://www.sjcgreens.org/140_gpcapositionprop69 *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org>*

3 2

Discuss ID 153: Bylaws Interpretation: Election of GPUS Delegation Alternate seats
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 #153 Ranked Choice Vote *Bylaws Interpretation: Election of GPUS Delegation Alternate seats* 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* The GPCA state Coordinating Committee approved the bylaws interpretation below on July 10, 2017, as amended by the Coordinating Committee during its August 7, 2017 and February 5, 2018 Meetings. GPCA Bylaws 13-3 governing bylaws interpretations state that such interpretations may be made by the Coordinating Committee, subject to confirmation by the Standing General Assembly (http://www.cagreens.org/ bylaws/2013-06-23#Article_13-3_Bylaws_Interpretation.) This interpretation is being put forward simultaneously with the election it authorized. *Proposal* That the Standing General Assembly approve the following bylaws interpretation: — WHEREAS, the GPCA's timeline for Standing General Assembly applications, discussion and voting is based upon the practice of predictable communications via the GPCA's email lists, web pages, voting pages and the GPCA Inform list; and — WHEREAS, in the spring of 2017, the GPCA’s information infrastructure faced unanticipated problems; and — WHEREAS, in the past GPCA members used this information to decide whether or when to run for GPUS Delegate or Alternate; and — WHEREAS, in April 2017, fewer applications were received than seats for GPUS Delegation Alternate (nine for 12 seats), while there were far more applications for GPUS Delegate than seats (22 for 13 seats); and — THEREFORE, the GPCA shall hold a special election to fill the remaining three Alternate seats for the remainder of the July 2017 to June 2019 term, and that any GPCA member who correctly follows the application process may qualify for the ballot. Resources: References: Delegate Apportionment Formula in Section 8-6 of GPUS Rules and Procedures Article VIII National Committee Size and Delegate Allocation: http://gpus.org/rules-procedures/#08 GPCA Bylaws Article 8, Section 8-2 Membership: http://www.cagreens.org/bylaws/2013-03-23#Section_8-2_Membership GPCA Bylaws Article 13, Section 13-3 SGA Confirmation of Coordinating Committee Bylaws Interpretations: http://www.cagreens.org/bylaws/2013-06-23#Article_13- 3_Bylaws_Interpretation 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>*

8 8

Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] 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 22 Mar '18

22 Mar '18

My reading of the language “on teleconferences and otherwise as necessary” is that this language empowers us to meet via Zoom and other video conferencing technologies. Eric Brooks SF, CA From: gpca-votes [mailto:gpca-votes-bounces@sfgreens.org] On Behalf Of 1 Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 7:39 PM To: GPCA-SGA-Vote discussion <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org> Subject: Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Discuss *ID 157*: Bylaws Amendment: Clarify Notice Requirements and Reset Quorum at a Minimum of 50% For Standing Committees’ Voting Membership It's the 21st Century and we're now using Zoom.us (a sort of GotoMeeting video roundtable platform) that is speeding up our processes - tremendously. Do we have to go back to a landline or the 80's? James Young SGA O.C. On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Adam Siegel <apsiegel(a)gmail.com<mailto:apsiegel@gmail.com>> wrote: Hello fellow SGA delegates, The Yolo and Butte County Councils have accepted this friendly amendment to amend the GPCA Bylaws so that the GPCA Spokespersons be voting members of the Media Committee, and would like the language of this proposal (157) amended to include the following change to Article 9 of the GCPCA Bylaws: That GPCA Bylaw Article 9 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. That Article 9-11.2 be amended from its current text: 9-11.2 Membership The Media Committee shall consist of eight voting members, appointed by the Coordinating Committee to serve staggered two year terms, including a Coordinating Committee Liaison, who shall serve as one of two Media Committee co-coordinators. The other Media Committee co-coordinator shall be elected by the Media Committee itself. In addition, GPCA spokespersons shall be ex-officio non-voting members, who may participate in the deliberations of the committee, but not vote. Eligible appointees to the Media Committee must have attended at least one in-person General Assembly within the last five or be a Standing Green Delegate, demonstrate a working knowledge of the Bylaws and Rules and Procedures and apply to the Coordinating Committee for appointment. To read as follows: 9-11.2 Membership The Media Committee shall consist of eight voting members, appointed by the Coordinating Committee to serve staggered two year terms, including a Coordinating Committee Liaison, who shall serve as one of two Media Committee co-coordinators. The other Media Committee co-coordinator shall be elected by the Media Committee itself. In addition, GPCA spokespersons shall be ex-officio voting members. Eligible appointees to the Media Committee must have attended at least one in-person General Assembly within the last five or be a Standing Green Delegate, demonstrate a working knowledge of the Bylaws and Rules and Procedures and apply to the Coordinating Committee for appointment. Adam Yolo On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 6:52 PM, Eric Brooks <brookse32(a)hotmail.com<mailto:brookse32@hotmail.com>> wrote: 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<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<mailto:gpca-votes@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> -- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes@sfgreens.org> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes -- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes@sfgreens.org> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes

1 0

Green Party Sex Tape video
by Angelica Duenas 17 Mar '18

17 Mar '18

Dear SGA delegates I am very disturbed by the Green Party Sex Tape video ( https://youtu.be/dxhUS-QQPbg) created and posted by Gubernatorial candidate Josh Jones. I find the video offensive and an example of extremely poor judgment by someone seeking to represent our party as a candidate for our state’s highest office. I was first introduced face to face with the Green Party at the August 2016 Green Party national convention in Houston, which I attended as an interested observer, after being turned off by the Democratic Party (as a Berniecrat delegate at the Democratic National Convention a week earlier.) At the GPUS convention, I met David Cobb, Laura Wells, Mike Feinstein, Jill Stein, Ajamu Baraka, Cornel West (when things looked like he might Go Green) and Luis Rodriguez (the GPCA's 2014 Gubernatorial candidate). Based upon those interactions, I was impressed by the Green Party, effectively going Green the following month. Since then, I have learned a lot about the Green Party and its inner workings. I love how there is a high value on internal democracy. And I love the GPCA and GPUS platforms – solid. But I have to say that if I would have come across this Josh Jones Sex Tape video in 2016 prior to attending the Green Party convention, I would have not given the Green Party a chance at all. The concept and content is immature and damaging to our party. A more thoughtful treatment could have been a great PSA moment. Instead it is an embarrassment, plain and simple. Given this, for anyone seeking our party’s endorsement, I think the video should be deleted from YouTube. But at a minimum, if this embarrassment is to remain on-line, the use of the words “Green Party” should be removed from the video's title. No one in our party has the right to post something like that, misrepresenting our party’s name in that manner. Disappointed in Los Angeles, Angelica Dueñas -- Angelica M. Duenas, M.A. *GPLAC Councilmember* *GYG Delegate* *GPCA CC Member* *GPUS Alternate Delegate* *"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one" *- John Lennon

30 53

Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] [GPCA-Media] Updates from IT and Clearinghouse
by 1 16 Mar '18

16 Mar '18

Awesome stuff from CH & IT! Outstanding! And, BIG MAHALO's for their fantastic work! Aloha, all! Let’s get to it… regarding all the words upon everything we/The Green Party attempts to convey to the world, and I'll start with this/pamphlet (again, done perfectly by CH & IT) first. That is a ton of information on any pamphlet for anyone to absorb, a ton. I'm sure a millennial with the attention span of an ant will enjoy cuddling up to that pamphlet at night. Back in the 80's floppy disks, Bon-Jovi and E.T. were the in things. Sadly, we also had Reagonomics, Cabbage Patch Kids and Milli Vanilli... Uhhg. Let’s fast forward almost 4 decades… A.I., SpacX, and faster than light information moving around us, constantly. Most importantly the 21st century of U.S. politics has become a vicious and ferocious political atmosphere. That same atmosphere evolves through every single political cycle. With such little resources (we're talking a very skimpy budget & a lack human bodies) the Green Party can only do our very best to compete with these two monolithic marketing juggernauts (Dumbocrats & Repiglicans), you know the same two party’s that continue to abuse, trample, rape and pillage our villages day by day. We have to do every single thing within our resources to gain favor from our prospective audiences, to be plausible, to show worth and value from as many U.S. voters a possible. That is the only way we can be “productive” to obtain support, funding in the years ahead and [ultimately] get Greens in offices and filling seats, right? Isn’t that our most major goal instead of being Green Peace, instead of being MADD, or a group just trying to educate the masses on how to behave to one another? Yes, it is important to be informed, but I am very sure we can do far more by getting into those seats and offices first, then we can have lab classes for everyone. …seats first. Now that I'm part of this Ohana/family... I'll shoot it to ya'll straight... don't take it as a jab, but it is all about how we are perceived, how we brand and how we stamp as many as possible with our impressions. Are they too long and drawn out, I am inclined to say yah-damn-right they are. I don’t think, I know that we need to be more concise and to the point. Bullet points for our *10 Commandments*/10 Key Values thus simplifying their meanings. This question may put most of you off, but does there need to be ten Key Values? Can we do five? I get it, the premise and the vision were all there at that particular time (1984'ish) in our nation's history, and people in those days actually had time to sit and read their favourite books. However, time moves on (quicker than ever before), nations and their cultures evolve, and I believe we should along with it. The constitution has been amended 17 times due to the growth of our still very beautiful and fantastic nation. A nation that I am still going to stand with and support. Both the Dumbocrats and Repiglicans (legislators, judiciaries and executives – not the voting republic) have altered dozens of foundational aspects of their verbiage along with the print of their party’s platform, their mission statements, their values and folkways to fit their target market, which still is the U.S. Voting Republic. And, even their bylaws, but that's a whole other tub to scrub. With attention spans shortening from hours to seconds, maybe we should rethink and "Millenialatize (Miltz)" our brand, message and our vision to fit the times? I could go on, but let’s just start with the obvious – we’ve got to practice the K.I.S.S. method, or we’ll continue as we are now. Or, better yet, let’s set the standard and prove to the Green Party nationally that California or, whatever state wants to evolve with us is being PRODUCTIVE. Well, if anyone wants to come on my show tonight or future nights and discus, please feel free as I have a Youtube Lives stream called Mana Talk with James <https://www.youtube.com/user/101jbrjaw/videos?view_as=subscriber>. I’m on a few times a week during the evenings and everyone on the planet is invited. Mahalo nui loha (thank you very much), James Young 714 371 8963 On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Nassim Nouri <nassim1nouri(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > We’d like to share some updates from IT and Clearinghouse. > Thanks to Brett and our volunteer translator Rohan, we have some new > resources: > > - The *Spanish version of the GPCA trifold*, as well as the English > version trifold and contact card are now available for download, under > media under Participate pull down nav, at: http://cagreens.org/media > The printed Spanish version will be available at the June GA, (possibly > sooner). > >> Please let us know how many 100packs you’d like ahead of time. > >> What other languages does your county need as a downloadable version? > > - We now have an *interactive map* and pull down (link at the top right > nav on cagreens.org homepage), to find your county party. > http://cagreens.org/county-map > >> Please let Brett know if your county page needs to be updated or > directly linked to your own website. > > - There’s now a *google calendar* (link at the top right nav on > cagreens.org homepage) for committees, working groups, county monthly > meetings and MAJOR state events. > http://cagreens.org/calendar-0 > >> Please send Brett any such recurring events you want added, provide a > link if you have an own event page. > > Thank you all, > > Nassim > CH & IT Committee > GP Santa Clara County > > _______________________________________________ > GPCA-MediaWG mailing list > GPCA-MediaWG(a)lists.cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-mediawg_lists.cagreens.org >

1 0

SGA DELEGATES LISTED
by Laura Wells 09 Mar '18

09 Mar '18

Hello - Below is a list of the 113 Standing General Assembly (SGA) delegates for the current one-year term ending June 30, 2018. (In July shortly after this term ends, counties will be requested to submit their new SGA delegation for next year.) Note that this is a high point in the number of SGA delegates from active counties (now 33) in California. If there are errors, please help us correct them by having a County Council member email delegate names and email addresses to applications(a)cagreens.org. If all spots were filled, there would be 126 delegates. The following counties’ appointments have not been received. If you sent an email before but it was missed, please forward that email to help us figure out what went wrong. Contra Costa - allotted 4 Imperial - allotted 1 Mendocino - allotted 2 Napa - allotted 2 The following counties have been allotted more delegates than they have currently submitted. San Bernardino - allotted 4, listed 3 San Diego - allotted 8, listed 6 San Cruz - allotted 3, listed 2 Here are the active counties and their SGA delegates for term ending June 30, 2018. Name County AJ Hill Alameda Bob Marsh Alameda Brett Dixon Alameda Greg Jan Alameda Jan Arnold Alameda Laura Wells Alameda Michael Rubin Alameda Pam Spevack Alameda Samsarah Morgan Alameda Alma Godinez Butte Steve Breedlove Butte Contra Costa Megan Buckingham Fresno Richard Gomez Fresno Terrance Tovar Fresno David Cobb Humboldt Desiree Davenport Humboldt Ember Hendershot Humboldt Imperial Anthony Fuentes Kern Wanda Jean Lord Kern Joanne Bateni Lake Adia Williams Los Angeles Ajay Rai Los Angeles Angelica Dueñas Los Angeles Annie Goeke Los Angeles Candice Yamaguchi Los Angeles Cordula Ohman Los Angeles Cris Gutierrez Los Angeles Cynthia Santiago Los Angeles Doug Barnett Los Angeles Genevieve Marcus Los Angeles Jeff Sklar Los Angeles Josefina Aranda Los Angeles Justine Bierne-Akley Los Angeles Linda Piera-Avila Los Angeles Lisa Hsu Los Angeles Lisa Taylor Los Angeles Marla Bernstein Los Angeles Matthew Wheeler Los Angeles Michael Powelson Los Angeles Mike Feinstein Los Angeles Sasha Karlik Los Angeles Shane Que Hee Los Angeles Timeka Drew Los Angeles Tom Bibiyan Los Angeles Zack Beatty Los Angeles Barbara Bogard Marin Marnie Glickman Marin Mimi Newton Marin Mendocino Frank Lambert Monterey Hebard Olsen Monterey Napa Michael Gaboury Nevada Sue Roberts Emery Nevada Gloria Bram Orange Gordon Johnson Orange James Young Orange Jeff Lebow Orange Matt Leslie Orange RJ Schwichtenberg Orange Aleece DePuey Riverside Bob Terry Riverside Greg Varra Riverside Mike Yasmer Riverside Gary Blenner Sacramento James Clark Sacramento Nicole Castor Sacramento Randy Hicks Sacramento Sid Akbar Sacramento Carol Bouldin San Bernardino Jane Jarlsberg San Bernardino Samuel Sera Rodriguez San Bernardino Ann Menasche San Diego David Morrison San Diego Michael Goldbeck San Diego Rick Greenblatt San Diego Rochelle Glickman San Diego Sean Bohac San Diego Eric Brooks San Francisco Jackie Diehl San Francisco Jennifer Woodward San Francisco John-Marc Chandonia San Francisco Mike Murphy San Francisco Rich Stone San Francisco Colt Gonzales San Joaquin Jennifer Hall San Joaquin Emily Bucchianeri San Luis Obispo Peggy Koteen San Luis Obispo Gloria Purcell San Mateo Mark Roest San Mateo Sanda Everette San Mateo Andre Gaytan Santa Barbara Leo Raabe Santa Barbara Brian Good Santa Clara Christine Pepin Santa Clara Nadia Nouri Santa Clara Nassim Nouri Santa Clara Sandy Perry Santa Clara Thomas Leavitt Santa Cruz Violet Zitola Santa Cruz Don Yost Shasta Ruscal Cayangyang Solano Victoria Ashley Solano June Brashares Sonoma Stephen Zollman Sonoma Susan Chunco Sonoma Tarik Kanaana Sonoma John Schmit Stanislaus Renic Gunderson Stanislaus Lauren Mauricio Tulare Anthony Krzywicki Ventura Doug Johannes Ventura Tiffany Grande Ventura Adam Siegel Yolo Walter England Yolo Sincerely, SGA Vote Administrators & Alternates Victoria Ashley, Brian Good, Laura Wells Eric Brooks, Mike Goldbeck

1 0

PLEASE READ: Always Put Your Name & Affiliation At The End Of SGA List Emails (was RE: Green Party Sex Tape video)
by Eric Brooks 08 Mar '18

08 Mar '18

Hi Nassim, all, Thanks for pointing this out. This is why the GPCA email list rules direct everyone to put their full name and county (or if appropriate a committee or working group affiliation) at the end of all emails so everyone knows who is speaking. This is a big list so please follow that rule to reduce confusion. Eric Brooks SF, CA SGA Vote Admin From: gpca-votes [mailto:gpca-votes-bounces@sfgreens.org] On Behalf Of Nassim Nouri Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 5:08 PM To: GPCA-SGA-Vote discussion <gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org> Subject: Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Green Party Sex Tape video There seems to be a technical issue with this thread. Somehow Nicole responded to Sadie’s question directed to Angelica?! I have seen this happen before on some threads and was wondering if there is a technical problem that mixes up respondents’ identity and/or emails. I know as a technical issue this is not on topic, but if there’s a glitch confusing the identity of SGA members on these threads it needs to be fixed. I assume this is a topic for the list admins? Or should IT investigate? Nassim Nouri Green Party of Santa Clara County ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On Mar 5, 2018, at 2:22 PM, Nicole Castor <nmcastorsilva(a)gmail.com<mailto:nmcastorsilva@gmail.com>> wrote: I had not said anything remotely close to implying sex work is disturbing, offensive, embarrassing, etc. What is disturbing, offensive, embarrassing is that the video seems to be mocking a legitimate occupation, painting it as a sort of "last resort" to stoop to out of desperation in meeting financial goals. Would the video be funny if you replaced sex tape with "taking a job as a receptionist" to pay for filing fees? I had posted an article above, which a similar one is now posted, which illustrates popular sentiment regarding a troubling stance of GP on sex work, and i shared this to demonstrate that we ought to be careful in the impression we give. -N While we are here, it is important that I mention, there is absolutely nothing “disturbing” “offensive” or “embarrassing” about sex work. By stating that this concept is so offensive to you, this is what you are stating and I don’t believe that is acceptable. Furthermore, if you listen to the video and script you will hear that this video was ALSO intended to draw attention to that fact. As a statement against slut shaming, and for the media to draw more attention to things that matter. Like Monsanto and Chevron corruption. Which, by the way, is something I know MANY greens are actively fighting for. You being offended by the idea of sex work, is unfortunate. I am sorry that you were not able to see past your prior indoctrination to see the big messages being a video made humorous to get the message out to demographics who don’t see the messages we do in our formats. I would implore you to look into this topic. https://theestablishment.co/the-green-party-is-failing-sex-workers-58632984… On Mar 5, 2018 1:59 PM, "Sadie Fulton" <sadie.fulton(a)gmail.com<mailto:sadie.fulton@gmail.com>> wrote: Thanks Jane. Yes, it did. We have a ways to go still, but many people are seeing it and donating who wouldn't ordinarily do so. On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 1:33 PM Jane Jarlsberg <jjarlsberg(a)gmail.com<mailto:jjarlsberg@gmail.com>> wrote: Sadie Fulton, i guess the bottom line on this thread is did this satire help raise funds for your campaigns?! peace, Jane On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 12:51 PM, Jane Jarlsberg <jjarlsberg(a)gmail.com<mailto:jjarlsberg@gmail.com>> wrote: i meant to address this question to Sadie Fulton. Jane On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Jane Jarlsberg <jjarlsberg(a)gmail.com<mailto:jjarlsberg@gmail.com>> wrote: i guess the bottom line on this thread is did this satire help raise funds for your campaigns?! peace, Jane On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:13 AM, Sadie Fulton <sadie.fulton(a)gmail.com<mailto:sadie.fulton@gmail.com>> wrote: Angelica, When you raised your objection to this video you had not even watched it. Have you watched it yet? Sadie On Mon, Mar 5, 2018, 02:05 Angelica Duenas <angelica(a)aduenas.org<mailto:angelica@aduenas.org>> wrote: Dear SGA delegates I am very disturbed by the Green Party Sex Tape video (https://youtu.be/dxhUS-QQPbg) created and posted by Gubernatorial candidate Josh Jones. I find the video offensive and an example of extremely poor judgment by someone seeking to represent our party as a candidate for our state’s highest office. I was first introduced face to face with the Green Party at the August 2016 Green Party national convention in Houston, which I attended as an interested observer, after being turned off by the Democratic Party (as a Berniecrat delegate at the Democratic National Convention a week earlier.) At the GPUS convention, I met David Cobb, Laura Wells, Mike Feinstein, Jill Stein, Ajamu Baraka, Cornel West (when things looked like he might Go Green) and Luis Rodriguez (the GPCA's 2014 Gubernatorial candidate). Based upon those interactions, I was impressed by the Green Party, effectively going Green the following month. Since then, I have learned a lot about the Green Party and its inner workings. I love how there is a high value on internal democracy. And I love the GPCA and GPUS platforms – solid. But I have to say that if I would have come across this Josh Jones Sex Tape video in 2016 prior to attending the Green Party convention, I would have not given the Green Party a chance at all. The concept and content is immature and damaging to our party. A more thoughtful treatment could have been a great PSA moment. Instead it is an embarrassment, plain and simple. Given this, for anyone seeking our party’s endorsement, I think the video should be deleted from YouTube. But at a minimum, if this embarrassment is to remain on-line, the use of the words “Green Party” should be removed from the video's title. No one in our party has the right to post something like that, misrepresenting our party’s name in that manner. Disappointed in Los Angeles, Angelica Dueñas -- Angelica M. Duenas, M.A. GPLAC Councilmember GYG Delegate GPCA CC Member GPUS Alternate Delegate "You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one" - John Lennon -- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes@sfgreens.org> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes -- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes@sfgreens.org> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes -- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes@sfgreens.org> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes -- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes@sfgreens.org> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes -- gpca-votes mailing list gpca-votes(a)sfgreens.org<mailto:gpca-votes@sfgreens.org> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes

2 1

Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Green Party Sex Tape video
by Angelica Duenas 07 Mar '18

07 Mar '18

Josh and I have spoken on the phone. We expressed our points of view. And we have made our peace. Josh has changed the title to "Green Party Comedy Skit" And I can appreciate that. We consider this topic closed. On Mar 4, 2018 10:33 PM, "Angelica Duenas" <angelica(a)aduenas.org> wrote: Dear SGA delegates I am very disturbed by the Green Party Sex Tape video ( https://youtu.be/dxhUS-QQPbg) created and posted by Gubernatorial candidate Josh Jones. I find the video offensive and an example of extremely poor judgment by someone seeking to represent our party as a candidate for our state’s highest office. I was first introduced face to face with the Green Party at the August 2016 Green Party national convention in Houston, which I attended as an interested observer, after being turned off by the Democratic Party (as a Berniecrat delegate at the Democratic National Convention a week earlier.) At the GPUS convention, I met David Cobb, Laura Wells, Mike Feinstein, Jill Stein, Ajamu Baraka, Cornel West (when things looked like he might Go Green) and Luis Rodriguez (the GPCA's 2014 Gubernatorial candidate). Based upon those interactions, I was impressed by the Green Party, effectively going Green the following month. Since then, I have learned a lot about the Green Party and its inner workings. I love how there is a high value on internal democracy. And I love the GPCA and GPUS platforms – solid. But I have to say that if I would have come across this Josh Jones Sex Tape video in 2016 prior to attending the Green Party convention, I would have not given the Green Party a chance at all. The concept and content is immature and damaging to our party. A more thoughtful treatment could have been a great PSA moment. Instead it is an embarrassment, plain and simple. Given this, for anyone seeking our party’s endorsement, I think the video should be deleted from YouTube. But at a minimum, if this embarrassment is to remain on-line, the use of the words “Green Party” should be removed from the video's title. No one in our party has the right to post something like that, misrepresenting our party’s name in that manner. Disappointed in Los Angeles, Angelica Dueñas -- Angelica M. Duenas, M.A. *GPLAC Councilmember* *GYG Delegate* *GPCA CC Member* *GPUS Alternate Delegate* *"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one" *- John Lennon

2 1