X-Envelope-From: X-Envelope-To: Received: from mail-io0-f194.google.com (unknown) by localhost (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTPS id w1H8F7fM000974 Sat, 17 Feb 2018 00:15:08 -0800 (envelope-from ); Received: by mail-io0-f194.google.com with SMTP id 30so1283352iog.2 for ; Sat, 17 Feb 2018 00:15:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=qaJbCmyANvsPJKxQSNzTiaeebPDiyDsRYewLGYtYvQg=; b=LnMOgnOw2tNbaq81ACO7yaCvy5MNHxvQeYnwMB6u02QjAeUOgV701ryMF+DtmNtlkL b5vIzKgwfI6lOR3OX+K/rbT02EKsRgDJ0iqlfuf1GxjZyFAWe0U1/aunCNv3lEL0NZpn JZ6TDTaey7iLfCMZsxTChtkWUVFYIyt2jeY0W4FE2SPZ+cDVLjsN6OyxQV3t+Jr0du+1 QgKMfXkk4vUnhEadJaWtcC7ZfOmV9kDg6FUbvwr2pb56mZTdh3eEZ3ltdIXp7Dq+3mHT 00AVFE4Tgabd5XXpGbJ0/ygM3bUHwOnShsUZu3RcmOlDJtB4CwW7Fc6xVcXOAH8VrKbg cVJQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=qaJbCmyANvsPJKxQSNzTiaeebPDiyDsRYewLGYtYvQg=; b=Ut9PUjkdXZmUFYKyCNWgP+Mxu0HQyjI4nHKIw83WaSmYPT1fSsZxjvtiX432RHZLcX S4CIyP/pcSxRaVSC8RwB9GR/BYfoEJe99OamVxkyKuqQfiap76zUHRF2IVo34EivmjRD NC8njEcyj8GXs/olSynMliE0KHpLPkKYkb+ulnpTox8AX0VUgPn+kYLXGueXOE+o+dS6 nRDJLHaBcGIQ4AH90DQE2EOoMcuuFBzFZYRt8logVWjwU2E9IA7IaCkOZ3NEBGUT/vO5 0xfsm8sclKUxwLxEOfKYbT6GeYsmuurPIVx+vxVyfMFD+3pQIE7mbjBM4bPOICUY6uDA 9eCw== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPBKEa1yD9PziO5kJYxLFB2bhak+ryvFYOySZnJ3ZMOfCD/2yYCl qAHtGzrQ2iOsqoRNV95lVWk4lYGDsb9ugzMYDj8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?AH8x2248nBXaeXExOiK3LHfOnSa3ZWQiVap7i+S7oe3/?= =?utf-8?q?KKwfq2klW2VJ0GPr6Z0I5RJUb9QigSvtZ3tjSYbsmlMUhEA=3D?= X-Received: by 10.107.1.3 with SMTP id 3mr10713700iob.41.1518842331942; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:38:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.11.152 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:38:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Victoria Ashley Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:38:21 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GPCA-SGA-Votes] Discuss ID 138 - Approval: Minutes, General Assembly, June 10-11, 2017 To: GPCA Discussion List for SGA Votes Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11394e2caa53e50565610984" X-Greylist: Delayed for 02:02:52 by milter-greylist-4.5.11 (gateway [0.0.0.0]); Sat, 17 Feb 2018 00:15:09 -0800 (PST) --001a11394e2caa53e50565610984 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes, amendments are a part of the consensus process. On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Nicole Castor wrote: > Are we taking amendments for this? > > GA was June 17-18, not 10-11. > > "Decision: Oppose AB 469 (Feinstein, CCWG)." > **Was ERWG, not CCWG which proposed. This has several incorrect reference= s > to this in these minutes. > On Feb 14, 2018 8:45 AM, "GPCA Votes" wrote: > >> *Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes@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-tak= en >> (including whether by consensus or by roll-call vote) and the text of al= l >> proposals, including amendments." (http://www.cagreens.org/bylaw >> s/2016-07-03#Section_7-5_Meetings) >> >> The following minutes from the General Assembly, June, 2017 in Sacrament= o >> are presented below, with links from this page to the text of each propo= sal >> in question: http://cagreens.org/ga/2017-11/minutes. >> >> *Proposal* >> >> That the following minutes be approved as presented in draft form here o= n >> 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 Due=C3=B1as 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 Byla= ws >> 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/1aq2d92mXc9FTx8EObLUtEq0F >> 3Jv-7zTTwx6VKh46gnc/edit?usp=3Dsharing >> >> >> 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 o= n >> 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 bud= get >> 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@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 mon= ey >> for candidates. >> - Affirmation (Quentin??) - agrees with Ruscal=E2=80=99s proposal especi= ally 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 $11= K >> 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 adopti= ng >> 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 t= o >> 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 numb= ers >> 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=E2=80=99s 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/201 >> 7-06/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 =E2=80=9CWhat are the counti= es doing?=E2=80=9D >> >> (2:15 pm - Delegate #6 checked in.) >> >> 3:10 pm Presentation and discussion: Gayle McLaughlin and Juan Reardon o= f >> 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-Coordinato= rs >> 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, Gree= n >> 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.=E2=80=9D >> >> 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 S= B >> 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 Ai= r >> 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 loc= al >> high air concentration emissions to offset the planned turnarounds or >> maintenance of their individual industrial plants. Air pollution thresho= lds >> 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 up= per >> thresholds for individual emission sources and a plan to lower overall >> emissions relative to the previous 5 years for high polluters. " [PROPOS= ED >> 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/platfo >> rm/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 sippe= r" >> rebates for vehicles that get a higher mpg." >> >> and >> >> The GPCA Fair Taxation plank calls for " =E2=80=A2 A system of carbon ta= xes on >> all fossil fuels to begin to reflect the real environmental cost of thei= r >> extraction and use." http://www.cagreens.org/platform/fair-taxation. >> >> =E2=80=94 Questions? None. >> >> =E2=80=94 Affirmations and Concerns - >> - (Hicks) - supports cap and trade measure because it opened the door fo= r >> polluters but this bill is more than that - we need to look at the bigge= r >> picture - this gives people another door not to do anything - not perfec= t >> 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 Cov= e >> 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 Cana= da; >> >> 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 & invest= ing >> 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 f= or >> threatened fish, songbirds, amphibians and many other species in Norther= n >> California and Southern Oregon; >> >> WHERE AS, a pipeline placed underneath Native American watersheds such a= s >> the Klamath River, Rogue River and Coos Bay would conflict with the effo= rts >> 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 th= e >> export of fracked gas out of Canada, Wisconsin, Utah, Colorado, Washingt= on, >> Oregon and California, protecting the vital water ways of California and >> Oregon and decreasing the production of fracked gas throughout the count= ry; >> >> 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 th= e >> 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 Souther= n >> Oregon. >> >> - Questions and affirmations: >> - (Nouri, Nassim) - affirmation. >> >> - (Gonzales) - proposes a friendly amendment to strike the words =E2=80= =9Cthe >> Green Party of=E2=80=9D from one of the Whereas clauses and otherwise co= rrect the >> grammar due to the stricken language so that it reads: >> =E2=80=9CWHEREAS, California's reputation as an environmental leader in >> sustainability would be adversely impacted by the approval of the propos= ed >> LNG and pipeline projects;=E2=80=9D >> >> - 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 s= ell >> 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=E2=80= =99s >> absence) >> >> C.T. Weber of Peace and Freedom Party=E2=80=99s 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 Tuesd= ay, >> 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 b= e >> meeting in Sacramento this coning weekend. I would like to stop by and m= ake >> 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 fr= om >> 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. Attac= hed >> 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 num= ber >> of candidates we have been able to qualify for the primary ballot droppe= d >> 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 ru= n >> for a statewide office, 3,000 signatures to run for U.S. House of >> Representatives and State Senate, and 1,500 signatures for State Assembl= y. >> 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. Hous= e >> 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 th= ese >> reductions, if AB 469 is signed into law, our candidates would still nee= d >> 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 as= k >> 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 environment= al >> 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 utilit= ies >> 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 b= y: >> the monopoly IOUs, electrical trade associations or their agents, or >> Senator Bradford. Any position taken will be copied to the GPCA Legislat= ive >> 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 i= s >> 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 >> =E2=80=9Caggregation,=E2=80=9D 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 ca= n >> 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= =E2=80=99s >> 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 accept= ing >> the friendly amendment or entertaining additional amendments at this tim= e. >> >> - 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 vacanci= es >> >> 1:10 pm Proposal: Approval Next General Assembly Meeting Date and Place >> (Coordinating Committee) >> >> - Ventura County proposes to host the next General Assembly during eithe= r >> 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 d= own >> afterwards. >> >> - (Rydberg) There are plans for a Green New Deal Conference in Eureka th= e >> 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 No= v. >> 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) bu= t >> most are women and many are named "Eric" or "Erik"! We need more women t= o >> 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@sfgreens.org >> * >> >> -- >> gpca-votes mailing list >> gpca-votes@sfgreens.org >> https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes >> >> > -- > gpca-votes mailing list > gpca-votes@sfgreens.org > https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes > > --001a11394e2caa53e50565610984 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes, amendments are a part of the consensus process.
=

On Fri, Feb 16, 2= 018 at 8:16 PM, Nicole Castor <nmcastorsilva@gmail.com> wrote:

Are we taking ame= ndments for this?

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

"Decision: Oppose AB 469 (Feinstein, C= CWG)."=C2=A0
**Was ERWG, not CCWG which proposed. This has several incorrect references = to this in these minutes.

On Feb 14, 2018 8:45 AM, = "GPCA Votes" <gpca.votes@gmail.com> wrote:
Please send your discu= ssion comments to gpca-votes@sfgreens.org

Discussion has begu= n for the following GPCA SGA ranked choice vote

Ranked = Choice Vote ID #138
R= anked Choice Vote Approval: Minutes, General Assembly, June 10-11, 2017<= /b>
Ranked Choice Vote Administrators: Victoria Ashley, Brian Goo= d, Laura Wells, Eric Brooks, Mike Goldbeck
Discussion=C2=A0 02/12= /2018 - 03/25/2018
Voting=C2=A0 03/26/2018 - 04/01/2018
Voting ends at Midnight Pacific Time

Backgroun= d

GPCA Bylaws 7-5.6 Minutes state that "M= inutes shall include the date, time, location and list of delegates in atte= ndance, 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_Meet= ings)

The following minutes from the Gene= ral 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 fo= rm here on the web here http://cagreens.org/ga/2017-011/minutes, and in= draft text form below:

GREEN PARTY OF CALIFORNIA<= /div>
June 2017 General Assembly - Draft Minutes
Sacramento, = June 17-18, 2017=C2=A0

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 <= /span>Delegate P
Erik= Rydberg Butte Delegate <= /span>P
Bert Heuer Co= ntra Costa Not delegate P
Brian Deckman Contra Costa Not delegate P<= /div>
Meleiza Figueroa Cont= ra 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 Del= egate P
Ajay Rai Los Angeles Delegate P=
Andrea Houtman Los A= ngeles Not delegate P
Angel Orellana Los Angeles Delegate P
Angelina Saucedo Los Angeles Delegate P
Cesar Gonzalez Los Angeles No= t delegate P
Christop= her Cruz Los Angeles Delegate P
Daniel Mata Los Angeles Delegate P
Doug Barnett Los Angeles Delegate P
=
Fernando Ramirez Los Angel= es Delegate P
James Lauderdale Los Angeles Not delegate P
Ji= mmy 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 D= elegate P
Martin Conw= ay Los Angeles Delegate <= /span>P
Miguel Zuniga Los Angeles Delegate P
Reed Heisley-Shellaby Los Angeles Delegate P
Richard Flores Los Ang= eles Delegate P
Rodolfo Cortes Barragan Los Angeles Delegate P
=
Rohan Sabnis Los Angeles Delegate P
Rubi Mondragon Avila Los Angeles Not delegate P
Ru= by Gallegos Los Angeles Delegate P
Shane Que Hee Los Angeles Not deleg= ate P
Yuliana Miranda= Mendoza Los Angeles Delegate P
Mimi Newton Marin Delegate P
Ike Heinz Mendocino Delegate P
Pam Br= own Mendocino Delegate P
Ron Lippert Me= ndocino Not delegate P
Audra Walton Monterey <= /span>Not delegate P
= Dominique Wade Monterey Not delegate P
Eleanor Lambert Monterey Not de= legate P
Frank Lamber= t Monterey Delegate P
Beth Moore Nevada= Delegate P
Pamela Osgood Nevada Not de= legate P
Sue Roberts = Emery Nevada Delegate P
Gloria Bram Ora= nge Delegate P
Phil Blumenfeld Orange D= elegate P
Bobby Halil= i Riverside Delegate P
Lorraine Salas R= iverside Delegate P
Christopher Carlson Sacramento Delegate P
<= div>Eric Frame Sacramento Delegate P
Farzad Qmehr Sacramento Not deleg= ate P
James Clark Sacramento Delegate P=
Jared Laiti Sacramen= to Delegate P
Lawrence Murray Sacramento Not delegate P
Nico= le Castor Sacramento Delegate P
Randy Hicks Sacramento Not delegate P
Carol Bouldin San Bernardino Delegate P=
Vickie Wilson San Be= rnardino 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 Fran= cisco Delegate P
Mike Murphy San Francisco Delegate P
Colt G= onzales San Joaquin Delegate P
Eric Luna San Joaquin Delegate P
Jennifer Hall San Joaquin Not delegate P
Mark Miller San Joaqui= n Not delegate P
Gloria Purcell San Mateo Delegate P
Lee McK= usick 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 Del= egate P
Nassim Nouri<= span style=3D"white-space:pre-wrap"> Santa Clara Delegate P
Robert Latimore = Santa Clara Delegate P
Don Yost Shasta = Delegate P
Lee Macey<= span style=3D"white-space:pre-wrap"> 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
D= alia Gonzalez Tulare Not delegate P
Fernando Serrano Tulare Not delega= te P
Lauren Mauricio<= span style=3D"white-space:pre-wrap"> Tulare Delegate P<= /div>
Carla Rodriguez Yolo<= span style=3D"white-space:pre-wrap"> Not delegate P
Connor Gorman Yolo Not d= elegate P
Sadie Fulto= n Yolo Delegate P<= /div>
Walter England Yolo Delegate P
AJ Hill Alameda ALT delegate<= span style=3D"white-space:pre-wrap"> A
Bob Marsh Alameda ALT delegate A
Patti Marsh Alameda ALT delegate A
Vicente Cruz Alameda ALT dele= gate A
Jessica Montie= l Contra Costa ALT delegate A
Paul Larudee Contra Costa Delegate A
Richard Gomez Fresno Delegate A
= Ruthi Engelke Humboldt ALT delegate A
Angelica Due=C3=B1as Los Angeles Delegate A
Henoc Gar= cia 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 Del= egate A
Mark Roest San Mateo Delegate A=
Melanie Liu Santa Cl= ara 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, ann= ouncement of Standing Committee vacancies

Quorum C= ount - 63 delegate cards handed out; all 63 delegates were present.
9/11 regions present - Los Angeles & Central Coast Regions missing

Agenda approval -=C2=A0
Changes proposed = during June 16, 2017 CC meeting are noted by Tarik Kanaana.=C2=A0
There is a request to switch the IT committee break out session to Saturda= y - the Bylaws Committee Co Coordinator agrees to switch the Bylaws Committ= ee break-out session to Sunday.

No outstanding que= stions or concerns.=C2=A0


Announcement of Standing Committee vacancies:
- Byla= ws 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 off= icio non-voting 9th member) - currently 7 Voting Members, 1 vacancy.
<= div>- IT Committee (8 Voting Members, including CC liaison) - currently ful= l, no vacancies.
- Media Committee (8 Voting Members, including C= C liaison, plus non-voting GPCA Spokespersons) - currently 1 Voting Member,= 7 vacancies.
- Platform Committee (8 Voting Members, including C= C liaison) -currently 4 Voting Members, 4 vacancies.
- Fundraisin= g Committee (8 Voting Members, including CC liaison plus Treasurer as ex of= ficio 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:

<= /div>
- Saturday morning Facilitators - Beth Moore, Jared Laiti
- Notes Taker - Mimi Newton
- Time Keeper - Eric Brooks
<= div>- Vibes Watchers - Susan Chunco & Gloria Purcell

The facilitators presented a brief overview of the consensus process= .

10:00 am Presentation: Coordinating Committee fe= male and male candidates for FY 2017-2019 make statements -=C2=A0

- Sanda Everette
- Sadie Fulton
- Erik = Rydberg=C2=A0
- Mimi Newton
- Deatra Cohen (in her abse= nce, her statement was read)
- Mica Daniel
- Mark Mille= r
- Eric Brooks
- Nicole Castor=C2=A0

10:20 am Explanation of Delegations by Laura Wells - General Assemb= ly, Standing General Assembly, GPUS Delegates and Alternate Delegates.

10:25am Presentation: GPUS Delegation delegate and alt= ernate 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 wou= ld 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 t= o raise funds for their County Council.=C2=A0

10:5= 5 am Proposal: Approval of Budget for FY 2017-2018=C2=A0

- Presentation from Assistant Treasurer/Treasurer-elect, Ruscal Caya= ngyang, who has noted some changes that are not reflected in the budget doc= ument 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@gmail.com. Text will be inserted before Discussion Period begins.]

<= /div>
- A discussion ensued in which numerous questions were raised to = which Ruscal answered.
- Affirmation(Brashares) - the funds alloc= ated to the Campaigns and Candidates Working Group (CCWG) is not for candid= ates but rather seed money. June invites people to join the CCWG to help fo= cus on raising money for candidates.
- Affirmation (Quentin??) - = agrees with Ruscal=E2=80=99s proposal especially his ideas for fundraising.=
- Additional questions were raised and numerous individuals enco= uraged people to join the recently established Fundraising Committee.=C2=A0=
- It was noted by Tim Laidman (Finance Committee) that GPCA rece= ived $11K in donations this year.
- Ruscal provided responses to = questions and comments. He explains that there are two options for the upco= ming fiscal year and recommends adopting option A and when and if the reven= ues come in, shift to Option B.=C2=A0
- A proposal is made by Mic= a 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 traini= ng for County Treasurers but indicates that the Finance Committee can nonet= heless send out FPCC manual for County Council Treasurers and Assistant Tre= asurers. He advises that the filing deadline for Treasurers is at the end o= f 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=C2=A0

<= /div>
Outstanding concerns - but willing to stand aside:

=
- Tim Laidman - The proposed budget Option A is already an aspir= ational budget insofar as it is already over $30K and in the last 5 years w= e haven't come close to that fundraising level on an annual basis. As f= or proposed budget Option B, nothing short of a miracle would make the numb= ers reflected on that budget a reality.

- Doug Bar= nett - Donations have come to a standstill because no donation request lett= ers have been sent out for a year.

No additional q= uestions or concerns.

Budget for FY 17-18 is appro= ved and adopted by consensus.=C2=A0

11:55 am Annou= ncements

12:00 pm Lunch, Women=E2=80=99s Caucus me= eting during lunch

1:00 pm Reconvene and Quorum Co= unt

Quorum Count on Saturday afternoon -
80 delegate cards - handed out=C2=A0



78 delegates present=C2=A0
10/11 Regions present (Central Coast Region missing)

1:05 pm - Proposal Strategic Plan - presentation from Laura Wells.=


- A discussion ensued in which a number of questions about the plan w= ere raised and answered.=C2=A0

- A friendly amendm= ent 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 C= C). Friendly amendment accepted (Wells).=C2=A0

- A= re there any outstanding concerns?
- Outstanding concern, but wil= ling to stand aside:
- Randy Hicks (Sacramento) - Prefers that th= is 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 =E2=80=9CWhat a= re the counties doing?=E2=80=9D

(2:15 pm - Delegat= e #6 checked in.)

3:10 pm Presentation and discuss= ion: Gayle McLaughlin and Juan Reardon of the Richmond Progressive Alliance= : The Story and experiences of the RPA.

4:30 pm Co= nfirmation of the appointment of Jared Laiti as the GPCA Liaison to the Sec= retary of State.=C2=A0

Affirmations - (Rai, Brooks= , Lee, Hicks).

4:20 pm Breakout sessions for commi= ttees and working groups (CCWG, Platform, ERWG, IT)

5:20 pm Confirmation: Standing Committee and Working Group Co-Coordinator= s
No new appointments, no new confirmations.

=
5:25 Announcements

Reminder for delegates to = "deregister" by returning their delegate cards if they are not pl= anning to return tomorrow.

5:30pm Dinner Break.

7:30pm Evening Social Gathering.

Sunday, June 18
8:00 am Breakfast, registration
<= br>
9:00 am Convene and Quorum Count

9:0= 5 am Breakout sessions for committees and working groups (Media, Green Issu= es, Bylaws)

10:05 am Reconvene

Quorum Count=C2=A0

63 delegate cards handed = out=C2=A0
62 delegates present: #3 de-registered (absent) and 1, = 2, and 4-63 present.=E2=80=9D

9/11 Regions present= with Central Coast and San Diego/Imperial Regions missing=C2=A0
=
10:05 - 10:35 am
Decision Items:

1. Decision: Ratification of the Coordinating Committee vote to opp= ose SB 775 (Wiekowski - Cap & Trade) (Coordinating Committee).

2. Decision: Ratification of the Coordinating Committee vo= te to oppose Jordan Cove LNG Export Station(Coordinating Committee)

3. Decision: Oppose AB 469 (Feinstein, CCWG).
<= br>
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.=C2=A0

"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 cr= edit system allows large corporations to distribute their air pollution ove= r many emission sites. This causes local high air concentration emissions t= o offset the planned turnarounds or maintenance of their individual industr= ial plants. Air pollution thresholds should apply to each individual indust= rial 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 complia= nce. Such inter-corporation purchase of credits must also end as it undercu= ts prevention of environmental pollution. Hybrid systems of "trading e= missions" may be supported as interim measures if there are definite u= pper thresholds for individual emission sources and a plan to lower overall= emissions relative to the previous 5 years for high polluters. " [PRO= POSED REVISION NEEDED]

We oppose cap and trade unl= ess certain circumstances are met. That platform does not state anything on= carbon taxes but the GPCA Transportation platform at http://www.cagreen= s.org/platform/transportation states:

&qu= ot;Substantially increase the taxes on gasoline, but allow some compensatio= n for low-income drivers. [see Creating the Right Incentives plank.]
<= div>
Legislate a "gas guzzler" tax on new vehicles = that get a lower mpg than the CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standar= ds and offer "gas sipper" rebates for vehicles that get a higher = mpg."

and=C2=A0

The = GPCA Fair Taxation plank calls for " =E2=80=A2 A system of carbon taxe= s on all fossil fuels to begin to reflect the real environmental cost of th= eir extraction and use." http://www.cagreens.org/platform/fair-= taxation.

=E2=80=94 Questions? None.

=E2=80=94 Affirmations and Concerns -=C2=A0
- (Hi= cks) - supports cap and trade measure because it opened the door for pollut= ers 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 s= omething.=C2=A0

- A discussion ensued in which a f= riendly amendment was made to oppose cap and trade but include recommendati= ons about what should be done instead, I.e., direct imposition of pollution= controls on the utilities themselves.

Friendly am= endment accepted (Brooks).

- Outstanding concerns,= but willing to stand aside:
- (Bram) She had heard the bill woul= d extend cap and trade. She wants to know if the current law is expiring an= d 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 tra= de, 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 repl= ace it.

- No other outstanding questions or concer= ns.
- Approved by consensus

Re: Ratifica= tion of the Coordinating Committee vote to oppose Jordan Cove LNG Export St= ation (Coordinating Committee):=C2=A0

The resoluti= on of GPCA is:

Green Party of California Resolutio= n 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 pip= eline by Jordan Cove LNG and their parent company Veresen out of Canada;

WHEREAS, use of LNG results in methane emissions. Me= thane traps heat in the atmosphere at a rate 86 times greater than Carbon D= ioxide;

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 decade= s 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 p= romote 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 Gr= een Party of California's reputation as environmental leaders in sustai= nability would be adversely impacted by the approval of the proposed LNG an= d pipeline projects;

WHEREAS, the proposed pipelin= es would cross hundreds streams, rivers and wetlands. This represents a maj= or threat to riparian habitats critical for threatened fish, songbirds, amp= hibians and many other species in Northern California and Southern Oregon;<= /div>

WHERE AS, a pipeline placed underneath Native Amer= ican watersheds such as the Klamath River, Rogue River and Coos Bay would c= onflict with the efforts of the indigenous Tribes of Northern California an= d Southern Oregon who have been working to recover and protect these resour= ces. These Tribes include the Yurok, Hoopa, Karuk, Modoc and Klamath;
=

WHERE AS, less than 1/3 of the 3,500 temporary jobs ass= ociated with the construction of the pipeline will be given to citizens of = California or Oregon and none of the projected 200 permanent jobs are requi= red 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. Second= ary profit holders come from Companies based out of Texas that produce frac= ked gas in Utah, Wisconsin, Colorado, Washington, Oregon and California;

WHERE AS, rejection of the Jordan Cove LNG Export Te= rminal would halt the export of fracked gas out of Canada, Wisconsin, Utah,= Colorado, Washington, Oregon and California, protecting the vital water wa= ys of California and Oregon and decreasing the production of fracked gas th= roughout the country;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLV= ED, that the Green Party of California expresses its opposition to the prop= osed Jordan Cove LNG terminal and associated pipeline; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Green Party of California encoura= ges the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission(FERC), California Governor Jer= ry Brown, Oregon Governor Kate Brown and the agencies of their State Govern= ments 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, Nass= im) - affirmation.

- (Gonzales) - proposes a frien= dly amendment to strike the words =E2=80=9Cthe Green Party of=E2=80=9D from= one of the Whereas clauses and otherwise correct the grammar due to the st= ricken language so that it reads:
=E2=80=9CWHEREAS, California= 9;s reputation as an environmental leader in sustainability would be advers= ely impacted by the approval of the proposed LNG and pipeline projects;=E2= =80=9D

- Friendly amendment accepted (Brooks).

- Outstanding concern, but willing to stand aside:
- (Barnett) - This issue is a HUGE concern and this proposal doesn&= #39;t address the problem. The US currently has 2 export ports for LNG nati= onally, 1 in Alaska and one in Oregon. The Trump administration has just ap= proved 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 c= ountries. This has not happened until now.

- No ot= her outstanding questions or concerns.

- Approved = by consensus.

Decision: Oppose AB 469 (CCWG, prese= ntation by Cobb, in Feinstein=E2=80=99s absence)

C= .T. Weber of Peace and Freedom Party=E2=80=99s 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 o= pposition to the bill. AB 469 will make it even more difficult for candidat= es 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 w= ould like to stop by and make a short presentation on why the Green Party s= hould 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 bu= t I hope to deliver it to the author and members of the Senate Election Com= mittee on Monday. Attached please find the letter of opposition. That way y= ou 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 oppos= e. Thank you.

C. T. Weber=C2=A0
Peace an= d Freedom Party of California=C2=A0
Legislative Committee Chairpe= rson

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 Me= mber Cooper:

The Green Party of California is a ba= llot qualified party in California. Before the passage of Proposition 14, c= andidates seeking the nomination of the Green Party had to collect a maximu= m of 150 signatures in lieu of filing fees. Since the passage of Propositio= n 14 when partisan primaries were eliminated, and its implementing legislat= ion 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%.=C2=A0

Instead of 15= 0 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 of= fice, 3,000 signatures to run for U.S. House of Representatives and State S= enate, and 1,500 signatures for State Assembly. Now AB 469 (Cooper)would re= duce the number of days that candidates have to get their signatures in lie= u 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 b= ad 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% redu= ction), 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 b= y 25%. However, even with these reductions, if AB 469 is signed into law, o= ur candidates would still need to gather more signatures in lieu per day th= an the current law.

Signatures in lieu of filing f= ees were supposed to be a reasonable alternative to filing fees. They are n= ota reasonable alternative and instead of making it more difficult, they sh= ould be drastically reduced. Therefore, the Green Party of California stand= s 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.<= /div>

- 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 goal= s to increase local clean renewable energy, reduce greenhouse gases, and pr= ovide local environmental and economic community benefits and resiliency. T= he GPCA will take an "oppose" position to legislation that underc= uts Community Choice energy programs with impacts such as: unfairly increas= ing costs on Community Choice customers, overly burdening Community Choice = programs and putting them at a disadvantage in relation to the monopoly inv= estor owned utilities or otherwise impacting the ability of Community Choic= e programs to meet the Community Choice goals described above. Some indicat= ors that a bill may create problems for Community Choice programs include b= ill sponsorship by: the monopoly IOUs, electrical trade associations or the= ir agents, or Senator Bradford. Any position taken will be copied to the GP= CA Legislative Committee which is a legislative watch committee that has th= e authority to rescind the position. This proposal is only in effect during= the current legislative session.

- Outstanding co= ncerns, but willing to stand aside:
- (Rubin) - Labor councils ar= e 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 bei= ng recommended, our party needs to take these issues into consideration.

- (Sorgen) - Proposes a friendly amendment to remove= the word =E2=80=9Caggregation,=E2=80=9D so people will be compensated inst= ead of just giving back the power to the utilities.=C2=A0

- (Hicks) - The PUC is nowhere in this document and, if you think y= ou can regulate energy without the PUC, as the regulators need to be involv= ed, you are mistaken. The PUC needs to come into play and needs to be addre= ssed in these documents. Because you can't do any of this without them.=

- (Bram) - concern about process because we are g= iving time for concerns to be expressed when affirmations are not being exp= ressed. (Facilitator=E2=80=99s reply: we are out of time).

- A brief discussion was had about the friendly amendment being pr= offered. Because of the time constraints, the proposers are not accepting t= he friendly amendment or entertaining additional amendments at this time.

- No outstanding questions or concerns.
<= br>
- 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 P= arty facilitated by Barry Hermanson

- Workshop II:= Using Social Media facilitated by Mel Figueroa and Sadie Fulton
=
- Workshop III: Movement School for Revolutionaries facilita= ted by David Cobb

12:00 pm - Lunch

<= /div>
1:00 pm - Reconvene and Quorum Count
Quorum Count on Su= nday afternoon - 54 delegates present -

- All dele= gates between 1 and 64 (last card handed out) were here except the followin= g:

3 - deregistered
21 - absent
35 - deregistered
39 - deregistered
45 - deregistered=
46 - deregistered
47 - deregistered
48 - der= egistered
49 - deregistered
57 - deregistered

- Regions: 9/11 Regions Present. (Central Coast and San Die= go/Imperial Regions missing)

- We have quorum.

1:05 Announcements, including announcement of Standin= g Committee vacancies

1:10 pm Proposal: Approval N= ext General Assembly Meeting Date and Place (Coordinating Committee)
<= div>
- Ventura County proposes to host the next General Assem= bly 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 aft= erwards.

- (Rydberg) There are plans for a Green N= ew Deal Conference in Eureka the weekend after the election.

=
- A show of hands/poll is taken about whether attendees prefer t= o schedule the GA for the weekend of Nov. 4-5th or 11-12th - per the Facili= tators, it seems like more hands were raised for the weekend of Nov. 11-12t= h.

- Outstanding Concerns, but willing to stand as= ide:
- (Salas) - both of the dates offered by Ventura County appe= ar to have conflicts with a number of different events.=C2=A0
- 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 appoi= nted by the CC) but most are women and many are named "Eric" or &= quot;Erik"! We need more women to volunteer for this committee (are th= ere any Erica's out there?)

2:55 Confirmation:= Standing Committee and Working Group Co-Coordinators (for any committees o= r working groups not confirmed in morning session)

[None]

3:00 pm Presentation: Single Payer Healthc= are and SB562 (Green Party of Sacramento). Keith McCallum -=C2=A0

4:15pm Closing session
Adjourned!
Resou= rces
None
References
None


Full details will be availab= le shortly at:


Please send your discussion comments to gpca-votes@sfgreens.org

--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes@sfg= reens.org
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/= mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes


--
gpca-votes mailing list
gpca-votes@sfgreens.org
https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/= mailman/listinfo/gpca-votes


--001a11394e2caa53e50565610984--