[Sosfbay-discuss] South SC County Greens participate in San Benito?

[Larry Cafiero_Liaison]

Gerry --

I can't reply within the text below without confusing people (myself 
included -- myself especially!), so I'll answer your questions up here. 
Joe Navarro, one of the newly elected county council members for the 
GPSBC who is copied in on this e-mail, can help me out here.

-- Meetings are held in Hollister, which is the county seat of San 
Benito County.

-- The bylaws committee of the Green Party of California has had a 
chance to review the GPSBC's bylaws over the past couple of months and 
has given its wise counsel on making the GPSBC bylaws adhere to the 
state bylaws and procedures. One of the primary changes was to remove an 
original clause in the GPSBC bylaws that provided membership privileges 
to Greens living in Gilroy and Morgan Hill. [I wasn't aware that GPSCC 
had a bylaws committee -- you guys and gals are good!] Any reference 
below to a "bylaws committee" refers to the state committee.

I think one of the primary concerns about the original bylaw allowing 
membership by Gilroy/Morgan Hill residents had to do with how Santa 
Clara County felt about this. Santa Clara had not been asked at the 
time, and I think that was the primary basis of the withdrawal, with the 
understanding that it could be brought back later.

-- On the issue of a local in Gilroy/Morgan Hill -- I don't think the 
interest is there at this point to have a Gilroy/Morgan Hill local in 
Santa Clara County, unfortunately, since we're only dealing with a 
couple of people. But ideally, if Gilroy/Morgan Hill started having five 
or more Greens regularly participate in San Benito and they thought, 
"Hey, we can have our own local and not even leave home," I think that 
would be great if they took the initiative to form a Santa Clara local. 
I would strongly encourage that. In that case, San Benito would have to 
sunset its bylaw once this local was affirmed by Santa Clara County.

-- I mention the state delegate count to avert any questions about it. 
It's pretty obvious, true, but I thought it needed stating, so the first 
question wouldn't be, "What about delegates?".

-- You say you are unclear about what I am asking. I am asking this: 
That Santa Clara County give its "okay" to San Benito County and state 
that it has no objection to San Benito County having a county bylaw that 
allows registered Greens living in Gilroy and Morgan Hill to be members 
with full membership privileges (i.e., voting, when necessary, and 
representing the GPSBC at plenaries, if elected) in the Green Party of 
San Benito County. Let me state the obvious again, as I did with the 
state delegate count: I am not proposing that San Benito and Santa Clara 
merge, nor I am proposing any sort of collaboration between the two 
counties (although I do support more established and experienced 
counties providing a guiding hand in "support," for lack of a better 
word, to newer ones).

Or if Santa Clara does have an objection to having south county Greens 
having membership privileges in San Benito, I'd like to know what they 
are so both Joe and I can address them.

Larry Cafiero
Liaison to the Secretary of State's office
Green Party of California

Gerry Gras wrote:
> 
> 
> Larry Cafiero_Liaison wrote:
> 
>> Santa Clara Greens --
>>
>> The Green Party of San Benito County has discussed the possibility of 
> 
> 
> 
> I am glad to hear that there now is an active Green Party of San Benito
> County.  Some time ago I looked at a map of counties and realized that
> San Benito County was the closest inactive county.  Welcome to GPSBC!!
> 
> 
>> Greens residing in the southern Santa Clara County towns of Morgan 
>> Hill and Gilroy to participate and vote in the GPSBC meetings. 
> 
> 
> 
> That is kind of them.
> 
>> The GPSBC have asked me to present this question to you on their behalf.
>>
>> The GPSBC held their first meeting on March 25, and elected officers 
>> and a county council. I attended the meeting and found their election 
>> of county council and officers to be valid. As soon as the regional 
>> rep for our region, Paul Franklin, reviews the minutes and affirms the 
>> process of the election of their county council to the state 
>> coordinating committee, they will be considered a functioning GP 
>> county, as outlined in the state bylaws at Section 4-1.22.
>>
>> The question had been raised during the course of the organizational 
>> meetings of the GPSBC prior to March 25 -- since one Green in 
>> particular from Gilroy who owns a home in San Benito and one who has 
>> contributed to the discussion of forming San Benito on-line are 
>> residents of Gilroy and Morgan Hill respectively -- have said it would 
>> be more convenient to travel to the San Benito meetings than traveling 
>> to Santa Clara meetings.
> 
> 
> 
> That does not surprise me.  Of course how valid that is would depend
> on where in San Benito the meetings are.  Looking at the map ...
> If the meetings were in Hernandez, that would not be true.  But it
> seems that the biggest town is Hollister, so I guess the meetings
> would be in Hollister, and that clearly is more convenient.
> 
> 
>>
>> In fact, a bylaw to that effect had been in the GPSBC bylaws 
>> originally submitted for approval to the bylaws committee, but was 
>> withdrawn on the bylaws committee's recommendation.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you referring to the GPSBC or GPCA bylaws committee?  I am guessing
> the latter.
> 
> 
>>
>> There are advantages to this arrangement: Primarily -- and this is my 
>> hope going forward -- it gets people involved in the Green Party and 
>> makes it easier for them to attend meetings. Also, it provides an 
>> incentive for Morgan Hill/Gilroy to start a local in their area, as 
>> outlined in Article 5 of the Santa Clara County bylaws. I am confident 
>> that San Benito would welcome the formation of such a local, and would 
>> sunset any bylaws accordingly should a Morgan Hill/Gilroy local be 
>> formed in Santa Clara County.
> 
> 
> 
> It would be good to have a local down there.
> 
> 
>>
>> The only hangup I can see is remote possibility "double voting" at 
>> meetings -- that is, Greens from Morgan Hill/Gilroy participating in 
>> both Santa Clara and San Benito meetings. If anyone sees this as a 
>> problem or a hangup -- I don't necessarily see it as either, but I 
>> would gladly field concerns or objections, and I'd welcome any 
>> suggestions for resolving them.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree that double voting might be a problem.  But maybe not.
> 
> Some background ...
> 
> In Santa Clara County we welcome anyone to our meetings.  We do not
> get many people who aren't Santa Clara County Greens, but we have had
> at least one Santa Clara County Libertarian and one San Francisco
> Green and two Santa Cruz Greens.  We probably have had others.
> 
> I don't remember any restrictions on anyone's right to speak, whether
> Santa Clara County Green or not.
> 
> We rarely have votes, but I think that when we do, we only allow
> Santa Clara County Greens to vote.  But we almost always reach
> consensus, so for consensus decisions, all attendees are practically
> equal.
> 
> I can't speak for the others, but I can't see a good reason why
> we should object to San Benito allowing Santa Clara residents to
> vote in San Benito meetings.
> 
> But if the GPCA bylaws committee objected to that, then what can
> you do?  Hmm, I suppose that depends on their objection.
> 
> Also, FWIW, Santa Clara County residents south of San Jose are
> not very involved in the Santa Clara County Green Party.  As far
> as I know, the one and only south-of-San-Jose resident who
> participates is Wes Rolley, who is quite active, but does not
> come to meetings.  And Wes sometimes has different interests,
> because he is sometimes in electoral districts different from the
> rest of us.  He is Pombo's district.  And I think he is in a
> (different) district that extends to San Luis Obispo.
> 
> Of course, if Wes were to spend more time with San Benito County
> and less time with Santa Clara County, then we would be disappointed,
> but of course he and others should be allowed to go where they want.
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> On a state level, this arrangement would not affect the delegate count 
>> for plenaries, as those are still calculated solely on the basis of 
>> registered Greens in each county from data provided by the Secretary 
>> of State's office. This formula for calculating delegates will remain 
>> unchanged.
> 
> 
> 
> I would be quite surprised if it was otherwise.
> 
> 
>>
>> I realize that this may be too late for your agenda for the April 4 
>> meeting -- and I cannot make this meeting to make a presentation -- but 
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes it would be possible even at this late date to add it to
> the agenda.  But we already have an agenda that is more full than
> normal, so I don't expect it to happen this meeting.
> 
> 
>> I believe there should be discussion on this issue for a possible 
>> presentation at the May meeting.
> 
> 
> 
> I am unclear on what you are asking for here.  It seems that you
> don't have a decision item for Santa Clara County here.  Do you
> just want to know whether it is ok with us for San Benito to allow
> Santa Clara County Greens to participate in San Benito?  Or are
> you asking for some Santa Clara / San Benito collaberation?  Or ...??
> 
> Speaking just for myself, I am glad that San Benito is active,
> and I believe in decentralization, and whatever San Benito County
> and south Santa Clara County Greens want to do is ok with me, as
> long as they don't make statements that say "the Green Party of
> Santa Clara County supports/endorses/etcetera.." without getting
> our permission first.
> 
> Gerry
> 
>