[Sosfbay-discuss] GPSC General Meeting Redesign

[Drew Johnson]

"Greens should focus on organizing their local meetings around activities.
For example: Bylaws meetings are a good way to kill your organization and
should be worked on in committee not at General Meetings."

   Brent McMillan, Political Director, GP-US

Took the words right out of my mouth!  We need to cease and desist in
using our General Meeting as some kind of Committee of the Whole.  Until
we do I will continue to vehemently steer people away from our General
Meeting (which I consider a form of cruel and unusual punishment) and
towards their Local meetings that we are developing now.  We can hold
committee meetings for our ongoing admin needs (like Outreach (incl.
Strategy, Tabling),  Inreach (incl Fundraising), Media (Incl. Newsletter,
Resolutions such as Gerry's Impeachment resolution)  but major word
smithing documents on the fly at our General Meetings is something no
Green should be asked to go through.

Jim Doyle, Merriam and I have been discussing for months how we'd likew to
reorg the General Meetings so that the County Council meetings and the
General Meetings do not end up essentially beibg carbon copies of one
another.  It boils down to trying something closer to what San Mateo does
-- their Count Council Meeting is essentially their business meeting
(although again the Co Council Meeting shouldn't devolve into a control
freak's dream and everyone else'e nightmare of another Committee of the
Whole) and their General Meeting they have video and discussion of general
interest.  We want to get conversation flowing on redesign of our meetings
to be more stimulating and FUN!


Green is Division of Labor!

Drew



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Brent McMillan <brent at gp.org>
Date: May 21, 2008 2:24 PM
Subject: [usgp-dx] 2005 Green Party National Survey Results - Section B:
Internal/Membership/Financial
To: national comm affairs <natlcomaffairs at green.gpus.org>

Dear NC Delegate:

Some you were probably not at the meeting in Tulsa when we presented the
2005 Green Party National Survey Results. We never made the survey results
public. I think that there is value though in going back and taking a look
at it now and again. Following is the section involving
Internal/Membership/Financial. It's good to see that we have accomplished
some of the recommendations listed.

In service:

Brent McMillan, Political Director
Green Party of the United States
202-319-7191
brent at gp.org

Section B: Internal/Membership/Financial

1. Results Summary

Strengths:

Survey respondents clearly indicated that they felt that the strengths of
the Green Party in terms of its internal policies and structure is that
first and foremost we are based on the 10 Key Values (mean 8.5) and
secondly that we do not take corporate contributions (mean 8.2). Greens
openness to people of all political backgrounds was also considered
important (mean 7.3).

Greens said that the publicity/outreach methods that they have found to be
most effective for gaining energy, members and/or political power at the
local level was Word-of-Mouth (63%) closely followed by Running Candidates
for Office (62%). Listed as the three most ineffective methods were, radio
and TV ads (5%), intentional spoiling (8%) and working with Republicans
and Democrats (9%).

Weaknesses:

Survey respondents said that the two biggest things standing in the way of
the growth of the party are that there are too many destructive
critics/infighting (mean 7.5%) and that there are not enough people to
fill the existing committees to make them effective (mean 7.5%).

When asked, "What changes (if any) do you think need to be made to the
national Party's administrative structure, policies, or procedures?"
survey respondents put the need for paid full-time fundraising staff (58%)
as a top priority. Second to that was paid permanent staff (53%). Also of
note was the need for more spokespeople (51%) and to institutionalize that
fact that we do not accept corporate contributions into our bylaws (48%).

Opportunities:

When asked, "Where should national Green Party funds be focused?" Campaign
aid for state and local races was the top priority (mean 8.1). Second to
that was the need for paid permanent staff (mean 7.6). This was also
reinforced in another question. See Weaknesses. There is also significant
support for helping fund ballot access efforts and legal fights associated
with ballot access efforts (mean 7.5). Building a reserve for national
political campaigns garnered the least support (mean 5.5).

Greens would like to see more participants at their local meetings (53%).
They would also like to see less talk and more action (52%).

Threats:

Greens felt that the biggest obstacles to recruiting new members were
voter apathy and a belief that politics is 'dirty' (mean 7.2). 'Lack of
advertising or promotional funds' (mean 6.9) closely followed by 'no
dedicated local committee/effort towards this purpose' (mean 6.7) were
also indicated.

Goals:

Overwhelmingly Greens agreed that setting a goal of Viable, affiliated
parties in all 50 states and all territories by the year 2020 should be
the main membership goal of the national party (mean 9.3).

Greens agreed that by the year 2020 they would like to see a
fundraising/budget at $10 million level per year (mean 8.1). They also
indicated that Full time fundraisers should be hired (mean 7.7).

Priorities:

National:

Clearly, Greens would like to see more collaboration between the national
party and their state/local party (79%). 19% responded the "same" and 2%
responded "less."

The number one focus that survey respondents wanted to see national focus
on is ballot access for state parties (mean 8.3). Fundraising (mean 7.8),
Media Support and Training (mean 7.8) were also identified as high
priorities. Platform Development had the least support of the options
(mean 5.3).

State and Local:

Survey respondents want to see their state and local parties focus on
Candidate recruitment/selection (mean 8.6) closely followed by 'Membership
Drive' (mean 8.5). Rated as least important of the options listed was
'Structural Re-organization' (mean 5.1).

2. Recommendations

We have to become more effective at dealing with conflict within the
party. There has been much emphasis in the Green Party on Facilitation but
little to none on Mediation. We need to build Mediation skills in the
Party.

We need to continue to work to build a 'big tent.' At the national level
we need to work to make this party welcoming to folks of different
political backgrounds. We need to be careful to not alienate future
converts. We need to head off efforts by sectarian groups within the party
that seek to dominate or drive out others. We need to emphasize the use of
IRV and Proportional Representation in our own internal elections and
avoid winner take all politics. Proxies should remain limited at best.

We need to recognize the behavior of "Dominance" and confront it. There
are many forms of dominance. One form is where one individual always has
to have their say. They do so at the exclusion of others. Another form of
this is when one individual says the same thing over and over again.
Everyone in the party has a responsibility to stand up to bullies and
support others who do. They count on silence and take it as consent. The
group as a whole has to make it clear that we don't tolerate that
behavior.

Another thing which undermines Unity is Gossip. We all know how
destructive this can be. We just need to be reminded of it. Character
assassination is a form of violence and should not be tolerated.

We need to confront bullies in the party and deal effectively with their
behavior. We need to confront 'power politickers' and 'destructive
critics' and steer them into more productive behavior. We need to clearly
distinguish between dissent and bullying.

We need to encourage the development of Membership Committees and
Coordinators. Greens need to set goals for recruitment and develop a plan
for meeting these goals. Then they need to take action. The Green Party of
Maine has done an outstanding job in this regard. We need to study what
they have done and spread the message of what has been the key to their
success.

We need to make committee work more attractive to volunteers. We need to
do a better job of recruiting committee members. If you've been around for
awhile in the party, who are you mentoring?

At the national level we need to continue to emphasize the development of
our Fundraising Program. We need to get back to where we have a full-time
Fundraising Director. Fundraising needs to be a team effort. Green
fundraising is different. We need to identify how it is different from
other types of fundraising. We need to better document what works and what
doesn't work and communicate that through out the organization. If we are
to win at the Federal Level we will have to have a fundraising revolution
in this party. After re-establishing this position there is support for
more outreach.

In the BRPP long range plan the fourth national director envisioned is a
Field Director. We need to establish an Outreach Committee at the national
level. The Field Director would be the staff person to the Outreach
Committee. We need to develop materials to assist local organizing and
development.

Ballot Access needs to be made into a standing committee of the national
party. The national party needs to take on a leadership role on ballot
access and not 'just leave it up to the states.' Ballot Access should have
a line item in the budget.

Greens should focus on organizing their local meetings around activities.
For example: Bylaws meetings are a good way to kill your organization and
should be worked on in committee not at General Meetings.

# # # #