[Sosfbay-discuss] GPSC General Meeting Redesign

[Andrea Dorey]

Well said, Drew!
We can also do some of this work via email.
Andi

On May 22, 2008, at 8:29 AM, Drew Johnson wrote:
> "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.
>
> # # # #
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
>