[GPSCC-chat] First Draft -- Agenda for Thursday August 25th GPSCC Monthly General Meeting

[John Thielking]

Additional items for the agenda:
 
1) We need to be sure to have our monthly discussion re: Iran and Syria.  
 
2) Also, we may need to revisit the decision about ordering 20 shirts, as the actual cost is more than originally estimated. I still have not heard from Caroline about what method she was using to screen print our previous batch of shirts, which could cut our estimated cost in half. 
 
3) Also, we should make a motion to formally endorse the position that the US and NATO should not intervene in Syria or Iran and pass this resolution on to other Green Party groups, especially the German Greens, who were in favor of the NATO intervention in Kosovo in the 1990's.  
 
4) We could also consider donating some money to an as yet undetermined group that would run SF Muni Ads in opposition to the Zionist hate speech against Palestinians that the MTA refuses to prevent from running because of a lawsuit in New York that ruled that the Zionist group has the right to run their ads on free speech grounds.
 
John Thielking

--- On Mon, 8/20/12, Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com> wrote:


From: Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com>
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] First Draft -- Agenda for Thursday August 25th GPSCC Monthly General Meeting
To: WB4D23 at aol.com
Cc: "David Merritt" <dymerritt at hotmail.com>, sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
Date: Monday, August 20, 2012, 8:12 PM




Hi, Warner, et al.:  


      Can we have a presentation by David Merritt, 7 - 7:30?  David is suing Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Chase and others over a predatory loan contract he and his wife signed under duress.  They were promised a 30-year mortgage at between 1 and 3 percent interest.  Then deadlines were manipulated to present them with the choice of signing a contract without reading or forfeit their down payment, the home they were buying AND be sued for $730,000.  They signed.  Later they learned that the actual contract effectively tripled their total obligation.  Their case seems to be typical of the predatory practices that have cut in half the net worth of the minority community in the US over the past few years.  Most victims have meekly accepted their fate.  The few who have sued have settled in 9 months or less -- except David and Salma Merritt.  David, not an attorney but representing himself, has kept his case alive in Santa Clara County
 Superior Court for 3 years.  During this period, he has won on appeal reversals of some decisions that went against him. I'm hoping we can clone what David has done a few million times over and force District Attorneys and Attorneys General to proceed with honest criminal complaints against senior banking executives and not accept the "negotiated settlements" that have become the norm since the end of the prosecutions that came out of the Savings and Loan scandal 20 years ago.  


      Best Wishes, 
      Spencer 


On 8/19/2012 3:53 PM, WB4D23 at aol.com wrote:




GREEN PARTY OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY
Draft Agenda for Monthly General Membership Meeting August 23, 2012
San Jose Peace and Justice Center, 48 South 7th Street, San Jose, CA (Near 7th and San Fernando)
 
7:00 pm – Eat and chat
7:30 pm – Begin meeting
 
Select Facilitator, Notetaker, Timekeeper, and Vibeswatcher(s), Select Agenda Preparer for next meeting; Affirm or modify draft agenda (5 Minutes)
 
Introductions and Announcements (10 Minutes)
 
Treasurer’s Report – Jim Doyle (5 minutes)
 
County Council Reports – Discussions and actions taken since last month’s General Membership meeting (10 minutes) 
 
Status Report on Foreclosures Program – Spencer Graves (10 minutes)
September 15th at
 
County Polling Discussions – Warner Bloomberg (30 minutes) See summary of ballot measures following the draft agenda/Also report(s) from County Council Members re discussions on the Standing General Assembly email lists
 
Discussion of status of tabling supplies --  (10 Minutes) Ballot Measures Positions Leaflets?  Jill Stein Literature?  Other items? 
 
Plans for Fall Tabling --          (15 Minutes) 

 
(2 Hours x Minutes Estimated Cumulative Times. Goal: Adjourn by 9:30 pm)
 
The GPSCC did not organize a study session regarding the November ballot measures between last month’s meeting and this month’s meeting.  Below is a copy of an email posted to the CCWG email list from the GPLAC study group.
>Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 11:23:38 -0400 (EDT)
>From: denise at panix.com
>Subject: Please Read - Our Endorsements re the November election
>
>This is from our endorsement committee and our voting members will 
>be making the final decision at our next meeting.  Please read:
>
>July 21, 2012 12-5pm LA GREENS ENDORSEMENT MEETING
>The following is the recommendations of our endorsement committee. 
>The next step is the full vote of the LA Greens membership at our 
>next meeting in order to finalize the recommendations and publish 
>them on our website. We may also produce flyers to hand out at 
>neighborhood events.
>Attending: Derek Iversen, Kamran Ghasri, Linda Piera-Avila, Bruce 
>Campbell and Denise Robb. At 2pm Lisa Taylor joined us. Jennifer 
>Epps arrived from SAFE to give us information about Prop 34.

>PROP 30 Education Taxes YES WITH RESERVATIONS unanimous.
>We decided to endorse both Prop 30 and Prop 38. Prop 30 is 
>Governors Browns tax on the wealthy as well as a one-quarter percent 
>additional sales tax to fund education and public safety. Our 
>reservations was that Prop 30 lumps in other things besides 
>education like public safety. We dont dislike cops in general 
>(except the ones that brutalize people). We just generally prefer 
>more education funding to police funding. (However under prison 
>re-alignment, there are serious safety concerns unless the state can 
>provide some funds to counties and other localities to watch over 
>the 38,000 felons who will be transferred or released from state 
>prison in coming months.) Also, the regressive sales tax was a 
>concern. But it funds K-12 as well as community colleges and would 
>prevent the state from hurtling off a fiscal cliff. (Education is 
>in dire straits with furloughs, layoffs and community college 
>classes being cut left and right.)
>Proposition 38 is wealthy Pasadena attorney (and human rights 
>advocate) Molly Mungers education proposition that uses a 
>progressive income tax to fund only education. It increases money 
>for poor and disabled children as well. While Mungers will bring in 
>$10 billion, Browns will bring in only $8 billion. Our reservations 
>with Mungers initiative are that the progressive income tax begins 
>with individuals who make only $7,000 a year (approximately $28 
>more), as well as the argument by many state political observers 
>that California voters simply will not vote for more than one tax increase.
>
>PROPOSITION 31 STATE BUDGET We didnt completely understand 
>it. The organizations that support it such as Common Cause are good 
>groups and Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association opposes it, which 
>would indicate it is likely to be a good reform measure. But we 
>couldnt wrap our brains around it. Kamran gave an in depth analysis 
>but we dont know what to do. The parts about decentralization, 
>shifting balance of power sound good. The parts about hamstringing 
>the legislature in terms of budget decisions may slow the budgeting 
>process down even further. It gives the Governor a lot of power to 
>declare a fiscal emergency and cut the budget unilaterally. The 
>unilateral power to the governor is our biggest concern. We say NO.

>Prop 32 NO. Union - Prohibits Political Contributions We hated 
>this initiative. It is another nail in the coffin for unions. The 
>funders are sketchy organizations and the opposition is every union 
>you could imagine.

>Prop 33 Auto Insurance. Instead of good driver discounts on car 
>insurance it offers discounts to good payers meaning that if you 
>have already had car insurance you will get a discount. But for 
>those who are poor or for some reason had a lapse in coverage, their 
>rates will be higher. There is an exemption for those who serve in 
>military or an exemption for 18 months within five years of 
>unemployment. It punishes people who have had trouble 
>obtaining/affording car insurance by making them pay more when they 
>finally can afford it again. We hate this one. They act like 
>they’re doing us a favor with this initiative but its another 
>corporate sponsored piece of crap where insurance companies are 
>trying to use this law to make more money for themselves. Please vote NO.

>PROP 34 Repeal Death Penalty: UNANIMOUS YES!

>Prop 35 Human Trafficking Vote: 5 yesses, and 1 abstain til 
>further information is obtained.
>
>There are 27 million slaves in the world today, many of whom are sex 
>slaves. Los Angeles is a big hub for human sex trafficking. The 
>internet is one easy way the criminals lure women. It prevents the 
>person trafficked from being victimized for their past, protects 
>minors and many other positive changes. The arguments made against 
>this proposition were with regard to civil liberties and concerns 
>that this involves the monitoring of traffickers internet activity.
>
>Prop. 36 Amend Three Strikes You’re Out. Can’t be thrown in jail for 
>a non-violent third strike. Unanimous. YES YES YES.
>
>Prop 37 Genetically modified foods. A woman in Chico, California 
>had a dream to put an initiative to label genetically engineered 
>food in California. She got Organic Consumers Association and 
>Center for Food Safety and others to work out the wording and put 
>this on the ballot. Requires labeling on raw or processed foods 
>offered for retail sale (including g.e. animals) which are entirely 
>or partially genetically engineered using recombinant DNA 
>technology. Restaurants and bars are exempt from the ordinance which 
>would take effect on July 1st, 2014. Enthusiastic YES!

>PROP 38 Education Taxes YES WITH RESERVATIONS 3 said yes with 
>reservations, 1 said neutral/abstain and another said no. vote:
>
>Prop 39 Tax Treatment Multistate business. No one has formed to 
>oppose this at the time of this writing.
>There was not an historic tax break for these multi-state companies, 
>but the GOP extracted the break during budget negotiations between 
>the Legislature and Arnold back in the '00s. Passing Prop. 39 will 
>add $550 million for energy efficiency and clean energy jobs in 
>California for each of the first 5 years, while that same amount 
>would go toward the battered state budget. (All proceeds relating 
>to closing the corporate tax loophole would go to the state budget 
>after the 5-year period). Due to the Prop. 98 state budget formula, 
>about $225 million of the $550 million going to the state budget 
>would go to fund K-Community College education in the first 5 years 
>(with the education funding increasing to about $500 million after 2017-2018).
>This closes the out-of-state corporate tax loophole. We recommend 
>YES (unanimous).
>
>Prop 40. Redistricting
>YES. Boy, is this complicated. But we will try to explain it here. 
>Initially, this was a proposition that would have undone the good 
>work done by the independent citizens redistricting commission who 
>got rid of the gerrymandered districts and redrew the boundaries for 
>state legislature and California congressional seats. The 
>Republican Party was very unhappy with the results of the redrawing 
>of the districts so they put this on the ballot. After it qualified 
>for the ballot, the California Supreme Court upheld the state senate 
>districts and said the lines were fine and it was done in compliance 
>with the Voting Rights Act. But it’s still on the ballot so in order 
>to keep the maps, we have to vote YES. Heres why: Since this is a 
>referendum, its a little different than your average 
>proposition. Its the reverse of an initiative in terms of 
>voting. A referendum means you are undoing a piece of legislation. 
>Voters are asked to either enact legislation or a constitutional 
>amendment (that has already been voted on by the voters or by the 
>legislature) in which case you would say YES keep the 
>legislation. This is even odder, however, because you are asked to 
>uphold not legislation but MAPS drawn by the commission. If you 
>want to repeal the maps you would vote NO. We do not recommend 
>repealing the work of the independent commission, so you need to 
>vote YES to uphold the maps that were already drawn by the 
>commission. Hanging in the balance are a few seats that may switch 
>from Republican to Democratic. Not because of politics but because 
>the independent commission determined the actual boundaries and they 
>happened to include more Democrats than Republicans. This could give 
>Democrats the 2/3 majority they have long sought in order to pass a 
>tax increase. Please vote YES.
>
 

 
_______________________________________________
sosfbay-discuss mailing list
sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss

-- 
Spencer Graves, PE, PhD
President and Chief Technology Officer
Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc.
751 Emerson Ct.
San José, CA 95126
ph:  408-655-4567
web:  www.structuremonitoring.com

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
sosfbay-discuss mailing list
sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20120821/f9c1c43b/attachment.html>