<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16525" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Times New Roman" bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=4>
<DIV><FONT size=4>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">February
28. 2010<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">To:<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Hally DiCarion, Green Issues Working
Group Co-Coordinator; <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Bert Heuer. GIWG
Co-Coordinator</SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">;
Wes Rolley; Will Yeager</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">From:<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Warner Bloomberg
wb4d23@aol.com<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">Subject:<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Santa Clara County GP Activists Comments
re GIWG Plenary Agenda Item ”Pending Ballot Measures”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">The
Santa Clara County Green Party uses a meeting of Plenary delegates and
alternates and other interested GPSCC members to review Agenda Packet items and
consense, where possible, on recommendations to take to a general membership
meeting, where positions and instructions are made.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The review group met last Sunday
(February 21, 2010) and consensed on the following regarding the GIWG Pending
Ballot Measures proposal.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">We
do not think that these items should be considered as a single agenda item.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Each ballot measure or possible ballot
proposal should be considered separately.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">The
first two on the list have qualified for the June Ballot and are part of current
County Polling and will be dealt with either by County Polling or as part of the
March Plenary Agenda, so they should be withdrawn from the
list.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">In
general, the descriptions of the ballot measures are all inadequate.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Many of them do not in any way describe
what the measure, if enacted, would do.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Those descriptions should have been part of the proposal in the Agenda
Packet.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Reference to a website is
not an adequate substitute. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">We
have concerns that our time and energies are being taken up with matters that
may not receive enough signatures to be put before the voters.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>We also do not like the idea of a
tentative or advisory position.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Either the GPCA should take a position on a matter or not.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Again, because the proposal suggests any
number of decisions might not be the final say, we feel this is an unfair
misdirection of our time and energies to have to take a position on all of these
different items.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">We
do affirm the concept of trying to establish earlier-rather-than-later GPCA
positions on items where there is, or should be, a clear GPCA position.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Therefore, we suggest that the GIWG
modify its proposal to prioritize the items on the list and take them in order
to the extent that time is allowed on the agenda March 7<SUP>th</SUP> to obtain
GPCA positions.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>In particular, we
would support the Marijuana Legislation item {because it appears enough
signatures have been collected so that it will appear on the November 2010
ballot) and the New Prop 187 item (because the GPCA has twice taken positions
opposing similar initiatives).<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Our
concerns remain as to the other items on the GIWG list.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 115%; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman','serif'">These
will be our recommendations to the GPSCC general meeting scheduled for
Wednesday, March 3<SUP>rd</SUP>.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>This information is being sent to you to consider in connection with how
the GIWG will or will not modify its
proposal.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>