[StrategyPlan] [GPCA-CC] Strategy Session(s)

Sun Nov 21 22:51:58 PST 2010

Jim,

I'm not sure you and Kendra are that far apart. In any case,
the newly-reconstituted Sac Greens - including a school board
member (who recently lost that seat; but that means he has more
time for this) and an attorney/former Green Congressional candidate -
are VERY INTERESTED in pursuing this. Very interested.

I've presented a summary of what you and Kendra have talked about,
and we now have a local voter registration group, and planning group.
We even have a student volunteer from UC who will work with you/IT
re: our web page.

Frankly, before, it was just 3-4 of us. And we, like all of you, have
been overwhelmed. Not now.

In any case, let's pursue this. Let us know what we can do.

Thanks,

Cres

P.S. There was even talk of hosting a plenary and/or gathering here in
Sacramento.

On 11/21/2010 3:41 PM, Jim Stauffer wrote:
> There are two separate conversations going on. The CC's discussions on
> strategy have been pretty good in defining what we should do. The
> problem with the CC is that no one wants to work on it. I was not too
> impressed with the one-time discussion of strategy on the coco call.
>
> But Kendra is charging forward with her plan, based roughly on the coco
> call discussion. I'll point out that she has never attended any previous
> coco/cc strategy session, and she had no experience with organizing
> state-level events. Her recent argument that this is just like county
> polling is too naive. Her idea that this should just be a topic the
> Locals discuss at their monthly meetings has been refuted in the CC
> discussions. But she wants to plow ahead.
>
> I stand by my statement that the window of opportunity has passed. It
> closed at the Fullerton plenary. My experience of nearly two decades of
> working at the state level has taught me that you need real buy-in from
> the Locals for something like this to work. They have to be convinced
> that the effort is necessary, will be productive, that they have
> ownership in it, and that it's worth their time to participate. That's
> what I wanted to attempt at Fullerton.
>
> My recommendation is to postpone any strategy session until the summer.
> Use the Spring plenary to have the discussion with the Locals and see
> how they feel about it. For all we know, they're not interested in this
> type of exercise. An alternative could be an ad-hoc committee of
> interested persons to develop some goal/strategy options to present to
> the party.
>
> I will also point out that it is the CC that has the responsibility and
> authority to organize strategy sessions.
>
> Jim
>
> P.S. I copying the CC because the idea of having a separate list for
> these discussions didn't work out too well. To date, there are just 5
> people on the list.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 11/17/2010 8:33 AM, Kendra Gonzales wrote:
>> I would like to move forward with organizing these sessions. The
>> logical next
>> step would be to send an email to County Contacts outlining the idea. I
>> suggest the date of Jan 29th to allow the most time for counties to
>> organize
>> themselves. This gives us 2 and 1/2 months to pull it together.
>
>> If Jan 29th seems like a reasonable date to shoot for, I offer to
>> write up an
>> email with that date, ask if they feel confident a meeting can be
>> organized
>> for their larger region, and advise the counties that, in the
>> meantime, GPCA
>> will be formulating an Agenda template that locals can use as a basis for
>> strategizing.
>
>> Can we set the date as Saturday Jan 29th?
>> (locals can add Sunday Jan 30th if they so desire)
>> Please weigh-in as soon as convenient!
>> Thanks,
>> Kendra
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* Jim Stauffer <jims at greens.org>
>> *To:* California State Green Party <gpca-cc at cagreens.org>; Cocos Green
>> Party
>> <gpca-cocos at cagreens.org>
>> *Sent:* Tue, November 16, 2010 6:07:25 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: [gpca-cocos] [GPCA-CC] FOR TONIGHT! CC Conf Call
>>
>> I did frame my request in some detail, but it was on the StrategyPlan
>> list
>> which I then discovered no one was reading.
>>
>> As for the plenary, you were facilitator for Sunday. You were not
>> asked to
>> lead a discussion on strategy planning. I put that time slot on the
>> agenda and
>> wanted to engage delegates in developing a strategy gathering that
>> they would
>> support and attend. And I wanted to recruit volunteers to help put it
>> together, since the CC just isn't capable of doing these things anymore.
>>
>> Your repeated phrase, "this is what we're going to do whether you like
>> it or
>> not" is not what I would call good facilitation. It certainly did not
>> leave
>> room for any other ideas.
>>
>> And I don't appreciate your finger-wagging lecture on the CC call last
>> night
>> telling me I had some kind of obligation to help organize these
>> existing plans
>> for a gathering. I don't agree with what's being planned, I don't think
>> they'll be productive, and I definitely don't have an obligation to
>> work on
>> such things.
>>
>> As I said last night, I think the window of opportunity for putting this
>> together has past. We're two months beyond the plenary and two months
>> from the
>> target date. You all can do what you want, but I don't see anything
>> that I
>> want to invest time in.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/15/2010 7:24 PM, Adrienne Prince wrote:
>> > Maybe it would be helpful if Jim would frame his request in terms that
>> > others can meet and understand. One possible approach might be to start
>> > with a seed question that you would like the locals/regions/gatherings
>> > to use as a starting point. Stomping your feet because we didn't "do it
>> > right" is not very helpful. I can understand your waning interest and
>> > would like us to fix this situation.
>> >
>> > I'm sorry you feel I "hijacked" the discussion that I was ASKED to
>> > facilitate (was I supposed to be a puppet of someone else's agenda? How
>> > exactly would I decide whose?). I was doing my best to sense the
>> need in
>> > the room. Basically, facilitating the only way that I could see the
>> > question going forward. If I miscalculated, then I apologize to
>> everyone.
>> >
>> > We're trying to be useful here (Kendra and I) and that's the best we
>> can
>> > do. If anyone has unmet needs, then let's get them on the table so we
>> > can start getting things done!
>> >
>> > MY opinion only, see ya on the call
>> > Adrienne
>> >
>> >
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 12:40:20 -0800
>> > From: david_quinley at yahoo.com <mailto:david_quinley at yahoo.com>
>> > To: gpca-cc at cagreens.org <mailto:gpca-cc at cagreens.org>
>> > Subject: Re: [GPCA-CC] FOR TONIGHT! CC Conf Call
>> >
>> > since i wasn't @ the Plenary its still hard for me to comment on this,
>> > if I can calls vibes here, I am, see if we can work this out tonight
>> > maybe, at some point what ever issues here, you are just going to haft
>> > agree to disagree with people and leave at that , theirs not a lot that
>> > can be done on this, no matter what happened @ the Plenary, as for the
>> > regional Strategy Sessions or what ever where calling them, given that
>> > mostly same small group on these calls, and most these emails on these
>> > state wide gp groups, and generally thinking let them happen, since
>> > their regional, we maybe should let them set the agenda, even if we get
>> > a only few new faces, its good, I mean this might be way develop
>> > candidates for us on the CC
>> >
>> >
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > *From:* Jim Stauffer <jims at greens.org <mailto:jims at greens.org>>
>> > *To:* gpca-cc at cagreens.org <mailto:gpca-cc at cagreens.org>
>> > *Sent:* Sat, November 13, 2010 7:35:00 PM
>> > *Subject:* Re: [GPCA-CC] FOR TONIGHT! CC Conf Call
>> >
>> > This is Kendra's strategy. I don't believe it reflects the breadth of
>> > discussion on the coco call, which this comes from. It certainly
>> doesn't
>> > reflect my opinion of how to plan and conduct an *effective*
>> > goal-setting session.
>> >
>> > This party has never had a serious debate and decision about the
>> > long-term goals of the party, and a strategy on how to get there. That
>> > is the type of meeting I was trying to promote. That is the
>> discussion I
>> > intended for the time slot at the plenary, with the purpose of getting
>> > buy-in and some enthusiasm from the counties.
>> >
>> > That discussion went sideways when Adrienne, as facilitator, took it
>> > over and used the time for an exercise of counties sharing success
>> > stories. Several times she made the statement, "this is what we're
>> going
>> > to do whether you like it or not."
>> >
>> > The coco call was the same 4 or 5 people and consisted mostly of a
>> > brainstorming session. This "proposal" is little more than the notes
>> > from that session. This is not the way you plan effective goal setting.
>> >
>> > I expressed doubts that this strategy session was going to materialize.
>> > It would have required a team of folks coming out of the plenary to be
>> > in charge of getting it organized. That didn't happen, and the coco
>> call
>> > did not assuage my doubts.
>> >
>> > We visited this topic on the last CC call. We concluded that a
>> > collection of small, local meetings may be the best way to get the
>> > broadest participation. I agree that it's worth trying, but that
>> type of
>> > distributed meeting requires more organized planning than does one
>> > centralized meeting.
>> >
>> > There were no volunteers for organizing this project from the CC
>> call or
>> > the coco call, other than Kendra. And I don't think her proposal
>> > constitutes an effective plan.
>> >
>> > Personally, I came away from the plenary without much enthusiasm for GP
>> > projects. Between the ambush meeting and the hijacking of the strategy
>> > session, I don't feel like putting much effort into this organization
>> > anymore.
>> >
>> > I think the CC needs to consider whether or not a strategy session that
>> > doesn't just waste peoples' time can really be organized for a late
>> > January meeting.
>> >
>> > Jim
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 11/8/2010 12:22 PM, Kendra Gonzales wrote:
>> > > *Please add to the Agenda for tonights Coordinating Committee
>> call....*
>> > > *(I've copied the Co-Cos as an FYI only)*
>> > > **
>> > > *Proposal for GPCA Regional Strategy Sessions*
>> > > *Tentative Dates:* Saturday, January 22 or January 29, 2011.
>> > > 1 to 2 day planning sessions for 2011 / 2012 and beyond.
>> > > Day 1 can focus on the common Agenda for Statewide Action Plan
>> > > Day 2 can focus on the regional / local Agenda (regional decision
>> re a
>> > > Day 2?)
>> > > **we've recently had a suggestion from Barry that this be 1 afternoon
>> > > session only.
>> > > **we cannot mandate this, so it should be a regional decision, I
>> would
>> > > prefer an entire day as I feel there is too much to cover in 1
>> afternoon.
>> > > *Locations:* open to volunteers who can organize this in their
>> regions,
>> > > which could include 1 to 5 (?) counties depending on logistics of the
>> > > local Green Party and geographic area.
>> > > *Ventura has offered to organize for Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis
>> > > Obispo,
>> > > and possibly L.A.
>> > > **
>> > > *Goal:* create a State Strategic Action Plan for 2011 / 2012, and
>> next 5
>> > > years (?)
>> > > using a common Framework / Agenda.
>> > > *Steps: *
>> > > *Finalize the proposal and send to County Contacts.
>> > > *Set-up a dedicated email listserve to handle communications. (done -
>> > > see below)
>> > > *Create the common Framework / Agenda for regions to use as a
>> template.
>> > > *Make outreach calls to counties that do not respond to the emailed
>> > > proposal.
>> > > *Research the use of Wikipedia as on on-line commnication tool.
>> > > *Research using video conferencing.
>> > > *Decide how and who will organize the results into a cohesive form
>> > > accessible by all.
>> > > (this is where Wikipedia could come in, and then the "Plan"
>> transferred
>> > > to the State website as we did with the Propositions)
>> > > *Sample Agenda items suggested so far: *
>> > > 1. Ideas for keeping the GPCA active and vibrant.
>> > > 2. Improving GPCA registration
>> > > 3. Candidates - eg; Which offices, how often,
>> > > 4. Issue based campaigns - eg; in coalitions, electoral (IRV), social
>> > > justice
>> > > 5. Developing Green locals
>> > > Shane suggests we frame the Agenda as questions and ask the
>> regions to
>> > > provide pros & cons to each, such as:
>> > > *Should GPCA focus on local elections?
>> > > *If focus to be on State-wide office, then should GPCA focus on
>> > > "winnable seats"?
>> > > *Due to the passage of Prop 14, what should our strategy be
>> relating to
>> > > the Primary?
>> > > *New dedicated listserve for this specific Proposal / Action*
>> > > (from Jim S.) Per discussion on the coco call, I've created a new
>> list
>> > > for the purpose of planning the strategy session discussed at the
>> > last GA.
>> > >
>> > > Note that this list is for planning the sessions, it is not
>> intended to
>> > > collect or discuss specific strategy items that people want to
>> suggest.
>> > > Anyone wanting to contribute to this effort can subscribe on the info
>> > page:
>> > >
>> > > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/strategyplan
>> > >
>> > > The list is configured for open subscription, you do not need admin
>> > > approval to subscribe.
>> > >
>> > > The address to send a message to this list is
>> > strategyplan at cagreens.org <mailto:strategyplan at cagreens.org>
>> <mailto:strategyplan at cagreens.org <mailto:strategyplan at cagreens.org>>
>> > > <mailto:strategyplan at cagreens.org <mailto:strategyplan at cagreens.org>
>> <mailto:strategyplan at cagreens.org <mailto:strategyplan at cagreens.org>>>.
>> > > ****************************
>> > >
>> > > Lets move on this as soon as possible!. Thank you.
>> > >
>> > > Kendra Gonzales
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > gpca-cc mailing list
>> > > gpca-cc at cagreens.org <mailto:gpca-cc at cagreens.org>
>> <mailto:gpca-cc at cagreens.org <mailto:gpca-cc at cagreens.org>>
>> > > http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > gpca-cc mailing list
>> > gpca-cc at cagreens.org <mailto:gpca-cc at cagreens.org>
>> <mailto:gpca-cc at cagreens.org <mailto:gpca-cc at cagreens.org>>
>> > http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________ gpca-cc mailing list
>> > gpca-cc at cagreens.org <mailto:gpca-cc at cagreens.org>
>> > http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > gpca-cocos mailing list
>> > gpca-cocos at cagreens.org <mailto:gpca-cocos at cagreens.org>
>> > http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cocos
>> _______________________________________________
>> gpca-cocos mailing list
>> gpca-cocos at cagreens.org <mailto:gpca-cocos at cagreens.org>
>> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cocos
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gpca-cc mailing list
>> gpca-cc at cagreens.org
>> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpca-cc
> _______________________________________________
> StrategyPlan mailing list
> StrategyPlan at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/strategyplan
>