web analytics

GPCO 2005 State Meeting Minutes

State Green Party Meeting July 9, 2005, at Frisco Community Center, Frisco, CO.

Hosted by Green Party of Summit County.

Tanya Ishikawa, Kent Holcomb, Dave Chandler, Jeffco Greens;
Doug Malkan, Summit;
Charlie Green, Royal Gorge;
John Wontrobski, San Miguel Greens;
Judith Mohling, Boulder Greens;
Eric Fried, Hollie Kopp, Jerry Gerber, Poudre Valley Greens;
Brad Klafehn, Rick Van Wie, Sunny Maynard, Tom Kelly, Dan Sage, Allen Butcher, Bob Kinsey, Denver Greens.
Observer: Hollie Kopp’s husband Adam Crowe.

Convened by co-chair Dave Chandler at 9:35 a.m. Doug Malkan explained the schedule and activities for the weekend.

Sunny Maynard will take minutes, and Dave Chandler and Allen Butcher will be co-facilitators. Judith Mohling will be the timekeeper.

Attendance check for quorum:

Present: Jeffco, Denver, Poudre Valley, Royal Gorge, San Miguel, Summit, Boulder
Not present: Southwest, Greeley, Mesa (Mesa arrived later)

Seven out of ten locals are present and we have a quorum.

Arapahoe Green Party activation: Tom Kelly reported that he and Roger Green obtained names and addresses of registered Greens from the Arapahoe clerk and did a postcard mailing. Ten Greens showed up at the initial meeting, and there is now a core group of about seven who have been attending monthly meetings since November 2004. They do not presently have bylaws.

Rick Van Wie moved that we approve Arapahoe Greens as a local, subject to later council approval of their bylaws. Arapahoes have an IRS number (EIN). Official title is “Arapahoe Green Party.”

Judith reminded us that we are using language from Robert Rules of Order. Need to use language like “proposals,” “agreement seeking,” “consensus,” and the like. Allen Butcher agreed and has a manual of procedures.

The approval of their bylaws will be submitted as an online proposal to Council. August 20, 2005 will be the deadline for submittal to Council, for approval pursuant to Council procedures. Allen Butcher asked for agreement, and consensus was unanimous. The Arapahoe Green Party is approved (provisionally), as an active local.

Doug Malkan reports that Summit Greens have changed their name to Green Party of Summit County.

Review and approval of agenda.
As revised:
IV. Officers’ reports;
V. selection of officers, national meeting delegates, etc;
VI. business (a. state meeting approval of online council decisions; b. web services; c national list policy);
VII. bylaws (a. online council activate/deactivate locals; b vacancy committee);
VIII. resolutions–impeachment and candidate recognition;
IX. National Reports;
XII. Workshop and growing the party.

IV: Officers’ Reports.

Treasurer: Brad Klafehn distributed copies of the treasurer’s report. State party has $1,282.00, same place we’ve been for last two or three years. In 2001, we had $20., so there has been improvement, but we’ve reached a plateau. Nothing in 2005: the two people who were giving on a consistent basis to state party have quit doing so. All our money is now coming from USGP revenue sharing. Brad started a split between State and National last November. It took them until March to start sharing money back with us. He was testing how accurate they were in getting money back to us. They did start. On expenditure side, phone voicemail is main expense. We have both an 800 and 888 number, but has been mostly used by telemarketers, which results in charges for us. Brad checked status of our 800 number by calling it and it has been disconnected by the phone service we were using. Since there was so little use for it, Brad made an online council proposal to discontinue it. So phone voicemail expenditure line has dropped by $5 a month due to cutting that service.

Donations: Brad maintains a database of all contributions to the state party since 2002. Over the last 2-½ years, only 20 people have donated anything to the state party, out of over 5000 members. Of those, 10 people who have given $100 or more, and the rest less. Yuri Talmore of Boulder is state party contribution leader. Brad sent him a thank you letter and it came back “addressee unknown.” Brad is #2; Jeffrey Glasgow is #3; Howard Hobbs, Lamar, $160; Susan Pennington, $130, etc. Brad has sent thank yous and all have been returned “addressee unknown.”

Judith mentioned she was a sustainer of the National Party; Brad said he has not seen funds coming back from that. He mentioned she needs to tell National.

Doug Malkan is the assistant treasurer for the National Party, as well as their paid staff accountant. They do checks quarterly to the states. He said you make a donation and you must request sharing with your state, and it has to actually get done in the office. I is a manual thing. There is a fundraising card: it is $36, and you are a card-carrying member of the Green Party. That is an automatic share with the state and for people who don’t want to give a huge amount of money. Person gets bumper sticker, pin, letter, card. National Party only makes about 25%. We should push that program locally. We should do a joint mailing with the National Party. We have to actively campaign with National, approach them, request to do this. Only one mailing a month, so we must get ourselves on the short list. With our present funds, we could do a mailing to half of our registered Greens.

Brad said last fundraising effort was a joint mailing with National two years ago, in 2003. National paid for everything.

Charlie said we should do it every year.

There was discussion of whether action was necessary to de-activate those locals who have not attended this State meeting; the bylaws do not mandate such action.

V.[Rose and Charlie Blount arrived from Mesa Greens, at 10:20.]

Tom Castrigno of Summit arrived 10:35.

Brad reported new SOS rules say that five days after the party’s registered agent resigns, if they don’t receive notice that a new registered agent is on board, they will deem the party no longer to exist. Brad sent his resignation already last Monday, effective today, because he “wanted to force our hand.”

Election for treasurer, two co-chairs, secretary, another national representative. And we need delegates to the national meeting in Tulsa at the end of July.

Allen read the duties of the treasurer. Brad said that, during non election years, it is a quarterly filing. In election years, filings are much more frequent. You do maybe a dozen. Must be done on time, or we are fined. Brad mentioned problems with online filing: sometimes all the required information does not fit into the field.

Doug Malkan proposed that the treasurer be required to report to the co-chairs after each filing is made, with the co-chairs to oversee that the filing has been done on schedule.

Allen Butcher proposed we elect officers as a slate and take just one vote.

Tom Castrigno reminded the group that you can amend the treasurer’s report after it is made. You just need to get the original report in on time.

Allen read the duties of the co-chairs. We have two vacancies. Dave said he didn’t really like being “co-chair,” particularly since the other co-chair position has been vacant for a few years now.

Doug Malkan suggested we change the structure to chair and vice-chair, rather than having the two co-chairs. Charlie G. said this has been widely discussed at the national level, too. This means a bylaw change. We need job descriptions. We took a straw poll, to see who would like to make a change, and it was 10 to 4 in favor of keeping it the way it is, with three standasides. Doug Malkan withdrew his request to put it on the agenda. We will discuss it later, or online.

Allen read the duties of the secretary. Sunny described the types of things which need to be done, particularly in an election year.

Duties of representatives to USGP: Charlie G. and Dave are current reps. All work is online. Doug will be going, already, to the national meeting in Tulsa, at UT.

“Delegate” is the representative on the virtual (online) council. Delegates to the national meeting are different: we are authorized to have two. Roles can be held by the same people.

Tom Kelly will stand for co-chair. Charlie Green will continue as alternate for national, and is willing to be the other co-chair. Dan Sage volunteered to do the treasurer’s job. Tanya was drafted to be secretary. Volunteers to go to Tulsa: designating Doug Malkan and Bruce Meyer. Bruce Meyer to be delegate to the national committee.

These are all two-year terms except for the national committee representative, whose term is indefinite, not to exceed two years. Allen asked for consensus, and it was affirmed.

VI: Business

A. State meeting approval of online council decisions: Proposition 008-04: to add Tom Kelly to 2004 GP-US national convention. 009-04: reinstatement of Royal Gorge Greens. Prop 010-04: reinstatement of SW Colo Greens. Prop 011-04: add three additional Greens as delegates to 2004 GPUS national convention. Prop 12-04: GP to donate $100 to each 2004 campaign. 13-04: elect Bruce Meyer as delegate to 2004 convention. 14-04: procedure for determining the GPCO presidential slate and apportioning delegates. 15-04: electing Dave Chandler to serve as national delegate to GPUS coordinating committee. 16-04: amendment to procedure for determining the GPCO presidential slate and for apportioning nominating delegates. 17-04: purchase Green Pages. 18-04: implementation of rules lost in the 4/27/03 edition of “Procedures and Guidelines.“ 19-04: support Clean Energy Initiative and oppose BI-145 (which vote failed); 20:04: GPCO to cover costs of Cobb rally; 21-04: endorsement of Colo. Electoral College Reform ballot initiative. 22:04: Endorsement of the Renewable Energy Requirement Ballot Initiative; 23-04: oppose Ref. A, state personnel system; 24-04: apptment of Chandler as GP co-chair. 25:04: Sharing state donor list with GPUS for fundraising mailing. 001-05: GPCO discussion list policy. 002-05: endorsement of H.B. 1079. 003-05: select process by which GPCO legislative committee can more effectively respond to rulemaking by state legislature. 004-05: amendment to GPUS bylaws to explicitly include alternates as representatives to the coordinating committee; 005-05: Conditional support of SB 079 requiring paper ballots in Colorado elections. 006-05: Colorado Transform Columbus Day statement. 007-05: proposal to hold 2005 State GP meeting in Summit County.

No challenges to any of these items.

B. Web services: Charlie Green talked about the host of our web site, Cameron, who is in California. We paid him $48 last year, and he has asked for the same this year. Brad said we paid $60 to him in 2002 and nothing in 2003. Doug proposed making it $50 instead of $48. John Wontrobski thinks we should go higher, since the website is much more important than our phone lines. Tom Castrigno made the point about paying people what they’re worth, not exploiting, etc., and suggests paying him $75. We took a straw poll, and the bulk of votes was to pay him $75.

C. National list proposals:
Charlie Green had nine new proposals from National, received during the last week.
More online discussion of controversial issues; amend 2005 annual meeting budget; to lower registration fee from $135 to $68; national party to pay for staff costs which had been included in delegates’ costs. Charlie thinks $135 very reasonable, since it includes room & board.
Internal democracy in the GPUS: to facilitate adoption of one person, one vote, to require all accredited state parties to estimate the size of their state parties relative to other states, then … to evaluate their claims. Charlie plans to vote no, because not purpose of national to tell state delegations what to do.
Selection of delegates to national convention: telling states how to select delegates and allocate their votes, and how to do binding. States do different things. He plans to vote no.
GP Declaration of Independence: GP will not endorse candidates or ballot lines of the two corporate-controlled parties. Affects state and national, not local organizations. Charlie to present this to us online.
To support international demonstrations at MOP climate talks in Montreal, 28th of Nov. through 9t Dec. First meeting of parties to Kyoto Protocol. Demonstrations timed to coincide with that on Sat., Dec. 2, demanding that Australia and USA ratify Kyoto immediately and work to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions. Charlie plans on voting yes.

GPUS ballot access committee will work to assist Greens to achieve ballot access, lobbying and legal initiatives. He plans to vote no because we already have the coordinated campaign committee, which does most of this.
Registration of proxy voting at national meetings: he plans to vote yes.
“More Million Marchers” to support effort re minimum wages, etc. He plans to vote yes.

Problem on national level with Green behavior. These particular people are disruptive and abusive, with threats of violence against other Greens who disagree with them. Most committees don’t have a provision for discipline or removing disruptive members, etc. Charlie just quit two committees over this kind of issue: endless arguments. Issue is: what is verbal abuse? Is dissent obstruction? Drawing up guidelines. Secretary refused to record a vote because she did not agree with the results! GP Utah has two sets of people each of whom call themselves the Green Party of Utah, filing their own slates of candidates, etc.

D. Co-chairs to oversee treasurer filings: Doug Malkan earlier made a proposal that the co-chairs oversee the filing after it has been made, and see that it has been done on schedule. Allen Butcher suggests it go in our Procedures and Guidelines document. Suggested the secretary’s duties be subject to the same oversight. Malkan agreed to change “oversee” to “monitor.” Allen suggests sub par. 5.2 , so that we are adding new 5.2.6 to the bylaws, dealing with co-chairs’ duties. New language: co-chairs will monitor the filings required to be made with the designated election official by both the state party secretary and treasurer. Bob Kinsey mentioned that these are the secretary and treasurer’s jobs, and we shouldn’t make the co-chairs have those responsibilities, too. Brad noted that changes to the bylaws must be filed with SOS within five days, so we may want to change P&G, instead.

Charlie Blount asked whether bylaws require a discussion period before they are amended. Allen reported that bylaws may be amended at a 3/5 vote at a state meeting. Brad says they can be modified at any GPCO meeting on a 60% vote. We have two other bylaw changes to contemplate. This is going to be taken up at agenda item “Bylaws.” Tabling it at this point, until after lunch.

Sec. letting online council activate and deactivate locals.

Lunch break: 12:12. Back at 1:00 for a half-hour discussion of growing the party. 1:30 on bylaws.


Title of proposed resolution: “Calling on the United States Congress to Initiate Impeachment Proceedings Against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for High Crimes and Misdemeanors”

Amendments: “the Green Party of Colorado asks THE COLORADO DELEGATES to Congress to immediately begin …”

John Wontrobski suggested this was a “pie in the sky” resolution, and that the Green Party is viewed as not dealing with issues and problems and this adds to the perception.

Allen said there is a national statement on this which we could endorse.

Change proposed by Dave to second resolving clause:
“Whereas, Bush and Cheney told the American public and Congress that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, yet UN weapons inspectors showed prior to the invasion that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq”:

Unanimous consensus to issue this statement. Dave will do the press release. Judith suggested all our names go with this–and we will list our chapters, too. Allen pointed out we are acting for the locals who are not here, as well.

Second resolution: Recognizing Colorado Green Party candidates. Charlie G. objects to an endorsement for nonpartisan elections. Rick Van Wie’s proposal: says it ties into building a party before the election in 2006. He says election has already started. He fears we are at a disadvantage.

Kinsey suggests we go, as a party, to our elected representatives and say, “Carry this bill or you will have a Green Party candidate running against you in 2006.” Dave suggests changing “would like to” to “will.” Dave wants to get party structure behind the candidates.

Bob wants IRV. Kent suggests combining them: use IRV tactic to pressure the Dems, and then use a list of possible candidates for every district that we can get a candidate for and say, “We’ll run in these districts if you don’t support IRV.”

John says work within our framework. Any candidate who wants to declare for an office, we can list him or her on our website, but we don’t need a resolution recognizing candidates before the process.

Judith thinks it is very important to put our weight behind someone who is even considering a candidacy.

Charlie G. doesn’t like the idea of passing a resolution which can be added to later. He likes John’s point. Tom thinks this recognition would stimulate participation.

Charlie B. pointed out that there was guy calling himself the Green Party candidate for Congress, and for sheriff, and he was not their candidate.

Sunny pointed out that our bylaws provide a process where candidates are vetted and approved by their locals before they advance, in their candidacies, to the next level. She felt a premature “recognition” of candidates before they were nominated would chill other persons from seeking the nomination.

Rick may withdraw this proposal. Charlie G. reminded people that the CCC of the USGP will help candidates. Dave wanted to show the world that we are proactive about candidates.

Resolution was withdrawn. Dave wants to get the sense of the group in how we want to promote candidates.

Charlie G. to put on the website the names of persons seeking their local GP nominations. Allen says, pending research Sunny has volunteered to do, see if we can put “the following people have expressed an interest in seeking the nomination of their local Green Party chapters to run for the following offices” on the website. Doug says we must be clear to our potential candidates that if they tell us they are seeking the nomination, they’d better file. Hollie pointed out you can form an exploratory committee for a Congressional office. John suggested there be a requirement of the local’s approval before they get their names on the website. Kent said if the candidate says he’s seeking the nomination from the local, he can get on the website even if the local really does not want him or her as the candidate.

Judith wants all persons who want to be nominees on that list. Wants to be loving and let them on, and then the process will take them off.

Allen points out that if someone challenges a name which is on there, it would have to be Council to decide whether they are taken off.

We have agreement as to the preceding language being put on the website.

Letting Online Council Activate/Deactivate Locals: Would change, so council could charter a new local, as opposed to just reinstating a local to active status.

Brad is looking at 3.1, which says how a Green local is accepted. Wants just to amend that statement so that they could be accepted by Council. Kent pointed out that would mean they don’t have to wait almost a whole year, as Arapahoe Greens have had to do. Arapahoe doesn’t have representatives on the council yet, due to that.

New 3.1: A Green Local must agree to abide by the Ten Key Values and to follow the bylaws of the Green Party of Colorado. A Green local must present its proposed bylaws for approval, and be approved by 60% of the voting Greens at a state party meeting, or by the state council.

There was consensus, but Tom Kelly stood aside. He said Arapahoe Greens have practical experience now in operating without bylaws.

Vacancy committee for elected officials: Charlie G. suggested we do this online. Rick wants Council to take this up this week.

Co-chairs monitoring duties of treasurer and secretary:

New 5.2.6 To monitor that official filings required to be made by the secretary and treasurer occur in a timely manner.

There was consensus adding the foregoing language to the bylaws.

Rick Van Wie reported he had volunteered to take on task of election reform at the last state meeting. With IRV, there is grassroots support across the political spectrum. We had some tentative support from progressive Democrats, Tupa and Plant. But Tupa and Plant made different representations in other districts than in their own district, as to whether or not they supported IRV. Rick feels GP needs to make grassroots effort on the local level and should be very broad-based, folks of all political stripes. Has a draft statute. Allen asked him for a report in written form.

John asked why Democrats or Republicans would support IRV. What’s in it for them? Sunny used 7th Congressional District as example, because Feeley got 48% of the vote and Chandler 3%, so Beauprez ended up winning with 49%. With IRV, Chandler’s votes would likely go to Feeley and make him the winner.

Doug Malkan asked what is the best way to implement IRV, and there was discussion. Brad pointed out Pat Waak was more progressive than the previous Dem party chair. Brad suggested we write her a letter asking for joint Dem & Green support of IRV. Puts them on notice.

Kinsey said second part of letter should say we expect Dem state legislators to carry a bill to that effect in January. Doug asked whether we could wordsmith this on the list. Brad to get the Council a draft.

Kinsey has written a book on his experiences running in the 4th C.D. Jerry Gerber said that implementation of IRV in San Francisco led to the formation of coalitions, people campaigning for their second-choice votes.

Allen suggested we form an IRV committee. But a committee was formed last year. We just need two co-chairs. Kent Holcomb and Bob Kinsey will be the co-chairs. A sign-up sheet is being circulated.

What the committee can or can do on its own: Brad doesn’t recall any committee being that active, but just said it is under the general supervision of Council.

Reports of Locals:

Denver GP: Rick: our presence in Denver has been pretty good, nonelectorally. Lot of presence at community events. People’s Fair, Pridefest–fantastic contingent this year. New banner, “Equal Rights: No More, No Less,” and we got claps. Big deal, because Democrats have a very big presence at that event. Very well received, especially from youth. AIDS walk: there will be a GP team. August 21. In 2003, GP raised $800. AFLCIO is not doing anything for Labor Day, but Jobs for Justice will co-sponsor with the Green Party a Labor Day picnic. Brad: we and the Jeffco Greens changed how our meetings work. Had the problem where people would attend these formalistic business meetings we had and be turned off. So we have started doing quarterly issues meetings. We’ve had one on CSAP and one on Peak Oil. Been well attended by new people. Juneteenth: we gave out Green Pages, made contacts with local black Denver KNUS radio talk show host who wants to have us on to talk about our issues. Also Black Political Women of Colorado. They want to have us to a meeting, too.

Boulder GP: Judith: Boulder Greens are working very hard, but not together, on Green issues. Carolyn Bninski, Ron Forthofer, Kathy Metzger, and Judith are the steering committee. They planned an event around the George Lakoff video, but it was just the same people who came. Thinks everybody is still there and that in an election year they will come forth again.

Jeffco: Kent Holcomb mentioned David Cobb came last year and that Tanya ran for county commissioner and was the best person running. Got 4%. She also started up a legislative committee again.

Royal Gorge Greens: Other half of his local went to People’s Fair and he was recognized at the Denver booth.

Summit: Tom Castrigno ran for county commissioner in 2004, and if he hadn’t, the incumbent would’ve run unopposed. So there were debates in which the Green was included. Tom got 27% of the vote. In April 2004, Jeff Bergeron elected to Breckenridge Town Council. He’s a great speaker–radio and TV host. He’s opposing the ski area expansion, dealing with I-70 planning process. Whole spoiler thing, ever since Gore, it hasn’t faded away even since 2004, because we’re viewed as the reason Bush got in, in the first place. We need to focus on IRV as the solution, and forget about the past. Registration has dropped.

Mesa: They ran Eric Rechel for county commissioner. He lost, but got out there and spent quite a bit of his own money. Thanks to the state for the $100 to every candidate. We had a float in the parade for candidates, there was a downtown street-Farmer’s Market–and he got out for that, participated in a bunch of debates. Been working with other progressive groups to try to form a coalition. There is a lot of opposition to the war, but Mesa County in general is very conservative. Marches to oppose the war. Next big protest will be the anniversary of Hiroshima. Charlie Blount is co-chair of this. Greens need a headstart, because we always start 100 yards behind. Thinks our convention should be earlier.

Poudre Valley: still recovering from the Kinsey campaign. Michael Moore endorsed Kinsey for one day, and then Miramax yanked the endorsement from his website. Only thing which brings people in is when we show a movie. We never see them again. We’re struggling with how to generate interest without having a major campaign in the works. Spoke to a high school recently. Young people seem to be looking for different solutions. Tried to start a Campus Greens group at CSU, but college is becoming increasingly conservative. Better reception from high school students.

San Miguel: We haven’t done much as a party, but have a number of Green issues in our area. San Miguel passed “high country zone district,” which won’t permit mountain roads to be improved. Conservation oriented. SM County instituted voluntary green building code; Telluride made its green building code mandatory. Town is continuing its condemnation suit against the County for open space.

What Art has been doing: OHV (off-highway vehicle) travel. County and USFS each lay claims to land and there are different rules under each government relating to OHV. Big environmentalist v. motorized recreational user. Side he’s on? He invited the motorized rec people to the table, and kind of started out on that side. Has gotten flak from local enviros for even bringing the subject up. But he worked on the high country zone district, as well.

Brainstorm: How do we grow the Green Party of Colorado?

Judith suggested statewide petition drive to get IRV on ballot. Sunny said go see state legislators and Pat Waak, first, for legislation.

Eric: not a question of coming up with a specific idea, but assessing where we are as a party, where we want to be, and how to get there. All the indicators: we still have 5000 registered Greens, and that’s going down rather than up. We have 11 locals out of 64 counties so in most of the state there’s no Green local, at all. Rotation of chairs in the last five years. No one has served more than one year. Don’t really have a state party., no state coordination. So people step forward to run for office, but learn there is no Green Party infrastructure to help. No volunteers, no donor base, no training. Have to assess the position we’re at. Know the spoiler thing is a big part of the problem. Long range trends he thinks are helpful for us. Lots of things happening in the world that neither corporate party is responding to, nor has any way to respond to, e.g., Peak Oil, energy-intensive oil-based economy we have, which is no sustaining. At same time global warning accelerating, and will cause massive dislocations in the world, due to U.S. trying to maintain this global empire.

Allen: focusing on ongoing issue campaigns as opposed to only periodic electoral campaigns.

Eric: we need to do things to bring people in, not necessarily just candidate-based. We get smaller and smaller if that’s all we do. You can be involved in political campaigns without running candidates.

Brad: we do have those seven or nine elected officials in the state, but, although we have some names on our website, we have no information on the: no picture, no bio, no resume of things they’ve done in their local communities. Need to put effort into that part of the website so people can see we Greens are achieving things. Scott Chaplin: Brad sent an email to him when Town of Aspen thinking about instituting IRV. Scott said yeah. You might know I’m now mayor pro tem of Carbondale. We’ve instituted IRV for local elections here. Brad emailed back and asked for digital photo and bio, and he did not respond.

Rick: election 2006: was on Reggie Rivers last year in the runup to the election, because he had three independent third parties on. I represented Denver Greens. Urged people to register Green. Need to start recruiting candidates and promoting election now. When we get to our nominating convention, want to see a nominating convention that looks like the ones I see on TV.

Doug: talk about direct mail for fundraising in conjunction with National, cause it wouldn’t cost us anything. Events.

Kent Holcomb: likes what we’re doing with the forums, movie idea is a great one. Two more: having some kind of debates with different people, not necessarily candidates. Think the state party needs to have its own election committee, so each candidate would have a committee to go to. State electoral committee.

Allen asked Tanya whether legislative committee could be used to build party. She said only way is if our press releases get out and people see our real positions on bills. People need to see what GP is doing on real-world issues. Not enough energy and time to do other types of projects.

Hollie: use of media, both free and paid, to get our ideas out there to a broader audience, something we should talk about.

Tanya: trying to list our Denver and Jeffco meetings in the free papers, but still haven’t succeeded in doing that. Kirstin Marr’s list may not be updated for the local weeklies.

Kent: more press releases.

Kinsey: we need something so that when someone registers Green, we send them a brochure encouraging them to make a contribution immediately, some way to show them something they can do as a member of the Green Party that would be more effective than doing other kinds of things. Try to build a whole statewide database of emails, encourage people to go to the website, take an action, etc. Give them a reason to register Green and tie them in with something they can do.

John: hire a development director for fundraising purposes. They sometimes operate on commission.

Charlie B.: get updated list of people who are registered Greens.

Sunny: look at term-limited incumbents and progressive counties and plan now to run candidates.

Kent had said candidate recruitment and a state electoral committee. This may be the same thing.

Allen: Libertarian strategy of just filling up the ballot with candidates, even if they never do a thing to campaign.

Charlie G.: National has objective of a Green in every campaign, but not just a placeholder. Actual candidates.

Eric: investigate the other states that may be in a stronger position, figure out what they are doing right.

Doug: suggested state-level workshops.

Kinsey: wants to see discussion of saying, “There will be a GP candidate if you don’t take a stand on issues we are concerned about.” We just passed a resolution for impeachment of George W. Bush. If Dem doesn’t take a stand promising to do that, we should not support him or her. We should run a candidate who is pledge to that issue.

Doug: In Summit, they almost assume we will run a candidate. We just run a candidate in each race, but we’ve done that consecutively for a few times.

Judith: she has 16 ideas and only 40 minutes. Suggests each person vote for four and we’ll discuss the top four. She wants statewide petition drive for IRV. We need it, we need excitement statewide, we could put together a huge coalition of people all over the state, and it would re-educate the public about why Gore really lost. Would generate excitement among youth.

Dave: bundle these: IRV, campaign strategy/candidates,

Rick: wants to come up with another way of addressing substance. Several things about elections.

John has question about IRV: anyone know when last petition drive was that was handled by other than paid circulators?

Dave: Amendment 24, the land use amendment, might have been done by volunteers.

Brainstorm – How to Grow the Colorado Green Party:

Statewide petition on IRV. State legislators’ support is separate.
Assess where we are as a party–needs more fleshing out.–Eric says not for discussion (remove item from list).
Activist committee for various issues (peak oil, education, Columbus Day, etc).
State electoral committee (to recruit candidates now, focus on progressive counties with term-limited incumbents, advertise our current Green officeholders on the website).
Register Green and send information to new Greens: outreach to the public
Register Green: send information to new Greens (electronically)
Convention for state party:
Direct mail for fundraising.
Events (including debates), forums, movies, tabling.
Legislative committee: making known our stances on legislation.
Media: keeping good updated list, good communication with specific editors, such that they call us.
Hire development director for fundraising on commission.
Focus on progressive counties with term limited incumbents.
Look at what works for other state Green parties.
Challenge a Democrat to take a progressive stand and threaten to run against him/her if he doesn’t.

Doug: wants to move forward with all those ideas in one way or another. Start with email list, but we have all these ideas.

Allen suggests setting up committees, grouping items as appropriate.

New suggestion: media

Fundraising committee: could have this development director.
Charlie G. said national combined the political boss with the fundraising position. They talked about outsourcing, and not only would they not get any of the money, but the people want to keep the list of names which are given to them.

Rick will be on any fundraising committee. Sunny suggested he ask his wife Stacy whether she would be interested in being development director (in which case Rick could not be on the fundraising committee).

Two existing committees:
IRV (election reform)

Four more we are talking about creating: fundraising, media, activist, campaign committee.

Charlie G. said we should put a representative on the CCC to bring the information back to us, instead of having our own campaign committee.

Bylaws require two co-chairs to create a committee, for Campaign Committee: Hollie and Dave to be the cochairs. Responsible for overseeing everything.

Allen wants to be co-chair of activist committee. He will get information out to locals as to what other locals are doing. Judith will help on this committee.

Outreach to be under media.

Fundraising: Rick volunteered to be a co-chair. Doug Malkan volunteers, too.

Media/outreach: Tanya will be part of that, but not a chair. Hollie will continue to do media.

Legislative: Brad will be on it, with Tanya.

Sunny objected to having co-chairs on the campaign committee also be possible candidates for office, and stated she would block.

Dave does not think there is a conflict. He’s not worried that we will have so much money that it will shade things for one candidate over another. He said Democrats have a coordinated campaign committee, and all the candidates have to be a part of it, organize and speak with a voice.

Bylaws state that creating a committee requires a 60% vote so voice vote is used rather than the Agreement Seeking consensus process, meaning that it requires 40%+ to block a proposal.

Eric says only problem would be if there were a contested race.

Allen called for vote on the other committees (excluding the campaign committee). Fundraising (Stacy, Rick, Doug); media/outreach, activist. Voice vote: all voted yes. (Blounts left before the vote.) Sixteen voted.

Campaign Committee vote: Dave yes, Tanya yes, Kent stand aside, Kinsey yes, John yes, Charlie yes, Doug yes, Judith yes, Eric yes, Hollie yes, all the rest yes, Allen stand aside, one no.

Thirteen yeses, two stand asides, one no, so it passes.

Adjourned at 5:05 p.m.