Tuesday,
November 18, 2003
Park Hill Library
Attending:
Sunny Maynard, Randy Richter, Josh Whitley, Mark Sweitzer, Rick Van
Wie, Ken and Mag Seaman, and Christy Bouchard
Secretary's
Report, Christy:
I am going back to school starting in January, while continuing to
work full time. Therefore I will have to give up my secretary position.
Treaurer's
Report, Bruce:
Bruce is absent.
Coalition/Diversity,
Rick :
Columbus day events were a success. There was not an official contingent,
per our previous vote, but greens and progressives were well-represented
anyway.
Oct
26th Front Range Green Forum, Sunny:
Sunny: 26 people were there, and new Weld county reps.
Issues discussed included: forming coalitions w/nonprofits to get
the word out about our cause. Mark made a presentation on that. Fundraising
presentation, Pike’s Peak’s climb for peace as a good
fundraiser. Garage sale idea for "Buy Nothing New Day".
Registration drive: people are defecting to Kucinich campaign. Poudre
valley greens have a place to make phone calls, I joined them to try
to track down some people to call. Registration percentages are way
down from where our goal was for this time, but we are at a higher
reg. (300 more) than we were a year ago. New voting rules per the
HAVA are challenging (Driver’s license number, SSN required).
While the new voter reg. form doesn't have the Green Party on it,
it now has all parties as write-ins in a blank space. We talked about
updating state platform and the state website. Task forces should
develop position papers on each thing. Goal is an action oriented
platform, not just theoretical stances on issues.
Mark: I thought it was energizing and educational. Lots of wonderful
ideas about grassroots development and outreach. What happened to
meeting notes? Content of meeting was great -- 4 hours -- which allows
for creativity. But no follow up. we are all too busy to keep up with
all our ideas after the fact. I know Randy is looking for office space,
it would also be great to have a staff person to coordinate these
events and follow up. It would be so sad for most of the stuff we
talked about not to come about.
Fundraising Concert, Josh:
Josh: Going well, everyone in the industry is telling me I’m
doing all the right things. We’ve sold 20 tickets right out
of the gate. Added Dave Johnson, he will do a duet set with Jeff Austin.
(DJ is also from YMSB) Then our presentation, then the rest of the
musicians. Trying to get Pete Warnick of Hot Rize. We’re doing
a halftime show, we’d like to register voters, etc. We've printed
posters to put in record stores. We have handed out lots of flyers.
We can really pack people in there if necessary. I would like to start
calling greens and telling them about the concert. The whole shooting
match, all costs involved is about $3800. If we sell 350 tickets,
we will break even.
Cervante’s manager said it would be OK to get autographed posters,
for a raffle. That would bring in extra $.
We need to make sure that we have a good message to deliver, educate
people.
Christy: Help me out with the halftime show, email me all your gory
statistics.
Rick: Denver made a deal with the EPA to keep us off the dirty cities
list, we should be on it now. Denver post, recent ozone levels.
Sunny: Should we invite any cooperating groups to this concert?
Josh: I think we’ll be registering a lot of people to vote,
but we might not have a lot of room for tables. Lots of bands are
into this stuff though.
Confirm
Josh as Co President:
Randy: are their any other nominations? Any blocks?
7:25 all in favor of Josh as Co President, replacing Dave Chandler.
Presidential
strategy; Rick, Mark:
Rick: My email of two weeks ago [the Anyone But Bush idea], I got
personally attacked for.
But as an activist, the Anyone But Bush is building as a movement.
Sam Webb from the Communist Party is publishing thick pamphlets on
it. Vote for a Change is everywhere, at every meeting in the city.
It was started by activist Democrats. For Greens, it’s a question
of strategy and tactics, but for me, it’s just about getting
Bush out of office.
Sunny: If we were going to run someone, we would have done it by now.
I think the Greens are just waiting to see if Lieberman’s being
nominated.
Josh: I would vote for Howard Dean.
Randy: I think there should be an option about whether the Democrats
screw up or not...
Josh: What everyone says is, “I’m mad about 2000,”
and “I just hate Bush too much to support you.” What Bruce
and I discussed, is voting Green at the local level while supporting
a Democrat for president.
Sunny: There has been a consensus at the state level not to endorse
Kucinich. I would have to abstain from a local decision because I
am a state copresident.
Mark: I have a formal proposal. It has actual steps at the end if
we agree.
Proposal:
• Support not having a nationwide candidate in 2004 is actually
a good idea. It dovetails with the large progressive movement wanting
bush out of office. I’m not taking it to the point of ANYBODY
but Bush, but we would love to have regime change in washington in
november 2004. Check out an article called "Ralph Redux"
In this month’s The Nation. It describes how a Green campaign
would affect the election. 2004 is probably the most crucial election
in our lifetimes, and we have to take a long view. We can’t
get a bad reputation among progressives that will damage our cause
forever. We should work with other organizations to influence the
liberal platform.
• Statement on Green Strategy for 2004, recently came out. Calls
for no nationwide candidate. Many people have signed on to this. This
is growing. Even people who were staunch Green presidential supporters
are changing their minds.
• Art Goodtimes and Craig Talbert of Colorado contributed to
this proposal drafted in July: (handout)
• I would not be surprised if Ralph Nader will step forward
only if Kucinich is defeated in the primaries. I suspect he will mesmerize
GP members with his celebrity status, and we will lose focus. We need
to take a proactive step and decide what we will do in advance, to
go in a different direction.
• Next summer in Milwaukee, many greens will vote for a national
candidate because they think it will spur party growth.
• I would like to propose that we get the state council to endorse
a resolution not to run a national candidate. This would not disallow
campaigns in states where a candidate must be run to preserve ballot
status. This would inspire other states to do the same, and the issue
would become moot.
• Key is to take an active versus passive stance for this election.
• Ralph could just run as an independent, which could have the
effect of driving the Democrats to the left some more due to his speeches.
A symbolic campaign. This would leave the GP unscathed.
• Cultivate local candidates instead, who have a real chance
of winning elections. Local initiatives, which can help the party
be a true force for change locally. Third-party friendly issues: campaign
finance reform. Put statements out about the GP position on issues.
Propose solutions.
• So we would draft a resolution, agree on wording, then put
it to the state council for a decision.
Sunny: Think back to last year’s senate race: the papers were
all saying “this is the race the GP should have run in.”
Ron thought about running for senate, but he declined because he said
it would upset the balance and the Democrats would blame the GP. Damned
if you do, and damned if you don’t. I think we’re succumbing
to the Democrats’ propaganda here, I think we should be in the
race to keep the democrats honest.
Josh: I think we can push our agenda with voters without having a
candidate, if we have a large number of registered voters. Example
of DeGette changing her position on medical marijuana.
Rick: This is definitely a quandry. Remember the opening address of
Bill Vandenburg at the progressive forum. He said later that Dems
don’t remember how bad their own party is anymore. But that
attitude stood out in stark contrast to the comments we usually get:
"you’ll hurt minorities, gays, the poor", are the
comments I get from people who are involved with these causes. They
don’t want bush to stay in office. But Kerry and Lieberman are
NOT progressives, and they will not do much to change anything. But
you have to think what the public perception will be if we run our
own candidate: people will think we don’t care enough about
the very things that are important to us. Say we do get a democrat:
give them enough rope and they’ll hang themself. Then we can
come in 4 years later and say, “see? you aren’t better
off under a democrat.” Right now, the progressive coalition
is a movement that we want to reach. The SEIU just endorsed Dean.
Unions are coming to him.
Mag: Could we ever get Nader to speak up for one of the democratic
candidates, to sacrifice himself, save the image. He would have a
strong voice and would cut through the superficial statements of the
democratic hopefuls.
Randy: He has come out and supported Kucinich, but he said if Kucinich
doesn’t get it, he will run.
Mark: He said that Kucinich was the only democrat he’d support.
Ken: People see Nader as the Green candidate, even if he made an independent
run.
Mark: I like what Rick said. The word “movement” is important.
There are 8 of us here talking about this, but meanwhile, hundreds
of people are coming together all over the city to promote the issues
we care about. We should support them, join with them.
Sunny: Ken’s campaign changed DeGette’s position on the
war.
Christy: remember that values are important to get back into the discussion.
Not to be afraid of the word “values”.
Randy: I agree with you all. We need to wean ourselves from Nader.
He won’t always be available. Anyway, what do you want us to
vote on, mark?
Mark: I would like to have a vote on whether the chapter would like
to draft a resolution. Also, Degette was not just influenced by Ken’s
campaign, but by the whole activist movement that represented a large
body of voters. It wasn’t just party politics, but a “movement”
of a large numbers of voters.
Rick: Ken did get 5000 votes.
Mark: Is there a difference of opinion on whether we will draft a
resolution to submit to the state, after voting on it ourselves.
8:03 all in favor, Sunny stands aside.
Fundraising,
Rick:
Rick is resigning as fundraising coordinator. Fatherhood is too challenging
right now. Now I need someone to sell these pins. (Donates the pins
to the party at large)
Office
Space
Randy: I was thinking about the possiblity of sharing office space
with CCMEP, they’re struggling financially now. Greens seem
supportive. CCMEP renst it from American Friends service committee
for $120 per month. Their little office would hold us too. There aren’t
lots of people there at any one time. 901 west 14th st, suite 7. They
have phone lines, a little kitchen, a conference room.
Josh: If you have DSL, you can get a web based service, $60 per month,
that lets you make long distance phone calls, everything included.
Rick: I think we’d have lots of activists access. But AFSC is
a 501c3.
Randy: Val Phillips has to OK it to have a political party in there.
Rick: How involved are you in CCMEP? How does Kate Goodspeed feel
about the Greens? I dropped out of CCAWI because she told me right
after I had drafted a platform, that they would be supporting democrats.
She said this to my face, then turned around and denied it to the
rest of the group. She would be the biggest hurdle.
Randy: I haven’t heard from many CCMEPs on this.
Mark: I don’t think she would be against us being there. I do
expect the national AFSC office would turn it down though. But if
for some reason they don’t, you can’t get a better deal
than DSL, phones, a desk, a conference room etc.
Ken: Denver Justice and Peace organization has an office too.
Sunny: A 501c3 can’t spend over 20% of its revenues on lobbying,
but I don’t think there’s a restriction on how much they
can take from a political party.
Josh: We may have
some more money by next month's meeting, if this concert goes according
to plan, so we could talk about it then.
Meeting
Schedule Change, Randy:
We have been discussing the possiblity of having a new meeting structure,
where we would have informal core Green business meetings each month
at someone's house or at a bar or the Merc, and move the public meetings
to four times a year, publicize them farther in advance, and schedule
activities and speakers that would be a draw for newer members.
Rick: Coloradans
tend to fluctuate about regular meetings. It's hard to get attendance
if there is anything else going on. Our meetings don't necessarily
generate action. We do need to have educational meetings that are
public events. Our current structure is hard to keep us sustained
through the low points when there aren't many people.
Mark: In the "ebb" times we don't have people available
to volunteer to do all the work we need done. If we have bigger meetings,
we'll get more volunteers.
Randy: Should we vote on this now?
Josh: Let's wait until the next meeting and we can discuss meeting
space at the same time.
8:30
meeting adjourns
Next meeting: Tuesday, December 16th at Park Hill Library, 6:30-8:30
pm
Respectfully
Submitted,
Christy
