[statecom-discuss] evaluate and strategize

[Mike Heichman]

Evaluate and Strategize:

1. I agree with Bill that we need to have a retreat and begin a deeper 
strategy discussion. Bill has raised this a number of times and each 
time I agree with him. So, let's move to the next step--seeing if there 
is interest and deciding when to begin our meetings.

2. Concerns: Time, Commitment and Diversity

    A. Time: 4 members of our State Comm are candidates. At least a 
couple (maybe more) of us are working full time in support of the 
campaign and the party. It seems that many of us have very busy and 
urgent schedules. We have work, family and personal commitments.

We have just canceled the 7-9 State Comm meeting and will need to 
reschedule. Our statewide campaigns have a deadline of August 1 to get 
the signatures--for many of us (I hope) this is an important priority. 
We may not know if we are successful until late August or, if there is a 
dispute, September. I believe that most of us hope that the campaigns 
will be a major priority until November 8. We may be putting out a 
newsletter. We have a scheduled convention for September 16. ETC. ETC. ETC.

    B. Commitment and Diversity: When can we START this? (I say start, 
because I believe that this needs to be an on-going process.)  I also 
believe that it is essential  that  our discussions reflect  the 
diversity  of our  State  Committee.

I believe that we need to build into our ongoing schedule a process of 
evaluation and strategizing. I also believe that it is essential that a 
significant number of the State Comm (the statewide leadership of the 
GRP) participate in this process, and that our meetings be diverse.

Proposal: That 2/3 of our Fall State Committee meeting be set aside to 
begin a process of evaluation and strategizing.

Reactions?

Mike Heichman


   



BillCunningham wrote:

>Once again, I think we badly need to have a retreat and begin a deeper strategy discussion.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>  
>
>>From: Merelice <merelice at gmail.com>
>>Sent: Jul 10, 2006 5:04 PM
>>To: Discussion List for StateCom members <statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org>
>>Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Re: [statecom] SUNDAY
>>
>>On 7/10/06, Owen Broadhurst <owen.broadhurst at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I very much appreciate the clarification that concern over stating No to the
>>>Fusion Proposal is likely centered less around the merits of the proposal
>>>itself than around how the party shall be perceived if it actually campaigns
>>>against it.
>>>
>>>I recall similar concerns being expressed regarding Equal Marriage Rights
>>>and issues relating to Palestine.
>>>
>>>Owen R. Broadhurst
>>>      
>>>
>>Oh dear, further clarification needed. This really isn't parallel to
>>human rights issues; you know full well that the people involved would
>>never back down in those situations.  And I'm not talking mere
>>perceptions of our party here. I'm talking about people in the thick
>>of coalition building on issues we have in common and the unnecessary
>>stumbling block that turning our backs on them at this time could
>>create. These are people seeking change; they are people we want to
>>work with; they are people we can win over if we choose to use fusion
>>as a stepping stone instead of a stumbling block. We need to get
>>elected so we can change the political system and serve the people.
>>And to get elected, we need their votes.
>>Merelice
>>_______________________________________________
>>statecom-discuss mailing list
>>statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>>    
>>
>
>
>Bill Cunningham
>_______________________________________________
>statecom-discuss mailing list
>statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>
>  
>