[statecom-discuss] What makes a local part of State GRP ?

Wed Feb 7 10:01:25 EST 2007

That's an interesting question....the relevant sections of the bylaws are below section 7.1 - 7.8...

  The technical answer is that the GRP club must send a letter to the State party indicating that they want to be affiliated.  GRP committee doesn't have to do this (see below).

  In addition tough, I'll say I'm glad that the question of "what makes a local part of the GRP if it doesn't get involved in state level stuff very much?" has been asked because it begs at least 4 other questions:

  A) Which groupings are clubs and which are commmittees ?  does anybody know ???

  B) Which clubs or committees had a founding meeting that was legal ?   Does anybody know ???

  (The by-laws require that ALL members be invited to a "founding" meeting.  I wonder how many locals/clubs/commitees did this in their "founding meeting".   

  Purely accidentally WSGRP did in fact contact all members when we made the decision to re-kindle West Somerville work and focus only on zip code 02144 - West Somerville - since all of those folks got a mailing and folks in the other zip code did not - therefore we were prudent in deciding not to be presumptuous and claim to represent all of Somerville as was discussed at our founding meetings - there were race and class undertones to the discussion as well since East Somerville might as well be a different city in many ways...)

  And how often does the club/committee have to make an effort to contact members, especially newer members in the geographic area ?  (Should we have a new by-law mandating that any local invite all of its members to a "reconstuting" meeting at least once every two years to insure local democratic processes....sort of the way we do with conventions being mandated to happen every year to insure democratic functining of the state party)

  C) A third question would be the questions of overlap.  If someone forms a Boxboro Town club and there is a neighborhood in Boxboro - let's call it Northside  - then can Northside form it's own local, the Northside Club, and be independent of the Boxboro Town club ?  

  Who would represent the GRP members in Northside  ?  Would it be the Northside GRP Club or the Boxboro City GRP Club ?

  The question would be there for other examples of overlap such as a Ward club located inside of a City Club etc... 

  D) 4th Question:  Can there be two clubs covering the same street, neighborhood, precinct, ward or city.  By my reading the answer would be yes.

  I wish we had enough clubs to make these questions pressing !

  Mostly I think that these questions don't matter but I think a re-writing of the bylaws to make it fit with actual practice is in order....especially if we are undergoing a process that would form several new clubs as I am working on, with the call for Part-time Organizers.

  In general terms however I would say that our principle of decentralization informs the functioning of our Party in these matter:  a local is part of the GRP in the sense that if they choose to get involved significantly then they can ... and even seem to have certain powers.... but they are not compelled to get involved very much....

  However "general terms" aren't good enough.  We really should re-write the bylaws carefully so that they match reality, make sense in terms of decentralization but also coherence of the State structure, and help avoid confusion and misunderstandings.

  ron

  Bylaws:

    7.1          Green-Rainbow Locals form the basic organizing unit of the Green-Rainbow Party. As long as the Green-Rainbow Local adheres to the Ten Key Values and does not undermine the stated purpose of the Green-Rainbow Party, the Green-Rainbow Party cannot interfere with their internal affairs or decision making process.  1.2          Green-Rainbow Locals must work to expand their activities, Green-Rainbow Party members, locals and the number of candidates running for office in their area.  1.3          There are two types of Green-Rainbow Locals denoted by their level of development: clubs and party committees. The key difference between clubs and party committees is their level of official recognition by the state.  A Green-Rainbow Party club is any group of three or more Green-Rainbow Party members, who meet together on a regular basis to advance the Ten Key Values. These meetings must be open to the public and democratically run. Locals may be defined
 geographically or by common interest. It can be organized at regional, city, town, ward, precinct, neighborhood or street levels.
  A Green-Rainbow Party committee is any group of three or more Green-Rainbow Party members, who meet together on a regular basis to advance the Ten Key Values and is a recognized party committee as defined by state law. It can be organized at city, town and ward levels as a local party committee, or at regional levels as a PAC, People’s Committee, or 527 organization.
  1.4          In areas where no Green-Rainbow Locals exist, members can form either type of local by holding a founding meeting and inviting all Green-Rainbow Party members in the area of the local to attend. The state committee or Green-Rainbow Locals can task individuals or groups of individuals to form locals within their jurisdiction.   1.5          Green-Rainbow Party clubs may affiliate with the Green-Rainbow Party by sending a letter to the Green-Rainbow Party indicating that they wish to act as the local representatives of the Green-Rainbow Party in their area. Green-Rainbow Party committees are automatically affiliated with the Green-Rainbow Party, but must send a letter to the Secretary notifying the state party of their existence. The Secretary shall certify the locals.  1.6          When Green-Rainbow Locals are voting on matters, such as Article 6.6 (calling a state convention), Article 8.13 (overriding a state committee by-law change or decision), or Article
 8.14 (calling a state committee meeting), the following voting rules shall apply.  A Green-Rainbow local shall have votes equal to the number of Green-Rainbow Party members in the local, dividing by ten, and then rounding any fractional amounts upward. Each Green-Rainbow local shall have at least one vote.
  Green-Rainbow Locals with two or more votes are encouraged to use proportional representation to reflect the actual vote taken by the local members. For instance, a local with 49 members and 5 votes who decided an issue 30 to 19, could assign 3 votes to A and 2 votes to B. However, the disposition of votes by locals shall be up to the individual locals to decide.
  1.7          The Green-Rainbow Party may disaffiliate a Green-Rainbow local for the following valid reasons:  ·         actions by the Green-Rainbow Local in contradiction to the Ten Key Values;
  ·         efforts of the Green-Rainbow Local to undermine the stated purpose of the Green-Rainbow Party.
The state committee may disaffiliate a Green-Rainbow local by first voting to post a public notice to members giving the reasons for disaffiliation and include a statement by the affected local unless the local chooses not to provide such a statement. At the next state committee meeting, the state committee shall vote to disaffiliate the local. If such a motion passes, the Green-Rainbow Local will be disaffiliated from the Green-Rainbow Party and will no longer be considered in the Green-Rainbow Party decision-making process, or allowed to represent themselves as part of the Green-Rainbow Party structure.

  I believe teh by-laws in the spirit of decentralization say something about any three 

BillCunningham <etwee at earthlink.net> wrote:
  What makes a local part of GRP if it may or may not be involved with State activity?

-----Original Message-----
>From: Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com
>Sent: Feb 6, 2007 11:02 PM
>To: statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Part-time work to build GRP local chapters using WSGRP model
>
>so, the answer to my question is: that whoever signs up can do it in any area 
>of the state they want to? Grace
>In a message dated 2/6/07 10:51:08 PM, ronwf777 at yahoo.com writes:
>
>
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> The West Somerville Model has three players in it, in order to make it work.
>> 
>> The three players are the Anchor, the Lender and the Organizer.
>> 
>> Each of the 3 players gets her or his needs met and that's why the model 
>> works.
>> 
>> There is the Anchor. (See previous email and notes on the model to 
>> understand anchor's role)
>> 
>> There is the Lender. (see notes on model). In West Somerville I was the 
>> Lender and am willing to be the Lender again for other communities. The lender 
>> gets repaid the $150 dollars after about 6 months or so.
>> 
>> The is the Organizer (see previous email to understand role of the 
>> organizer)
>> 
>> This effort is locally-oriented, decentralized and does not involve the 
>> State Party, any Statecom committees or any regional entities except to note that 
>> the local entity that gets formed may or may not choose to be involved with 
>> State or regional-level activity.
>> 
>> Hope that helps...
>> 
>> Ron
>> 617 230-2835
>> 
>> Melissa Harrell 
wrote: Hi Ron,
>> 
>> Can you clarify for me who would be making this loan? Is there a local or
>> WSGP making this loan? Is the State Party expected to do this?
>> 
>> ~Melissa
>> 
>> On 2/6/07, Ron Francis wrote:
>> >
>> > Great Questions Grace...
>> >
>> > I was not at statecom but I read the minutes and I don't think that this
>> 
>> > proposal or anything resembling it was made.
>> >
>> > The answers to your most of your questions follow from the model (see
>> > below) but I'm happy to answer the questions and it might also help other
>> > people too (to hear the answers), so thanks for responding....
>> >
>> > The main sponsor in the WSGRP model is the local anchor, (who is given a
>> > loan initially and then subsequently raises the money from the locally
>> > organized people and repays the loan). In West Somerville I gave myself 
>> the
>> > loan and the WSGRP repaid me willlingly. I'll do the same (give a loan 
>> to
>> > any willing anchor), in other areas, who is willing to go through the 
>> sixth
>> > month process, and said anchor will repay the lender.
>> >
>> > So an anchor must be located,.... but the only requirement is that the
>> > person be willing to shephard 3 or 4 meetings (preferably first one at 
>> their
>> > own house) starting at about three months from now. (Part of the work by
>> > the part-time staff could be help locate an anchor although I was mainly
>> > planning on doing that myself or having someone else who is familiar with
>> > the model be involved in locating anchor)
>> >
>> > All of these things are in the notes for the model although the amount
>> > paid I think could be between $150 and $200.
>> >
>> > I already have two people interested in doing the work but I will announce
>> > that there are 5 days left to apply and make decisions early next week. So
>> > if you know people who are interested then please have them apply in the
>> > next 4 or 5 days.
>> >
>> > The anchor can work from anywhere. (Michelle operated from Shrewsbury and
>> > did the West Somerville work)
>> >
>> > (Initially the part-time staff person would have to work with me for an
>> > hour or so over the phone or in person, in order that they understand the
>> > model. (I will also volunteer time, as I did in West Somerville, to help
>> > guide the anchor's work although Michelle did the work in West Somerville
>> > with only a little bit of guidance....)
>> >
>> > Hope that helps...
>> >
>> > Also note that the person would probably work in a given State Rep
>> > district as this idea can parallel (in terms of geographic structuring) 
>> the
>> > Local Ballot 2008 proposal I have recently posted. In fact it might be
>> > worth a trial run to try to execute the model with a particular issue 
>> chosen
>> > to organize around (rather than the survey used in West Somerville)
>> >
>> > Ron
>> > 617 230-2835
>> >
>> > Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote: Ron - is this based on one of the proposals we
>> > missed at Statecom?
>> >
>> > Who is sponsoring this? Do you know where this person would be
>> > working? I
>> > assume you raised the $ for this?
>> >
>> > A few of these details, I'll see if any of the younger folks from my
>> > campaign
>> > are interested - thanks, grace
>> > In a message dated 2/6/07 12:07:19 PM, ronwf777 at yahoo.com writes:
>> >
>> >
>> > > Dear GRP folks,
>> > >
>> > > If anyone knows someone who would be interested in part-time work over
>> > the
>> > > next half a year ($12) to kickstart, or start anew, Green-Rainbow
>> > chapters by
>> > > doing phonecalling work, mailings, some door to door work and other
>> > types of
>> > > outreach work (see below), then please let me know.
>> > >
>> > > The work would be for 12 +/- 2 hours and would take place over the next
>> > > month and a half.
>> > >
>> > > The person should have good positive energy about organizing, be
>> > organized,
>> > > be committed to GRP values, and be comfortable on the phone and in
>> > reporting
>> > > progress on a regular basis.
>> > >
>> > > The person would look to replicate the steps indicated below (See WSGRP
>> > > outreach model including student intern comments on improving the
>> > model), or a
>> > > very similar set of steps.ï¿½D** Included in this email are two of the
>> > flyers used
>> > > to do some of the WSGRP mailing effort from Dec 2005 WEst Somerville
>> > outreach
>> > > effort culminating in a kick-off meeting of 13 people and two subsequent
>> > > meetings of 10 people each.
>> > >
>> > > The outreach work would culminate in three to four meetings beginning
>> > three
>> > > to four months from now in a given community for which an "anchor" can
>> > be
>> > > established.ï¿½D** If the work goes well then further part-time work is
>> > possible.
>> > >
>> > > Persons of color and people from other oppressed backgrounds are
>> > encouraged
>> > > to apply.
>> > >
>> > > If you know someone who is interested, then please forward them this
>> > email
>> > > and ask them to send a brief cover letter explaining (1 paragraph each
>> > please)
>> > >
>> > > 1) why she/heï¿½D** would be good for this position
>> > > 2) what her or his commitment is for GRP values.
>> > > 3) experience doing local municipal level organizing
>> > >
>> > > for more info call
>> > > Ron Francis
>> > > 617 230-2835
>> > >
>> > > background:
>> > >
>> > > Various Chapter-building modalities have been tried by the GRP including
>> > the
>> > > West Somerville Model summarized below:
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** This work was done by a student for a Service Learning
>> > > ï¿½D** Project at Shrewsbury High School to rejuvenate the Somerville GRP
>> > > chapter.
>> > >
>> > > The student wrote this report in concluding the work.
>> > >
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** A) Time spent:ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** The total time for outreach was 9 hours.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** To put stamps on 230
>> > envelopes:
>> > > < 1 hr. Return labels on 460 envelopes (230 being the recipient
>> > envelopes) &
>> > > stuffing the 230 into the bigger envelopes: 2 hrs. Put name labels on
>> > 230
>> > > envelopes: < 1 hr. Stuffing envelopes three times (three separate pieces
>> > of
>> > > paper): 1 hr.15. 130 initial phone calls: < 2 hrs. Second, third round
>> > of phone
>> > > calls: 30 minutes. Additional time spent counting/recounting, reworking
>> > Excel
>> > > database, adding additional columns to database, and driving.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** The
>> > process
>> > > in its entirety of reaching 230 people by mail and 37 people by phone
>> > took
>> > > about 8 hours for me, plus about an hour or so from Ron Francis helping
>> > with
>> > > flyers and a few calls and emails. Total 9 hours.ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D** B) Money Spentï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** Total money spent was $172 dollars. I spent $12.58 on a box of 500
>> > no. 6
>> > > envelopes, even though I only used 230, and I am returning the
>> > remainder. I
>> > > spent $85.47 on 230 stamps. I spent $73.66 at Staples for the three
>> > pieces of
>> > > paper included in the envelopes to be copied and folded.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** The 
>> grand
>> > total is
>> > > $171.71. (Note: In order to raise money, perhaps at the meetings for
>> > each
>> > > chapter, they could pass a hat around to collect donations. Or maybe the
>> > me
>> > > mbership committee would cover some of these one-time costs, if this
>> > method proves
>> > > workable for jump-starting other chapters)ï¿½D** This cost of 172 was 
>> offset
>> > byï¿½D**
>> > > $90 raised by the group at the meeting in small donations.ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** C) The mailing.ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** There were 543 names of Green-Rainbow Party Somerville residents. 
>> 130
>> > had
>> > > phone numbers, while 413 did not. Of the 413, I sent out 100 of the
>> > flyers to
>> > > random residents in the 02144 area code (close to meeting location). In
>> > > total 230 pieces of mail were sent out. (It will be interesting to see
>> > if there
>> > > is any difference in the turnout between those who received phone calls
>> > and
>> > > those who did not. At the meeting we will ask how people heard about the
>> > > meeting)ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** D) The phone callingï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** Of the 130 with numbers, I tried 115 of them, while Ron Francis 
>> tried
>> > 15.
>> > > Our results were:ï¿½D** ï¿½D** 93 whose phone numbers were disconnected, not 
>> in
>> > service,
>> > > had moved, were a wrong number, etc.,ï¿½D** ï¿½D** 8 who clearly stated they 
>> were
>> > not
>> > > interested,ï¿½D** ï¿½D** 15 who clearly stated they were interested, 5 of whom
>> > said they
>> > > were planning on attending the meeting,ï¿½D** ï¿½D** And 14 who did not return
>> > the phone
>> > > messages.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** A day before the meeting I reminded all 15 interested, 
>> and
>> > all
>> > > 14 in their messages, to come to teh meeting. and return the survey. The
>> > > number of these returned surveys is yet to be determined.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** 
>> Numerous
>> > phone calls
>> > > revealed that some people had misplaced or not seriously looked at the
>> > flyer
>> > > they received, and a few said they had not received it at all. The 93
>> > whose
>> > > numbers were not good will serve the same purpose as the additional 100
>> > in the
>> > > random sample to see who shows up at the meeting without having been
>> > reached
>> > > via the phone.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** Of the 8 who said they were no longer
>> > > interested, the responses were: two because of a change of party, one
>> > woman
>> > > changing to democrat, two because their English was not very good, one
>> > > because she was finishing grad school, one because she had just had a
>> > baby, one
>> > > because he was too busy, and one because she thought the use of the
>> > mailing list
>
>> > > would go better to saving a tree instead of being sent to her.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** Of
>> > those
>> > > who were interested but could not come, most reasons were because of a
>> > conflict
>> > > in date or because they were generally interested but didnï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¢t 
>> feel like
>> > > putting in the specific effort for this event.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** The general 
>> response
>> > I received
>> > > was uncertainty in the strength of the party. One particular initial
>> > response
>> > > I got was ï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æš¢ï¿½ã¢â€œI got no money.ï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æš¢ï¿½ã¢ã€“ People seem to feel as if the 
>> party is
>> > always
>> > > asking for money, and in that sense, most people donï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¢t seem very
>> > optimistic
>> > > about giving. Another man said how he preferred to give money to the
>> > local
>> > > chapter instead of Green Party USA . One person asked why the
>> > > Green-Rainbow Party didnï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¢t join the Progressive Democrats to 
>> double
>> > the
>> > > strength into one party. Another man said how he found that many
>> > advocates for
>> > > the environment were then guilty of not recycling, etc. themselves. He
>> > thought
>> > > that the party should concentrate on the environment more.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** One 
>> woman
>> > > mentioned how she used to receive the Green-Rainbow Party e-mails until
>> > she blocked
>> > > them.ï¿½D** She found them very irritating because they often only stated a
>> > > reminder that she was a member, and she recalls that they never really
>> > included
>> > > very important information. One man found the survey to be very rigid
>> > and
>> > > formulated, so he didnï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¢t fill it out. He is however coming to 
>> the
>> > meeting, so we
>> > > will definitely be able to hear his two cents.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** One man is 
>> disabled,
>> > and
>> > > rarely leaves the house. He was not sure if he would come or not,
>> > especially due
>> > > to his low energy and low capability to take in a lot of information. He
>> > said
>> > > he thought he could be helpful with phone calls, if we needed.
>> > > He has a big problem with the government, social security, the court
>> > system,
>> > > and the way it is run, and said if anyone had a problem with the court
>> > > system, he would be on the front line to help them. He also had strong
>> > interests
>> > > in animal rights, including cats, dogs, and other animals, such as
>> > raccoons,
>> > > the environment, and the education system. He works in an after school
>> > program
>> > > a few days a week. One man was concerned about the dinner being a
>> > vegetarian
>> > > meal, which of course, it was.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** Two people we called said that 
>> they
>> > would
>> > > not respond to telephone calls, and one at the meeting said the same,
>> > and that
>> > > heï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¢d prefer to be contacted via mail or email.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** My feeling 
>> is this:
>> > Of all
>> > > these various and specific concerns comes a party with a lot of
>> > potential, if
>> > > only it could encourage its members via some tangible evidence. I told
>> > all
>> > > of those willing to listen about the win in the Cambridge school
>> > committee,
>> > > and the ballot question win in Waltham about land development.
>> > > Many people were excited and interested, but those were the people who
>> > were
>> > > already interested.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** However, beginning with GRP members gaining
>> > recognition
>> > > in other committees and winning election questions / candidacies,
>> > perhaps
>> > > real change can begin to occur, eventually having with low-income
>> > families
>> > > beginning to speak out in favor of the GRP.ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D** E) What could be done better:ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** Phone numbers: We will need to try the phone book more often in 
>> order
>> > to
>> > > get more phone numbers. (It will be interesting to see if using
>> > > peoplepages.com will yield more correct phone numbers than the ones
>> > provided by Dan through
>> > > that phone service.)ï¿½D** ï¿½D** I think that sending members a copy of the 
>> GRP
>> > > newspaper would encourage them more, sending those on the borderline of
>> > interest
>> > > over to the side of interest. (Ron was supposed to do this but he got
>> > busy and
>> > > didn't)ï¿½D** ï¿½D** Other than that, I donï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¢t know how much you can 
>> improve
>> > > communications with each member without having their telephone number.
>> > The success of
>> > > solely sending mail will be proved at the meeting.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** Perhaps
>> > door-to-door
>> > > contact would be the next step.ï¿½D** Also, at the door, there should be a
>> > sign-in
>> > > sheet, along with a list of members who do not have phone numbers, so
>> > those who
>> > > attend the meeting can look over the list for people they know whose
>> > numbers
>> > > they could give us.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** The only other way to get the numbers of
>> > > those who do not attend the meeting would be to specifically send them
>> > > letters askingï¿½D** for their numbers, and wait for responses.ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D** F) Overall results of the outreach part of experiment:ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** Out of 37 people contacted by phone numbers, 5 people said that they
>> > would
>> > > show up at the meeting, although typically only 50% will actually come
>> > so
>> > > that may be 2 people but perhaps those 2 will bring others. Still these
>> > 5 could
>> > > be counted as being interested and may come to future meetings.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** 
>> Of
>> > the 10
>> > > who said that they were interested but could not come, perhaps some will
>> > show
>> > > up in the future. It may also be that some folks bring other folks (some
>> > > said that they know people who may be interested)ï¿½D** ï¿½D** It is 
>> encouraging
>> > that 15
>> > > out of 37 people that I talked to were interested. If we can figure out
>> > a way
>> > > to turn that interest into participation then that would be very good.
>> > There
>> > > are already some active GRP people in Somerville who may bring some
>> > people to
>> > > the meeting. Ron said that his friend Bob Cable from Somerville
>> > Divestment
>> > > Project is coming (didnï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¢t come but called and was very 
>> interested and
>> > even
>> > > upset that he couldnï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¢t make it) and Jamie did some outreach as 
>> well.
>> > > ï¿½D** Other cities may not have as many active GRPï¿½D**Â¢ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¬ï¿½æœï¿½ã¢Â¢s, 
>> proportionately to
>> > their
>> > > size, although they might, so this should be factored in determining the
>> > net
>> > > effect of this experiment. It was cold and snowy on Sunday so that might
>> > have
>> > > affected the meeting results. The meeting is being held at a place that
>> > has
>> > > public transportation so that is another variable.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** Personally I
>> > would like
>> > > to stay involved with the party, and maybe other students could be
>> > encouraged
>> > > to take on such a project in another city.ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D** G) Results of the Meeting:
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D** Eleven people were there, 5 women and 6 men. (plus jamie's 
>> little
>> > son)ï¿½D**
>> > > Of seven people (including Ron and me) who said they would come, five
>> > showed
>> > > up, so the additional six who came had not been contacted via the
>> > telephone.
>> > > They told us they had heard about the meeting via e-mail, or had gotten
>> > the
>> > > mailing (I think 3 and 3). The total cost for the meeting was $170, but
>> > we
>> > > raised $90 by passing a cup around.ï¿½D** Surprisingly every member at the
>> > meeting
>> > > said they would show up for the next meeting January 15th.ï¿½D** Everyone
>> > agreed to
>> > > take a look at the phone list and identify people that they knew and
>> > could
>> > > contact by phone (since many numbers were missing).ï¿½D** One man agreed to
>> > get
>> > > information about energy usage issues in Somerville . Another man agreed
>> > to get
>> > > information about military recruiting. Two people volunteered to
>> > organize an
>> > > activity for youth interested in GRP to make events more family
>> > friendly.ï¿½D**
>> > > Others seemed generally willing to participate. Lot of discussion
>> > > about climate /ï¿½D** traffic and how that is interconnected to need for 
>> oil
>> > > based foreign policy.ï¿½D** For about 90 minutes the group discussed issues
>> > important
>> > > to members and how to go about them.ï¿½D** ï¿½D** There is a copy of the 
>> minutes
>> > from
>> > > the meeting listed below, which gives some detail about every issue
>> > discussed.
>> > > ï¿½D** ï¿½D**
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ï¿½D**
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > statecom-discuss mailing list
>> > > statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> > > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > statecom-discuss mailing list
>> > statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > statecom-discuss mailing list
>> > statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> > http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> statecom-discuss mailing list
>> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> statecom-discuss mailing list
>> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>> 
>> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>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