[statecom-discuss] [candidate-development] CDLC Telecon meeting

Jim Hammerman jim_hammerman at terc.edu
Wed Apr 9 13:02:56 EDT 2008 

Dear John,
I understand that you've been frustrated with Mike and others, but I think 
we need to be careful not to dismiss our agreed upon processes too 
quickly. Processes are made for a reason--to allow everyone to know the 
"rules of the game", so we know how we expect to work with one another and 
so that the agendas and tasks and decisions made reflect the kind of 
participation that is consistent with our values of inclusiveness and 
transparency. Historically, too often the people who don't abide by 
processes are those who have enough power and privilege to get away with 
it. The danger is that those who eschew processes that we've agreed upon, 
even while claiming to have good intentions, are really themselves doing 
so "to advance partisan objectives" if not "to further personal ambitions 
and settle grudges" (which, by the way, at least without further 
information, I wouldn't attribute to you or Mike or anyone, actually). Due 
process is most important to protect the relatively powerless. Abiding by 
our processes helps us stay true to our values of inclusiveness, 
open-ness, transparency, and consensus-seeking. In this light, Mike's 
insistence that all of us when working in the name of the GRP abide by our 
processes is not "harrassment" but a valuable reminder for us to be who we 
say we want to be in the world. While the work is important, so is the way 
we _do_ the work, because we all know the ends don't justify the means. 
Best, Jim





"John Andrews" <jandrews166 at gmail.com> 
Sent by: statecom-discuss-bounces at green-rainbow.org
04/08/08 02:55 PM
Please respond to
Discussion List for StateCom members <statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org>


To
candidate-development at green-rainbow.org, "GRP - statecom-discuss" 
<statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org>
cc

Subject
Re: [statecom-discuss] [candidate-development] CDLC Telecon meeting






Mike,

Over the past few months I have noted that you have ceaselessly harassed
anyone who dares to actually do work for our Party.  You demand that they
report their actions fully to you, respond to your ideas for how they 
should
behave, obey your interpretations of process and rules,  and redo their 
work
to please  you.  If they do not, you demand that they tell you how they
intend to satisfy you.  At times you have been responsible for almost half
the email load on our listserves.  Imagine what it would be like if all 
our
two dozen StateComm members behaved like this.  Several persons subjected 
to
this harassment have dropped out of our discussion lists or have 
threatened
to resign from the Party.  Many valuable hours have been consumed trying 
to
respond to criticisms, emails, and negative postings. This is not
contributing to the health of our party.

Many of the disputes involve legalistic arguments involving process or
interpretation of by-laws.  While I appreciate the need to try as best we
can to adhere to published process and bylaws,  I think what has been
happening is that recently these provisions have been used inappropriately
to further personal ambitions, settle grudges, and advance partisan
objectives.  I think this has to wind down.   We are in the process of
building a stronger and more effective party.  People are actually doing
work between committee meetings.  That is wonderful.  We need that.  We 
need
to shake off the old habit of having people show up for a meeting without
having done any work, give directions to the few workers present, and then
disappear for a month.

We are all stretched thin.  Often things are done late or at the last
minute.  That's probably not going to change anytime soon.  But we are on
the verge of getting some really exciting things going.  We've got much
better things to do than argue with each other over who best followed some
vision of the process.

Please think about how your actions are going to help or hurt the Party.
For my part, I think the process debates are hurting the Party, and I 
don't
want to spend our precious meeting time embroiled in such arguments.

- John

P.S.

Regarding your repetition of Gary's complaint that he is "co-chair" of the
Advisory Ballot Working Group, be aware that the minutes of the CDLC state
that " As a result of a proposal passed at the last StateComm meeting, the
CDLC is asked to appoint a representative to a working group focused on
advisory questions placed on district ballots.  Jill Stein and Gary Hicks
volunteered to serve on this group.  "  Thus Gary and Jill are jointly 
CDLC
reps to the Advisory Ballot Working Group.  This group will presumably 
elect
its own chairs, if that is how they want to organize.  The Platform
Committee is convening this group. Everything done up to now has been
informal and exploratory.  But it has been important in getting things
rolling.

-------------------

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Mike Heichman <mikeheichman at verizon.net>
wrote:

> Hi Dave,
>
> Thanks for calling the meeting.
>
> I certainly can understand that you and Jill have been very busy.
>
> However, both of you should have seen this coming (I kept on sending out
> requests.) and this is not adequate notice.
>
> I will be present at tomorrow night's conference.
>
> I have a request. I would like for us to vet the PROCESS (not the
> content) of those proposals which are connected to the work of the ABWG.
> CDLC was supposed to be involved with the ABWG and it seems like we were
> shut out of the process.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Heichman
>
>
> DvEngland at aol.com wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I realize it's been awhile since CDLC has met.  Jill and I have both
>  been
> >straight out on other things, both GRP-wise and business.  But we do
>  need to
> >meet and your time would be most valuable right now.
> >
> >This is short notice, but would you please try to call in on the 
telecon
> >conference tomorrow (Tuesday) at 9:00.  Info is below.
> >
> >Our agenda is two items:
> >
> >Approval of a revised delegate selection recommendation to
>  AdCom/StateCom.
> >We have a subcommittee meeting Monday night to redraft the  memo and 
will
> try
> >to circulate it by midnight.
> >
> >Vetting of some of the proposals being considered by StateCom this
>  weekend.
> >Only four pertain to CDLC and we will focus on those.  They  are listed
> >below.  In a separate email, I'll send all the proposals along  to you
> shortly.
> >
> >Thanks for your patience and willingness to respond on short notice.
> >Hopefully, once tax season is over, I will be able to resurface and 
give
> CDLC  more
> >of the leadership it deserves.
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >CONFERENCE CALL-IN INFORMATION:
> >
> >CDLC Telecon
> >Tuesday,  April 08, 2008
> >Start Time:     9:00 PM  Eastern Daylight Time
> >End Time:     10:25  PM Eastern Daylight Time
> >Dial-in Number:  1-605-475-4150  (Midwest)
> >Participant Access Code      55828
> >
> >Two main agenda items:  1) the CDLC report to State  Committee on
> delegate
> >selection, and 2) Vetting of proposals for StateComm  4/12 meeting.
> >
> >The following is the list of the submitted  proposals.  The attached 
file
> has
> >the complete text for each proposal, as  posted on the GRP website. The
> four
> >proposals with "CDLC" written after  the title are the ones on our 
agenda
> for
> >vetting by  CDLC.
> >
> >
> >ID    TITLE     VETTING
> >2008.01    Ballot Question on Predatory  Lending
> >2008.02    Getting SPWG Moving  Again
> >2008.03    Advisory Ballot Question  on the Global Warming Crisis
> >2008.04     Code Green Imperatives for Addressing GW Emergency
> >2008.05    Ensuring Fair Decision-making     CDLC
> >2008.06    Free Choice for National Convention  Delegates    CDLC
> >2008.07    Expedited  Discussion Rules
> >2008.08     Implementation of our Delegate Selection Plan     CDLC
> >2008.09    Campaign Financing Standards for GRP  Endorsement    CDLC
> >2008.10    Adcom Size  Change
> >2008.11    Exploring  Feminism
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >**************Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel
> Guides.
> >  (
> 
http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016
> )
> >_______________________________________________
> >candidate-development mailing list
> >candidate-development at green-rainbow.org
> >http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/candidate-development
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> candidate-development mailing list
> candidate-development at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/candidate-development
>
_______________________________________________
statecom-discuss mailing list
statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss

More information about the statecom-discuss mailing list