4. The chapter has allowed the former male Co-Chair of the GBC (now Secretary) to repeatedly denounce and deny the validity of the statements of our state party. He has claimed falsely that the co-chairs' statement lacks standing as GRP policy.
5. The same chapter officer has organized a national group that meets every Sunday, “Greens and Allies Against Covid Repression”, a group that opposes our party’s policies. Every week he uses the GBC-Discuss list to invite our members to attend its meetings. This has been the only activity of the chapter.
6. The chapter has held hybrid meetings that have included an option for an in-person, indoor, maskless component. At the October in-person part of the meeting, only one member wore a mask. The chapter has recklessly endangered its members.
7. In an email last fall, the current Secretary attacked Danny F and called Mike H. a “CovidNazi”. When Mike H. requested that the chapter take action against the then-co-chair at a chapter meeting, the chapter chose not to take any action.
8. The GBC has created a toxic atmosphere over time in which bullying occurs, as in the name calling on list, the disruption of a vote taking place at the December 14, 2021 meeting, and harassment of a female guest activist as a "troll" or "mole". As a result of this abusive, undemocratic atmosphere, an unknown number of members have stopped attending chapter meetings, while anti-mandates members have selectively recruited new members to the chapter to support their anti-public-health agenda.
9. The December GBC meeting chose by a 2/3 vote to take no action on the StateCom effort to decertify the chapter. Clearly the majority of chapter members don't value the GRP even enough to keep the chapter affiliated with the state party.
10. The current chapter Secretary has participated in efforts disrupting events hosted by Boston Mayor Michelle Wu for her public-health policies. The chapter has tolerated this.
11. The officers elected January 11, other than the current Secretary, have been silent on chapter business. The only chapter business pursued by the current Secretary is his campaign against vaccine mandates, including denial that there is a pandemic.
12. At the January 11 chapter meeting, a duly submitted proposal to recall the Male Co-Chair for cause was skipped. Four proposals by Mike H. were not addressed. Two supporters of the actions of the former male co-chair were elected as co-chairs and he was elected Secretary.
Showing 8 reactions
Sign in withFacebook Twitter
I clearly support the state party position on Covid. I have consistently advocated for reason and dialogue re: the opposing positions. I believe that the party position is in the best interest of public health while also believing that those who oppose this postion have serious and valid concerns re: the potential ongoing impact on civil liberties and government/corporate overreach and manipulation. The party statement does indicate an ongoing need to monitor the science as well as progression of the virus and potential for changing public health response.
My concerns are over the process which got us to this point. These concerns have been shared with both Statecom and Adcom. Hopefully they have been considered. I won’t repeat them here. Suffice it to say that a decert vote is a maximum consequence the party has. It must be taken with the utmost serious consideration and the cause for such thoroughly evaluated and considered. I believe that on these last points, those who call for immediate decert are not doing so with the best interest of the party considered. Such a vote, to me, is a degrading of our 10 Key Values. At least 4 of them are jettisoned by this need of immediacy to decert. These include:
1) Decentralization: decisions must be made by and for the people most directly effected. The membership has just recently voted in new leadership. They need the opportunity to develop a postion acceptable to the needs of the party. A rush to judgement deprives them of that capability.
2) Grassroots Democracy: The GBC has just conducted a democratic election that brought in new leadership. Though some challenge the process, it was what the chapter had decided upon in the December meeting. There was some chaos over the process, but a vote was ultimatley taken by paricipants whom were all approved by the meeting as being valid voting members by the chapter’s by-laws. Just because it came up with a differnet solution than some would have preferred, it was nevertheless democratically decided.
3) Diversity: The chapter has elected a black/native American gay male as its male co-chair and a new female co-chair in an attempt to bring both the chapter and state party into a reasonable agreement and address its current dysfunction. A reasonable process will allow this to unfold
4) Feminism: The process is just as important as the outcome.
I suggest to Statecom a NO vote on immediate decert and a YES vote on the process that will quickly resolve the conflict or lead to dissolve the chapter. A rush to judgement is not in the best interest of the party..
1) The Novemeber mtg called for a subcommitte os the state party to be created and instructedto hold a discssion with GBC. To my knowledge this committee was not created nor tasked with moving forward. This would be an important next step as new co-leadership of GBC has been elected.
2) New co-chirs have been elected. They need time to process the conflict and see what accomodation can be achieved. The fact that DR is elected secretary may be frustrating for people, but has no basis for decertifying the chapter.
3). This issue would be strengthened by clearly stating in opur by-laws/poliy/procedures that the use of GRP infrastructure ( listserves, etc) to actively organize against GRP policy is grounds for the individual(s) to be disaffiliated. Our policy must clearly distinguish between one sating and objection or opinion and active organizing against GRP policy. As an organization we have the right and responsibility to develop and articulate party supported policies but we have an obligation to clearly state them and identify consequences when violated.
4) Denouncing and disagreeing is one thing, an aspect of free speech. Actively organizing against stated policy ( using parrty resources)n under the guise of GPUS/GRP affiliation is totally different. We must struggle with this.
5) As above #4
6) Members have free choice to attend via ZOOM or face to face. This should not be part of the complaint asa the Co-chair statement itself is vague on this point and in my opinion rightfully so. Indivuidals have the ability to make decisions for themselves.
7) Is this really the detail that statecom wants to dig into for each chapter. This seems extreme.
10) If actions taken identify DR as acting on behalf of GRP/GBC, this would be significant. Is that the case?
12). This should be struck from the complaint. We worked from a draft agenda and the proposal to remove DR was set aside in favor of the election. After Mike H’s careful review of the bylaws, DR withdrew his nomination for co-chair. This removal was accomplished via a democratic vote of all who qualified under chapter by-laws to vote.
The issue of Mike H’s proposals not considered was an issue of time, not exclusion. Other prosals of DR’s also weeree not considered. Again as a function of time.
SUMMARY; This proposal, despite its flaws provides a way forward. and allowing small amount of time for the GRP and GBC to meet and review. This is democratic, thoughtful and meets the needs of all parties concernedd.
I recommend NO vote on immediate de=certification and YES, with reservations on the above reference proposal.
POST SCRIPT: I will not be in attendence at the statecom as I will be at an anti-war with Russia standout.
Good luck and Good sense to all who will vote on this. There is no gain in anger amongst ourselves. We must move ahead move overthe barriers and do the work for People, Planet and Peace.
There may be questions about the difference between this amended proposal and the proposal adopted 11/21/21 by StateCom to disaffiliate the Greater Boston Chapter. This more recent amended proposal omits the charge that the GBC refused to suppress discussion of Covid; that was an invalid reason for disaffiliation of a chapter. The amended proposal is likely to be further amended to list several other charges against the chapter, addressing its undemocratic procedures. The flaws in the 11/21/21 proposal led to significant dissent, reflected in the 13-7-1 vote. The current proposal seeks to gain a consensus for the good of the GRP and its standing in Greater Boston.
David Keil, West Metro region; member, Greater Boston Chapter
-"we are a part of nature , , ,) consideration is tha avoidance od ideologically driven consequences in factionalizing retaliation, (Whose faction will win the vote? Whose arguments will carry the day?) Shades of Bidendom.
1) Female Co-chair: Michele Fahey
2) Male co-chair: David “Ebony” Barkley
3) Secretary: David Rolde
4). Treasurer: currently held over to vote on in February: John Blumenstiel
This election was a democratically run. The winning candidates were democratically elected. Some participants express concerns that the new officers will not produce positive change within the chapter, but at this point in time that is conjecture only and the process needs to proceed with all parties putting forth good faith efforts for the successful realignment of the local GBC chapter and the State Green Rainbow Party.
This comment is inteneded to provide clarity for our statecom members and is a continued endorsment of the above stated proposal.