GPCA

Green Party of California
General Assembly
September 9th-10th, 2006
South Lake Tahoe, El Dorado County

Proposal for GPCA General Assembly, September 9th-10th, 2006

Subject: Approving the GPUS Affiliation Agreement

Sponsor (Name of Working Group or Standing Committee): Coordinating Commitee

Presenter (Name, address, phone number, email): Cat Woods (cat801@mindspring.com, 415-897-6989), Marybeth Wuerthner (mb-@sbcglobal.net, 530-891-1815)

This proposal was scheduled for the April plenary but was deferred to the next plenary in order to ensure that it had sufficient time for discussion. Counties have been invited to use the extra time for careful consideration and discussion of the history and proposal.

Subject (10 words or less): Approving the GPUS Affiliation Agreement

Background and Purpose: (100 words or less; include relationship, reasons and/or justification to the GP): In November 1998, the GPCA General Assembly (GA) passed a proposal to affiliate with the Association of State GPs (ASGP) for two years. In the proposal, the ASGP was presented as “a forum for discussion,” particularly regarding a possible presidential campaign in 2000. No affiliation agreement was part of this proposal, nor was there any promise or discussion of a binding agreement to put an ASGP nominee on state ballots.

In December 2000, the GA decided to continue its affiliation with the ASGP, in anticipation of the upcoming ASGP meeting about possibly forming a national party meeting FEC standards. Again, no affiliation agreement was presented for approval or even mentioned. The proposal to continue the affiliation included assurances that the ASGP continued “as a federation of sovereign state Green Parties” and that “The GPCA will maintain its autonomy.” Later that month, at the ASGP national meeting, the ASGP discussed filing with the FEC, with no mention of an affiliation agreement.

An affiliation agreement was drafted for the ASGP at some point between December of 2000 and June of 2001. During this time, the name of the party was changed to the Green Party of the United States (GPUS). (The final text of this agreement is appended to this proposal.)

The GPCA Coordinating Committee (CC) decided to sign this affiliation agreement at their meeting on June 4, 2001. Several inaccurate claims were made at this meeting. Ric Newbery contested them at the time and in his corrections to the draft minutes. Despite his efforts, these claims have been widely believed in the GPCA until very recently:

• One inaccuracy was that “The General Assembly has voted to go forward with ASGP’s process for federal filing status.” Actually, the GA never voted on the issue of ASGP federal filing status, only on affiliating with the ASGP.

• A second misconception was, “We have been asked to sign the same affiliation document that we signed previously except that the name of the organization has changed.” Actually, the GPCA never signed a document prior to this. The name of the organization had changed since the agreement was drafted, but the agreement had never been presented to or approved by the GA.

• A third point of contention, in response to a concern “that we may lose autonomy by this association,” was the claim that this was “not the case, that the purpose of the document is strictly to get national attention, legitimacy and status.” As Ric pointed out, some statements in the agreement appeared to give up some autonomy and empower the national organization “beyond the mandate previously given by the General Assembly.”

Ric asked to “re-visit this topic at the next plenary” in order to bring the terms of affiliation to the policy-making body of the GPCA, the GA. Others agreed that “the affiliation wording warrants reconsideration” by the GA. The CC decision to sign the document included a promise to address the wording of the document with the GA. However, no report of signing the agreement was made to the GA, nor was the text of the agreement presented, revisited, reconsidered or addressed, as stated in the decision, at any time during the next four years.

In November 2001, the FEC recognized the GPUS as a national political party. In December 2003, the GA adopted article 11 of the GPCA bylaws regarding our GPUS delegation, including paragraph 11-1.1:

“The Green Party of California (GPCA) has affiliated with the Green Party of the United States (GPUS). No decision of the GPUS is binding on the GPCA without its consent.”

In the discussion of this item, it was again emphasized that “We are not yielding any authority by participating in the Green Party in the United States.”
Due to contention within the party regarding how the terms of the affiliation agreement were interpreted and enforced in 2004, the breach of process regarding approval of the terms of affiliation was finally revisited. In December 2005, a proposal was brought before the GA to approve the affiliation agreement, while recognizing the stipulation in the GPCA bylaws that “No decision of the GPUS is binding on the GPCA without its consent.” The presenters had asked Greens to send them all suggested amendments to the proposal, in the effort to build the 80% support necessary for approval. The GA considered seven versions, including one to reject the terms and disaffiliate and one to alter the affiliation agreement itself. The presenters asked for a straw poll to help decide which version should go forward through the consensus process. The result of the straw poll was that the options of disaffiliating (6 votes) and altering the text of the agreement (2 votes) had very little support.

At the request of the GA, the presenters agreed to bring this decision back to the next plenary -- including both the version which had the most support (version A below, 29 votes) and a version with about half that support which some felt needed to be discussed further during the consensus process (version B below, 16 votes).

*The presenters wish to thank these people for their help in this research: Jo Chamberlain, Mike Feinstein, Mike Wyman, Chuck Giese, Hank Chapot, Magali Offerman, Ric Newbery, Tim Morgan, and Dean Myerson.

Proposal (200 words or less):

VERSION A: The GPCA approves its affiliation agreement with the GPUS, with the recognition that the GPCA bylaws stipulate that “No decision of the GPUS is binding on the GPCA without its consent” (Paragraph 11-1.1).

A state nominating convention will be held after the national nominating convention to review presidential and vice-presidential nominations made at the national level and to take an IRV vote to approve nominees for our California ballot line.

VERSION B: first paragraph above only (delete second paragraph)

Committee Decision (Report if the proposal had consensus of the committee; and/or what concerns were expressed): Approved by Consensus on Coordinating Commitee Jan 9, 2006 teleconference: “The CC asks those planning the next plenary to try to reserve one hour for this item, in order to give delegates sufficient time to discuss the issues and make a good decision.”

Attachment: OFFICIAL AFFILIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GREEN PARTY OF CALIFORNIA AND THE GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES (click for link to .pdf of original document)