A Reorg That Limits Participation and Loses Members??

By: Dianne
Published On: 1/19/2007 6:38:40 PM

I know that it looks a bit early to be bringing up the topic of committee reorganizations.  But, I'd like your comments on this committee's reorganization in 2005 which didn't seem legitimate to me.  At the end of the reorg caucus, the committee had lost 56% of its membership and the officers remained the same.  I don't know for sure, but I believe this is the way reorgs are always done in this committee.

I'll refer to this  county committee as XYZ Democratic Committee.  The XYZ 2005 reorg notice ran in the local newspaper on December 5th. Two days later, only the committee members were sent an e-mail (with the Declaration of Candidacy (DOC) form attached) telling them that there was to be a reorg on December 19th.  Other county Democrats were not sent the e-mail with the DOC form.  If the members hadn't read the newspaper, this was their first notification of the reorg.  The e-mail stated that the forms had to be returned by December 12th (6 days later) in order to join the committee on the 19th.  There was no mention of limiting the membership, which I thought is the reason to have a 'closed' caucus. 

The XYZ committee bylaws state the following:

ARTICLE III ELECTION
The XYZ Democratic Committee shall be elected by Mass Meeting/Caucus during the period between the 1st Saturday in December in odd numbered years and the second Wednesday of the following January. The Committee must decide the meeting date in October and communicate that information to the State party not later than November 1. The mass meeting/caucus may be held on Saturday or any other weekday evening. Any waiver of the time requirements stated above must be approved by the State Party Chair or the Steering Committee. The Chair shall give at least seven (7) day's notice, but not more than two weeks of the mass meeting. The notice shall be a paid political advertisement in the main local newspaper and meet all requirements as specified by the Virginia Democratic Party Plan. No fees may be charged for attending the Caucus. All attendees must meet state party requirements for participation in the caucus.
ARTICLE V MEMBERSHIP
Section 1
Membership shall consist of persons signifying that they: (1) are registered to vote in XYZ County, (2) are Democrats, (3) believe in the principles of the Democratic Party, and (4) will not oppose a Democratic nominee in any ensuing election. Each precinct shall be represented by at least one full voting member of the committee who shall be at the time of his or her election a resident of that precinct. Any person applying for membership is subject to verification of his/her voting status.

Section 2
Declaration of Candidacy Forms for election to the Committee shall be completed in writing and filed with the Chair prior to convening of the mass meeting called for the purpose of reconstitution of the Committee. ??

Concerns/Questions:
Why would the committee want to limit the reorg to a closed caucus for it's current members only (other county Democrats were not notified electronically)? 

And, if the committee's bylaws didn't limit its membership, what would have been the reason to not allow walk-in Democrats to join the committee that day and vote for officers at the meeting which followed?  Was this the reason that, after the reorg caucus ended, the membership had dropped by 56%.

How can this be good for the Democratic Party in Virginia?  I can't see where losing badly-needed members is a good thing. Can the Party Plan be changed to discourage this type of reorg from happening again? 

Comments



It's time for details (sndeak - 1/22/2007 10:54:07 AM)
Dianne,

I think it is time to identify the county cmte you are having problems with.

Quite honestly, it is hard to take this seriously if you are not going to put everything out there for debate and analysis.



What are your thoughts (Dianne - 1/22/2007 2:02:50 PM)
on how to ensure this doesn't happen again?


Spotsy (Not Robert Roberts - 1/22/2007 10:56:51 AM)
the previous posts identify her as newly moved (in the past year) into Spotsylvania County.


Questions (Alice Marshall - 1/22/2007 3:33:55 PM)
Why would the committee want to limit the reorg to a closed caucus for it's current members only (other county Democrats were not notified electronically)?

To protect the party from Larouchites, communists, or anyone else who might wish to co-opt the Democratic party for its own purposes. At one time or another both of these groups, and other extremists have attempted to co-opt the Democratic party. The present ByLaws were written with a view to create an open party where anyone who supported the principles of the  Democratic party could participate and at the same time exclude those with a disruptive agenda.



Alice has a good point (sndeak - 1/22/2007 8:23:36 PM)
Loudoun County was the Larouchie HQ and they did try to take over the local party. It ended up in court.

The current members are always contacted to see if they want to continue serving.

You can still show up and run for a precinct slot. If there is more than one candidate then there is a vote.

Most counties put a slate together. If there are no contested races at the deadline, they can cancel the caucus.

Again, most counties do limit the number of members due to quorum requirements. You don't want to have a cmte of 300 people and only 40 routinely show up and you can't do any business because of quorum rules.



Protecting the integrity of the Party (Not Robert Roberts - 1/22/2007 8:52:28 PM)
There are no rules that say you can't go to a meeting at any other time during the year and pay your dues and sign up and become a member.  The reorganization caucuses are for members only- it is not a normal meeting- it's like a closed, inter-party election.  If you want to participate in the inner workings of what is essentially a private organization then you need to join first. So, join the party now so that you can  participate in the reorganization later.

Also, let's not confuse "Democrats" with "The Democratic Party."  Anyone can be a Democrat and, indeed, we want to reach out to anyone and everyone who is interested.  However, the Democratic Party is a seperate entity comprised of Democrats that exists for the purpose of electing other Democrats to office.  You can be a Democrat and not be a member of the Democratic Committee.  The reorganization is for the Democratic Committee-- not any and all Democrats. Does that make sense? It's not exclusive, because anyone can join at any point during the year. It's just that at the reorganization when the organization elects its officers, it only makes sense that those who have cared enough to become members during the past year are the ones who are allowed to vote and make those decisions.



Well Said... (kingdem - 1/23/2007 12:02:24 AM)
Well said NRR. One can become a member at anytime. You can become a member at the mass meeting by signing the oath and still vote in the election that same day.

If you all have problems with the Spotsylvania Democratic Committee, why won't you stand up and take it back? No one is stopping you from organize a bloc of voters and take the current leaders out. I mean come on, that is politics 101. However, if the rules are the rules... they're the rules. You just can't change them because YOU are losing the game.

Stand up and take the Party back. Let's stop the complaining. You all sound like stereotypical Democrats.



Maybe I haven't said it clearly, and I apologize (Dianne - 1/23/2007 9:42:44 AM)
Spotsylvania Democrats were NOT allowed to walk in the day of the reorganization and join the committee and then vote on officers. 

Here is the sequence:

  -  12/5/05  Newspaper announcement

  -  12/7/05  Members (and only members) were sent an e-mail telling them for the first time, that there was to be a reorganization on 12/19/07.

  This was the first time that the officers had notified the members that there was going to be a reorganization in just 12 days (right before Christmas) when everyone had made their holiday plans.  The officers never mentioned the upcoming reorganization at a committee meeting before sending out this e-mail and there had been no outreach to other Democrats in the county.

  - 12/12/05  Deadline for getting the forms back to the Chair in order to be eligible to both join the committee and to vote on officers on December 19th.  If you hadn't found your e-mail, read it, printed out the forms, and put them in to the mail by 12/12, you were out of luck. If you were on TDY, if a member in your family mistakenly deleted the e-mail....you would have never known that you could run for an office. 

  - 12/19/05  Reorganization and current officers were re-elected and the membership dropped from 88 members to 39.

And as to your last comment, I have stood up, like many other talented people in this county, and have tried to change things and make this committee more active. This county is filled with talented Democrats who will no longer go to meetings because the committee is so inactive and so resistant to change.  The officers didn't want change so they've used this 'closed' caucus method, kept the date reorg date to themselves until the very last "legal" minute and not surprisingly they got themselves re-elected. 

The last sentence of my diary said..."Can the Party Plan be changed to discourage this type of reorg from happening again?" was to ask fellow Democrats to consider situations like this that is hurting the Virginia Democratic Party.  Go to the SBE and look at the statistics for this county's Democratic turnout and support for Democrats; we were 21st out of 23 in turnout and in support for Webb in the 1st District.  There are very many talented Democrats in this county who have come to meetings, wanted to change those figures, have good ideas on how to do it, but they are kept out of the process by tactics like this....we lose....you lose...and the candidates lose.

That's the bottom line and the one we should never take our eye off of.



I still don't understand the problem (Not Robert Roberts - 1/23/2007 10:26:18 AM)
you say, "12/7/05  Members (and only members) were sent an e-mail telling them for the first time, that there was to be a reorganization on 12/19/07."

ok.... so this time, why don't you and everyone who thinks like you become a member before the last minute and therefore be in the know about what's going to happen so you can take appropriate action when the time comes. This time you know what's going to happen- you know how to be prepared- you know how to fight it. So do it!

In the meantime, become a member, suck it up, and recruit like minded people to be on your side when the time comes. Like KingDem said... that's politics 101.



Raising your consciouness ... (Dianne - 1/23/2007 2:19:06 PM)
In writing this diary, I was trying to bring up what I considered a very serious problem in a reorganization that was held in Spotsylvania in 2005.  In my belief the officers of the committee abducted the reorganization process for their own re-election purpose by hiding the reorganization process from the county Democrats.  It's done, over, and history now. And so 2006 was a lost year for the Democratic candidates in this county, my earlier reference to the SBE stats. 

I haven't been able to raise the consciousness of anyone thus far in this diary to make someone conclude that maybe we ought to change the "rules" for conducting reorganizations to ensure that this type of reorg doesn't happen again.  If the rules allow it, it will happen again.  Power corrupts.  And giving only a 12-day notification before the reorganization, in my opinion, is nothing more than deceit. 

Could we move the comments to what you might think needs to be changed in the state rules (or procedures) to ensure that all reorganizations in the commonwealth are conducted in the sun, in the open so that another year is not lost for Democrats.  It's for the good of the party!!  Large, active, organized  committees (such as in NoVa, etc.) need to understand that not all committees are like them.  Try to put yourself in our position and situation.  Would you be happy to have had the reorg hidden from you?  Now how about some ideas that could be made to the DPVA to avoid this in the future.



How about this tactic? (Nell - 1/23/2007 3:33:57 PM)
This is the sentence in the local committee's bylaws that jumped out at me:

The Committee must decide the meeting date in October and communicate that information to the State party not later than November 1.

This year, make sure you and another 35-50 Dems become members during the year.  Begin to agree among yourselves on potential candidates for committee officers. 

On November 2, call Levar Stoney and find out when and where the reorg meeting is happening.  (Also, get a commitment now from Levar that the reorg info for every locality will be posted on the state party website on November 2.)

Use the month of November to make sure your 'revitalizing Dems' members get the reorg time and place, and know who their choices are for officers.

Thoughts?



Another possible help (Nell - 1/23/2007 3:48:58 PM)
Get to know the chair of the Democratic committee in a nearby locality, and have them make available to one of the 'revitalizing members' a copy of the declaration of candidacy form.  That's in case the form is only sent out to the 38 current members again.

Have each of the 'revitalizing members' (RMs) make a photocopy of their signed DOC before sending it in to the chair (which shouldn't happen until close to the deadline published in the paper), and have each person bring the copy with them to the reorg meeting.  That's to guard against the chair pretending at the reorg that s/he hasn't received the forms.

It should go without saying that during the summer and fall the RMs need to provide active, visible support to Democratic candidates on the ballot in November, if there are such (for the General Assembly or local constitutional offices).  That's both to build the bonds among RMs for a cohesive vote at the reorg and to cut the ground out from anyone in the old guard who tries to claim that the RMs are not really Dems or have some hidden agenda.



Thank you Nell (Dianne - 1/23/2007 5:01:28 PM)
Your comments are meaningful and helpful.  Is it your understanding that the 'closed' caucus, where you have to prefile before the reorg, is appropriate for a committee that doesn't limit it's membership?  I remembering finding a memo on the DPVA site that I presumed Ruth Anne Walker wrote.  She wrote that a closed caucus was good for limited membership committees -- like those in NoVa.  And the open caucus (firehouse) was appropriate for committees which want to get as many members as possible.  Do you happen to know?

Thank you again for a positive and useful set of information and ideas.  I'm having two couples over for dinner Thursday who are members but no longer attend because of the leadership....I'll discuss your ideas with them....we haven't given up yet.



I just don't know the answer (Nell - 1/26/2007 1:48:00 AM)
to your question, because our committee's bylaws do limit our membership to 35.  It's a small county; the bylaws call for us to have at least one representative from each of the 17 precincts. 

So we're searching for a category of 'membership' that can make sure we're involving the hundreds of people who've shown their interest through signing up for email updates, willingness to attend events, volunteer, donate, put up yard signs, etc.

I understand some localities use the term 'member' for that last, and the term 'steering committee' for what we've been calling 'members'.



Nell, it sounds like you're moving in the right direction in your committee (Dianne - 1/29/2007 12:13:18 PM)
If my committee had limited its membership to ensure that each precinct was represented, I'd understand the reason to have to prefile your Candidacy form, etc.

What I do know is the Chair has been there "forever" (I've only been around through one reorg) and he used this assembled caucus method -- didn't tell anyone about it; held it at 6pm on a Monday night when everyone's on I-95; and well you know the rest of the story. 

I've written another diary that talks more on the subject that might interest you. http://raisingkaine....

Several of the responders in that diary were helpful to my dilema and offered good comments like yours.

I just want to ensure that this kind of "clever" reorg doesn't happen again.  Under the current Party Plan, if they did it once again, they'd still be within the Party's rules!!!!

Thanks again.



Nell, it sounds like you're moving in the right direction in your committee (Dianne - 1/29/2007 12:22:14 PM)
If my committee had limited its membership to ensure that each precinct was represented, I'd understand the reason to have to prefile your Candidacy form, etc.

What I do know is the Chair has been there "forever" (I've only been around through one reorg) and he used this assembled caucus method -- didn't tell anyone about it; held it at 6pm on a Monday night when everyone's on I-95; and well you know the rest of the story. 

I've written another diary that talks more on the subject that might interest you. http://raisingkaine....

Several of the responders in that diary were helpful to my dilema and offered good comments like yours.

I just want to ensure that this kind of "clever" reorg doesn't happen again.  Under the current Party Plan, if they did it once again, they'd still be within the Party's rules!!!!

Thanks again.