Green Party of Connecticut

Details

Minutes--September 2004 SCC meeting Wesleyan University (Fisk Hall room 413), 7:15-9:30pm

Attendees:
1. Central Connecticut chapter: Steve Krevisky, Vincent Maruffi
2. Fairfield chapter: Ed Friend, David Bedell
3. Hamden chapter: Aaron Gustafson, Francis Braunlich
4. Hartford chapter: Ed DuBrule (NV), Lynah, Albert Marceau, Mike DeRosa, Barbara Barry DeRosa
5. New London chapter: Andy Derr
6. Northeast chapter: Jean deSmet
7. Northwest chapter: Elizabeth Brancato (voting for Women's Caucus; not voting for Northwest chapter), Judy Herkimer, Kim Herkimer, Audrey Cole
8. Shoreline chapter: Lindsay Mathews, David Adams
9. Tolland chapter: Karin Norton
10. Western chapter: Justine McCabe, Rachel Goodkind

Brian Brotman (Wesleyan student) (NV) (see "guest slot" below)

Lindsay and Judy co-facilitated the meeting. Persons known to the secretary not to be chapter voting representatives are so noted ("NV"). No attendees were present from the New Haven chapter. The West Hartford chapter and Southeast chapter are no longer counted toward quorum (see minutes of June 2004 SCC meeting).

A. PRELIMINARIES The Ground Rules (developed by Connecticut Greens in meetings in November 2002) for conduct of the meeting were adopted by consensus. The August 2004 SCC minutes were approved by consensus. In the guest slot, Wesleyan student Brian Brotman (who had reserved our room tonight) said that he had worked on the Cobb campaign in New Jersey last summer.

B. OLD BUSINESS AND PROPOSALS

1. Budget. Mike presented the budget proposal of Appendix 1, which comes from the Executive Committee. The first two items in the budget are contributions of the state party towards the office rent and utilities. Mike distributed a handout (available from the secretary) titled "Reasons to support the state Green Party office". He said that the CTGP's liability insurance is directly tied to some funding connection between the state party and some rented or owned property. He noted that people have talked about suing the CTGP. He said that two insurance agents had told him that homeowners' policies will not cover events. He said that the Hartford chapter has been working hard (including movies and speakers) to cover the Hartford chapter's share of the office.

The Northwest chapter had presented an alternative budget. It was in Appendix 9 of the SCC agenda distributed prior to this meeting and at this meeting. All the figures in the Northwest chapter budget are the same as those in the budget of Appendix 1 except that the Northwest chapter budget does not include money towards the Hartford office rent or utilities. The Executive Committee's budget has an annual surplus (income minus expenditures) of $520. The Northwest chapter's budget has an annual surplus of $2,520. [Secretary's note: the expenses in the Northwest chapter's budget actually add to $9,480 rather than $9,880; hence the annual surplus is actually $2,920.] Elizabeth Brancato said that the Northwest chapter met twice over the past month and at their more recent meeting decided to withdraw their proposed budget.

Audrey said that budget proposals normally include the current year's appropriation for each budget item alongside the proposed appropriation for each item. She said (or implied) that the proposed budget should be reworked until it resembles the budgets of other organizations she has seen. She said that the Northwest chapter determined that the only statutory requirement for insurance is worker's compensation insurance (if there are employees). Audrey has been told that the insurance industry in general doesn't require rented or owned property to provide insurance (though an individual insurance company or agency may impose this requirement). Justine said that her insurance agent said that we don't need an office to obtain insurance coverage. Karin said that she talked to the insurance company last June and obtained quotes for premiums with no office, one office, or two offices (Hartford and New Haven); the premiums would be much higher if there were no office. Karin expressed concerns about the ability of the state party to afford an office, saying that "we got way into debt with the office". She said "what about the Hartford chapter's debt to the party?"

David Adams asked whether political parties need insurance. Do other states' Green parties purchase insurance, and (if so) is their insurance connected to offices? Andy said that liability insurance is needed to protect the officers of the party; "political parties get sued a lot".

Andy said that advantages of having an office include visibility of the party and a place to meet. He said that the Hartford chapter has had trouble coming up with its share of the rent. Justine said that there have been many months when the Hartford chapter hasn't paid its share of the rent. Mike said that recently the Hartford chapter formed a PAC and since the formation of this PAC it has been able to pay its share.

Andy proposed that the SCC could approve continued funding for the office, subject to the condition that the Hartford chapter managed to come up with its share of the rent. Two or three variations of this idea were discussed, such as giving the Hartford chapter a trial period of three months.

Aaron said that if there were to be a partially state-funded office, it would be desirable to have it staffed (even a volunteer with posted office hours two days per week).

Jean says that the Northeast chapter makes use of the CTGP's insurance regularly--events such as speakers need insurance. The recent DNC2RNC marchers made use of the CTGP's insurance--they found they couldn't get insurance elsewhere ("we won't cover political events"). Rachel said that the CTGP insurance was used to cover the booth the Western chapter had at Village Fair Days, and that the CTGP insurance was needed to cover eight showings of movie(s) at a local library.

Justine spoke of the large amount of money Chris Reilly has asked to be reimbursed. She said that we need to determine the facts regarding this money through some kind of audit. Until this matter is resolved the state party should refrain from spending on anything beyond essential needs. Audrey agreed that there should be a full audit of CTGP past finances.

Lindsay spoke of one Shoreline chapter member's comment that if the state passed a budget that brought the state party far into debt, the Shoreline chapter may become responsible for part of that debt.

The facilitator asked if there were consensus that the Executive Committee budget should be passed by the SCC. Clearly there was a lack of such a consensus. The facilitator (making use of the modified consensus procedures) asked if the Executive Committee (the presenter of the proposal) wished to (1) ask for more time to discuss the budget, (2) withdraw the proposal (return it to the Executive Committee for modification), or (3) move to a vote. The members of the Executive Committee present at tonight's meeting (Ed DuBrule, Elizabeth Brancato, and Mike DeRosa) left the room to discuss what to do, and returned to say that they withdrew the proposal (the budget) from further consideration at tonight's meeting.

2. Bylaws segment "4-1 Chapters" (Appendix 2). Passed out for discussion at June SCC meeting; submitted by the New London chapter for tonight's meeting. (Bylaws changes must be initiated by a chapter, per the bylaws.)

3. Bylaws segment "4-2 State Central Committee" (Appendix 3). A version of this was passed out for discussion at July SCC meeting; submitted by the New London chapter for tonight's meeting. As submitted tonight, the italicized text in section 4-2-B is to replaced by the boldface text which follows it, and boldface text has been added to section 4-2-C.

Tonight's meeting dealt with the two bylaws segments as one agenda item. Andy presented the proposed bylaws changes. By consensus these proposed bylaws changes were referred to chapters for consideration.

Secretary's note: below are the steps by which the bylaws are changed. Note the asterisked sentences below (asterisks added by secretary).

(1) Any Chapter may, provided two thirds of its full membership concur, propose to the State Central Committee amendments or changes to the Party Bylaws.

**(2) The State Central Committee shall refer the proposal to all active Chapters for review and recommendations.

**(3) Each Chapter may, by a two thirds majority of its full membership, recommend rejection, State Central Committee approval, or submittal of the proposal to the next following Party Convention for consideration of the full membership.

(4) If two thirds of the Chapters recommend approval, the State Central Committee may enact the change or refer it for Convention action.

(5) If Convention action is called for, members in good standing but unable to attend the Convention shall each be entitled to vote by absentee ballot.

[From the bylaws, posted on the website www.ctgreens.org --click on "archives" on the home page. Numbering of steps added by secretary.]

4. Proposal from Hamden chapter on creation of an IT (information technology) committee (Appendix 4). Aaron presented the proposal. Ed DuBrule noted that the proposal speaks of the committee members as " the state webmaster, all chapter webmasters and interested individuals with IT skills to offer'. He asked if a person without specialized IT knowledge, but with an interest in contributing to the committee (and perhaps with interest in privacy issues) could join the committee. Aaron said that such a person could join. Mike said that he is interested in joining this committee. Someone stated that Dmitri D'Alessandro and Chris Reilly have expressed an interest in joining the committee. David Bedell wondered if the committee's functions would overlap the communications committee; Aaron said that the committee would work with the communications committee. By consensus the proposal was passed by the SCC.

5. Proposal from Hamden chapter on creation of voters' rights working group (Appendix 5). Aaron presented the proposal. It was written to address concerns raised by David Agosta and others. It is would be an ad hoc working group rather than a committee. Karin wondered if formation of a committee would be better--the committee could later turn its attention to implementing the voter outreach program mentioned in the proposal. Jean said she might be interested in joining the group. Jean spoke of creating a policies/procedures manual based on voting laws. Audrey spoke of a case in which a town clerk was misinformed of voting laws--Audrey had to go to the Secretary of State's office. By consensus the proposal was passed by the SCC.

6. Proposal from Women's Caucus on rotating location of SCC meetings (Appendix 6). Elizabeth Brancato read the proposal. Eddie Friend said that a drive from Fairfield County to Middletown is 1 hour, 45 minutes; a drive from Fairfield County to a meeting in the Northeast corner of the state would be much longer; there could be problems reaching a quorum unless SCC meetings were held in central CT. Andy said that a drive from New London to an SCC meeting in the northwest corner of the state could be longer than 2 hours. Karin said that rotating meeting sites would let Greens in different parts of the state meet each other; limited rotation could be done during the summer. David Bedell suggested rotation among central locations (Hartford, Meriden, Middletown, and New Haven). The drive from Fairfield County to New Haven is easier than the drive to Middletown. Francis suggested rotating among Congressional Districts. It was noted that CT is a "short" (not "tall") state in the sense that I-91 runs north and south.

Karin noted that the proposal says that the location must be announced at least one month before the SCC meeting. She suggested that there be a central default location, in case no location was announced by one month before.

The Women's Caucus withdrew the proposal and will rework it in view of the above input.

7. Proposal from Steve Krevisky and others on endorsing the Nov. 20 "Where do we go from here?" conference (Appendix 7). Steve passed out additional preliminary information on the conference: it will be "A day long statewide forum designed to allow activists to share assessments of the elections and plot strategies to go forward in the building of a movement to end the occupation of Iraq and to bring the troops home." It will be Saturday, November 20, 2004 at Central Connecticut State University. The initiating group is CT United for Peace; the host is CCSU Peace Studies. There will be "Celebrity keynote speaker, representatives from 4 national antiwar coalitions, workshops, and a general strategy 'plenary' session. Recognition of leading CT activists. Time to report on your victories and mix it up with folks from around the state."

There will be a planning meeting Sunday October 24 [new date from September date originally announced], 2pm, Church of Holy Trinity, Main St., Middletown. Bring proposals for statewide spring activities, also ...."

By consensus the SCC endorsed this conference.

8. Proposal from Women's Caucus on unreimbursed expenditures of Chris Reilly (Appendix 8) Elizabeth Brancato read the proposal. Ed DuBrule said that his minutes of the August 2004 SCC meeting included an explanation by Chris of the expenditures, and that Chris had said that that section of the minutes is accurate. Ed said that former treasurer Bruce Crowder had given e-mail comments on that section of the minutes, also. Ed said that Chris had submitted to the Executive Committee a complete listing (in the form of an Excel spreadsheet) of the unreimbursed expenditures.

Justine said that the proposal proposes (1) an audit of CTGP finances related to the unreimbursed expenditures; (2) that " Bruce Crowder and Chris Reilly appear before the SCC at the next meeting in order to explain the history of the current GPC debt related to the Hartford office". Audrey said that she could do the audit.

Due to the lateness of the hour, it was decided by consensus to defer further discussion of this proposal to the October SCC meeting.

C. REPORTS

1. Treasurer's report (read by Elizabeth Brancato).

"The finances for the CT Green Party are looking up this month. In the past month we took in $1,781.00 and paid out 973.42. Our receipts were $1,291 from fundraising events, a $260 contribution from the Green Party of the United States, and $230 in monthly and other contributions. Our expenses were 661.68 for the Green Party office in Hartford (these included past due bills we couldn't pay before). $265.26 in Fundraising expenses, $38 for the post office box (this is for 6 months), $6 in bank checking account charges and $ 2.58 for the CT Green Party toll free number.

"In addition we received $250 from the Green Party of the United States for the Joyce Chen for State Rep. campaign. A check is on its way to the Joyce Chen for State Rep. campaign. This is a contribution from the National party that we are just facilitating. We also had a contribution for an insurance rider of $ 332.8. for the DNC2RNC event.

"Currently we have a balance of $1,152.46. We hope to use this money for a large fundraising mailing. We have paid up all our recent debt, but if we subtract the debt from Chris Reilly our balance would be - $2,388.36.

"I also want to point out that we have $837.96 so far this year in, in-kind" contributions. I don't think everyone is aware that we need to report In-kind contributions in the filing to the state. Additionally it is important for budgeting to be aware of how these expenses are being paid.

"As always please consider being involved in the Fundraising and Budget Committees.

"For more information on the CT Green Party Finances you can call me at 860 379-0632, email me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or look at this webpage: http://www.kirajoy.com/CTGP/CTGP_Treasurer.html"

One attendee commented on the part of the treasurer's report which reads "but if we subtract the debt from Chris Reilly our balance would be -$2,388.36". She said that the SCC hasn't acknowledged this as a debt to Chris.

Reports from committees, campaigns, and chapters were not given, due to lack of time.

Fundraising letter information. Mike reported that the Executive Committee plans to do a large fundraising mailing ( to approximately 2,000 people). He distributed a sheet containing information he had obtained from American Mailing Services on the details of that mailing (Appendix 9). Amounts on the sheet include $420 for postage (21 cents per piece) (payable up front), $200 to $300 for Xerox one page plus supply return envelope, and $235 for downloading our database/compare addresses to postal service database/sort/tray/etc., for a total cost of $855 to $955. Mike said that it is hoped that this mailing will bring in at least $3,000 in donations. He asked that chapters discuss this plan.

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

Appendix 1 Budget proposal [e-mail from Bob Eaton 7/12/04]
item#
item
annual
amount
monthly
amount
(cents omitted)
comments (added by Secretary)

--------Expenses---------

Exp1
Hartford office rent

$1,200$100
$100 per month from CT Green Party (decrease from current $250 per month; Hartford chapter pays rest)

Exp2
Hartford office utilities
$1,200
100
$100 per month from CT Green Party (this would approximately cover the entire utility bills)

Exp3
Fundraising events
$1,000
83
Expenses to hold fundraisers

Exp4
Fundraising mailings
$3,000
250
Postage etc.

Exp5
Money for candidates
600
50

Exp6
Insurance
830
69 Liability insurance. New Haven chapter closing its office.

Exp7
Printed handouts
750
62
Literature (brochures, flyers)

Exp8
Internal elections/annual meeting
$1,500
125
Postage, printing

Exp9
Buttons/bumper stickers
500
41

Exp10
Other expenses
400
33
Domain name registration, etc.

Exp11
Reimbursement to Chris Reilly
900
75
Spending by Chris for office rent, postage/printing/envelopes for September 2003 fundraising mailing, and CTGP website domain name. This is partial re-payment; balance to be repaid in future budget years.

-------Expenses total-----

11,880 990

-------Revenues---------

Rev1
Monthly Friends contributions
$2,400 per year
$200
People who donate monthly to the CT Green Party

Rev2
Telephone solicitations for contributions
$2,400
200

Rev3
Fundraising from mailings
$4,000
333

Rev4
Four events
$2,400
200
Four fundraising events

Rev5
Ad Hoc contributions
$1,200
100
Examples: website visitors donate, donations included in annual elections mailing

-------Revenues total---
12,400
1033

Balance
520

Revenues exceed expenses by $520

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

Appendix 2 Proposed bylaws changes from BRPP committee (bylaws, rules, policies and procedures) [From e-mail received from Tom 6/22/04; submitted by New London chapter per e-mail of 9/13/04 from Andy.]

4-1. CHAPTERS

4-1-A. A local chapter shall consist of Green Party members from towns and municipalities within a contiguous geographic region. No chapter shall be larger than a County and none smaller than a single town with the exception of Campus Green organizations.

4-1-B. A local chapter may petition for affiliation with the State Central Committee upon having at least three meetings with five or more Green Party members in attendance at each of the three meetings.

4-1-C. A chapter may be declared inactive by a majority vote of the State Central Committee (SCC) if it has not met within the past three months. A chapter will automatically be declared inactive if it has not sent chapter representatives to the State Central Committee meeting for three months in a row. Inactive status will begin as of the third meeting.

4-1-D. The State Central Committee may vote to revoke a chapter's affiliation with the CTGP if that chapter has not met within the past 6 months.

4-1-E. An inactive chapter will be declared active again if it hold two consecutive monthly meetings monthly meetings with at least five members present and sends representatives to two successive state meetings.

4-1-F. Chapters that have had their affiliation revoked must re-petition the State Central Committee for affiliation once the requirements detailed in 4.1.B are met.

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

Appendix 3 Proposed bylaws changes from BRPP Committee (bylaws, rules, policies and procedures). [From e-mail received from Tom 7/26/04; revised per 9/13/04 e-mail from Andy.]

4-2 STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE

4-2-A. The State Central Committee (SCC) shall be the final decision making body of the Green Party of Connecticut, and shall consist of democratically elected representatives from each affiliated local chapter.

4-2-B. Local chapters of the CTGP shall be represented at State Central Committee meetings accordingly : up to 99 registered Greens, the chapter is entitled to 2 voting representatives; from 100 to 499 registered Greens, the chapter is entitled to 3 voting representatives; above 500 registered Greens, the chapter is entitled to 4 voting representatives. Each chapter is entitled to two voting representatives, and is also entitled to an additional representative for each 100 registered Greens residing in the chapter. Voter lists from an appropriate authority (either a town clerk or the Secretary of State) will be the final source in determining the count of a chapter's membership. If these are not obtainable the chapter shall be entitled to two voting representatives.

4-2-C. Caucuses for under-represented groups shall be entitled to one voting representative on the State Central Committee. Under-represented groups are defined as any grouping of Greens that has historically failed to gain adequate access to power in society at-large (i.e., women, African-Americans, youth, etc.). Caucuses shall be established by the State Central Committee. An individual attending an SCC meeting may cast multiple votes--one vote as a chapter representative and one as a caucus representative.

4-2-D. Representatives to the State Central Committee are responsible for disseminating information to their respective local chapters. They are also responsible for following the mandates of the local chapters they represent.

4-2-E. The modified consensus process will be used at State Central Committee meetings. In the event consensus cannot be reached, a vote will be taken with a simple majority being needed for passage of the proposal. Changes to the bylaws need a 66% majority for passage.

4-2-F. Quorum shall be required for votes taken at the State Central Committee meeting. Quorum shall be defined as representation (by at least one voting representative) of at least two-thirds of all active CTGP chapters, excepting Campus Green chapters and inactive chapters.

4-2-G. Chapters shall elect their representatives to the SCC once a year. Representatives shall be eligible for re-election.

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

Appendix 4. Proposal from Hamden chapter on formation of an IT (information technology) committee

[in 8/10/04 e-mail attachment from Aaron Gustafson]

Green Party Meeting Proposal Form
PRESENTER (committee, chapter(s) or group of individuals)
Hamden Green Party
CONTACT (name, address, phone number, email)
Aaron Gustafson; 83 Treadwell St, Hamden, CT 06517; 203-230-9726; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
SUBJECT (10 words or less)
Creation of IT Committee

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE (100 words or less; include relationship, reasons and/or justification to the State Central Committee)

The purpose of the IT Committee would be to oversee all IT-related undertakings of the CT Green Party.

PROPOSAL (200 words or less)

We propose that the CT Green Party form an IT Committee. This committee would oversee all Information Technology (IT) projects that are initiated by or come under the jurisdiction of the CT Green Party. The initial task for this committee will be the creation of two databases:

Registered Greens in CT

Minority party and/or unaffiliated voters in CT

The IT Committee would oversee the continued maintenance and administration of these databases as well as work to enable sharing of this information back and forth with local chapters and campaigns.

The IT Committee would initially consist of the state webmaster, all chapter webmasters and interested individuals with IT skills to offer. The IT Committee would be required to make periodic reports to the SCC.

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

Appendix 5 Proposal from Hamden chapter on creation of voters' rights working group [in 8/10/04 e-mail attachment from Aaron Gustafson]

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE (100 words or less; include relationship, reasons and/or justification to the State Central Committee)

The purpose of the Voters’ Rights Working Group will be to work toward improving the relationship of the CT Green Party and the population of registered Greens in CT. This Working Group is being formed to address inadequacies in the current voting process and to ensure proper procedures are followed to allow for the involvement of every Green registered in the state of Connecticut.

PROPOSAL (200 words or less)

We propose that the CT Green Party constitute a Voters’ Rights Working Group, consisting of at least one member each of the Elections Committee, Communications Committee and IT Committee and any other interested parties. The initial purpose of this Working Group is to examine the current state of primary voting among registered Greens in CT. The group will be charged with finding out what ways we can better reach voters and obtain their participation in the primary election cycle (via interviews, questionnaires, etc.). The eventual outcome from this Working Group will be 1) an examination and full report on past oversights regarding primary voting among Greens in CT (to be presented to the SCC); and 2) a plan for how to best carry out primaries on local, regional and state levels through the use of a secure internet-based voting system (for those with internet access) and traditional mail-in ballots (for those without internet access or who prefer to vote by mail). The Working Group’s final recommendations will presented to the SCC and, upon approval, become the initial blueprint for a new voter outreach program. It is likely that this Working Group will be of use from time to time following the launch of the program to evaluate it successes and failures and work to refine the process over time.

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

Appendix 6 Proposal on rotating SCC meeting location.

Green Party Meeting Proposal Form
PRESENTER (committee, chapter(s) or group of individuals)
CT Green Party Women’s Caucus
CONTACT (name, address, phone number, email)
Kelly McCarthy; 83 Treadwell St, Hamden, CT 06517; 203-230-9726; This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
SUBJECT (10 words or less)
Rotating monthly SCC meeting location

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE (100 words or less; include relationship, reasons and/or justification to the State Central Committee)

The monthly SCC meetings have been occurring in only one or two towns in the state—namely, Middletown and more recently, Hartford. Rotating the state meetings through each of the chapters would periodically ease the burden on certain groups and, hopefully, provide for the participation of additional Greens.

PROPOSAL (200 words or less)

We propose that the CT Green Party rotate the monthly SCC meeting locations through either: 1) each of the individual town/regional chapters on a cyclical basis; or 2) each region of the State (N/S/E/W).

This rotation would follow a predetermined schedule, and would require each chapter/regional chapters to secure an appropriate meeting space and give notification to the SCC of the location at least one month before the scheduled meeting.

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

Appendix 7 Proposal on endorsing the Nov. 20 conference "Where do we go from here?"

Green Party Meeting Proposal Form

PRESENTER (committee, chapter(s) or group of individuals): Steve Krevisky, Vincent Maruffi, Vic Lancia, Susan Oehl, Ed DuBrule, Bob Eaton, Elizabeth Brancato

CONTACT (name, address, phone number, email): Steve Krevisky, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

SUBJECT (10 words or less): endorsement of Nov. 20 conference "Where do we go from here?"

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE (100 words or less; include relationship, reasons and/or justification to the State Central Committee): CT United for Peace is sponsoring a Nov. 20, 2004 conference with the theme "Where Do We Go From Here? What are the next steps for the peace movement?"

PROPOSAL (200 words or less): the CTGP should endorse this conference.

------------------------------------------------------------------ Appendix 8 Proposal on unreimbursed expenditures made by Chris Reilly

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE (100 words or less; include relationship, reasons and/or justification to the State Central Committee)

One of the pillars of our party is accountability and transparency in all things; and, at the present, the SCC has been unable to reconcile the debt owed to Chris Reilly because the former treasurer, Bruce Crowder, has not provided any explanation for the situation. Even if Bruce is no longer active with the party, his actions are leaving the GPC heavily in debt and he shares in this responsibility. The Women's Caucus is proposing this audit so we minimize the possibility of similar incidents occurring in the future.

PROPOSAL (200 words or less)

We propose that the SCC request Bruce Crowder and Chris Reilly appear before the SCC at the next meeting in order to explain the history of the current GPC debt related to the Hartford office. We would like for them to reconcile:

1) why Chris Reilly, founder of the GPC and former treasurer, did not communicate the presence of the loans to at least two of the co-chairs (Tom and Justine), despite his obvious knowledge of GPC process;

2) why Chris wasn't repaid (if the loans were regarded as short-term and "informal" by Bruce and Chris) once there was income from a fundraising letter;

3) why half of the rent for the Hartford office wasn't paid by the Hartford chapter, even if the SCC half was paid through a loan from Chris.

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

Appendix 9 SUMMARY OF QUOTE FROM AMERICAN MAILING SERVICES FOR FUNDRAISING MAILING

Description: 8.5 inch by 11 including Letter, Folded BRE insert in # 10 Envelope
Quantity:2,000
Weight Less than 3.3 oz

1.
Down load your database from disk or tape and setup Format and Printer.
CASS certify Database(to achieve postal discounts.
Direct address pieces, sort, tray/Bag, Tag and deliver to Post Office
Insert Pieces
…………………………………………………………………
Total $ 235.00

2.
Postage Estimate
Automation Standard at $.21 X 2000
………………………
Total $420.00

3. If you want AMS to Xerox 1 page insert plus supply small envelope
…………………………………………………….. $.10 to $.15 per envelope
For 2000…………………………
Approximate Total……
$200.00 to $ 300.00

Total cost for mailing using AMS all the way for 2000 pieces (approximately)
……………………………………
Total $855.00 to 955.00

TPL_BEEZ2_NAV_VIEW_SEARCH

TPL_BEEZ2_NAVIGATION

TPL_BEEZ2_SEARCH

September 2004

TPL_BEEZ2_ADDITIONAL_INFORMATION