Re: [Mpls] Electing city DFL delegates the same year as the
I'm happy to hear my DFL brothers sisters in the Mill City are making progress on the same year precinct caucus constitutional ammendent. However be careful what you wish for! This change has been attempted a number of times in Mpls and always gets shot done. The present system favors incumbents and makes uprisings harder to organize. The people seating in the delegate seats and voting on the ammendment at this years city convention will be people who are supportive and beholden to the present city power structure to a certain degree. That doesn't mean it can pass, it just means it is going to take an organized effort. In the Saintly City there is still a lot of debate about reforming our caucus/convention process and even though we elect city delegates in odd numbered years to paraphrase Yogi Berra, if people don't want to come to the precinct caucuses nobody's gonna stop them. ;-) This year the City of St. Paul DFL has really outdone itself by combining the caucus / convention meeting and holding them on the same day, and moving that day from March to one of three days in April, Tuesday the 17th, Saturday the 21st or Sunday 22nd. The "official" reasoning for this change was that it would increase participation by reducing the level of time commitment needed to participate. I'm still one very sceptical old guard DFL'er that believes we never should have combined the caucus convention meetings or moved the date but I'm currently in the minoirty over here on this issue. So, as you prepare to advocate for the change, be prepared to address some of these issues. Will the caucus and convention meetings be on the same day or be held on different dates. Who will decide the dates, Ward organizations or the city organization? What will the dates be, March, April or later? Dennis Hill Ward 2 DFL Co-coordinator St. Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/23/01 11:51AM This is a brief update for those who are interested in this issue. My motion to consider at the City DFL Convention an amendment to the City DFL Constitution providing for odd year caucuses passed at the City DFL CentralC ommittee meeting last night. Amendments to the constitution will be considered under "other business" which will provide for discussion of andv oting on the amendment while ballots are being counted in the Mayoral race. Hopefully, this will assure that a quorum is maintained for consideration of the amendment. Scott Benson Chair, 5th Congressional District DFL ** This e-mail and its attachments have been scanned for viruses. NDIS/ADCS University of Minnesota **
Mary Jo Copeland and orphanages
According to today's Strib, Mary Jo Copeland was turned down for a zoning change to build an orphanage in Brooklyn Center. I think she'll be back at city hall now, to get space out of Minneapolis. She won the battle to get Sharing and Caring hands downtown, but it sits under the garbage burner so everyone using it can suck up a little heavy metal rain from the burner when they use the shelter. I'm solidly opposed to orphanages because they teach kids how to operate in institutions, rather than presenting them with a family situation to work from when they grow up. My mother, my aunt and two uncles grew up in an orphanage and they never quite grasped "family" in a way helpful to themselves or to creating a healthy family structure. I asking people to keep a sharp eye out for Mary Jo's orphanage proposal. She also stated that the orphanage should go to Brooklyn Center because, "God wants it there and his Holy Mother wants it there." That's a Pat Robertson ploy, but reminds me that 'the Cabots speak only to Lodges and the Lodges speak only to God." Scarey stuff, scarey people talk that way. WMarks, Central
Re: [Mpls] Electing city DFL delegates the same year as the
I would certainly oppose a mail-in or online vote for endorsement. This would undercut the speeches, question-and-answer periods, seconding speeches by people I know, discussion with other delegates, and the rest of the personal interaction that goes on in a caucus endorsement system. Delegates at these events learn a lot about the candidates there, and I think it helps them make better decisions. This personal interaction of the caucus endorsement system, vs. the TV sound bites of a primary system, is the main reason I support a caucus endorsement system. I think allowing mail-in or online voting would just make this into an in-party primary system. If you want that, just join all the news media in trying to kill the caucus system and go directly to a primary system. (Note that they all would make money off a straight primary system.) Why not a city-wide mail-in/online vote from party members for endorsement? You could add in ranking per the fairvote people. Everyone from the past precinct caucus could vote and you could add an additional party membership process for others. The process would actually build the local party instead of narrowing the window for paticipation. Steven Clift Carag Resident
Re: [Mpls] Electing city DFL delegates the same year as the
I would certainly oppose a mail-in or online vote for endorsement. This would undercut the speeches, question-and-answer periods, seconding speeches by people I know, discussion with other delegates, and the rest of the personal interaction that goes on in a caucus endorsement system. Delegates at these events learn a lot about the candidates there, and I think it helps them make better decisions. This personal interaction of the caucus endorsement system, vs. the TV sound bites of a primary system, is the main reason I support a caucus endorsement system. I think allowing mail-in or online voting would just make this into an in-party primary system. If you want that, just join all the news media in trying to kill the caucus system and go directly to a primary system. (Note that they all would make money off a straight primary system.) Tim Bonham, Ward 12 Why not a city-wide mail-in/online vote from party members for endorsement? You could add in ranking per the fairvote people. Everyone from the past precinct caucus could vote and you could add an additional party membership process for others. The process would actually build the local party instead of narrowing the window for paticipation. Steven Clift Carag Resident
