LOCATION (Zoom)
Members Present: Linda Stark, Lois Sargent, Lori Stewart, Lucy Corchado, Marsha Finkelstein*, Nancy Anderson, Paul Tucker, Tyler Carlton*, Phil Kelley, James Willis, Shey Jaboin, Alice Merkl, Diane Fawley, Elizabeth Bradt, Jeff Cohen, John Mahoney, Josh Turiel, Joyce Greer, Lauren Noyes, Christopher Malstrom, Chris Fuccione, Debbie Everett, Jerome Judge, Jerry Judge, Michael Cusick, Rod Kessler Guests: Marilyn Hazel*, Matt Chilliak, Arthur Powell*, Christopher Lorant, Julie Curtis*, Andy Feldman Recorder: Christopher Malstrom* denotes State Committee Members
Call to order at [7:05PM]
Welcome and Introductions
Rod Kessler begins with a welcome to the committee. Goes over the agenda for the meeting. Notes that he’s been serving as active Chair since Jill Mulholland stepped down in September. He became president of another organization at the same time so would not have the time to commit to being Chair on a permanent basis and is not running for the Chair position as a result. Mentions that the executive committee made the decision not to hold a meeting in October so we could focus our efforts on the general election over needing to elect a new Chair for ourselves. Tried to keep the broad committee updated on ways to be involved in the election. Notes that uncertainty arose regarding our committee paperwork and whether or not it was filed with the proper agencies. Our broad committee paperwork has been filed and processed but we still aren’t entirely certain regarding individual ward committees. Mentions the Dem win for the presidency and how the campaign is still happening in Georgia with plenty of opportunities for people to get involved. Lastly thanks everyone for their patience and help as he navigated filling in as the acting Chair for this committee.
Christopher Lorant The Massachusetts Democratic State Committee Disability Outreach Committee 7:10PM
Christopher thanks everyone for welcoming him to this meeting. He is a member of the MA Democratic State Committee Disability Outreach Committee. Is joining us to make us aware of the committee and inform us of their Facebook Page which he is providing a link to.
Rod asks what the FB Page is doing and Christopher responds that it’s providing disability information as well as election information.
Chris Fuccione mentions that he will be in touch with Christopher to discuss further re: our own Disability Outreach Subcommittee.
Old Business
Bylaw update: Tyler Carlton 7:13PM
Article IV Section A: Striking the words “(or co-Chairs)” after Chairperson and adding “Co-“ to “Vice Chairperson” and replacing “(one or more)” with “(male identifying and female identifying)”. So the by-law reads “The officers of this organization shall consist of a Chairperson, Co-Vice Chairperson (male identifying and female identifying)…
Subsequently, this change would result in needing to change Article VI - Vice Chairperson to be changed to say “Co-Vice Chairpersons” and the description shall say “The Co-Vice Chairpersons shall…”
Tyler is recommending we change our bylaws to reflect the above. Says it will serve 2 purposes: align us with how the state party organizes (1 Chair of any gender-identity and 2 Vice Chairs one male-identifying and one female-identifying [or non-binary]) and prevent us from creating restrictions on who could run for which positions. Posits that our current bylaws would force someone out of a vice-chair position if the chair (who would be the opposite gender-identity) resigned and only someone of the same gender as the vice chair was interested in holding the position. Also postulates that our bylaws would prevent someone from running for a chair or vice chair position if there were only people of the same gender-identity as the person in question interested in holding the alternate position as well. States that this change would prevent these potential issues by eliminating broad requirements for gender-balance and replacing them positions tied to specific gender-identities. (i.e. if there was no male-identifying person interested in the Vice Chair position to complement a female-identifying Chair, we could still have another female-identifying person run to be Vice-Chair. We would just technically have a vacant male-identifying Vice Chair position that could be filled at any time)
States that this potential change will first be going to the Bylaws Subcommittee for review and discussion and then will be brought before the full committee for discussion and a vote.
Marsha asks how it would impact someone who is non-binary. Tyler tried to ensure the language of the change is as inclusive as possible and our rules should probably run similar to our caucus rules where we have similar procedures.
Tyler asks that anyone who was made a part of the Bylaws committee connect with him after the meeting to set up a time to meet and discuss.
Marsha mentions that the new Chair, when elected, could appoint any new members to the Bylaws Subcommittee that they see fit.
Election for Chair Position [7:20 PM]
Rod reiterates that he is not seeking to be elected to the Chair position before opening the floor to nominations
Debbie Everett nominates Christopher Malstrom for Chair. It is seconded by Marsha Finkelstein and accepted by Christopher.
No other nominations are brought forward and James Willis moves to close nominations and it is seconded by Marsha. All vote in favor.
Rod invites Christopher to speak on his vision for the committee.
Christopher starts by thanking everyone for their support shown by committee members over the previous weeks as well as at this meeting. Then notes that he would hope to accomplish a lot of what Jill was hoping to accomplish. Plans to lead the committee into a more active and visible role in the community to increase awareness of our organization. Would like for the committee to work to capture the attention of more Salem residents, particularly younger people moving into the city as they are being priced out of areas such as Boston. Is proposing days of service throughout the year where members commit to volunteering at local organizations that are taking an active role in helping the community. Ends by noting that another priority is transparency in state government and making sure that the committee is staying aware of the goings on at the state level so that we are not only working to elect Democratic leadership, but also working to hold them accountable to their constituents.
Rod opens the vote for Chair.
Christopher Malstrom is unanimously elected as Chair of SDCC, Rod hands leadership of the meeting over to him.
Chris Fuccione asks about voting for a new Secretary.
Christopher confirms that we will need to elect a new Secretary at our next meeting, in addition to a second female-identifying Vice-Chair to stay in line with our bylaws. He is proposing that we hold our next meeting in early January to give members enough time to consider running for the positions while not delaying for too long. In the meantime will be appointing members Lorelee Stewart and Marsha Finkelstein to interim Vice Chair and Secretary positions, respectively, after consulting with members of the state committee. Both Lorelee and Marsha except these appointments.
Review of Meeting Minutes [7:25PM]
Christopher Malstrom requests that we table minutes review for our June and July meetings until he is able to get the meeting recordings from Jill Mulholland.
MOTION to TABLE minutes review for June and July: Chris Fuccione
Seconded: Lauren Noyes
Discussion: no discussion
Outcome: APPROVED
Treasurer’s Report [7:28PM]
Treasurer’s Report delivered by: Debbie Everett
Summary:
8/14 - balance = $2,560
Received $128 in dues
Expenditures: $5 in ActBlue fees
Total Balance: $2,683
MOTION to APPROVE Treasurer's Report: Lauren Noyes
Seconded: Chris Fuccione
Discussion: James Willis asks everyone to give Debbie a round of applause for all of her hard work. Liz Bradt asks if direct check or ActBlue is preferred. Debbie mentions that Actblue does have fees but also makes record-keeping easier. Checks can be mailed directly to Debbie at: 65 Cavendish Cir.
Chris Fuccione asks about us getting a SDCC PO Box for mailing and having the Chair and Treasurer hold access to it. Rod Mentions that PO Box is probably about $120. James notes that he used his PO Box occasionally but not frequently. Decided it was a low priority.
Outcome: accepted
New Business
Matt Chilliak for Seth Moulton [7:35 PM]
Offers thanks to all of the Congressman’s supporters as well as anyone who involved themselves in the process, supporter or no. Notes that JP Moran still hasn’t conceded the race to Seth and is claiming fraud like many other R’s. Spoke about some events the Congressman has organized recently including a veteran’s event. Informs us that his piece of legislation creating the 988 emergency mental health hotline has passed and signed into law and mentions how important it was for Seth to talk openly about mental health issues on the public stage to help end the stigma. Won an award from the bipartisan Congressional Management Foundation in constituent services, speaking to the work he is doing on behalf of his constituents. Finishes by mentioning that Seth does plan on supporting Nancy Pelosi for Speaker going into 2021 and that he and Congressman Moulton are open and available for any questions anyone might have.
Shey Jaboin asks Matt about his position for the Congressman and he confirms that he is the campaign manager. She then asks about requesting a meeting with the Congressman, noting that a request can be made on the website but it isn’t particularly easy. Matt says that anyone can email him and he will get them in touch with the Congressman. Lastly, Matt wishes Julie Curtis a happy birthday as her birthday was the Friday before the meeting.
Membership Info Form
Christopher created a Google Form for committee members to fill out to help him get a better idea of who members are and what they are interested in. particularly in terms of subcommittees. Also for people interested in joining the committee so we can follow up to make them members. Put a link in the chat and in the post-meeting email for members to access at their convenience.
Andy Feldman for Act on Mass and their Transparency is Power campaign https://actonmass.org/the-campaign/ [7:45]
Introduces the Transparency is Power campaign, a campaign geared towards making MA state government more transparent for its constituents. Legislature writes their rulebook every two years, next time coming up in January. The campaign is geared towards getting local reps to support 3 rules aimed at increasing transparency: committee votes made public, bills public for 72 hours prior to final vote, threshold for public floor vote reduced to 8 reps from 16. Act on Mass is building district teams across the state to meet with reps and ask them to support these rule changes. Further empower them to escalate in constructive ways to produce results. He invites any SDCC members to join the campaign and encourages people to check out the campaign website.
Liz Bradt asks how we got to the number “8” for rule 3 and Andy mentions that they would prefer a lower number but felt 8 was a compromise from 16.
John Mahoney asks if Rep Paul Tucker has any input on this matter.
Paul Tucker comments that currently the Chair of a committee has the option to release votes as they see fit and believes that a majority of current Chairs don’t have an issue with releasing them when asked. Commenting on the 72 hour rule, mentions that despite talk of reps only having 15 min to read a bill before signing it, most of these bills are discussed so thoroughly in a number of different committees that reps have many opportunities to see bills before a vote. Believes that there is virtue to how the House takes its time putting bills through committees in that they are subsequently well thought-out.
Liz Bradt asks Paul about the number being reduced from 16 to 8. He responds that he doesn’t recall a time while he’s been in office that someone has had a hard time getting a roll call who has wanted one. Comments that he doesn’t know how we got to the number 16 so isn’t sure how 8 would compare but reaffirms that he doesn’t believe16 is a difficult threshold to reach.
John Mahoney asks if Andy has a response to Paul’s remarks. Andy comments that yes, committee votes can be made public at the discretion of the chair, but the campaign believes that votes should be made public automatically and not at the discretion of different Chairs. Then comments on various progressive legislation that is popular with MA residents but aren’t getting passed in state government so transparency should help understand why. In regards to the 72 hour rule he emphasizes that it should also be important for constituents to have adequate time to read a final bill and provide feedback before it is voted on.
Jeff Cohen thanks Andy for coming and comments that transparency is definitely important. Mentions his work for climate activism and working with Reps Moulton, Tucker and Lovely, noting that he has positive experience with all three. Notes that bills maturing is not as important as taking bold action for issues that need to be addressed now (i.e. climate change) and that reps should be pushing harder to get legislation passed to address these issues as opposed to lagging through the committee process.
Shey Jaboin asks Rep Tucker about funding behind getting bills passed or no vs. active action from constituents. He does admit that money in politics can play an active role in the process but speaks to the importance of the committee process. Notes two recent examples of legislation where a last minute objection made it clear there could be a problem with the bill despite otherwise looking like a good bill.
Christopher Malstrom talks about publicly available committee votes and references his own experience to note that having votes made public automatically would make the information more accessible to the average constituent. The process of needing to find a specific committee Chair’s contact information and reach out to them about the votes of a specific bill can seem daunting, particularly to younger constituents looking to be engaged. Rep Tucker reaffirms that he is always open with how he votes and willing to share whenever asked, as well as mentioning that most committee Chairs he knows of are willing to make votes public. Does note that he believes the argument to make a rule change for them to be made public has merit.
Christopher thanks Andy for joining us and he thanks the SDCC for inviting him. A link to the campaign was provided in the chat as well as in the meeting followup email. John Mahoney and others thank Rep Tucker for participating in the discussion and sharing his thoughts.
Georgia Runoff actions
Christopher shares a poll with the room asking people about their interest in Georgia volunteer options. Most signify that they are interested in volunteering, mostly through postcards and secondarily through phone and text banking. Christopher talks about postcard campaigns he has worked on in the past, noting how easy and accessible they are. Lauren Noyes notes that she has a list of addresses from NAACP and another organization as well as some postcards to go with them, but needs more postcards and stamps to complete the list. Asks if it’s possible to pool resources to do the postcard campaign. Also notes that NAACP has volunteer opportunities. Marsha Finkelstein suggests we dedicate money to purchasing postcards and stamps for a postcard campaign. Others also voice support for this plan. Lauren shares info for the postcard template that she has found including pricing options. James and Lauren suggest $500 as an amount to allocate for the campaign. Chris Fuccione motions to approve spending $500 on this postcard campaign and Lauren seconds it. Marsha asks about doing the math for how many postcards/stamps would give us the best bang for our buck and suggests that we approve the $500 to purchase 1000 postcards. John Mahoney asks about how we’re going to spend the money and Christopher notes that we’ll be purchasing the postcards through the website Lauren shares and postcards purchased through USPS. Lorelee notes that we aren’t collecting money we’re using money from our current funds.
Christopher closes discussion and calls for a vote. Vote is unanimous in favor of allocating $500 to postcard and stamp purchase for a postcard campaign.
Christopher asks the committee if they have an interest in us hosting a phone bank, many show interest. John Mahoney notes that many candidates organize their own phone bank so we should potentially go through their campaigns. Christopher notes that SwingLeft is actively looking for hosts for phonebanks and was interested in hosting one and including the SDCC. Many people noted that weekends work better for them over weekdays. Christopher notes that he’ll circle back with phone bank info in later emails to the SDCC.
Lastly Christopher notes that he made a Linktree website that is currently working as the committee website. It acts as a landing page for links to volunteer and donation opportunities as well as our actblue link for dues payments.
DSC vote last week
Christopher brings up last week’s MassDems meeting where they held elections for their own Chair. Notes that some members asked that he opened the floor to anyone who might want to comment on the vote.
Jeff Cohen expresses disappointment in the process and what transpired at the meeting. Mentions that he feels the issue is integrity. He believes that the Chair violated the committee rules and that it is shown in the Jaques report. Notes that he emailed Julie, Art, Tyler and Marsha who shared their thoughts and he appreciated that. Felt the meeting/call itself was very unprofessionally conducted. He hopes that party members can learn from this failure to work for a better future.
Christopher Malstrom choses to offer his thoughts, beginning with the meeting itself. Notes that he was present for the first 2 ½ hours of the meeting and was surprised at the number of times specific committee members had to point out to the broader committee that the meeting was being publicly broadcast so they should act more professionally. Then speaks on his personal viewpoint in relation to the allegations against Gus and how they related to the Alex Morse/MA College Dems scandal. Notes that, like Morse, he is a 31yo gay man who is now engaging more actively in his community politics and how the smear campaign launched against Morse became reminiscent of ways in which he and members of the lgbtq+ community have been discriminated against historically. Gives more detail on the Morse scandal and how the smear campaign was launched without much in the way of evidence and yet he was immediately vilified by the party and media. As more reporting was done it was revealed that the campaign was launched with some influence from the state party and Christopher emphasizes that this information had him feeling very discouraged and frustrated with the party. He was further disappointed to then see the committee re-elect Gus so broadly when he personally felt that Gus should have chosen to resign. Ends by noting that the ordeal was a source of anger for him and caused him to question his commitment to the party when he felt like the party was not committing fully to his community.
Marsha Finkelstein asks the SDCC if anyone is unaware of what is being discussed. Some express being unsure but having read some news articles. Marsha goes on to discuss the events briefly. Then discusses the state committee membership and how it is composed. Notes that the majority of people who voted in favor of Gus were 20 year members, while a majority of younger and minority groups weren’t adequately recognized. Explains that she did not vote for Gus and anyone is welcome to look up who she voted for, and that the reason she campaigned against Gus was to be in support of those who she felt weren’t being treated justly in the process. She notes that she wanted to see us move forward with new leadership and was disappointed by how the meeting itself was run, with one member commenting that “Gov Baker is doing a great job!” Firmly believes that we need to move in a new direction because the party has lost a lot of trust from the general public.
Chris Fuccione asks if it is true that implications of wrongdoing against the Chair were “swept under the rug” at this meeting. Tyler Carlton responds that they were not “swept under the rug” but, unfortunately, by the time they got to new business it was after 10 and they didn’t want the meeting to run longer so they weren’t able to discuss it. Notes that it could be on a future agenda but implies that isn’t certain and further elaborates that since it was 10:15-10:30 by the time they got to new business they couldn’t have adequately had a thoughtful and meaningful discussion about the topic, including the Jaques report. Mentioned it was mentioned by someone after the meeting was adjourned so it wasn’t ignored but the meeting had ended so they didn’t discuss it further. Says that there is a meeting coming up at the beginning of the year where it could be discussed.
Christopher Malstrom asks why the committee chose to hold off on attempting to discuss the report until after the election. Tyler and Marsha indicate that they are unaware. Tyler notes that the report wasn’t released until the Monday before, which was later than anticipated.
Chris Fuccione asks if it would’ve been more appropriate to hold off on the election until discussion could be had about the report. Tyler notes that everyone had access to it and they are bound by state law to hold the election when they did. He said that he would have preferred if the vote was on a weekend instead of weeknight so that more time could have been spent having a discussion on the matter.
Alice Merkl expressed agreement with those who felt disappointed by Gus’ actions and the committee vote.
Jeff Cohen notes that he has felt like a “Democrat of Consequence” because he is feeling like the party is abandoning progressive action and change. He states his belief that the state party has been largely failing its membership and struggling to be inclusive. Says that the election exemplified frustrations he has felt with leadership in the party for years and believes that we need to be more assertive in asking for change.
Tyler Carlton wants to state for the record that he did choose to support Gus’ re-election despite agreeing with a lot of the sentiments aired by Christopher, Jeff and others. Maintains that he had specific reasons to make this decision and is more than willing to discuss them with anyone who would like to reach out to him personally.
Christopher asks if there is any further comment from present members. None are brought forward so he ends discussion on this topic.
MOTION to adjourn made at [9:05]: Lauren Noyes
Seconded:. Marsha Finkelstein
Discussion:
Outcome: Meeting Adjourned
Comments