Thread by @RL_Miller

On a special @ca_dem executive board meeting to ban fossil fuel and law enforcement money from the party. I haven't said much in public, til now. @NoFossilMoney thread!

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney it all began when I served on a committee, henceforth known as committee 1.0, to address party finances. I lobbied hard to keep fossil fuel money out. And I won, and we wrote a report in Feb 2020.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney and that report was adopted by chair @rustyhicks at the March 2020 eboard meeting.

The minutes of that meeting, which iinclude that report, are not on the @ca_dem website. Coincidence?

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks the process of working on that Committee 1.0 report was extremely secretive. The party restricted access to the report we wrote. We could not access the doc outside of 1 hour per month. We could not copy the doc at all.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks luckily, I had a sense that something was really wrong, so I screenshotted the critical graf providing that the party would stop taking fossil fuel money

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks but then six months after signing off on that report banning fossil fuel money, @rustyhicks then took over $100k from Sempra Energy, an investor owned utilty committed to promoting natural gas and climate destruction.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks and the issue of fossil fuel money has been simmering within the party ever since.

Later in summer 2020, the party's finance committee also recommended against taking law enforcement money. And that also was basically ignored.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks we have tried to work thru party channels, which is why I've stayed fairly quiet on twitter. And we have been stonewalled at every turn.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks in August 2021 at the eboard, we tried to bring forth two motions to bar the party from fossil fuel money and law enforcement money, and chair Hicks refused to hear the motions.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks in frustration at the stonewalling, we -- 50 executive board members -- petitioned for a special meeting, the meeting happening right now.
And then the real obstacle course began.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks the party demanded we "verify" our signatures by faxing (!!!) wet signatures (!!!). They demanded we pre-register, and pre-register again, and held a special credentials committee meeting to verify, again, that we were entitled to vote.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks the party demanded that we provide the names and addresses of each speaker.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks now, the party is offering to convene a Commitee 2.0 to redo the work of Committee 1.0. And I have some things to say about why that's a bad idea.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks right now the party secretary is trying to sell Dem exec board members on the need for more delay and more committee processes, rather than simply making the decison now.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks this week, in response to our demand for a special meeting, the party announced the members of Committee 2.0. Several of the most conservative, status quo defending members of the party. No climate activists at all.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks and the party treasurer is paying lip service to the general idea of a habitable planet, and standing in solidarity with young Sunrise activists. She will vote against our motion to cease taking fossil fuel money now.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks so shortly the party will be voting, and this is pretty simple. Do we immediately cease taking fossil fuel money or do we study the matter again?

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks because committee 2.0, made up of mostly conservative status quo defenders, is either going to reaffirm the work of committee 1.0 (2019-20) or it's going to water down the work of committee 1.0, whose key graf I had to screenshot because it was never made public

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks right now party vice chair @BettyYeeforCA is speaking in favor of delay and study.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks @BettyYeeforCA my bad. she is making a motion to approve the delay committee tactici, ahead of the motions we have been working on.

Activiists are being steamrolled by the party.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks @BettyYeeforCA we activists forced the special meeting to be heard. We brought motions. Our motions have not been heard. Instead @BettyYeeforCA is moving a substitute motion to rubber stamp a delay committee.

@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks @BettyYeeforCA I'm honestly in shock. We forced a special meeting to hold a meeting to get the party to stop taking fossil fuel money and law enforcement money. party put every obstacle in our path. Now that we finally get the meeting we are not being heard!!!

All i can say is: the world is watching @Ca_dem leaders argue in favor of delay as Cal is being hammered by a bomb cyclone. Delay is denial and @rustyhicks is a climate denier.

Multiple people are trying to be heard to table this steamroller motion but @rustyhicks will not recognize them.

Same tactic as in August 2021 that led to this meeting.

I count six people who wanted to be heard to amend the steamroller/ delay motion, table, reconsider, etc, raise points of order. None of them were recognized before the vote.

Motion passes 78 percent to 22 percent

We now are taking up the motion to immediately ban fossil fuel money. This is a Potemkin vote. The 78-22 vote to delay and study the matter further was the key vote.

I spoke in favor of the second motion to immediately stop taking fossil fuel money. But as noted above, any vote would be a Potemkin vote, hollow and meaningless

And here it comes, a motion to defer and delay "immediately stop taking fossil fuel money" to the Delay Committee 2.0. Because the planet is not at all on fire.

Vote is 199 to 117 to defer to Delay Committee 2.0 an immediate ban on fossil fuel money. IOW, over 60 percent of voting @CA_Dem folk favor delay, study, process rather than action on @NoFossilMoney.

Now the party is doing a re run of the fossil fuel money issue, on law enforcement money. Motion to defer and delay and study after vows to stand for Black Lives Matter. Black speaker calls party out for performative allyship.

Vote to delay an immediate ban on law enforcement money, and instead send to Delay Committee 2.0, passes 188 to 121.
Party Finance Committee made this recommendation over a year ago but chair @rustyhicks ignored it.

Vote to adjourn the meeting passes, 233 to 54. End of live rage tweeting thread.