Tag Cloud
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
STORYLINE Sacramento Co-op Board publishes phony ballot argument, refuses legitimate ones
This storyline has only one article
Viewing thru of
Sacramento Co-op Board publishes phony ballot argument, refuses legitimate ones
by David Mandel, published on July 27, 2011 at 10:35 PM
Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op members will likely see only a phony “against” ballot argument when they vote in September on Measure 2, a Board-sponsored bylaws amendment that would bar the store from considering any political views or country of origin in making purchasing or any other decisions.
The elections page on the Co-op website presents a 263-word (the limit is 275) “for” argument from the Board, “countered” by a mere 63-word, sarcastic offering, purportedly from Charles Steven Arevalo, who is unknown to any of the active opponents of Measure 2. Any reader can tell that his true position is in favor, not against.
“This cynical move really takes the organic, honey-sweetened carrot cake,” said David L. Mandel of Co-op Members Matter, who submitted an authentic argument against the measure.
The Co-op Board asserts that it is simply following a rule that the first argument submitted gets published. It disclaims any responsibility for determining whether a submission is genuine.
“Imagine that a measure on the state ballot were accompanied by a printed argument that in fact favored the opposite of what it was labeled,” Mandel said. That would never happen, and it shouldn’t happen at our Co-op either.
Another of the Co-op Members Matter group, Ellen Schwartz, did in fact submit the first “con” argument. But it was rejected because it exceeded the length limit, which was announced only after she had already submitted her argument. “I sent my argument to the Board, but nobody notified me when they subsequently implemented the word limit. They did not “reject” my submission; they never even acknowledged receipt of it, despite two follow-up emails, hard copy submission and telephone calls.” said Schwartz. She and other Co-op members say she should be given the opportunity to shorten it, or to replace it with Mandel’s submission.
“This blatant subversion of any fairness signals that the current board is afraid of giving members a true choice and voice,” Mandel said, noting that it comes on the heels of an ongoing struggle over the board’s refusal, in violation of the Co-op’s bylaws, to place an initiative on the ballot that would let members decide whether to boycott Israeli products, then denying proponents the time-honored right to distribute literature for their cause in front of the store. “Whether one supports or opposes this boycott proposal, Co-op members have the right to hear about the issue and decide on it, as the bylaws provide.”
Measure 2 opens with “anti-discrimination” provisions that are redundant due to existing bylaws, not to mention federal and state law. But it would also prohibit the Co-op from using criteria related to “political opinion” or “national origin” in making purchasing or any other decisions.
The measure is clearly a reaction to the boycott proposal, aimed at preventing any such future efforts. But opponents note that this would also bar favoring local, small producers over imported goods, and that preferencing organic, sustainably grown and fair-trade products reflects political values that most Co-op members share.
“This [Arevalo's] ballot argument completely fails to address the issues, which means Co-op members are being denied the chance to make an informed decision,” said Co-op member Ellen Levy. “If the board has any interest in holding a fair election, they will immediately replace this with a legitimate ballot argument.”
“The controversy surrounding Measure 2 is yet another example of the Board leadership mismanaging a situation and creating more problems with their actions for our Co-op” said Board candidate Cody Potter, who is running with Susan Bush on a pro-democracy platform. “It’s really unfortunate and unnecessary. … Our leadership seems to have lost their spirit of cooperation with the Co-op membership!”
Disclosure:
Disturbed, then appalled, by the Co-op Board's series of moves to squelch discussion among and input from members, I got involved in the ad hoc group supporting the Cody Potter and Susan Bush for the Board and opposing the ballot measures.
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
I'm sorry, but how can this be thus? The Co-op cannot deny you venue in front of the store, so it doesn't sound kosher...if you pardon the pun. I've passed out literature in front of the store that was probably reviled by a lot more customers and staff there than this controversy ever came close to, but No one ordered me away, nor could they. The front of the store is a sidewalk, and a public right of way.
Mr. Mandel's argument is completely bogus. He proposes to censor the argument of another owner, also opposed to Measure Two, because he doesn't think it's good enough. How outrageous. Imagine for a second if his argument had qualified (it didn't) and the Board censored it for the misinformation it contains. I'm sure there would be even more outrage from Mr. Mandel. Apparently that argument wasn't in line with the extremist positions of the BDS group that Mr. Mandel has chosen to associate himself with -- the same group that is suing the Coop, has harassed our customers, and disrupted our Board meetings.
The argument submitted by Ms. Schwartz was nearly double the length detailed in the Co-op's election code. It was submitted before the 2011 rules were published and thus ineligible. This group (which its ever-changing names, but it's really BDS) was aware of this change in the rules, which is why it submitted Mr. Mandel's argument.
Now they want it both ways.
Thankfully the Board is following its rules and Bylaws, just as it always has.
Mr. Mandel was never told by me or anyone on the Board that he couldn't submit his argument as a household shopper. In an email to me, Mr. Mandel discovered for himself that he wasn't a member with eligibility to vote in the election, and that, in turn, means he couldn't submit an argument.
The facts are that Mr. Mandel discussed this issue with me and another Board member months ago. At that time, Mr. Mandel mentioned to me that he had not patronized the Co-op in a long time. I think his sudden interest in the store, and his past experience in Israeli-related issues, are something that other owners should know about when reviewing what he writes about our Co-op. Apparently Ms. Bush disagrees.
This was never a "simple initiative drive." This is part of a national effort by BDS to try to get a victory notch in their belts for their cause. It has failed at every other Co-op in American except one, where the Board of Directors voted for the boycott without any member participation or notice. Perhaps that's Ms. Bush's idea of "democracy." On the other hand, our Co-op has had multiple discussions of this, published material on our website and in our newsletter, and it has been the subject of more than a dozen meetings in the past year. The Board is following the Bylaws that require review of owner initiatives by the Co-op's Policy Committee (dominated by non-Board members) to ensure that what is on the ballot complies wit the cooperative principles, our Bylaws, and California law.
It's not surprising that Ms. Bush -- who has never participated in the governance of the Co-op by serving on a committee or in any other capacity -- was unaware of the basic fact that says only primary members can vote. I'm glad that Ms. Bush, who is running for the Board of Directors, is finally becoming aware of the basic rules of membership. Now if she would only become familiar with the Co-op's Bylaws, of which she also shows a basic lack of knowledge, she would understand that the Board is obligated by those rules to not allow measures onto our ballot that are illegal, don't comply with the Cooperative Principles, or with our articles of incorporation. Our legal counsel agrees. But somehow, because Ms. Coulter and Ms. Bush and Mr. Mandel aren't getting their way, the Co-op has become "undemocratic."
The one name that Ms. Bush shares with the others who are suing the store, harassing our customers, and disrupting our meetings is that they are associated with BDS, a group that has targeted Co-op's nationwide for their activities. The only time Ms. Bush has ever showed up to a Coop event or Board meeting was when the BDS attempt to inject politics into the Coop was on the agenda. Yet strangely, it's the one name that Ms. Bush doesn't include in her campaign literature or on her website. Talk about a smokescreen.
Ms. Bush also knows, having been to Coop events, that there has been ample discussion of their attempt to impose their political views. These include numerous meetings, Facebook discussions, letters in the Co-op Reporter, and the Co-op website.
And I have no problem with disagreement with the Board. It's healthy. But what Ms. Bush and Maggie Coulter are trying to do is force their political views down the throats of Co-op members. And in accordance with our Bylaws and the Co-operative principles, the Board has rejected their attempts with the overwhelming backing of Coop owners. So now they are trying to sue their way onto the ballot, costing the Coop energy and resources that should be devoted to helping local growers and the operation of our store.
Lastly,
From what I can read, Mr. Maviglio isn't attacking you or your age or your membership, and if you sense that, it's only because you and Maggie Coulter have been viciously attacking the Coop Board for more than a year, bothering shoppers, screaming at meetings, and other uncivil acts that turned shoppers like me against you. I'm glad that he and the Board are finally saying enough to the lawsuits and picketing of a store that is meant to bring people together. Perhaps you should distance yourself from Ms. Coulter instead of being her pawn.
And the facts are that you didn't attend a single Board nor Committee meeting in the five years I've been on the Board until you took up the cause of the BDS. That's not an attack; it's a fact.
By the way, "Israel" is a criminal racist anachronism which daily flouts more UN resolutions than Carter had liver pills.
The only point to this BDS agitation is to educate Americans with a conscience to the true history of the Zionist Enterprise. Read some Herzl, check out Ralph Schoenman's Hidden History of Zionism, Lenni Brenner's Revisionist Zionism from Jabotinsky to Shamir; then Jas Petras' the Power of Israel in the United States, cheap on Amazon:)
As for racism, the savages who want to pick up where Hitler left off do a fine job of that.
As for Rachel Corrie, good riddance to a fellow traveler.
Mr. Mandel wants the Board to censor and remove a ballot argument because he doesn't like it. The Board has no power to do such a thing.
The co-op membership has historically had the right to decide about things like boycotts. They earned that respect: historically informed and progressive membership choose causes that were important enough to them to be worth the risk to THEIR store. Anti-apartheidt, not anti-tax pledges. Open democracy, not corporate secrecy and almighty bottom line.
This board of directors, who, in their wisdom, stock a beer called "BITCH CREEK", want to choose what is "politically correct" and want to prevent the members from considering whether any more conflicts in the world are obscene enough to deserve their store's boycott.
I hope the members see this situation for what it is and vote "no" for both propositions and "yes" for Bush and Potter, the only two candidates who acknowledge this dire threat to our co-op.
Oh, and whats this "BDS" that you're all talking about? I'd like to know, since I have a feeling I'll soon be accused of being one.