From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Co-op Board Rejects Democracy Initiative
The Sacramento Natural Foods Co-Op Board voted to not allow the Restore Co-op Democracy Initiative on the ballot. This measure includes provisions to ensure Open Comment at Board meetings; guarantee Member input into decisions; allow the Membership to decide if they want their Co-op operated under the corporate model of Policy Governance; and end discrimination against Members tabling in front of the store.
Co-op Board Rejects Democracy Initiative; Puts Bylaws Amendment to Restrict Purchasing Criteria on Co-op Ballot
by Maggie Coulter
Before a packed room of Co-op Members, shoppers and others at its June 7 meeting, the Board of the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op considered three items for the upcoming September ballot.
A Bylaws amendment, proposed by Board President Steve Maviglio, would prevent the Co-op from making purchasing decisions on the basis of “political opinion” or “national origin.”
Some members voiced support and several raised objections. One concern was that the proposed amendment could be used to prevent the Co-op from making purchasing decisions related to environmental or social concerns, since these are a matter of “political opinion.” For example, distributors of non-organic produce, Coco-Cola, or products tested on animals, non-Fair Trade products could claim the Co-op was discriminating against them by not carrying their products.
Proponents of the Human Rights Initiative stated that forbidding the Co-op from making purchasing decisions based on “national origin” seemed to be aimed at their effort to allow Co-op Members to vote on whether they want their store to support Palestinian human rights by not carrying Israeli products until Israel stops violating those rights.
One audience member expressed that preventing the Co-op from making decisions based on national origin was contrary to its stated goal of supporting local farmers and producers.
The Board considered a motion to remove the wording “political opinion” but it failed; the Board then approved the amendment as proposed for placement on the September ballot.
No to Restoration of Co-op Democracy
The Board voted to not allow the Restore Co-op Democracy Initiative on the ballot. This measure includes provisions to ensure Open Comment at Board meetings; guarantee Member input into decisions; allow the Membership to decide if they want their Co-op operated under the corporate model of Policy Governance; and end discrimination against Members tabling in front of the store. (The text of both the Restore Democracy and Human Rights initiatives are available at http://www.coopdemocracy.org.)
Initiative proponents maintain that the Board has no authority under the Bylaws to prevent either the Human Rights or the Restore Co-op Democracy Initiatives from being placed on the ballot. They cite Bylaws Section 10.06, which mandates the Board to put initiatives on the ballot once two procedural requirements are met. Both requirements, signatures and proposing the action at a Board or member meeting, have been met for both initiatives. (Bylaws are available on the Co-op's website and also at http://www.coopdemocracy.org.)
During the course of the meeting, three speakers, who identified themselves as being Jewish, spoke in favor of the Co-op taking action to support the human rights of the Palestinian people. Other speakers said they opposed a boycott. One man stated that he just wanted to be able to vote on the initiatives.
“We are just asking the Co-op to do what the Bylaws say,” said Josh Cadji. “We’re member/owners of the Co-op and that’s why we are here. We did not join the Co-op about this issue like John Boisa, who is here as part of his paid job.”
John Boisa, a co-founder of Save our Co-op that opposes the initiatives, is the paid director of the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC). JCRC’s stated purpose includes “Educat[ing] and advocat[ing] on behalf of [and], protect[ing] Israel.” In a June 6 opinion piece in the Sacramento Press, Boisa accused the Initiatives' proponents of directing their protest against the Co-op management, Board, and “ultimately – wait for it – the Jews.”
“Boisa’s inflammatory suggestion that we are going to attack Jews is outrageous and slanderous,” said Initiative supporter Ellen Schwartz. “I’m Jewish as are others in this group. We support the human rights of everyone regardless of their religion.”
Local Jewish Voice for Peace activist, David Mandel notes that “JCRC is an unelected body that purports to speak for the Sacramento Jewish community on various issues, with much of its activity focused on quashing any dissent from uncritical support of Israeli government policies. JCRC has excluded from its ranks Jewish groups that criticize Israeli policy. Moreover, the majority of Jews in Sacramento do not belong to any of the organizations that are represented on JCRC, and national surveys have shown that most American Jews, contrary to JCRC's leadership, support a change in U.S. policy that would seek an end to Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and promote peace based on human rights for all."
In the same opinion piece, Boisa dismissed reports that JCRC’s Barry Broad had forcefully grabbed a woman on the wrist when Broad was tabling with Save our Co-op against the Initiatives. Boisa, who was not present when the incident occurred, questioned its veracity because the woman was related to one of the Initiative’s proponents. The incident, which occured May 8, was immediately reported by the woman to Co-op management; she later filed a police report. Barry Broad, chair of the JCRC, admitted to touching but not grabbing her. Co-op management barred him from tabling as a result.
“It is shocking to read this man justify assault because of the victim’s relation to someone else,” said Cadji. “That sounds like blaming the victim to me.”
Board mails 7,000 members that the Co-op is being “targeted”
Prior to the meeting, the Co-op Board had mailed out a letter to its approximately 7,000 active members alleging that the Co-op was being targeted by a group that was trying to change co-op principles, harass shoppers, and call for a boycott of the store. The letter indicated that this group’s efforts were at odds with the Co-op’s Bylaws, democratic member control and the cooperative principles, and invited members who agreed with the Board to attend the June 7 meeting.
Although the Board's letter blamed the Sacramento Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Working Group for the targeting, it appeared to be directed at another group, Sac Co-op Owners for Democracy and Human Rights, which is supporting both the Human Rights and Restore Co-op Democracy initiatives.
The cost of sending the letter was not disclosed but is estimated at well over $3,000 for postage, stationery, and reproduction. An email with the same content had been sent to Co-op Members on June 6, preceded by a similar email sent on May 31. (Contents and analysis of the letter and the emails is available at http://www.coopdemocracy.org).
Some audience members thanked the Board for sending it and others said they found it disturbing, offensive, and erroneous.
One Co-op Member described some inaccuracies in the letter, including that the initiatives being proposed had nothing to do with the Co-op principle of open membership as the letter alleges. She also refuted the harassment charges and noted that the three times the police had been called, they found no wrongdoing.
Fire Marshalls called; Preferred shares back on ballot
Fire Marshalls were called because of the room overcrowding. No room capacity sign was visible. When Fire Marshalls arrived, they stated the room capacity was 48 persons and asked that people voluntarily leave before the meeting continued.
One audience member was overheard commenting that of the several times City authorities had been called, at least now it was for a legitimate reason.
The Board also voted to put a Bylaws amendment on the ballot rewording the preferred shares measure that had been passed in September 2010. Apparently the initial wording, drafted by the Co-op’s attorney, had been inadequate to facilitate the sales of shares as desired by the Co-op. If preferred shares are ultimately sold, their purchasers are entitled to get their money back before any Members.
About the author: Maggie Coulter is a 15+ year member of the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op , a member of Sacramento Co-op Owners for Democracy and Human Rights, a human rights and environmental activist and an organic gardener.
by Maggie Coulter
Before a packed room of Co-op Members, shoppers and others at its June 7 meeting, the Board of the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op considered three items for the upcoming September ballot.
A Bylaws amendment, proposed by Board President Steve Maviglio, would prevent the Co-op from making purchasing decisions on the basis of “political opinion” or “national origin.”
Some members voiced support and several raised objections. One concern was that the proposed amendment could be used to prevent the Co-op from making purchasing decisions related to environmental or social concerns, since these are a matter of “political opinion.” For example, distributors of non-organic produce, Coco-Cola, or products tested on animals, non-Fair Trade products could claim the Co-op was discriminating against them by not carrying their products.
Proponents of the Human Rights Initiative stated that forbidding the Co-op from making purchasing decisions based on “national origin” seemed to be aimed at their effort to allow Co-op Members to vote on whether they want their store to support Palestinian human rights by not carrying Israeli products until Israel stops violating those rights.
One audience member expressed that preventing the Co-op from making decisions based on national origin was contrary to its stated goal of supporting local farmers and producers.
The Board considered a motion to remove the wording “political opinion” but it failed; the Board then approved the amendment as proposed for placement on the September ballot.
No to Restoration of Co-op Democracy
The Board voted to not allow the Restore Co-op Democracy Initiative on the ballot. This measure includes provisions to ensure Open Comment at Board meetings; guarantee Member input into decisions; allow the Membership to decide if they want their Co-op operated under the corporate model of Policy Governance; and end discrimination against Members tabling in front of the store. (The text of both the Restore Democracy and Human Rights initiatives are available at http://www.coopdemocracy.org.)
Initiative proponents maintain that the Board has no authority under the Bylaws to prevent either the Human Rights or the Restore Co-op Democracy Initiatives from being placed on the ballot. They cite Bylaws Section 10.06, which mandates the Board to put initiatives on the ballot once two procedural requirements are met. Both requirements, signatures and proposing the action at a Board or member meeting, have been met for both initiatives. (Bylaws are available on the Co-op's website and also at http://www.coopdemocracy.org.)
During the course of the meeting, three speakers, who identified themselves as being Jewish, spoke in favor of the Co-op taking action to support the human rights of the Palestinian people. Other speakers said they opposed a boycott. One man stated that he just wanted to be able to vote on the initiatives.
“We are just asking the Co-op to do what the Bylaws say,” said Josh Cadji. “We’re member/owners of the Co-op and that’s why we are here. We did not join the Co-op about this issue like John Boisa, who is here as part of his paid job.”
John Boisa, a co-founder of Save our Co-op that opposes the initiatives, is the paid director of the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC). JCRC’s stated purpose includes “Educat[ing] and advocat[ing] on behalf of [and], protect[ing] Israel.” In a June 6 opinion piece in the Sacramento Press, Boisa accused the Initiatives' proponents of directing their protest against the Co-op management, Board, and “ultimately – wait for it – the Jews.”
“Boisa’s inflammatory suggestion that we are going to attack Jews is outrageous and slanderous,” said Initiative supporter Ellen Schwartz. “I’m Jewish as are others in this group. We support the human rights of everyone regardless of their religion.”
Local Jewish Voice for Peace activist, David Mandel notes that “JCRC is an unelected body that purports to speak for the Sacramento Jewish community on various issues, with much of its activity focused on quashing any dissent from uncritical support of Israeli government policies. JCRC has excluded from its ranks Jewish groups that criticize Israeli policy. Moreover, the majority of Jews in Sacramento do not belong to any of the organizations that are represented on JCRC, and national surveys have shown that most American Jews, contrary to JCRC's leadership, support a change in U.S. policy that would seek an end to Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip and promote peace based on human rights for all."
In the same opinion piece, Boisa dismissed reports that JCRC’s Barry Broad had forcefully grabbed a woman on the wrist when Broad was tabling with Save our Co-op against the Initiatives. Boisa, who was not present when the incident occurred, questioned its veracity because the woman was related to one of the Initiative’s proponents. The incident, which occured May 8, was immediately reported by the woman to Co-op management; she later filed a police report. Barry Broad, chair of the JCRC, admitted to touching but not grabbing her. Co-op management barred him from tabling as a result.
“It is shocking to read this man justify assault because of the victim’s relation to someone else,” said Cadji. “That sounds like blaming the victim to me.”
Board mails 7,000 members that the Co-op is being “targeted”
Prior to the meeting, the Co-op Board had mailed out a letter to its approximately 7,000 active members alleging that the Co-op was being targeted by a group that was trying to change co-op principles, harass shoppers, and call for a boycott of the store. The letter indicated that this group’s efforts were at odds with the Co-op’s Bylaws, democratic member control and the cooperative principles, and invited members who agreed with the Board to attend the June 7 meeting.
Although the Board's letter blamed the Sacramento Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Working Group for the targeting, it appeared to be directed at another group, Sac Co-op Owners for Democracy and Human Rights, which is supporting both the Human Rights and Restore Co-op Democracy initiatives.
The cost of sending the letter was not disclosed but is estimated at well over $3,000 for postage, stationery, and reproduction. An email with the same content had been sent to Co-op Members on June 6, preceded by a similar email sent on May 31. (Contents and analysis of the letter and the emails is available at http://www.coopdemocracy.org).
Some audience members thanked the Board for sending it and others said they found it disturbing, offensive, and erroneous.
One Co-op Member described some inaccuracies in the letter, including that the initiatives being proposed had nothing to do with the Co-op principle of open membership as the letter alleges. She also refuted the harassment charges and noted that the three times the police had been called, they found no wrongdoing.
Fire Marshalls called; Preferred shares back on ballot
Fire Marshalls were called because of the room overcrowding. No room capacity sign was visible. When Fire Marshalls arrived, they stated the room capacity was 48 persons and asked that people voluntarily leave before the meeting continued.
One audience member was overheard commenting that of the several times City authorities had been called, at least now it was for a legitimate reason.
The Board also voted to put a Bylaws amendment on the ballot rewording the preferred shares measure that had been passed in September 2010. Apparently the initial wording, drafted by the Co-op’s attorney, had been inadequate to facilitate the sales of shares as desired by the Co-op. If preferred shares are ultimately sold, their purchasers are entitled to get their money back before any Members.
About the author: Maggie Coulter is a 15+ year member of the Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op , a member of Sacramento Co-op Owners for Democracy and Human Rights, a human rights and environmental activist and an organic gardener.
Add Your Comments
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network