I am writing a 3 part post on my home blog on this deal.
Since the CRA is still under threat of lawsuit – I am having to be somewhat circumspect in what I am writing. But – I want to dedicate these posts to the anonymous lawyer that was railing on me earlier. [Ed. note: That would be "Newbie!"]
Click here to see the elections results. We Won, all of us on the “Contract With the CRA” Slate.
The Convention was a zoo – the lead up to the convention was insane as well. There had to be a ton of money riding on this convention for a lot of people because the tactics used were straight out of a Union Hall.
Click here to read about my experience on Friday, April 15th – day one of the CRA Convention
Aarron,
I heard the OC chapter doubled down on Marylin Davenport!!
I am not sure on that. But, I saw a lot of people there that you guys blog about here and a lot of the descriptions were accurate.
For the record, I was railing on you Sgt. because you wouldn’t address the fact that your faction blatantly violated the bylaws in passing the bogus residency requirement a couple of weeks before the convention. You had your day in court and lost, badly. I know you can rationalize the judge’s ruling all you want, but the fact is that you were prevented from enforcing your illegal policy. Period. And I was one of the ones who was locked out of the General Session (more on that later) who was arguing that you were not violating the court order as long as you did not exclude a single delegate for not residing in the geographic region of their unit.
I wouldn’t want to disappoint the good Sgt., so here’s my take/rant on the joke that was the CRA convention (you’ll love this Vern):
For the record, I supported Karen and her slate going into the convention, and any question I had of whether I was supporting the right side was dispelled within minutes of Saturday morning if you care to read my tome below.
I got in line to get my delegate badge on Saturday morning. When I gave my unit name, my name was highlighted in scarlett red. The gentleman at the table told me I had been flagged and I could not get a coveted delegate badge at that time. When I asked him why I had been flagged, he did not know. When I asked him how I could find out, he told me to find George Park. However, since Mr. G. Park was currently inside the conference room, that was rather difficult. You see, the agenda I was given when I registered (I had previously paid my $200+ registration fee) said that Saturday morning’s session was a “General Session.”
When I tried to enter the General Session, one of the two large men stationed at each of the two entry ways to the conference room, informed me that I was not able to enter because I did not have a badge (either delegate or Board member). When I told him that I was trying to enter the General Session as advertised, I was refused access.
After another hour or so of waiting in the lobby of the hotel (many shenanigans went on from both sides during the entire conference, too many to address here), I finally got to address Mr. G. Park, still outside the conference room because I was barred from the General Session, to his credit (one of the few times I will ever give him such), he gave me actual information. He told me that I was flagged for some reason, that the flagged delegates were being called into the conference room and told the reason they were flagged. They would then be given a chance to explain or defend their delegate status, at which point the current delegates would be allowed to vote on whether to seat the flagged delegate or not. I asked Mr. G. Park why I couldn’t enter the General Session and he told me it was a closed session. I must’ve missed the secret agenda his side handed out changing the General Session to a closed session, but I digress.
A quick note on Saturday’s General Session. I talked to know less than 5-10 CRA members at the convention who told me that they had never had a closed session to seat the delegates before. As I understand, they had an area reserved for delegates and placed other viewers in a separate area to prevent non-delegates from illegally voting. This will be important later.
Back to my fine Saturday. The morning came and went, and still I sat. Lunch passed. The afternoon came and went. Finally, some 10 hours after I started waiting, I was given that magic pass to enter the hallowed hall. I was paraded up to the front, the charges were read against me, and me and my group pled our case to the jury. The vote was cast and we were given grace and seated. Huzzah!
Since I was now one of the “Inner Circle” I was given a beautiful blue delegate badge (that’s going on my mantle) and actually allowed to stay in the room. Imagine that! Not only that, but I was allowed to vote on the handful of remaining challenged delegates. What do you know!
As I actually saw it, the process went like this – delegate(s) marched up, charges read, case pleaded, vote taken. Just like me. The votes I saw were quickly counted, half of the room by Mike Munzing, and half by the good Sgt. Hmmmmm, the Sgt.’s running for a CRA office and he’s counting to see whether the delegates should be seated – no conflict of interest there. Oh yeah, and his brother was running for offfice too, while running the Kangaroo Court deciding on only some of the delegates fates. Yeah, totally on the up and up.
I forgot to mention, 300+ delegates were submitted by the various units. The Credentials Committee, which was led by Mr. G. Park, included several people running for office. Again, no conflict here, right? On Friday night, I was told the Credentials Committee abandoned the conference room and barricaded itself in one of the hotel rooms to go over the submitted delegate list. By the time the next morning dawned, the CC had flagged over 1/3 of the delegates (an unprecedented number I was told by more than one person who had been to many past CRA conventions). Only those delegates blessed by the CC were initially allowed to get badges and enter the sacred conference room.
And since the farce lasted all day, the breakout sessions (one of the reasons I was attending the convention) were cancelled. So the only substantive sessions of the weekend fell victim to the joke happening behind closed doors.
That was my fun Saturday. 10 hours in a hotel lobby, criminal line up, bed time.
Sunday was more subdued. I think everyone was tired from the implosion of the CRA that had happened the day before. Armed with my magic badge, I confidently strode into the conference room. Sadly, the doors were now opened to all and I was relegated to commoner status like everyone else.
Sunday’s session began at 10:00 am because someone screwed up and put that on the agenda rather than 9:30 am like it should have been. So the session really started at approximately 10:20 am since Mr. G. Park, Celeste Grieg and her crew were apparently too tired from their hijinx the days before.
Since everything at this convention took forever, why not take an hour to approve the rules, several of which were now moot. Kudos to Mike Spence for proposing an amendment that required a refund for all convention attendees who were not given a delegate badge and were denied access to Saturday’s charade. Shockingly, it was overwhelmingly approved. Apparently, a vote was held early Saturday to open the General Session, I mean secret closed session, to all convention attendees, but it was defeated [Note to the geniuses who voted to keep the session closed on Saturday, but then voted to refund the money of those shut out, and there had to have been more than a few, if you had simply opened the Saturday session as advertised, you still would've had a lot of ticked off members, but you would've saved the CRA thousands of dollars in refunds - rationalize that for me, please.]
And a special shout out to Craig Alexander, attorney at law. He went to the mike to “reluctantly” oppose the refund motion. His stated reason was that there was a class action threatened against the CRA. That puzzled me, because if you refund the members their money, you pretty much eliminate their standing for suing you for keeping them out of the top secret closed session. But that’s just me.
Sadly, I had relied on the representation by the CRA that the Sunday session would end at noon, and I had to get to my rental car location, so I was unable to stay around for the “vote” that occurred.
Now my random thoughts:
I understand that both sides use the so-called paper units to their benefit. But that’s operating within the bylaws. Eliminating delegates for any reason other than failure to pay dues, failure to be a CRA member (registered Republican), failure to timely submit the delegate list, or failure to timely transfer to another CRA unit, is not in the bylaws. I actually spoke to one delegate who told me that both sides abused the system, but since Karen’s side gamed the system better, it was ok for Ms. Grieg’s side to effectively chuck the bylaws out the window to rig the election.
I am all for fixing the elections and endorsements problems with the CRA. Ignoring the bylaws and effectively rigging an election is not the way to do it. I would be in favor of geographic restrictions on delegates. And I would love to get rid of paper units who exist solely to get people elected and endorsed. But you cannot selectively apply the bylaws to exclude delegates from your opponents to win an election. My evidence for that – I was told by a delegate that their unit failed to comply with the bylaws on selecting delegates, but that it did not matter because the head of the unit was voting for Ms. Grieg and her slate. Yeah that’s the moral high ground.
I also find it ironic that there is some question as to whether the Park brothers’ own unit (Placer County) is a paper unit or not. I heard from at least 3-4 delegates from that area that Placer never had meetings, or they combined the CRA meeting with the Central Committee meeting (yeah, that’s proper). Yet despite these problems, they never had to account for their unit’s legitimate status. Hmmm, I wonder if it had anything to do with the Park brothers running the show? Nah.
Did Karen’s side engage in some shenanigans of their own? I’m sure they did. I wasn’t a fan of trying to rip the door off its hinges and barge into the top secret General Session, barrelling through two or three gentlemen in the process. I also wasn’t a fan of screaming into the room every time the door was opened, or chanting loudly from outside the conference room, because we were guests in a hotel, but emotions were running high. I have also read on the other side’s blogs that Karen’s folks allegedly sent hateful emails and made threatening calls to Ms. Grieg’s house. If that’s true, they should be kicked out of CRA immediately. But so should the good Sgt. (why he wasn’t kicked out when Chuck Devore revealed that he tried to sell an endoresement is beyond me – yes I believe Chuck’s word over the good Sgt.’s), and all of Ms. Grieg’s side who made the CRA a literal joke over this weekend. I understand that Ms. Grieg is a woman of God, but she didn’t do anything this weekend to convince me of that.
In sum, assuming any of you have even bothered to read my whole missive, this was my first, and likely last, CRA convention. The good Sgt.’s side made several references to us not being unions, etc. I would ask those folks this question – who locked out its own paying members from a General Session? I would love to hear the answer to that one.
So what do we do? Well, in my opinion, we should’ve had an election the way the CRA has always had an election, let the chips fall where they may, and then make real changes to prevent anyone from doing this ever again. What we shouldn’t have done was lock paying members out of the process, selectively enforce bylaws that have nothing to do with seating delegates, and try to steal an election.
It’s the first time I’ve ever been ashamed to be a member of any group. And I know I was not alone in feeling that this weekend.
Newbie.
While I have not fully read your detailed convention report let me state that as Vice Chairman of the 2001 CRA Endorsing Convention for governor and constitutional office candidates, I do not recall our having barred delegates in good standing from any of the nearly 100 statewide CRA units.
That said what unit do you belong to and how long have you been a member?
Whe did you pay your annual dues?
Not having attended the just concluded CRA convention, without conducting interviews of both camps and third party attendees, I cannot engage in what rules and by-laws might have been violated.
Based on your overall experience I would say it was not the brightest day for the conscious of the Republican Party as advertised by the CRA for the past 76 years.
Mr. Fremming – your delegation got seated, because unlike so many others you had some proof of legitimacy. Other people could not even remember the name of their unit nor answer basic questions about how they were selected as delegates.
That’s the key issue.
Secondly – I’d encourage you to come to a CRA meeting in Placer, and also to visit the Placer County Clerk’s office and have a look at our form 460′s. You’ll see that we indeed meet regularly and raise a fair amount of money for local elections – which are two things Ladera RA can’t claim.
Sgt York.
Sorry this dirty laundry is now on the net for the whole world to see.
Just a quick response to your comment.
Each CRA unit has a set of By-Laws that establishes the frequency of their meetings. I do not know if that requirement was met or not.
As to raising funds. While this is an obvious goal there are other ways to supprt the GOP such as voter registration drives that we did every 4th of July at our booth in Mission Viejo. I can’t speak for any other unit’s activities.
Again. Unless the By-Laws have specific mandates such as fund raising for candidates I think you are going off base with your argument
No, try again, Newbie is not “Mr. Fremming.” It’s weird how many people do this, try to guess an anon’s identity, and they’re almost always way off.
He’s probably someone you never heard of, Aaron.
Sgt Park.
As stated by Vern, Newbie is not anyone named Fremming.
As he attended the convention you should know his identity if you had any role relating to the credentials function.
Forget the name and focus on his documented grievances.
Thanks for the harrowing tale, Newbie. Felt like I was there. mmmm… smells like … VICTORY!
I always love a good Apocalypse Now reference, even from a liberal flame thrower such as yourself Vern.
Most guys who suffered through that stoopid war came out as liberal flame throwers, or even farther left!
Mr. Gilbert – Mr. “Newbie”‘s issues are way off base. The attack against the Placer Unit is absurd… the point about the fundraising is that our unit actually gets people elected which is what CRA units should be doing. Our members walk precincts, make calls and the like.
I only have three other possibilites as to the identity of Mr. “Newbie” as I was there in the middle of the fracus. Mr. Newbie was standing 5 feet from me when his unit was credentialed y the committee.
I can tell all of you this – the issues will stand up to legal scrutiny regarding the credentialling. I can not comment further because of the legal action.
As to what makes a legit unit? They must meet 4 times a year at a minimum. Placer met 6 times last year, and twice so far this year. The source most people are quoting about the legitimacy of Placer is Karen England (the defeated Pres Candidate) herself. She has said the same things for four years about the Placer Unit.
It is also an amazing concept how trouble-makers can pull their alinsky tactics and somehow claim to be the victims when they lose.
I have another posting up the I will bring over about Saturday that will answer a lot of the “Newbies” “Charges” in his comment as well.
Sgt. York.
Having served as our unit president both before and after CRA VP Scott Voights was elected SRA president I am quite familiar with the meeting requirements and precinct walking functions. Many of the candidates we supported were elected. For the record SRA met around 10 times every year.
Our local unit’s credentials were second to none. However, I need to remain focussed. This post is not about SRA.
Did you say FORMER secretary? Are you referring to a person in the San Gabriel Valley?
We made sure that our dues were mailed in time to participate in local, regional and statewide conventions. Our representatives credentials were never an issue.
As this activity involves litigation it’s best for me to stay out of the debate.
Yes. That person from the San Gabriel Valley lost.
Further, the unit must have 10 paid members to keep a charter. The dues must be current – and due to the refusal by many units to forward records, it was impossible to even verify the simplest information.
There were units claiming as many as 45 members that have a documented history of not meeting and exisiting only for sending convention delegates.
Had the now former membership secretary have forwarded the records and those de-credentialed units actually been legit… the convention elections could have been different. However, one has to wonder why the records are so “secret” and why they were not handed over after the election to the new membership secretary.
By the way – since “Newbie” was not in the room – I can tell you that few of the de-credentialling votes were close. Most were close to a 2-1 margin against.
Larry – I am sorry the laundry is out in the open, too. But, the other side spent tens of thousands of dollars on this drill and the smears and slander to go along with.
Once the legal crap is done – I will spell out in spades what was done. Even “newbie” will look at it in amazement. (That is part of what is frustrating about these exchanges is that I can’t get specific in my answers)
To this day no one from Ms. Greig’s side (you know, most of whom have been in power for over a year now) can tell me why, despite everyone apparently knowing about these paper units for years, nothing was done until the convention itself, after the delegate lists had been submitted and the candidates running for office saw the list. Most of what Mr. Park complains about goes to whether the unit is/should be in good standing, and has nothing to do with whether the delegates should be seated.
I can’t speak to my units’ prior meetings. I can say that we have had two meetings in the past 45 days or so, including our most recent one where former Assemblyman and CVUSD Board Member Ken Maddox spoke.
As to the questions about the Placer Unit, I heard from at least 2 members (neither of whom were Karen England) questioning whether properly noticed meetings were held. That’s why I support true accountability for all units. There should be minutes required for each meeting, including who attended. I think the VPs or Senate Directors should be given responsibility for certain units and required to make sure they are not paper units. If there is some question, the Board should offer to help the units that really want to exist and support the CRA, and revoke the charters of those that only exist for endorsements and elections.
I understand Mr. Park’s frustration at not being able to talk about a lot of what he wants to talk about due to the pending litigation. However, he and his folks brought this on themselves by ignoring the paper units until it was clear their side would lose the election, then implementing an illegal residency requirement, then disenfranchising dozens of delegates the day the convention started. Had Ms. Greig flushed out the paper units earlier, none of this controversy would have happened. I have yet to see a single member of the Board take responsibility for letting this happen, and that tells me it’s only going to continue in the future.
Newbie – Peggy Mew was friends with a lot of people, including Celeste. Peggy was left in charge of the charter review committee after Celeste was elected president. That was a mistake.
Peggy stonewalled having Charter Review committee meetings for months. When Celeste was going to remove her – it was already almost time for the upcoming elections and was really too late to do so. You have to show some regard for a 30+ year friendship between those two that is now gone.
As to my unit – Karen and company (a lot of people in the Sac RA) have been complaining about the Placer Unit for years. We have 77 members currently and I am sitting here looking at the minutes from our last 6 meetings. Our By-laws and our style of meeting are unorthodox. Our March meeting in 2011 was a screening of the movie “the Child” about how the government wants to raise your kids. We’ve never met monthly and likely never will.
If you want to talk further – please call me. My number is on the state website. But I think this answer will explain a lot.
I don’t know how people can say Republicans are DOOMED in California when we have these competing stories of courage and grit, with people counting votes for delegate challenges until they had blisters on their feet, and others, just sitting, sitting, sitting.
Keep it up guys. You are doing a great job.
Amen, Mayor.
Wait till I can out the fraud that was attempted… it will get even better.