AGAINST by Gary Z
I am OPPOSED to Amendment 02 to GR02. The Amendment reorganizes the intent of the underlying staffer’s responsibilities away from a set of discrete tasks, and instead positions them as a resource to our chapter’s steering committee. The underlying base resolution is far too premature and ill-defined to move forward — this amendment would make it worse. Be warned - this proposal would leave Metro DC DSA on the hook for $26 THOUSAND dollars. Socialists should be extremely cautious about how we maneuver with this funding.
We have heard at debate around the base proposal that this chapter hiring plan is intended to be an “experiment.” What this “experiment” fails to do is study or understand what works about our chapter currently, and clarify how it would connect to the functioning base structures and workflows our chapter already relies on. Consider that the most effective parts of our chapter that deliver the most consistent work and backbone structures of our chapter — our Administrative Committee, Publications Working Group and Campaigns Council — have been laboring for years to keep Metro DC DSA spinning while operating on threadbare financial allocations from the chapter. There is nothing in these proposals that clarify how a staffer would connect or cohere to what is actively working in our chapter or how it functions. The downside risk of this wider proposal is an interruption of the current workflow and cadre operations within the chapter.
This amendment does not correct the underlying issues with the proposal. It instead makes the original proposal less clear about what any staffer would be expected to do and what they are responsible for. This amendment instead allows the staffer’s abilities and duties to be defined solely by the chapter Steering Committee. While administrative flexibility will be important for any future staffing position, adding abstraction to an already vague and predefined proposal introduces significant risk to our treasury and trust in the central structures of the chapter.
My opposition to this amendment and the base resolution should not be taken as hard opposition to any staffing in the future. But we must move with extreme caution as we build up a staffing structure. But this amendment and the original proposal move way too fast. We should wait until the Chapter Program is fully realized before committing too quickly.
Our chapter is in the process of developing a two-year chapter program, heralded by the Chapter Program Committee. This was authorized by an authoritative vote of the chapter last year, and is set to be finished for ratification and amendments by the chapter at this year’s convention. It will determine our priorities and focus as a chapter for two years, and once ratified, will determine the nature of our auxiliary organs’ operations going forward. Making large spending decisions on chapter resources before this program is completed and finished would be incredibly irresponsible! We must know what our objectives are, and what structural and laborious resources we need to deliver them, before we begin pissing away our resources.