Bill (Witt) and others on the listserv, The Christian Science Monitor and other newspapers around the country have picked up the story of an attempted takeover of the Sierra Club board of directors through the election process. Sierra Club leaders cannot by law use the resources of the organization to lobby for one slate of candidates over another. Iowa Sierra club members will likely not see a story about this election in the quarterly newsletter. "'It's a democratic process. To accuse these candidates of taking over the Sierra Club is like accusing the Democrats of taking over the White House,' said board member Paul Watson, who co-founded Greenpeace and now heads the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society." The difference here is that Americans use party labels to distinguish the goals of candidates. In the Sierra Club elections, members will be given a ballot which is likely to have little information about a range of goals dear to the candidates. You will not see Anti-immigration Caucus vs. Status quo caucus. As Iowa's delegate to the Sierra Club's Council of Club Leaders, I heard about this effort last September. Board member Paul Watson was called upon to answer questions about such a rumored takeover. I reported back to the Iowa ex-com about his aims and methods, but there was not an agreement to publish a description of the potential at this year's election for a drastic change in policy. I can urge my fellow Sierrans to vote. One of the reasons we are open to a takeover from any group is that only 10% of the 750,000 members vote. With a pool of 75,000 voting, a few thousand determined and informed members can elect their favorites. A quarter of a million dollars in dues money can be used to gain control of an organization with the substantial assets of our Sierra Club. When the terrorist attacks of September, 2001, occurred, a range of conservative voices were raised calling on the Sierra Club to renounce the use of violence to attain their environmental goals. The Sierra Club could respond that our policies already kept us well within the law; indeed the Sierra Club does not have a policy of civil disobedience to further its aims. If a group advocating violence or civil disobedience were to come into control of the Sierra Club, many members would question their allegiance to the Club. I urge members to get informed about the candidates using all the information on the ballot and any information available through the public media. Talk to your friends in Sierra Club. THEN PLEASE SEND IN YOUR BALLOT. Jim Redmond Briar Cliff University [log in to unmask] 3303 Rebecca St. Sioux City IA 51104 712-279-5544 712-258-8303 home -----Original Message----- From: Bill Witt [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 11:59 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Today's Associated Press Coverage [bcc][faked-from] Dear Sierra Friends, I'm puzzled by what appears to be a considerable lack of interest in the upcoming BOD elections. Only three of the 94 members on this list-serve have responded to my expressions of concern. Others, however, are taking note. Here's a list of newspapers that today published an AP story on the takeover effort. Bill Witt USA Today Kansas City Star Seattle Times (ran with their own story that had local interviews) Sarasota Herald-FL Salt Lake City Tribune Chicago Tribune Boston Globe Miami HeraldContra Costa Times-CA Fort Wayne Journal Gazette-IN Fort Wayne News-Standard-IN Grand Forks Herald-ND Belleville News-Democrat-IN Atlanta Journal-Constitution Providence Journal-RI Corvallis Gazette Times-OR Tri-Valley Herald-CA Wichita Eagle Wilkes Barre Weekender-PA Bradenton Herald-FL Rocky Mount Telegram-NC Columbus Ledger-GA Centre Daily Times-PA News Journal-TX Fort Worth Star-Telegram The Guardian-UK MLive.com KTVU.com-SF Biloxi Sun Herald-MS San Jose Mercury News-CA phillyburbs.com-PA Wilmington Morning Star-NC Dayton Daily News-OH Macon Telegraph-GA Akron Beacon-Journal-OH The Ledger-FL Tuscaloosa News-AL Rival factions compete to control powerful Sierra Club SAN FRANCISCO (AP) ? A fierce battle is brewing over the future of the Sierra Club, and an unlikely issue is at the center of the debate: immigration. A growing faction in the nation's most influential environmental group has urged a stronger stance against immigration, calling the growing U.S. population and its consumption of natural resources the biggest threat to the environment. Past and present Sierra Club leaders say the anti-immigrant faction has teamed up with animal-rights activists in an attempt to hijack the 112-year-old organization and its $100 million annual budget. "At stake is really the heart and soul of the organization," said Adam Werbach, the club's president from 1996-98. "It's a sad attempt by a very small special-interest group to take over the entire Sierra Club organization." Some of the old guard has organized a movement called Groundswell Sierra to oppose what they say is an attempted takeover by outside groups. Their opponents responded by filing a lawsuit claiming the leaders are unfairly trying to influence an upcoming board election. Between March 1 and April 15, members will cast mail-in ballots to fill five open seats on the club's 15-member governing board. The club's anti-immigration faction says it needs only three more seats to control policy. "It's a democratic process. To accuse these candidates of taking over the Sierra Club is like accusing the Democrats of taking over the White House," said board member Paul Watson, who co-founded Greenpeace and now heads the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. Groundswell Sierra was formed after club leaders learned that Watson, who won a seat as a petition candidate last year, spoke openly about a takeover attempt during a speech at a conference on animal rights. Animal rights activists have agitated for the club to denounce hunting, fishing and meat consumption. Club leaders say the anti-immigration debate has drawn in outsiders who want to promote their agenda. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a Montgomery, Ala.-based civil liberties group, has reported that extremist racist and anti-immigration groups are encouraging their members to pay $25 to join the Sierra Club and vote in the election. In January, center co-founder Morris Dees said he would run for a board seat to draw attention to the anti-immigration movement. Groundswell Sierra is encouraging members to vote because less than 10% of the club's 750,000 members have participated in recent elections, making it easy for candidates to win board seats with relatively few votes. Founded by Scottish immigrant John Muir in 1892, the San Francisco-based Sierra Club, the country's oldest and largest environmental group, has traditionally advocated for clean air and water and protection of wildlands and wildlife. Despite its swelling ranks ? membership has grown by 50% over the past decade ? the Sierra Club hasn't had much success at achieving its top priority these days: stopping what members believe is an assault on the environment by the Bush administration, said executive director Carl Pope. "This administration has played by a different set of rules," Pope said. "If you don't play by the normal rules, you can do a lot of damage ? even in three years." Immigration came to the fore in recent years as some members pointed out that the United States consumes more natural resources than any other country. The debate came to a head in 1998, when members voted by a 60-40 margin to remain neutral on immigration. But the issue has not gone away. In recent elections, several members who favor tighter curbs on immigration have been elected to the board. "Many environmentalists are not willing to deal with this very important issue," said board member Ben Zuckerman, a UCLA astronomy professor who co-founded a network of club activists called Support US Population Stabilization. "The numbers need to come down. Legal and illegal immigration are at record-high levels." Many club leaders say an anti-immigration stance would alienate members as well as allied progressive groups that represent immigrants and minorities. "The Sierra Club is an inclusive organization," said Groundswell spokesman Lawrence Downing, the club's president from 1986-88. "If the Sierra Club adopted an anti-immigration policy, you've lost your constituency and your credibility." In an unusual move last month, all 13 living former club presidents sent a letter to the board demanding action to protect the club and endorse the candidates nominated by the board. Last week, the three most prominent candidates supported by the anti-immigration faction filed a lawsuit against the Sierra Club, seeking to bar the organization from using club resources to back certain candidates. Board President Larry Fahn called the lawsuit an attempt to "muzzle the leadership." Watson and his allies, meanwhile, say the group's ruling elite is simply afraid of losing power. "I think there's a group that's trying to protect their turf," said David Pimentel, a candidate supported by the anit-immigration faction. "They want to run it their way from the inside." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to: [log in to unmask] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Make your voice heard! Find out how to get Take Action Alerts and other important Sierra Club messages by email at: http://www.sierraclub.org/email