Subject: MMOW Rejects Open Process; PRESS RELEASE
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 00:18:09 EDT

Ad Hoc Committee for An Open Process 
P.O. Box 1114
Old Chelsea Station
New York, NY 10011

For Immediate Release:  April 28, 1999

Media Contacts:  Leslie Cagan  212-927-8342  email: [email-masked]
Bill Dobbs       212-966-1091   email: [email-masked]

MMOW BOARD AGAIN REJECTS CALL FOR OPEN PROCESS PROPOSED MARCH LOSES ANOTHER 
BOARD MEMBER AD HOC COMMITTEE MOMENTUM GROWS

The Millennium March on Washington (MMOW) board has again ignored a call for 
opening the process for a national LGBT mobilization to the communities they 
claim to represent. After their board meeting on April 25 and 26, the MMOW 
released a press statement saying `the board discussed plans to broaden its 
structure,' but the release indicates a lack of understanding of what an open 
process means.

Late on April 25th the MMOW Board and several members of the Ad Hoc Committee 
for an Open Process met for 90 minutes. During the meeting, MMOW co-chair Ann 
deGroot announced plans to use the internet and hold town meetings. However, 
the MMOW would not agree to opening up a community-wide discussion around the 
country to decide whether or when there should be a national mobilization.  

`E-mail cannot replace a democratic, inclusive process nor can promotional 
town meetings replace local organizing committees that are part of the 
decision-making process ' stated Ad Hoc member Leslie Cagan. `Attempts to 
deflect criticism by announcing their choices for new additions to their 
board or by allowing a few people to attend part of their meeting do not 
address the central problem that a handful of people - not a broad cross 
section of the lgbt community - decided it was time to march on Washington.'

Earlier in the day of April 25th, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) 
executive director Kerry Lobel announced her resignation from the Board of 
the Millennium March. The MMOW claims that Lobel left for `personal reasons.' 
However, NGLTF has made public Lobel's 3-page resignation letter. Lobel cites 
three main reasons for her decision -- all of them directly related to MMOW. 
Lobel departed over political disagreements; doubt over the value of a march 
in April, 2000; and concerns over financial accountability.         

In February, the National Youth Advocacy Coalition executive director Rea 
Carey resigned from the MMOW Board. Other organizations have withheld their 
support of the event, including the National Black Lesbian and Gay Leadership 
Forum, Pride at Work, & BiNet USA, It's Time America (transgender 
organization), and over 500 lgbt activists around the country have signed the 
Call for An Open Process.

On April 25th, The Ad Hoc Committee also met with the National Organization 
for Women's (NOW) President Patricia Ireland and Vice-President of Action 
Elizabeth Toledo for nearly an hour to discuss the possible suspension of 
NOW's conditional endorsement of the MMOW and to reconsider its relationship 
to the planned MMOW.

The Ad Hoc Committee maintains that the MMOW has waited too long to address 
crucial community organizing issues. `The Ad Hoc Committee is not opposed to 
national marches -- look at who we are,' said Steve Ault, co-chair of the '79 
and '87 marches. `However, unlike the other marches which proceeded from a 
community-wide mandate following discussions on when, why, how and if we 
should march, the MMOW event was decided by a handful of people meeting 
privately.'

During the meeting with the Ad Hoc Committee, MMOW executive producer Robin 
Tyler stated that she unilaterally called for the Millennium March and that 
it would happen because they have contracts for `10,000 hotel rooms' in 
Washington, D.C. for the weekend of April 30, 2000. 

"Let's us never forget how we got here", said black lesbian activist Mandy 
Carter, an '87 and '93 MOW organizer from North Carolina.  "While there is 
now emphasis on how diverse the MMOW Board is with people of color and women, 
this was not at all the case when key decisions were made by a few 
self-selected people. It is precisely when decisions are made that diversity 
is most needed. And not just diversity of race and gender but of issues and 
constituencies too.  That is more than a flaw in how to organize in a social 
justice movement."

The way the MMOW is being planned represents the privatization of the 
movement for profit with no accountability: what is the budget, what 
financial commitments have already been made, where is the money coming from? 
The Ad Hoc Committee is struck by the lack of community/movement building 
that was the hallmark of the previous three marches on Washington.

Throughout the meeting with the MMOW Board, the Ad Hoc Committee reiterated 
that the fundamental decisions must be revisited through a grassroots, 
community-wide, democratic decision-making process. The Ad Hoc Committee has 
offered to work with present members of the MMOW Board and others to develop 
such a process. 

The Ad Hoc Committee is a volunteer, grassroots group that formed in early 
1998 shortly after an announcement was made public for a `Millennium March on 
Washington.' The group's `Call for an Open Process' has created discussion 
throughout the lgbt movement and is now supported by many well known 
individuals and organizers of the three previous marches on Washington.

-30- 

Addendum:
(1) Call for An Open Process 
(2) Kerry Lobel's letter of resignation
(3) NOW's conditional endorsement 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALL FOR AN OPEN PROCESS

The Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender people of the USA have organized three 
national marches on Washington, in 1979, 1987 and in 1993.  These marches 
raised the visibility and advanced the issues of our communities.  But the 
real importance and success of these mobilizations can be measured by the 
effect they had on our own communities.  Grassroots organizing raised issues 
locally, spawned lasting coalitions and turned many of us into activists.  On 
state and regional levels, new links were forged.  Nationally, constituency 
organizing resulted in the emergence of national organizations and networks. 
The marches on Washington have been unique organizing tools that helped build 
a larger, stronger and more unified movement.

Each march was very different as were the times during which they were 
organized.  However, each one was run democratically with mass, grassroots 
involvement, and each followed a similar organizing scenario.  A committee 
(which dissolved after its work was done) organized a national meeting to 
which representatives of all lesbian and gay (and later expanded to include 
bisexual and transgender) organizations--local, state and regional as well as 
national-- were welcomed.  Organizational representatives voted, but 
otherwise, all in attendance were invited to participate in these open 
meetings.  Here, the primary decision whether to have the event was made 
first, followed by deliberations on the name of the event, the politics, 
structure, leadership, and the organizing strategy.  Then, throughout the 
country, open, democratically run meetings selected delegates, with mandates 
to include women and people of color, to a national steering committee, the 
highest decision-making body.  Constituencies were also represented in the 
national steering committee and every national organization in our community 
was invited to join.

Many of these meetings were at times contentious and chaotic.  But in the end 
the decisions were accepted because the process was fair and inclusive. 
People from all over the country were motivated to commit their time, energy, 
and resources to build the marches because they realized that they were both 
heard and represented.  And finally, when the big day arrived, we reveled in 
and were empowered by our accomplishment.  The marches on Washington 
strengthened our movement largely because they were democratically run 
grassroots efforts on a massive scale.  They have become an essential part of 
our proud history and a model to other movements for social change.

Now, as a fourth march on Washington is being proposed, we must summon the 
legacy of the previous three--for the process by which this discussion 
proceeds will define not only the nature of any event that may follow, but 
more importantly, that of the lesbian/ gay/ bisexual/ transgender movement 
itself.

Therefore, we, the Ad Hoc Committee for an Open Process, propose:

1.  that a call be issued for an organizing and strategy conference to 
include discussion and a decision on the proposed march on Washington and 
other proposals brought forth, with nothing about the proposed march on 
Washington presented as a fait accompli;

2.  that all lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender organizations be invited to 
send two voting representatives to the meeting;

3.  that attendance and participation (other than voting) be open to all.     
We are calling for an open process to engage our movement in a serious, 
national discussion on whether or not we want to go to Washington--what's the 
purpose, when do we want to go, what would we be calling for, and how do we 
insure the maximum, most diverse participation in any planing process? 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
KERRY LOBEL'S LETTER

April 25, 1999

Dear Colleagues,

It is with great regret that I resign as a member of the Board of Directors 
of the Millennium March on Washington, effective immediately.

The reasons for my resignation stem from three basic issues, which have 
continued to grow over time. First, I have significant political 
disagreements with the March call and planning, which have not been 
addressed. Secondly, I have grown increasingly skeptical of the value of this 
event for the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) movement at this 
time. And finally, I cannot endorse certain decisions made by the Board. 
Although I have great trust and affection for each of you individually, it 
does not assuage my concerns and questions. I now believe I will be most 
helpful to the community from outside the Board.

Since the initial call for the March, grassroots activists have consistently 
challenged us as national leaders. Their concerns address the credibility and 
legitimacy of the March and they have demanded an opening of the March 
process for greater discussion. The questions have been on whether to march, 
what agenda to march for, and how best to use the tremendous platform and 
visibility that such marches provide.

Despite my political disagreements with the call and process, I agreed to 
serve on the March Board, believing my participation could change the course 
of the process. I also felt that as a representative of the oldest national 
political organization, and one of the few explicitly progressive national 
GLBT groups, my voice was needed in the March planning process. I stated at 
the time that I would remain on the Board as long as my presence represented 
the best interests of Task Force members, our constituents, and the movement 
as a whole.

Since I joined the Board, my participation has been challenged by members and 
activists with whom we have deep and longstanding relationships. Individuals 
from all perspectives have intensively engaged me, the Task Force staff, and 
our Board. I took their concerns to heart and carried them in my work on the 
March Board. During my tenure, I voted in the minority on key resolutions on 
personnel issues, the naming of the March, and the broadening of the planning 
effort to allow more people a seat at the table. I helped lead the successful 
effort to ensure that funds raised by the March would go to statewide 
organizations, people of color organizations and other constituents 
underrepresented in our movement. However, the Board has largely ignored the 
fundamental issues that lead me into become involved: why we should march, 
the agenda, and the involvement of the entire GLBT community. I cannot serve 
on a Board that will not open itself to greater input and scrutiny from the 
communities we claim to represent.

The second reason for my resignation is that I continue to doubt the value of 
this March at this time. I honor the value of our previous national Marches 
and acknowledge them as having been political turning points in the lives of 
many current leaders and activists. However, the effectiveness of such an 
enormous commitment of time and resources at a moment when more and more 
energy is demanded of the GLBT movement at the state and local level is 
questionable. Nothing so dramatically reinforced this as the success of 
Equality Begins at Home.

Held one month ago and sponsored by the Federation of LGBT Statewide 
Political Organizations and the Task Force, EBAH was supported by national 
and local groups, including the March Board. It demonstrated the incredible 
power of investing in state and local movement building. It also exemplified 
the real possibilities for political advancement of GLBT equality in every 
state. More favorable bills were introduced in state legislatures, more 
allies were reached and involved, more media coverage was generated in every 
state on GLBT issues than had ever been achieved at the state level. Because 
of its overwhelming success, the campaign is likely to be repeated in years 
to come, perhaps even annually.

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force has committed the vast majority of 
its resources to deepening and growing political power in every state. The 
time I have spent on the March Board has taken away from my important work at 
the state and local level. I need to concentrate my energies on NGLTF1s 
efforts to build this state-by-state movement and on advocating for our 
grassroots constituents at the national level. This is the heart and soul of 
our work and it requires us to have the courage of our convictions.

Finally as a Board member, I have had personal financial responsibility and 
liability for the non-profit corporation producing the March. I am concerned 
that the March is not moving forward in a strategic manner. I am also 
concerned that neither the Board members nor our GLBT community have full 
access to information about March management and finances. I can no longer 
accept the personal risk my participation on the Board requires. I hope that 
my colleagues, many of whom are working very hard and responsibly, will push 
for information and accountability in the planning process.

In closing, I want to assure you that the Task Force will be visible at the 
Millennium March on Washington to encourage gay, lesbian, bisexual, and 
transgendered people from around the country to continue their work through 
state and local organizing. They will come to Washington to experience the 
power of gathering in their nation1s capital, to feel strength in numbers, 
and to create a show of force for the GLBT community. We will be persistent 
in our efforts to ensure that the energy and momentum of the March carries to 
local communities. The financial commitments made by the March Board to 
organizations dedicated to statewide organizing and people of color 
organizing could be the finest legacy the March will leave to our movement.

If significant changes are made in the March planning and organizing, the 
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force will gladly consider rejoining the 
planning efforts for the Millennium March on Washington. In the meantime, we 
will advocate for the inclusion of our entire community in the March process 
and for the linking of our agenda to those of other movements for social 
justice. We hope these issues will be reflected in the March planning and 
agenda.

Sincerely,

Kerry Lobel  Executive Director, NGLTF

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NOW's CONDITIONAL ENDORSEMENT
Tue, 9 Feb 1999

From the National Organization for Women Action Center:

NOW Press Office 202-331-0066 Loretta Kane, x 762 202-785-8576 (fax)

Following lengthy discussions over the last four months, the Board of 
Directors of the National Organization for Women (NOW) voted to endorse the 
Millennium March for Equality, based on assurances by March organizers that a 
number of NOW's concerns would be met.

"We are facing serious right-wing attacks on lesbian and gay civil rights. We 
must start the new century with unprecedented strength.  To do so, we need a 
unified, progressive movement where everyone has a place at the table," said 
NOW President Patricia Ireland.  "NOW's participation in the Millennium March 
depends on the inclusion of feminist concerns in the March agenda and people 
who represent the wide diversity of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and 
Transgender (LGBT) community in the organizing process."

The resolution passed by NOW's Board anticipates that the March agenda will 
address discrimination based on not only sexual orientation, but also sex, 
race, class, age and disability.  NOW received assurances that the right to 
privacy and to control one's own body, implicit in the March agenda, would 
include the right to abortion and reproductive health care.  NOW's 
endorsement is also contingent on a commitment that with its expansion, the 
Millennium March On Washington's (MMOW) board will represent the diversity of 
the LGBT community, including open lesbians of all races, colors, abilities, 
classes and ages.  Finally, NOW's resolution recognizes the importance of the 
MMOW's board's taking steps to reconcile the differences that have arisen 
within the LGBT community over the March.

Organizing for the Millennium March got off to a rough start when key-players 
in the LGBT movement challenged the manner in which the march was called, and 
questioned what role people of color and issues of race and class would play 
in the event and the organizing process.  While many individuals and 
organizations who fight racism have signed-on to the march, the controversy 
still exists.

"By signaling our willingness to participate in the Millennium March, we hope 
we can help facilitate a resolution to the existing problems.  NOW wants to 
be part of the solution," Ireland said.  "Now is the time to close ranks and 
fight our enemies -- not each other."