Resolution 18: Regular Membership Reports

Click here to download PDF

Why Is Build Endorsing C/B #18?

Listen to the Locals!

  • Providing memberships in a timely manner must be a foundational function of the national organization.

  • Locals have been asking for regular membership lists for years, and while the national organization is getting better, it still takes far too long to get regular lists.

  • There is no reason our database cannot be setup to run and process regular membership reports on an automated schedule, our national organization has simply neither prioritized the staff time to do this nor trusted the members offering to do this.

Frequently Asked Questions

CONCERN: The Compendium cost estimate says this work’s already happening.

ANSWER: Members have been offering to help for years, and the whole time we’ve been told this work is underway and happening. If the work is actually underway, then great, this resolution reaffirms its importance. Either way, this has taken far too long, and we deserve accountability and timelines.

CONCERN: The compendium cost estimate says the timeline of this proposal would be very costly.

ANSWER: How is the compendium estimate of $8,035 “very costly” to send us the data of what’s in our existing database, but $180,000 for NGP VAN, a voter database software--an entirely new database, didn’t need to be voted on at the convention? 

ANOTHER ANSWER: $8,035 to get regular membership reports on a monthly basis and reports of new members on a weekly basis would be the best money this organization could spend. If you join an organization and don’t hear from them for at least a month, you are incredibly likely to get involved. But if you get a call the week you join, the chances you get involved are much greater. This is not a question of data, it’s our basic ability to call, email, and text our members.

ANOTHER ANSWER: This organization still has plenty of members who’ve previously offered to help with this and understand how to do this work. Why does the cost estimate assume consultants will be needed? If it’s about the security of trusting members with data, why is National quicker to trust consultants than members with our data?