To: Jack Wilson, Chairman, Republican Party of Virginia
From: Fred Gruber, Founder, Republican Change Committee
Jack Wilson, you are opposed to the State Central Committee (SCC) restructure proposed legally and put forth by the Republican Change Committee (RCC) to the SCC for the Agenda of the state convention. Ok, you are entitled to your opinion. However, you are simply wrong â€“ your facts are not correct. You are either ignorant due to not understanding our Party Plan Amendment (PPA), thereby misleading the grassroots – or you are pushing a gross distortion. That you would say we intend to disenfranchise 2/3rds of the three Federations – VFRW, YRs and CRs – evidences how wrong and misleading you are!
You have written about since March 24, and recently spoke against, the PPA (6/25 on the Zoom discussion with Mike Schoelwer and Rich Anderson â€“ glad you finally deigned to show up to one of your several invitations).Â The RCC intends to pare down the size, and increase the efficiency, of and grassroots representation on the SCC.Â
I will explain.Â
I founded the RCC last November, the day after that disastrous election where the RPV allowed 43 seats to go uncontested. I felt something had to change at RPV leadership, and decided to form a committee to make that effort. We gathered statewide a group of knowledgeable, activist Republicans, intending to function until we bring about change.
The present SCC has 78 members, with the latitude to increase to 90. That includes 31 unelected members (i.e. Not elected at any District or State Convention). Our RCC proposes to pare the SCC to 54, a reduction of 31% (not even close to the â€œalmost 50%â€ you contend Jack). The 24 to be eliminated does include three, one each, from each of the three allied Federations â€“ VFRW, YRs and CRs â€“ which, to counter your contention, does not relatively diminish their voice.
In current day SCC, the three Federations vote 9 votes (3×3). They interact with 78 SCC members, of which they are 11.5% (9/78). RCCâ€™s restructured SCC would have the same three Federations, but with 6 votes relating to 54 in total SCC, their new representation would be 11.1% (6/54), not meaningfully different. Very importantly, if, as Jack Wilson seems to favor, the SCC membership was to grow to its allowable maximum of 90, the three Federations would only represent 10.0% (9/90), a decrease in â€œpowerâ€. Our RCC PPA would not allow expansion beyond 54, so the combined VFRW, YRs, and CRs would always have voting power of at least 11.1% (vs a possible reduction to 10.0% in present SCC structure). So, we refute Chairman Wilsonâ€™s accusations. Further, our PPA, if passed at the State Convention (whereâ€™s the money for that Jack ? â€“ you have not responded to several inquiries), would increase grassroots influence to 89%, up from 60% presently.
Wilson said he has only been in office about 18 months. I have heretofore been inactive in politics, since March 2016 when I declined to run again for Chair of the 7th District, because I had come to the feeling that VA politics was too â€œslimeyâ€ for me. Still, I kept a half-eye on the RPV and am not aware of anything Jack has done, except oversee the election disaster in 2019. I know through Fairfax friends that he never even visited that largest GOP unit in the state. His opponents both have decidedly contrary opinions on transparency and participation. Rich Anderson expects he will live out of a suitcase, traveling to visit units â€“ but he too opposes our PPA SCC restructuring.
All in all, given the negative evidence on Mr. Wilson (and so much more has been listed elsewhere), I declare its time for new RPV leadership. That is especially true with Jack Wilson, who is not giving the grassroots truthful or complete information.