OCP Workshop 08/29/2012

Agenda:

When should we meet

Non-negotiables

Style of meetings – seems like this style is working ok right now

Sobriety at meetings to vote or participate

Getting things on an agenda

Removing voting members

When should we meet – brainstorm:  Monday at 10:30, Evenings 5, 5:30, or 6, Saturday, Thursday morning

• Chris:  wonders about an afternoon meeting;  is there another afternoon that would be better for Philip
• Philip:  other than Tuesday evenings and all day Wednesday – any other afternoon, Philip would be willing to make some accomodations
• Ron:  wonders about Friday;  Philip is ok with Friday;  Saturday might work except there are many Saturday events to work around
• Ron:  wonders about leaving it on Wednesday and Thursday once a month – just changing it to evenings isn’t going to fix all of the problems;  people may be able to figure out ways to change their schedules;  Ron also thinks the Monday switch would be fine;  a concern about the 4-5pm slot makes Ron worry that the group might dwindle but if we keep it while we are open, we might always be catching new people – feels more ocpish to do it this way
• Mark:  there is no way to include everyone, the meetings during a normal ocp time with once a month Thursday seems fine
• Mike:  likes the meeting on Wednesday, if working remotely works for Philip, there might be other ways for people not at ocp to be involved as well;  this is working, we have people here, we are getting a quorum – this is mike’s biggest reason for keeping it as it is
• Ron:  is there anyone that would like to see it on Monday?
• Philip:  is fine with this video meeting plan so leaving it on Wednesday would work
• David:  likes the idea of sticking with tradition, people know when this meeting is
• Ron:  this might only be for this semester that Philip goes to Northern Va;  if we don’t hear a proposal to change the meeting day/time, we will leave it as is
• Mark:  Proposes we change this meeting to Monday at 10:30 and keep the 2^nd Thursday of the month
• Michael:  seconds this proposal
• Mark:  likes the idea of Philip being here in person which works on Monday
• Mike:  this is only for a calendar semester and we may need to change it again;  issues like this come up a lot and the stability is important
• Ron:  if Mike Farrand cannot be here on Monday, that would be a reason for Ron to stay with Wednesday; 
• Amy, Gary Shelton, and Mike Farrand cannot be here on Monday
• Gary:  Monday is a crowded day at OCP already and we close at 2 pm;  Gary has to work on Monday and would like to be here, Friday – the place is shut down and the day seems open for a possibility for a meeting
• Matthew:  has some reasons why he wouldn’t want to do it on Friday –
• Mike:  wonders if we need to figure out how to change the thing that happens on Monday if we do decide to change this meeting
• Three voting for; seven voted against – this did not pass so we will stay with the Wednesday meeting at 10:30

 Sobriety at meetings

• Mike:  there is a list of many other things that are meaty;  we could try to get to this topic but lets get to something more important
• Kris:  agrees
• David:  feels like a code of standards is important;  thinks there should be something in place that you cant do certain things
• Philip:  would like to see us move on to something else because this doesn’t seem like an exciting thing
• Mike:  we will be dealing with some code of behavior of the larger ocp at some point;  currently, we do all know something about good behavior and common sense

 What should be discuss next?

• Philip:  would like to hear other people’s ideas
• Jonathan:  would like to talk about how to get things on the agenda
• Mike:  if we can address this quickly, mike would be behind talking about the agenda topic
• Matthew:  would like to be able to explain his idea at some point
• Ron:  there are a lot of ideas out there;  we are trying to lay a foundation right now for how to get to these individual ideas;  Heather said one day that we need a community meeting;  maybe we need a second sort of meeting where people can put things on an agenda, but where is the cross-over with this meeting if we were to have a second sort of meeting; 
• Deliverables:  code of behavior, rules and regulations, purposes of ocp, framework for the community to govern itself; hours and access to building proposal; membership idea; revisiting teams as a way to get things done; programming and how this would work
• David:  we need to get to where we are voting – maybe we should come up with a date by which we want to accomplish certain tasks – maybe we should come up with a 30 day plan
• Claude:  agrees that we should try to pick one thing and work on it for 30 days
• Mike:  there are two levels of discussion;  one is the functioning of this group and the other is addressing the deliverables;  maybe we can channel ideas under these broad categories so that as we get to the category, we have smaller ideas recorded;  maybe at the beginning of each meeting we can get agenda items
• Ron:  we have set out goals and we have been accomplishing them; 
• Mark:  has a suggestion about a community gathering
• Sadie:  wants to see us talk about behavior
• Teig:  what is good and bad behavior
• Ron:  do we start with membership or do we start with purposes; 
• Ron:  seems like some energy around talking about purposes and non-negotiables;  do we need specific purposes about this building that might be different than the larger ocp purposes
• Ron:  next week we will start with a discussion about purposes and non-negotiables for next meeting – next Wednesday

OCP Workshop 08/22/2012

• Mike Farrand:  gives us an update from last meeting
• Jonathan:  notes some other details from last week
• David:  suggests that people put their phone on vibrate for this meeting to help keep the focus
• Philip:  wonders about other details like this – how do we create rules like this, if people are in the room and obviously not be paying attention, how do we treat this person in the meeting or not
• Heather:  suggests we do a volleyball workshop
• Kris:  if there is some discussion that doesn’t have to do with the meeting, maybe this should be taken to another room to help keep meeting focus
• Teig:  wonders about what this group and what we can do as far as setting policy – the board will come up with some non-negotiables;  teig would like us to talk about the policy of animals in the building
• Mike:  show respect, be on our best behavior, we will get to topics eventually
• David:  would like to see us move forward with ideas – such as creating a goals workshop of sorts
• Heather:  if the Board votes something down, maybe we could talk to the Board about why we would really like to do it and.
• Philip:  Yes, I can see that happening.  Maybe the Board gives you a chance to come to a Board mtg after that to discuss it for the OCP.
• David: OCP wants to be a subculture of Harrisonburg.  I decided I wanted to be part of “main street” instead of part of OCP’s small little subculture.  You can’t be an island without the greater Harrisonburg. 
• Heather:  We’re not trying to be a subculture.  I wouldn’t come in; I would sit outside.  Now I come inside and volunteer.  We’re trying to do something good here and all of Harrisonburg is welcome to be involved.  We can have jobs and can be involved in this.  I have 2 daughters and I would welcome them to come here.
• Kris:  wants to include more people to grow ocp
• Rebecca:   someone who has a need can get help with this need – likes this being something that ocp does – matching up a giver with a need
• Sadie:  likes rebecca’s ideas but says that some people wish that ocp didn’t exist – some people will give you money to get you to go away;
• Teig:  wonders about the workshop with community helping organizations – groups offered to pay for people’s rides – was this the jobs resources fair
• David:  goals workshop – a lot of people might tell you to your face that they like ocp, but really they don’t think highly of ocp;  some working people feel like ocp is an eyesore;  people is david’s family ask why people come down here – he says that he likes it and comes to see other family here
• Heather:  people don’t like to see panhandling, it can be an eyesore, people who do it don’t even like it;  everyone has needed something in their lives;  heather would give up time to help do a fundraiser for ocp – we could have more – they are fun for the people who come and fun for the people who help put them on;  there would be more volunteers who would want to do more
• Jonathan:  reminds us the first three years were crazy and we are getting better
• Heather:  first impression of OCP was not that great – feels like it has gotten better
• Sadie:  first impressions are very important;  Sadie had no desire to come here the first time – the Lord told her that she had to come in; 
• Heather:  likes to come here to help for something to do – like a second home; 

Programming ideas:  volleyball workshop (Heather Kilburn), goal workshop (David Meyers)

OCP Workshop 08/15/2012

Lingering issues:

• Monday switch – and when to make it
• Lingering concern about folks who can’t make the Wednesday meetings but who would like to be a part of workshops
• What constitutes a quorum
• Set minimum time limit on reintroducing a topic that does not pass
• Sobriety at meetings required
• To vote
• To discuss
• Should the style of the workshops be examined, reimagined, and or varied in order to make them accessible to as many personality and learning types as possible
• Mike:  would like to focus on quorum and outside participants – the Thursday crowd, is there anyone (ron or exec. Director) required to be at a meeting for it to happen
• What constitutes a quorum
• Other questions might be:  when does someone get removed from membership
• Heather:  at least 8 people from the voting group here to vote
• Kelly:  it seems like it depends on the meeting topic as far as how many need to be here
• Kris:  maybe 80% need to be here
• Mike:  seems like about 12 people are using here – maybe 6 people who are eligible voters – about 2/3^rd of eligible voters
• Teig:  likes the number six
• Ron:  likes the idea of 51% of the total registered voters
• Jonathan:  likes to see a total number like 8 for now – later we could move to something else
• Mike:  likes the idea of a total number for right now as people may come and go
• Heather:  likes 51%
• Kris:  also likes the 51%
• Ron:  what if someone goes to jail for 3 months and comes back – then we don’t really have to answer the question of when does someone get off the list – so if we have a set number of voting members present, it doesn’t matter for now when people come off the list
• Mark:  likes % of eligible voters
• Mike:  Thursday night quorum issues might arise
• Ron:  this decision might just be a sort of temporary decision and maybe we can make changes for quorum as need be
• Heather:  what about those who come to these three meetings just to get some hidden agenda passed
• Kris:  there are probably enough people here that people would see that hidden agenda and it also takes 80% to pass something
• Jonathan:  could get behind any idea knowing that we will probably have to change this quorum
• Mike:  would like to see us pick a number – proposes we would like to see us have 7 people in order to have a quorum;
• Teig:  Seconds the motion
• Ron:  feels like six seems a little small, maybe this would encourage others to come to the meeting;  if it is less, you keep discussing
• Jonathan:  likes the idea of 51%
• Kris:  likes 51% also
• Mike:  we might not have to change the number for a while if we just set the number
• Ron:  likes the idea of a set number as we currently don’t know how big the voting member list might get and how people might come off that list
• Vote:  10-yes, 0-no
• Teig:  would like to see members names recorded on votes
• Mark:  when someone is running for some big election that seems important
• Thursday Night – people can’t be here
• Some people can’t be here for the current time during the daytime;  the same issue applies to people who couldn’t be here during an evening meeting
• An idea was that we could hold all votes to a Thursday night
• Mike:  wonders about the idea of putting things online
• Kahleel:  wonders about getting an Arabic translation – mike suggests that google translator could provide an Arabic translation
• Ron:  we will never be able to find a time that pleases everyone – lets leave the way it is – Thursday night is a possibility for some, and minutes are on the blog
• Mike:  as a voting member, Thursday would be the same as Tuesday
• Ron:  would like to see some sort of synopsis to be kind to the Thursday group so they can catch up
• Heather:  everybody comes to these meetings but some people are getting paid – could the meetings be moved to Saturday when everyone can be here;  this would be more fair to everyone;  we could Thursday only people be involved in more of the votes this way;  this idea means that we would have a meeting every week and it would be on Saturday
• Mike:  we could save this topic as we move into the topic of moving the Wednesday meeting to Monday
• Kris:  feels like Philip needs to be here for the final discussion on when to move the meeting;  feels like people should care enough to come whether or not there is pay connected
• Ron:  proposes that the rules that we have established for quorum, eligibility for voting, etc carry across ALL meetings no matter when they might be;
• Mark:  seconds this proposal
• Votes:  8-yes, 0-no

Other ideas:  how to get things on the agenda, when does someone get removed from membership, rules on reintroducing a topic

Six Week Summary 08/09/2012

Our first order of business – What are the initial Rules of the Game for the Workshops?

Rules of engagement 

• Make sure there is someone to fill following roles
• Facilitator- leads meeting, holds others accountable 
• Reminds people at the beginning
• Try not to repeat their ideas
• Keep it concise
• Twinkles= I agree
• One person talks at a time
• Once an idea is on the floor, it is the group’s idea, not the individual’s
• Think beyond yourself – What is best for the group?
• Uses Stack method and other methods – go around – small group discussion, etc.
• Respectfully terminates long monologues (if no time keeper).
• Minute keeper – records the discussion in an organized and understandable way
• Time keeper
• Times sharing – Four minutes?
• Says “time” or “minute” so that its neutral and not attacking anyone personally
• Change amount of time based on subject/ number of people present
• Vibe- keeper – Makes sure meeting is fair and healthy – keeps an eye on meeting as a whole – some examples:  Are more shy people other groups free to share?  Is one person or group of people dominating the meeting?   
• The people who aren’t participating need to be quiet and go somewhere else to talk
• Post meeting minutes weekly

Then we looked at Positives, Negative, Visions 

What OCP has been to its members - POSITIVES

• Life-changing experiences
• A place to live, love and grow
• A place to be accepted, no matter what
• A place to come when you have nowhere else to go, open doors to all
• Socializing, fun, building interpersonal relationships
• Broaden horizons
• A safe place
• Resourceful; provides some basic needs (i.e., food, shelter, clothes, receive mail)

What OCP has been to its members - negatives

• Challenging to mediate all the diversity -> conflict
• Lack of order; chaos
• Staff
• Grounds
• Programming
• Community
• Boundaries
• Rules
• Our positive characteristics end up becoming our pitfalls; want rules, but not too many or too stringent ones; moderation

Visions – What would we like OCP to become?

• Growth oriented; more learning
• Promote personal growth
• Intellectual growth
• Life skills
• Practical skills
• Spiritual growth
• More Activities/ Classes/ entertainment
• Open more
• Workshops always
• Respectful, orderly, cohesive
• Outward reaching – teaching people to serve others  

 

Certain polarities or tensions were discovered

Tensions

• Everyone welcome / Unmanageability
• Everyone welcome / Place for Homeless Folks 
• Everyone Welcome / Christian place
• Mercy of Christ  / Rules and Tough love
• Send People Out  to the world with skills to survive on their own / Build Community

Examined other public places where everyone is welcome

Examples of places where everyone is welcome…

• Wal-mart, Public Library, AA, Church, and OCP
• How is this relevant to OCP?
• Each place has a focus, rules and consequences for certain behaviors, people are generally there for the same cause (which makes for cooperation), staff to uphold the rules
• What makes these organizations run smoothly and what it is that has helped to make OCP a success in the post-September world?
• Set hours
• More focus
• More staff present during operating hours

Examined existing purposes and unofficial Vision Statement

OCP is a Christian organization that seeks…

• To accommodate, foster and provide activities and programs related to personal growth and community well being
• To be a resource in the community for individuals seeking information or services already provided by other organizations
• To educate and empower individuals towards self-sufficiency, thus creating social capital for the community at large
• To nurture a community that appreciates diversity and sees differences and conflict as opportunities for spiritual growth

There was a consensus around the power of the statement: 

Personal Growth and Community Well-Being.  This sounds right. 

• The other purposes seem to be bullets points off of this idea. 
• Number 3 seems to simply repeat number 1.
• Seems like more bullet points could simply be added . . . to number 1

OCP’s Vision

“We seek to build an atmosphere of love, safety, education, spiritual awareness, healing and fun – a community center where anyone in the world is welcome to help or participate. OCP is dedicated to breaking down barriers that tend to separate humans from the joys to be experienced in loving community, and particularly dedicated to including in its activities those struggling with poverty and difficult life circumstances. Over the years, experience has revealed that incredible healing potential, for all parties, exists in the simple act of sitting down and eating or socializing together across social barriers.   There was concern about the last sentence – is it really true? If so, is it really “incredible”?

Made a list of “Deliverables”

Deliverables

• Possibility of monthly meetings 2^nd Thursday of the month
• Community meeting Thursday Aug 9 (after dinner)
• Process for workshops  
• People who have attended three meetings are eligible to vote.  
• 80% super-majority required to pass a vote.
• Anyone who is part of the 20% opposition has the right to block until the next meeting (once),
• In order to determine 80%, we will round – anything below .5 rounds down, everything else rounds up
• Community center purposes  
• Should we have an emphasis on homelessness?
• Code of behavior / Personal responsibilities
• Framework for community to govern itself
• Set of rules and regulations
• Rules of empowerment
• “Do” Policy
• Hours / Access proposal
• Membership – For or against / plan?
• Plan for programming/Entertainment
• Revisiting teams?

Left Over: 

• What constitutes a quorum? 
• Set minimum time limit on reintroducing a topic that does not pass.
• Lingering concern about folks who cannot make the Wednesday meetings but who would like to be a part of Workshops.
• Should the style of the Workshops be examined, reimagined, and or varied in order to make them accessible to as many personality and learning types as possible?   

Other topics that have emerged:

• Need for some kind of grievance system
• Need for Community Meetings separate from Workshop
• Tuesday workday ideas
• Programming improvements