OCP Workshop 09/26/2012

• At the end of the last meeting, there was a proposal:  to develop a membership system that encourages, coordinates, and captures the volunteer energy to make OCP and the community at-large a better place to evolve over time from workshops
• Mike:  wants to be clear that we have a proposal and we are in the discussion phase of the proposal; 
• Ron:  the workshops and the membership might actually serve two different functions; 
• Mike:  once a proposal has been made and seconded, can the proposal be changed and/or how;  reminds us that we have a list of what types of issues the membership might deal with – privileges, rewards;  we need to make a decisions about membership or not
• Jonathan:  maybe we should scrap the current proposal by voting it down and then focus on what the workshop group is doing – what is their purpose
• Ron:  maybe the only purpose of the workshop was to create the beginning of the body that would help create and develop OCP
• Sigi:  would like to see us go back to community meetings
• Teig:  how do we “judge” ourselves;  what about people who throw cigarette buts on the ground – how do we police ourselves;  if I felt like I was a member of this community with some power, maybe I could speak up;  we should have some sort of judiciary committee – so that people who do something wrong can be judged by their peers – 5 or 6 people, maybe 12; 
• Ron:  not sure community gatherings got things done because there were no teeth in those things;  often there were college interns and no community members;  how can the body that is upholding the rules be respected;  we are always trying to mediate, not punish – how can we have people get along in our community;
• Sigi:  some of the community meetings were very profound;  membership and policing are freaking sigi out
• Daniel:  with regards to breaking rules (ie. Throwing cigarettes down), you could explain that we are trying to keep things clean instead of making the person feel badly about their choices;  doesn’t like the idea of a judiciary committee here at ocp; 
• Daneen:  the idea of rules and discipline – likes the idea of friendship more than membership;  some people come here that don’t know what we are doing, maybe we could develop some sort of book for new people to explain what we are doing;  where is the money going to come from for those books?;  maybe the membership could donate some money for this; 
• Heather:  people shouldn’t be drinking on the property – people being passed out on the property shouldn’t happen; 
• Ron:  lets try to focus on the system of membership – pro or con
• Sigi:  doesn’t think that a membership is going to fix the problem of cig buts on the ground;  likes the word friends better than membership – people are going to do things that they aren’t supposed to do
• Ron:  doesn’t feel like the gentle approach that Daniel talks about has ever worked – maybe there is a way to have some ownership in this place and some authority;  the issue is are we going to create something where people are in or out with privileges and responsibilities;  would like to see a dynamic democracy – anyone with an idea can get a topic to the group and then the group can discuss and decide;  if there is a problem, the group can come together to figure out the issue – the people involved in the community can help figure out answers to problems;  we tend to structure organizations with one person in charge, and is there a way to get rid of the “one” focus and turn to the group
• Mike:  do we want a membership system or not and do we need to focus on this or not;  would like to see us vote on this;  why are we using the term membership when we don’t like the term – but this does some up the concept;  this group seems a bit like community meetings;  hopefully this group can make some decisions and keep people interested;  would like to see the words associated with membership up on the board – privileges/rewards, behavior/standards, governance/adjudication, standards/behavior, staffing;  we should run in parallel and develop the concept of the membership system while this group continues to meet as “Friends of OCP”;   
• Teig:  would like to see us develop a way to deal with people – a way to deal with peers
• Daniel:  all for a body of people with some extra privileges, standards, etc;  feels like we have some governance – the staff;  would like to see some other level where other community members have some authority;  can’t imagine the idea where 30 or so people have enough authority to tell people where not to put cigarette buts;  having a small group in power seems to keep things tidier; 
• Ron:  occasionally use language that brings up the old days – like someone cussing someone out – not sure how much of an issue this is – it is a better scene now;
• Sigi:  we are definitely at a better scene – a lot of the things we are talking about just seems to happen naturally – it doesn’t really take a membership to tell people what they should and shouldn’t do; 
• Daneen:  we can’t run to the staff for everything that comes up;  having a group like “Friends of OCP” could be helpful
• Philip:  people still do some cussing around here;  want some people who have some passion for developing membership to break off into a committee and maybe bring it back to this group;  we have a sort of ethos that is very forgiving – we should be hopeful; 
• Teig:  who is the chief enforces – who is the governing body – right now Ron or Philip – right now it’s Philip – you have justice and mercy on your side – is this the way that it is supposed to be or should we have a jury of our peers?;  really worried about this – key to what this place is all about;  ron wants us to govern ourselves –with a jury – how do we do this – we should talk to people who aren’t following the rules – we should be able to govern ourselves accordingly
• Ron:  the judiciary thing might happen like monthly – only in extreme times – when we couldn’t figure things out day to day;  what is MY motivation for membership – being able to rely on – certain things are going to be done and handled – what is the motivation for people to take responsibility – in Rogers mind, OCP being here is enough of a reason to plug in – if he works it keeps going, if no one works, it doesn’t keep going;  do there have to be other benefits;  some people here get paid US currency to be here – what are some other things that motivate people;  are we always going to have community meetings where things get lost
• Philip:  we do want to have something so that we can agree on rules and what is right to do
• Jonathan:  thinks we should vote on the membership proposal and looks forward to the future where the membership can make decisions about staffing 
• Mike:  the founder is no longer getting cussed out – perhaps we are moving from a sort of old testament to a sort of new testament – maybe this is the process that we are going through – AA went through a similar process;  tried to twinkle in support of Philip’s idea – something is an important issue, but it is too detailed and we could create a smaller group to look at certain issues or topics;  maybe a smaller group could look at some of the details under “membership”
• Ron:  wanted to make the recommendation that preparing lunch is an issue – we don’t have the input from some of our most hard-working people – not sure how to fix this problem, but does seem like a problem;  not sure about the think-tank going away – what about a session where groups break up during this time and then report back at the end of the meeting;  what might some of the aspects of membership look like;
• Ron wonders about letting the proposal sit until next week and then allow people to break out into smaller groups first before voting on this idea of membership
• Teig:  likes the idea of breaking up into groups for more concise conversation
• Ron:  thinks this idea would break things up and make it more fun
• Daneen:  wants to rephrase what Sadie has said about having this meeting after lunch so that lunch people can be involved
• Matthew:  agrees that right after lunch is not the best time either
• Daneen:  we have two dilemmas
• Jonathan:  doesn’t want to see us stay open an hour longer – close and then have the meeting
• Ron:  do we lose new people if we don’t stay open
• Matthew:  if we have membership meeting after 2, the ocp is still open to those involved; 
• Christina:  what about doing these meetings an hour earlier?
• Teig:  groups idea – each table could have a subject and then we move people from table to table
• Ron:  another way would be to focus on one topic at a time and have all tables deal with that and then discuss to the group and then switch topics; 
• We will all think about times that work better for the kitchen group to be involved