OCP Workshop 01/16/2013

• Code of behavior discussion
• Mark:  do we need to consider not meeting since Philip isn’t here and the board wanted Philip to attend meetings
• Ron/Jonathan:  the feeling was that generally a time that Philip could make was important, but certainly being on vacation wouldn’t stop a meeting
• Daniel:  when we have a membership, seems like they should not be held back from ron or Philip not being here
• Mike:  wants to thank Daniel for bring up this issue
• Jonathan:  would like to talk about the judiciary committee
• Mike:  maybe we don’t want to put the chicken before the egg;  we need to talk about what before the how;  the code of behavior could be a mix of obeying the laws, a couple things specific to this place, following our own moral code, respecting each other;  see the judiciary committee as less of a tattle tale scene and police state
• Ron:  likes the idea that an individual should try to handle issues alone, then a small group gets together and tries to address it, then the person might come into the judiciary committee;  the mediation is what we do – to deal with problems as a first step – this should be how we live;  confused about how some rule should govern the membership separate from anyone who comes through the door;  feels like we should try to define code of behavior even if it is short
• Daniel:  thinks we should try to define a code of behavior;  members would probably be held to slightly higher standards;  
• Ron:  seems like there are two topics – a code of behavior and a way to address infractions;  seems like we should talk about code of behavior first
• Daniel:  don’t want to lose that members might be held to a slightly higher standard – members might be “expected” to jump up and help if someone brings a food donation – something like this might be brought to the judiciary – the person who doesn’t ever get up and help
• Ron:  some people are in a place in life where being a member might not be a good fit, but just being here might be important – we don’t want to lose this with membership
• Gary:  understands we are trying to straighten things out so they can be the best they can;  it has become more of a government since we are trying to work on membership – sad that we need to resort to these measures
• Ron:  how is behavior here at OCP
• Mike:  thanks Gary for saying that good morals should guide us;  maybe we are looking at a motto of sorts, maybe a slogan – this would be our code – words could include:  we try to obey all laws, show respect to each other, clean up after ourselves, and help out when we can – some people aren’t able to help out for various reasons – we would police ourselves
• Anna:  really like the idea of obeying laws (for the most part);  pretty important history especially if we are going to live as a Christian organization, there may be laws we choose not to follow;  some of us might work to overturn access to abortion;  there could be instances where we don’t follow certain laws
• Ron:  if you are involved in a conflict, you have to attempt to mediation with the other person;  
• Matt:  thinks there should be some better mediator skills available – sometimes people say that because they haven’t heard a threat, it can’t be dealt with
• Ron:  matt’s point brings up at that there needs to be some training for people doing mediation;  non-violence might be a word we want to use in our code of behavior – makes Ron think of the Spirit of Jesus;  maybe there is a something in our vision statement that we could pull out
• Mike:  showing respect for each other covers a lot of ground;  specific OCP rules might need to be included – drinking on the property for one;  ideally, people would obey laws;  we need to present ourselves as a law abiding community;  its best that we operate with our own moral code – this would generally cover most of the ground;  personal moral code might be in conflict with some laws, but we could include words like:  we seek to, or “in general we follow all laws”
• Ron:  would like a better word that “laws”;  in nazi Germany, the government created laws that Christians could not follow;  maybe someone wants to talk to someone selling drugs instead of turning him/her in;  at Summerhill School in England, there are some basic rules, but basically, the community over time develops rules as the community sees fit;  who knows what rules we might come up with that make sense over time – here one cant be alone in a room with a child that isn’t your own – these rules are different from this code of behavior;  Summerhill has a large amount of rules because they have to live together every day
• Heather:  maybe when we start disciplining people, we should start one-on-one;  we shouldn’t call people out in front of the group;  this will just lead to anger and start things off on the wrong path
• Daniel:  think rules that develop will develop organically – it is hard to see what we might need in the future;  would be better to develop process for making rules;  like the idea of talking with someone in private first, maybe there are two or three people who get involved in mediation if one-on-one isn’t working;  then if this doesn’t work, they come in front of the community at large – maybe not a specific judiciary team;  rules will develop organically as things come up;  there are some standard ones that we can decide on right away – no drinking on the property, not being alone in a room with a child
• Ron:  we have talked about a code of behavior that might be a statement, maybe there are five or six rules that already exist, then there is some separation on how to address breaking rules
• Kris:  seems like we need to address some issues like smoking pot in the building or drinking on the property just because someone believes it;
• Daniel:  defining what is and isn’t right would be an ongoing process – we should establish a process for defining right and not;  we might let someone come in stoned or drunk but not come in and smoke pot in the room;
• Ron:  this whole experiment is about dynamic democracy – maybe nothing should be set in stone – when it comes to protocol that we need to establish, it would all be changeable;  confused about laws;  there is no way that we are going to let someone  break the law when it comes to smoking pot;  would like to see something that says we agree to resolve our differences
• Mark:  likes the word protocol:  what is going to make ocp function best on a day to day basis;  we don’t need to look so cosmically about talking about following God’s law;  there are things that we need to set as protocol – this place degenerates on some Thursday nights into mayhem – feels like there should be a rule about people coming here repeatedly drunk;  we should focus on what would make ocp function the most smoothly – there should be some absolutes;  
• Daniel:  the importance of addressing why we are going to have to talk about all of these topics at once:  code of behavior, rules, process for rule making, enforcement;  
• Kris:  when talking about code of behavior, this is about laws, rules;  
• Ron:  we keep talking about Mike’s statement which is illegible;  could we get it on the board readable;  to mark, what it to be the smoothest possible in the context of OCP vision
• Mike:  sometimes we need to go to nuts and bolts and then back up to general;  
• Alex:  does our vision statement already encompass a “code of behavior” statement;  this makes sense
• Mark:  a little uncomfortable with the notion that here at OCP,
• Ron:  not so sure the vision statement speaks to one’s behavior while at OCP;  there could really be something to :  as we are trying to be comprehensive with a statement that we are covering the few things that we feel like are the rules;  maybe we should talk about the rules first
• Daniel:  the rules is for people who don’t know how to act
• Gary:  the word enforcement is important – we spent a whole month on these vary same issues when we shut down in September – we felt we had covered most of it, but this never addressed the enforcement issues, and the laws weren’t typed out and handed to each person;  some people may know about some of the rules but not all of them, and there is nothing written for them to follow;  sometimes it seems like there is a flexibility where rules bend sometimes – we need to rules to be stable and stick;  we need some steady rules – these may need to be typed and handed out so people know what is expected;  enforcement is definitely an issue that has never been addressed – people turn their head, act like they don’t work here