OCP Workshop 05/29/2013

Chris:  what about an elitist feel with the membership, but if anyone can attend meetings

Ron:  Early Church has a membership and although anyone can come to meetings, only members have a vote;  like the idea of the membership honoring those people who are interested in running the place;  looking towards the future, the membership could be some sort of filter for things – ie.  Housing or jobs – you couldn’t just walk in off the street and be part of the housing scene;  maybe jobs would be the kind of thing that would be available to members;  the membership can help implement new ideas – the membership could discuss ideas and then help come up with a plan;  

Shinea:  agree with the membership idea – if you are coming off the streets, you should be able to come here and learn and maybe you would want to become a member;  never really wanted to be a member, but recently, life changes have made me feel like I might want to be a member;  

Ron:  we did have community meetings once a week, and people did come and participate – now, people would probably respond better to a weekly meeting;  membership meetings will be at least once monthly – sometimes someone has to come in front of the community for some rule infraction, and it was always valuable to have the whole community there;  mind continues to be confused about a time – mark works at night, others work during the day – do we do our best to talk with our bosses to try and get some time off so that we can attend;  a quorum of 51% needs to attend for meetings to happen – members would try to the best of their abilities to attend meetings;  seems like everyone needs to participate or just the staff

Chris:  if it is important enough to the people who want to be members, it seems like most jobs could work around a schedule with enough advance warning – barring a family emergency or a job that wouldn’t let you leave;  we gave our word to be here, so we did come even though we will have to leave early

Ron:  is there a magic time that might work for most people – Sunday evenings?;  some jobs won’t give you an evening off;  

Jonathan:  wondering about making a proposal about monthly membership meetings and members are strongly encouraged to attend;  

Mark:  if we are talking about meetings attendance, lets just start somewhere – monthly sounds good;  

Ron:  we are trying to figure out what it means that members are supposed to attend three meetings;  what about “members will try in earnest to attend membership meetings”;  someone like roger is here every day and works all day but will not attend meetings – what do you do about this?;  like that we are backing off being legalistic about people coming to membership meetings;  time and date might be something for the initial membership to deal with

Jonathan:  “Membership meetings will be at least monthly, and all members are strongly encouraged to attend.”;  seconded by Sadie;  9 for – 0 opposed

Ron:  seems like we want trial members show up to membership meetings during their trial period

Shinea:  if you aren’t a member, people shouldn’t be able to use and abuse OCP;  all the people that don’t have any place to go should do something here;  

Ron:  a point of clarification – so far, we have never said that someone would have to be a member or trial period to be at OCP;  most people are still interested in OCP being an outreach to people who have nowhere to be and no interest of getting involved;  a lot of people have been through a lot and might need time just to be here before thinking about becoming a member;  would like us to have some sort of radical generosity but those that are plugging in will be able to have more decision making power;  having time at ocp that is just open to members could be something we decide

Shinea:  if you are going to come to OCP, you should at least show appreciation somehow – try to help do something – anything;  ocp could suffer from people not having their minds right where they need to be;

Michelle:  from my own experience, there have been times when I came just because I needed to be with community, but I was not emotionally able to be helpful to anyone or anything;  I have watched people walk into this building who came unable to help but within 6 months, came to a place to be able to help;  some people are aware of whats going on, but they do not want to have to come to a meeting or feel like it is a job and not just for fun;  over the years, I have gone from one extreme to the other;  the last couple years have been constant turmoil;  

Chris:  if you look at an AA meeting, so people come just to draw strength from the circle but might not feel like talking;  some young guys started coming to OCP and were interested in lots of other things, but many have come around to being with their families;  

OCP Workshop 05/22/2013

Ron:  one of the basic requirements for membership is that members would have to attend meetings

Charles:  would like to affirm membership meetings

Larry:  not sure we can talk about this until we know more about our needs;  would like to talk about new member orientation

Michelle:  we did nothing but have meetings in the beginning;  a lot of the things on the list right now used to be discussed at meetings;  

Ron:  a reason to talk about membership meetings might be that people might be assuming membership meetings might be at this time;  maybe there would be a reason to say that membership meetings wouldn’t be at a time like this – working on finding a time that would be the most accessible and how frequent;  picture the membership being made up people from all walks of life;  healthy community is a variety of people from various walks of life – retired, full-time working folk – owned by people in the community;  

Mark:  systematically taking one thing at a time, we are going to have to talk about it sometime

Larry:  conceptually that this is open to people from all walks of life is a really important part of OCP;  however we talk about membership meetings should be a part of this;

Ron:  we tried to have an evening meeting of this “Friends of OCP” that people weren’t very interested in coming to;  are people just happy doing what they are doing now with participation?;  there a quite a few people who plug into ocp but don’t want to participate in this kind of

Michelle:  is there some way to coordinate with what we want and with people at the farm or people at early church;  Sunday night is game night at the farm

Ron:  hear michelle saying that we should watch out for other significant events in the community;  considering people who are already plugging in but don’t want to come to a meeting seems important;  wondering if monthly is even enough in the beginning;  quarterly would probably not be often enough;  teams would probably meet more regularly;  another question is that this implies that members need to attend membership meetings

Mark:  we haven’t defined what membership meetings are;  maybe what we mean by meeting attendance is that people should attend any meetings that are happening – if someone comes to an event planning meeting that is great;  people attending meetings that aren’t just membership seems important;  

Ron:  if you are on the board of something, you are definitely expected to come to meetings;  there will be lots of decisions being made that people need to be involved in;  judiciary where decisions are being made about people be involved or not;  at a church, 300 members in a church but only a few people come to annual budget meeting;

Jonathan:  what if tasks that the membership would address would be completed by a “team”

Larry:  is the membership advisory or decision making;  maybe this group would have to meet more often in the beginning;  

Philip:  seems like the membership would be a decision making group

Ron:  seems like the idea of meeting attendance definitely applies to membership;  the membership makes decisions about running the place;  the membership might be a filter for something – like if we had an enterprise or housing – one would have to be a member to apply;  seems like it gets wishy washy if people aren’t required to be at membership meetings;  if the membership gets too large,

Michelle:  agrees that we need to think about what ron just said;  how many volunteers do we have that care if they are members or not;  think it would have a lot to do with priorities – if you really want to see this happen, wouldn’t you make it to a membership meeting;  

Larry:  priorities makes me nervous – can’t be here a lot much next week because I have things going on;  we need to be careful to not assume that just because someone doesn’t show up for a few weeks that they don’t care about ocp;  staff is here because it is their job;  

David:  next week getting prepped for other hip replacement – will be gone again for a while – doesn’t mean I am being lackadaisical about ocp – at this point it is amazing to be able to leave the house to come down occasionally;  

Ron:  want to observe that we can have a membership that the definition isn’t everyone who cares about ocp;  board is a small group, staff is a small;  2/3rds of people on teams might not be members, then there are people that just come to ocp but aren’t members or anything – they just come;  we haven’t really said “a member run community center” – if it were to go in that direction, seems like we would want that group here;  we never did like the word membership – maybe we need a new word

Alex:  kind of sounds like we are talking about some sort of executive committee – membership seems like everyone should be a part;  “membership” doesn’t seem to make sense for what it seems like we are really talking about;  

Ron:  being stopped a little in tracks about how hard it is for people to attend meetings (like board meetings) who want to be involved;  like the idea of the filter system where the person who never plugs in is not involved in decision making;  seems like the idea of all membership attending

David:  why hasn’t anyone though about a suggestion box

Ron:  this reminds me of having the membership create some specific groups like judiciary and might vote on that group and who comes;  makes me think that a quarterly membership meeting would allow us deal with important issues;  all this makes me think of some kind of hierarchy in membership;  

Larry:  comment about hierarchy – never experiences the staff lording power over or being superior ;  however the membership develops, it is very important for people to be/feel included;  

Ron:  keep feeling like members will attend quarterly membership meetings;  

Mark:  supposed to be talking about meeting attendance;  we need to understand that if we have someone who needs to come to three membership meetings to become a member and have meetings quarterly

Ron:  monthly membership meetings – have to have a quorum, and members should do their best to attend membership meetings;   if someone feels passionately about something on the agenda and cant be there they would get their comments to someone who can be there;  maybe agendas would be out ahead of time

Alex:  likes the idea of someone being able to attend any three meetings;  never experienced a bad sense of hierarchy – have experienced leadership;  

Ron:  even if we establish a membership and a structure, doesn’t seem like we will ever run out of things to talk about;  would be nice to have a time once a month to get together to talk about issues;  if you are going to be on a team anyway, seems like you are already committed;  the idea of inviting others into the process – even the person who talks at the kitchen team meeting but not so much at the membership meeting time may have the most important thing to do;  members will agree to attend monthly membership meetings

Michelle:  had a thought – in the beginning, we did teams – a place where all the team meetings have minutes posted;  like the idea of at least a weekly meeting per team;  a big major meeting might work every 1-3 months as long as teams were meeting regularly;  

Philip:  there will be a lot of things to discuss and lots of team details that need to discuss other team details – that we are all in harmony and following the

Larry:  have a trial person attend membership meetings and team meetings might be too much

OCP Workshop 05/15/2013

Topic: Trial period

• What we’ve accomplished:
• Process for workshops
• Do we want to revisit the Teams concept?
• Code of behavior/motto/confirmed rules
• Membership
• Last week’s brainstorm:
• Most people liked the idea of 3 month trial period
• General agreement
• Trial member must attend 3 membership meetings
• Still being defined
• General agreement
• Idea of buddy/mentor/sponsor (already member)
• Task: define trial period
• 3 months
• 3 membership meetings
• Basic member requirements
• Brainstorm: what is the trial period?
• Membership-evaluation of person (strengths/weaknesses/how to grow stronger)
• what can they do for OCP/what can OCP do for them
• vote on whether or not person becomes member (Sigi)
• 3 months/meetings is reasonable
• 15 too much (Larry)
• Buddy system is great idea-more personal and in relationship with someone; representative of what OCP is about (Philip)
• Trial period specifically means a period of time-we are being too redundant and are confusing issues (Mark)
• Meeting attendance is confusing, having volunteer hours is fine (spirit of volunteerism)
• Buddy system-shouldn’t put themselves on person, but good idea
• Like idea of trial person putting themselves on the agenda and taking initiative when ready for membership (Ron)
• With teams-want to include outside community always, hard to give to every team and implement everyone (Philip)
• Should be on a team during trial period-find one they relate to
• Membership meetings may not even be when we’re open, just when people are most available (Ron)
• How do you become a trial member? (Ron)
• A person should have to want to-has to have interest, can’t be forced (Mark)
• Should we be concerned that people feel that they have a say in membership?
• How do you draw the line between those who have a say and just volunteers? (Ron)
• Different people have different strengths-evaluate them on what they can contribute (Sigi)
• Someone who is naturally part of OCP community may not be interested in membership
• What membership could potentially mean-can have say in whether we bring in more staff, create micro loans, turn industries into worker cooperatives
• can influence their life-may motivate them to become a member
• can propose certain movements/actions in community (Ron)
• Come to membership meetingtrial period begins
• given buddy/mentor/partner/sponsor/friend during trial period for questions/help
• friend because OCP is a Christian organization-“Jesus called us friends” (Curtis)
• “friend” from among members who will help them navigate the process
• minimum 3 months (could be more/long as they want)
• do basic membership duties-volunteer, join team, obey rules, new member orientation, attend at least 3 meetings
• Might be changed?
• Upon completing the trial period, a person can present themself for membership at a membership meeting for approval by the membership(Ron)
• ***If a person wants to be a part of the membership, he/she will announce that desire at a membership meeting. At that point, he/she will have a friend from the membership (generally of the same sex), who can help them through the trial period. The trial period will last a minimum of three months. During this time the potential member will attend at least three membership meetings and follow the basic requirements of membership. Upon completing the trial period, the person can present himself/herself to the membership for approval.***
• Proposed by Philip
• Sigi seconds it
• Unanimous decision that it passed
• Gender issue?
• Should be paired with same gender (Sadie)
• Someone with particular disability and person with background with problem who could help them may be of different gender (Ron)
• Should members be Christians? (Curtis)
• Don’t want people to have to be Christian to be a member-don’t force as part of Christian philosophy (Ron)
• It would be wise to have 30 day evaluations (3 during trial period) (Sigi)
• Trial period is the evaluation-not sure what it would accomplish (Ron/Curtis)
• Maybe just a check in? (Sigi)
• Too much evaluation/constantly checking in-too much/already covered (Philip)
• Is it too liberal? Do we want to give this much power? Experiment-everyone is welcome
• Many different personalities/conflicts
• How do we keep the spirit of OCP but also have it mean something to be a member?? (Ron)
• Reminder of current voting process-80%majority required to pass something
• What do we do when we have a member who breaks a serious rule?
• Do we eliminate them? Give them a certain amount of time to return? (Sigi)
• Ron says off topic
• See what happens after trial period
• Let membership figure that out (Philip)

OCP Workshop 05/08/2013

Michael:  suggests we move to talking about a Trial Period

Ron:  an example from the Little Grill, if someone wants to become a member, s/he must spend a certain amount of time and do some various things during this time;  

Michael:  likes Jonathan’s idea, but thinks that less time, like 2-3 months;  if someone puts this much time in, seems good;  

Curtis:  likes the suggestion of 6 months because some people come and go, and this would show stability;  this would

Ron:  what about this initial group – would workshop members have a free ride to membership;  how long would the trial time be; what are some things people would need to do;  some things seem obvious – like attending meetings, being involved in a team, and doing a new member orientation;  

Brainstorm of what people might do during a trial membership:  some kind of meeting attendance, 15 or more volunteer hours a week, code of behavior – adhering to it, joining a team, working on a project, completing new member orientation, presenting oneself for membership, get a buddy/mentor/sponsor, start over if non-adherence to code of behavior, referred by someone who is a member, membership fee, mow the lawn, someone could volunteer more time, go with member or staff member to represent OCP with something outside of OCP, settled outside responsibilities before beginning trial period,

Group:  seems like most of the group could get behind a three month trial period

Ron:  maybe we could get all of the details together about the trial period and then have a big vote after we get the details set

Michael:  if someone isn’t able to meet all of the requirements in three months and it takes four months seems like it would be nice for someone to be able to become a member

Larry:  meeting attendance – Wednesday mornings might make it hard for people to make it to meetings

Alex:  during the trial period, all of the basic requirements of membership should be a part

Ron:  would have some concern about 15 hours per week in light of fairly lengthy discussion – when we realized that someone could come to morning worship, go to a class, eat lunch, wash dishes for 15 minutes, and go out and play volleyball – you would have only volunteered for 15 minutes but you would have been involved in the community the whole day;  then keeping track of these details might also cause a paperwork nightmare;  seems like having someone be on a team would be enough to have someone be involved enough and the team does its work when it does;  

Preston:  if someone has a full-time job, how does a required number of hours even possible;  

Michael:  in the future, once things are set up, these rules for trial period can change as we find things don’t work

Ron:  nothing we are creating is set in stone, and we are just setting it up, and then things can go onto agendas and be changed

Ron:  what if we said something like – a trial member must attend three membership meetings – this way, if they were monthly, someone could complete a trial period in three months

Philip:  what about the three meeting requirement

Curtis:  the mentor or sponsor – would this be a member?;  

Ron:  how do we start with the membership?;  at the little grill, we started telling people that if they weren’t involved by a certain date, they would have to go through the trial period;  

Larry:  what is membership going to mean?  Decision making body?  Ownership responsibility?;

Ron:  we started by saying what it wouldn’t mean – the board is the governing body of OCP, drinking would not be allowed, etc;  but, the board is behind this process

Michael:  would there ever be a time when someone did something so outlandish that someone would be removed from being a member;  

Ron:  maybe people during trial period should go to at least one team meeting for each team;  about sponsorship – it is an important idea because there might be people who have a difficult time navigating systems, and this might prevent someone from becoming a member – a sponsor would just be someone who could answer questions or help someone by checking in;  

Anna:  really like the idea of sponsorship, and there is a lot of wisdom in AA’s model of sponsorship where a man is sponsored by a man and a woman is sponsored by a woman

Mark:  shouldn’t a trial member be able to check in with any member;  

Ron:  maybe we shouldn’t use the word “sponsor” since there are a lot of people involved with AA and this is a different thing;  would like to see the idea of a helped or sponsor being as non-heavy-handed as possible

Michael:  we haven’t gotten to the point where there are set rules;  how can rules be changed

Ron:  we have a deliverable:  “framework for community to govern itself”;  

OCP Workshop 05/01/2013

Matt:  wonders if others besides Ron feel like some of the t-shirts are inappropriate to wear at OCP;  Ron has asked in the past about Matt turning a t-shirt inside out

Ron:  would hope that (if we had a membership and matt was a member);  why would the rest of the community have to judge that;  there was a child next to you the other day – seemed like you (matt) were more interested in the rule than the fact that there was a child next to him;  

Michael:  rarely have seen a shirt that is offensive;  what if someone has a dispute;  could someone dispute it if some things are offensive to some and not others

Ron:  in general, if we weren’t exposed to the kind of violence on a t-shirt, would rather not see it;  there seems to be some kind of darkness to some of the shirts and it would be nicer to see beauty;  

Matt:  wonders what is appropriate and what is not;  there should be a rule about how violent something can be – would just like to know what is ok and what is not

Michael:  seems like it would be best for ocp to have people wear shirts that aren’t offensive

Ron:  don’t want the first thing someone comes here wearing something inappropriate to hear is something negative about having to change shirts;  would be nice for people to self regulate;  

Matt:  not always sure what is appropriate – sometimes I do know, but it isn’t always clear;  

James:  in an earlier discussion, matt came through very beautifully about children when it comes to sexual abuse;  wish that matt would have the same kind of heart to little ones when it comes to shirts and images

Michael:  safe, fun, learning, Christian environment;  

Ron:  The interpretation and enforcement of these rules is subject to the discretion of the staff;  what do people think of this

Michael:  would add something about a person being here means that you need to adhere to these rules – that being here is a privilege and not a right

Jared:  move to add to the beginning of the rules:  “The interpretation and enforcement of these rules is subject to the discretion of the staff.”;  seconded by Alex    

All in favor; no opposed

Ron:  how do we want to enforce the rule about “no animals in the building, except Jasmine”;  seems like there must be a couple chances before someone gets dealt some actual enforcement

Michael:  enforcement seems cut and dry;  sometimes Ben’s dog comes down;  what should we do about this

Alex:  seems like something should be said about enforcement – something about if this continues continues to be a repeated problem, it may

Ron:  maybe the animal is not allowed on the property

Ron:  what about dogs that are violent or scare people;  maybe we should avoid this to stay on topic

Mark:  this is a very minor rule compared to the others – lets just leave this to the discretion of the staff – we have rarely had issues

Jonathan:   proposes the enforcement be: “ If this becomes a repeated problem, the animal and/or the owner may be asked to leave the property.”; seconded by Jared;  all in favor, no opposed

Ron:  the next rule for enforcement is:  “When a conflict arises, those involved must be willing to participate in a staff-led mediation process.”

Johnny:  don’t like the way staff is disrespected – people act like there is no leadership and that they have been here for years;  don’t like people to disrespect;  staff gives people a place to be, rest, and have a meal;  everyone has issues, but to just go at people running this place should not be allowed;

Michael:  only been involved in this kind of process once, but what is the process and what if someone refuses

Ron:  wants to make sure that the person is able to come back to OCP when they are willing to participate in mediation;  not everyone is used to dealing with conflicts in this way – using mediation, so someone might not be willing to participate initially, but want to make sure that when someone decides they are willing to participate, want to make sure the enforcement allows ample room for this

Michael:  if the person doesn’t agree to come into the mediation process, what if someone is banned indefinitely, can they get back in that same day;  could the staff ban someone indefinitely if someone doesn’t agree to participate in mediation

Ron:  a person unwilling to abide by this rule is not able to be at OCP until they are willing

Alex:  “If those involved in a conflict are not willing to participate in a staff led mediation process, they are not allowed on the property until they are willing to participate.”

Ron:  seems like we are repeating the rule in the above statement

Michael:  what if someone continues to be involved in conflict

Mark:  what if the staff led mediation can’t happen right away – would like someone with a conflict to be gone until the mediation is able to happen;

Michael:  what if someone doesn’t get into a physical altercation but is so abusive – could someone be banned indefinitely

Jonathan:  “Any person who is unwilling to participate in the staff-led mediation process will not be allowed to be at OCP until they are willing to participate.”;  Jared seconds;  10 yes, 1 no; no block