Newcastle 2019 Governance Decision Making - 2 proposals
Animorph Co-op
Public
Seen by 90
As outlined on the wiki, we came up with two proposals that were presented to the gathering at the end of day one, and further workshopped on the second day. There were no objections to the proposals hence we would like to put them forward to a vote by all members of CoTech.
Proposal One - Voting Membership of CoTech
This proposal puts forward the model of “Voting Shares”. A Voting Share is held by an individul when ALL of the following are TRUE:
- They are a member of their own co-operative
- Their co-operative is a member of CoTech
- Their co-operative contributes £1 per week for their individual voting share
If ratified, the proposal will come into effect on the 28th of February 2020. More details on wiki page.
Proposal Two - Voting Membership of CoTech
Making binding decisions involves two steps:
1. The Proposal Loop
2. Voting (Ratification / Binding)
The Proposal Loop step is an iterative process of refining a proposal so that it may be taken to Voting. Any individual member or group of members may put forward an idea to refine into a proposal and they may make use of any communication channel to do this e.g. sending out emails to interested parties, collaborating over forums, etc. Once the individual or group is happy that their idea has matured into a meaningful proposal that requires a binding decision they inform CoTech that they wish the proposal to be discussed at a Monthly Meeting call (which are held remotely). The task of Monthly Meeting (as it relates to the proposal) is to engage with the proposal and decide if it is mature enough to send to a vote, or whether it needs to be iterated further. A mature proposal will embody the SMART Principles.To be taken to Voting the proposal needs to be seconded by any voting member of CoTech who was not involved in making the proposal. The purpose of this seconding is to provide a minimal check on proposal readiness before it goes to Voting -- if nobody will second the proposal perhaps it needs more engagement and iteration.
Voting occurs using the Loomio platform. A vote on Loomio is created which links to the proposal details and members are informed via appropriate channels. A proposal is subject to the rules of the constitution. To pass -- a two thirds (67%) vote in favour of the proposal is required. Once a proposal has passed the Loomio poll becomes the documentation of the decision. Any actionable items outlined in the proposal should be assigned appropriately for implementation.
Once the second proposal is ratified, the two-step process will be valid for all votes. The outcome of voting on the first proposal will imply how the voting occurs on Loomio.
Again, more details on wiki page and in the minutes
Please have a say, your vote matters!
One vote per co-op please!
Poll Created Mon 16 Dec 2019 1:26PM
Proposal One - Voting Membership of CoTech Closed Thu 16 Jan 2020 1:02PM
I met with Szczepan from Animorph a couple of weeks ago to have a chat about these two proposals and how best to share the outcome.
Although there was a positive response to the two proposals we've subsequently found it hard to work out what to do next.
The constitution says that we should have member decisions (votes) for 3 reasons:
- approving new members
- changing the constitution or manifesto
- changes to the criteria for membership
The first of these happens occasionally and is usual uncontroversial. I don't think we've ever had a vote for either of the other two reasons.
When we reflected on this it became clear that we should have expressed these two proposals in terms of the changes we wanted to see made to the constitution or criteria for membership. This might have made it clearer exactly what was changing.
We considered re-running these two proposals, but came to the conclusion that we wouldn't gain much from having two classes of membership and a more prescribed method of decision making when the only decisions CoTech really makes (historically) are decisions about who joins CoTech.
Pursuing a change in the criteria for membership to create associate members and full members, and a change to the voting system to one-member rather than one-coop per vote feels like it could be quite a divisive change. Again for not much practical benefit and quite a lot of administrative cost (it's quite hard to manage membership in Loomio to restrict who can vote, for example).
Instead what we plan to do is:
- Establish a permanent CoTech fund based on what we've learned during the pilot year.
- Make membership of that fund voluntary (but suggested) for all CoTech member coops.
- Agree collectively between the members of the fund how best to make spending decisions, based on the ideas presented in proposal 2 above.
Setting up this fund will not require a membership decision as it won't affect either the constitution or membership criteria. Therefore we'll just get on with it.
We'll be contacting all CoTech member co-ops shortly with more details about how to join the fund. In the meantime if you have any questions or thoughts ask away in the comments below.
As outlined in the thread and on Newcastle 2019 wiki page.
Results
| Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Agree | 90.9% | 10 |
|
| Abstain | 9.1% | 1 |
|
|
| Disagree | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Undecided | 0% | 109 |
|
11 of 120 people have participated (9%)
Shaun Fensom
Thu 19 Dec 2019 5:21PM
For CBN
Josef Davies-Coates
Sun 12 Jan 2020 2:51AM
I agree, but I think it should be "at least £1 a week", i.e. ideally more. Especially given this is going to in effect be the fund.
Graham
Wed 15 Jan 2020 12:48PM
This seems fair, although it needs to be kept under review as there is clearly scope for a takeover by a single member org or small group of orgs who have more people/money than others.
Aaron Hirtenstein
Wed 15 Jan 2020 3:54PM
I don't now how I feel about this proposal, it "feels" onerous and a bit cumbersome but I appreciate the rigour and detail. Part of my confusion is I'm not sure what decisions this might be relevant to but I assume it's for member decisions as defined by the constitution at present.
Poll Created Mon 16 Dec 2019 1:27PM
Proposal Two - Bringing a Proposal to a Vote Closed Thu 16 Jan 2020 1:03PM
As outlined in the thread and on Newcastle 2019 wiki page.
Results
| Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Agree | 90.0% | 9 |
|
| Abstain | 10.0% | 1 |
|
|
| Disagree | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Undecided | 0% | 110 |
|
10 of 120 people have participated (8%)
Ian Snaith
Mon 16 Dec 2019 2:26PM
This seems fair and in line with Co-op Principles.
Shaun Fensom
Thu 19 Dec 2019 5:22PM
For CBN
Aaron Hirtenstein
Wed 15 Jan 2020 3:57PM
As my comments on the other proposal. I got confused by Loomio's new UI and thought I was voting on both!
Chris Lowis (Go Free Range) · Mon 16 Dec 2019 3:34PM
A few clarifying questions:
Are we in effect saying that larger co-ops receive more votes? That is, individual members of a co-op will be able to vote instead of the co-ops themselves?
Will the votes still only apply to [member decisions](https://wiki.coops.tech/wiki/CoTech_Constitution)? If I want to organise an event, for example, I can just get on and do it without a vote, presumably?
Is the £1/member/month mentioned the same as being a member of the CoTech fund, or is that to be run separately?