Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Quorums/Reopening decisions

[Terry (Sarito) Whatley (terry.whatley]

Nikki,
 At Nevada City Cohousing (California), it took us 4 meetings to arrive at
a consensus
on quorum.  We ended up with a requirement that 40% of full member
households must be represented at the time a decision is made. Now this
means that
we need 14 of 34 households represented.  I don't think any other decision
we've made
has been harder to get to consensus on than this one was.
 We require 1/3 of the people who were present at a decision to agree to
its being reopened.
But we've made several provisional decisions, where part of the decision is
to revisit it
after some time or upon request.
 Our first households moved in at the end of December, we're all moved in
since spring,
and we're hoping that the site work is almost finished.

-sarito

> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:53:09 -0700
> From: "Nikki Sachs" <nikkisachs [at] gmail.com>
> Subject: [C-L]_ Quorums/Reopening decisions
> To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org
> Message-ID:
>         <329d50630610261953n205b8c77oeb6f15465307c7 [at] mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hello,
> We are in the process of deciding.what the quorum for our general meetings
> should be, the minimum number of members who have to be present to
> officially conduct business and consense on binding decisions.  We are
> also
> discussing the same thing in relation to reopening a previously consensed
> decision to new terms?  How many "votes" have to be in favor of this to do
> it?  What have other communities done?  Thanks.
>      Nikki Sachs for the process team
>      North Oakland Cohousing, a fledgling urban infill cohousing community
> in the Temescal area of Oakland CA.