Cohousing-L Mailing List: An example of Wild Sage's decision making process

[Ellen Orleans (ellen]

Hi Folks,

Rumor has it that someone at the conference was looking for this. Let me
know if you have questions.  I know it is long, but I believe we can't
use attachments on this list serve.

Thanks...

Ellen Orleans
Wild Sage Cohousing (an co-author of this document)
Wonderland Hill 

DECISION MAKING PROCESS

INTENT

To have a decision-making process that balances several needs, including
the need for all ideas to be expressed and heard, the need for community
buy-in and support, and the need to sustain community energy.   This
process is built upon several premises:

?       All points of view are important and there needs to be
sufficient time to consider them.

?       Decisions will be made in a timely manner in order to sustain
community energy.

?       We will stay aware of the time spent discussing proposed
decisions in order to maintain a high level of community energy.

?       Whoever cares about a proposed decision should be involved in
that decision. Support for participation, i.e. child care, will be
provided by the community.

?       Everyone does not need to be involved in every decision.

?       If a community member is informed and aware of a proposed
decision and does not raise an objection, then the decision stands.

?       Each household carries one vote in any decision, except in
decisions that directly relate to the Wild Sage Vision Statement, in
which case every member will carry one vote.

?       The type of decision-making process used, authoritarian,
majority, super majority or consensus will depend on the specific
circumstances regarding that decision. Consensus should be sought
whenever possible in whole community decisions.

PROCESS

Team Decisions
1.      Standing teams are empowered to make decisions that are within
their defined scope of responsibility as outlined in their team job
description. The community can also empower standing teams or ad hoc
committees to make final decisions about things not normally within
their scope of responsibility.

?       Standing teams must inform the community, on a regular basis in
community meetings, about the decisions they are working on so that
interested people can participate.

?       Standing teams must inform the community if the decisions they
are working on, (which are within their scope of responsibility), will
be recommendations or final decisions. If two or more households raise
objections to their making a final decision, the team will instead bring
a recommendation to the community.

?       Community members can give teams input on team decisions if they
do so within the deadline the team provides.

2.      If there are one or more household objections when a team
presents its final proposed decision to the community, the objecting
individuals will meet with the team to discuss the objection and perhaps
revise the decision.

Whole Community Decisions

The whole community will be involved in making a decision when that
decision needs community support in order to be successfully
implemented, or when it directly impacts the Wild Sage Vision Statement

Voting Definitions

A.      ?Yes? (thumb up)-- I agree and support the proposed decision.

B.       ?Stand aside? (thumb sideways) ? I personally object to the
proposed decision and will not commit my energy to implementing it, but
I won?t block it because it is not in conflict with the vision and won?t
do irreparable harm to the community. 

C.       ?Neutral? ? I don?t care one way or the other about the
proposed decision and will support and/or participate in implementing
whatever decision is made.

D.       ?Block?  (thumb down) ? I block the proposed decision from
moving forward because I believe it is against the vision and will do
irreparable harm to the community.  Blocking is a very serious step and
should be done very rarely.

Steps in community Decision- Making: 

Whenever possible, major decisions requiring group support will be
addressed in three meetings. (Time-sensitive issues will be put to a
vote sooner.)

In the first meeting, the community will be fully informed of the
proposed decision, including time for Q & A.  In the second meeting
members will express their points of view on the proposed decision.  In
the third meeting a consensus will be sought using the following steps: 

1.      First try for full consensus among attending households and
proxies.

2.      If the attending members can?t reach full consensus, then
adequate time will be allowed to hear from those not in favor of the
proposed decision.

3.      Try again for full consensus.

If the attending households still can?t reach full consensus, then the
following guidelines will apply:

For a Decision That Does Not Require Group Energy

If a decision does not require group energy (or community funds) to
implement, it will pass if there are no blocks, regardless of how many
?stand asides? there are.       

For a Decision That Requires Group Energy

If a proposed decision that requires group energy does not pass, those
who are standing aside or blocking will form an ad hoc committee with
other community members who have a strong interest in the decision.
Attending members will decide on the level of decision-making authority
that the ad hoc committee will have for that particular decision. The
level of authority could be to:

?       make the final decision or,
?       come back to the community with a fully consensed recommendation
for the community to vote on or, 
?       do additional research. 

Whichever level of authority receives support of 80% or more of
attending members is the level of authority that will be given to the
team or ad hoc committee.

1.      The ad hoc committee will return to the community with the
appropriate information (final decision, recommendation, or research).

2.      If a vote is required, then full consensus will be tried for.

3.      If the attending members can?t reach full consensus, then allow
adequate time to hear from those not in favor of the proposed decision.

4.      Another vote will then be taken, with the following guidelines:
if at least 80% of attending households vote ?Yes?, and there are no
blocks, and if there are no more than 10% stand asides, then the
decision will be considered passed.

Blocks and stand asides: If there are any blocks or more than 10% stand
asides, the proposed decision will not pass at that time.  Note: This
situation should not arise, as anyone standing aside or blocking the
original proposed decision should have been part of the ad hoc
committee. (Percentages are of attending members and will be rounded to
the nearest whole number).

Proxies: Because all members will rarely be in attendance at all
meetings, votes may be submitted to the Steering Team or Process Team
using the proxy form, prior to the meeting at which the proposed
decision will be presented. Individuals submitting proxies are strongly
encouraged to participate in discussions about the proposed decision
prior to sending in a vote. Proxy votes can support decisions, stand
aside or share concerns.  But because a proposed decision can change
during the course of a discussion, proxy votes  will not be permitted to
block, nor will their stand asides count in the final percentage.
However, extenuating circumstances can be addressed by the Steering
Team.

Distinguishing Between Decisions That Require Group Energy and Those
That Don?t

For most decisions, this distinction should be self-evident.  However,
every proposed decision brought before the community should include a
discussion of whether the proposal would require group energy to
implement or not.

Determining if a block is legitimate

1.      If there are enough ?Yes? or ?Neutral? votes for the decision to
pass, but there are still one or more blocks, then the matter will go to
the Steering Team.  The Steering Team will decide whether blockers are
blocking for the good of the community or for personal reasons.  If the
Steering Team determines that the blockers are blocking for personal
reasons, then the blocks are considered stand asides.

2.      If the Steering Team determines that the blocker is blocking for
the good of the community, then the proposed decision will come back to
members for discussion, revision and another vote.

Back up decision making

If after all the steps have been followed and the community still cannot
make a decision, then the proposed decision will go to the Steering
Team, which will make a final decision, with input from interested
parties.  (The assumption here is that the community will ultimately be
able to make its own decisions, and that decisions will be turned over
to the Steering Team very infrequently, if at all).

_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L