Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: associate membership policies

[R Philip Dowds (rpdowds]

We've not yet had much experience with this yet, but we divide things up 
according to decision mode, not decision substance.  First we go through the 
steps of classical consensus / consent, hoping to invent something within 
everyone's tolerance range (which, for shorthand, we refer to as "unanimity", 
although some purists think this is an abuse of terminology).  Any and all 
community members are welcome to be part of the consent / consensus process.  
But ...

If, after strenuous good faith effort has failed to produce unanimity, the 
proposers can choose to go to super-majority vote = 75% or better yeas out of 
minimum quorum of 17.  But and however ...
  •  Voting is not by member but by unit; each of the 32 units has a single, 
equal vote.  In this mode ...
  •  Only the owner(s) has(have) a voice; if tenants were members, they would 
not be voting.  And ...
  •  The owner must be in the room.  No absentee ballots, no mail-ins, no 
proxies.  We currently have absentee owners living thousands of miles away, and 
thus far, they seem satisfied to let those on site make all the decisions.  We 
understand we must recognize power of attorney if presented, but so far, this 
isn't happening.

Philip Dowds

> On Mar 3, 2014, at 10:09 AM, Sharon Villines <sharon [at] sharonvillines.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> Briefly we solved this by making two classes of decisions. Class 1 decisions 
> are those that related to financial and legal obligations that impact owners 
> and Class 2 decisions which relate to community issues of living with each 
> other. Any resident who signs an Associate Membership Agreement agreeing to 
> participate in the community, participates in Class 2 decisions.