Spokescounsil Planning Meeting 02-06-2025 6pm

Reminder: Process shape for discussing proposals

Proposal Process for Spokes Planning Meetings adapted from “Consensus”(keep close to 33 min total):

• Intro proposal (5 min)
• Questions/Concerns (5 min)
• Friendly ammendments (10 min)
• Withdrawals (1 min)
• Voting/Blocks/Stand Asides (1 min)
• If Block occcurs > discussion > ammendments offered (10 min)
• Vote again (1 min)

Agenda

• eat and hang (60mins)

• super speedy emotional check ins (no gossip), 1 min per person or less (8mins)

• claim roles (2mins)     * facilitator     * note-taker     * stack     * time-keeper     * action-item-wrangler

• action item check-ins (10mins)

  • Move proposals / make proposals with LP's template
  • (All) Comment on outreach proposal here
  • (Ash +LP) Refine Spokes explainer
  • (Ash) Make spokes flyer
  • (Iris) To craft inline text blurb to announce Spokes in signal chats
  • (Frankie) to write a proposal about prioritizing proposals (with dot voting)
  • (Frankie) Write a first draft agenda for the 1st Spokes meeting
  • (Ash) Write proposal: Cleaning proposal process
  • (Andrew) to identify "dream team" of people who know things about the physical infrastructure of woodbine (and its problems)
  • (Andrew) At next meeting, Andrew wrangles action items
  • (Briar) Write out what we need to do to make the next meeting the last before the actual Spokes meeting
  • (Briar) Write an agenda for the next meeting
  • (LP) Make date poll for the next meeting

• outreach (10mins)

• style of consensus (10mins)

• how to post agenda items (10mins)

• how to prioritize agenda items (15mins)

• break (5mins)

• quorum (5mins)

• how roles get decided (5mins)

• how meeting dates are decided (2mins)

• how long are the meetings (3mins)

• how spokes communicate outside of meetings (10mins)

• sitdown with directors (10mins)

• first spokes council agenda (15mins)

• unplug the space heater (5secs)

Notes

Attending: Frankie, Briar, Ash, Paul, LP, Natalie, Maria

Reminder: Process for discussing proposals

• Proposal Process for Spokes Planning Meetings adapted from “Consensus”(keep close to 33 min total):
  • Intro proposal (5 min)
  • Questions/Concerns (5 min)
  • Friendly ammendments (10 min)
  • Withdrawals (1 min)
  • Voting/Blocks/Stand Asides (1 min)
  • If Block occcurs > discussion > ammendments offered (10 min)
  • Vote again (1 min)

Roles: 

• Facilitator - frankie
• Note-taker - ash
• Stack - paul
• Time-keeper - briar
• Action-item-wrangler - LP

Proposal Review/Voting:

outreach (10mins) No Friendly Ammendments (FA), Vote outcome: pass

style of consensus (10mins) 

• FA:
  • Woodbine has liability to be considered and respected, concerns were voiced that proposals must respect liability 
  • Proposals should include some caveat that anything regarding changes to finance structure need to include the finance team, should consult them while drafting any proposal that touches finances
  • Proposals should include awareness and respect for the legacy of how things have been operating without being stuck in old ways if they are clearly not working, those drafting proposals are expected to research this and talk to people working in the areas their proposal touches
  • Proposals need to be concerned with working groups being asked to do labor 
  • Proposals should involve awareness of/research into who at Woodbine has expertise in an area that the Proposal touches (i.e. consult dinner wg for any dinner related proposals)
  • Proposals need to including an explanation/ proof of the problem it is trying to solve 
• Vote outcome: pass

how to post agenda items (10mins) 

• FA:
  • Need a digital wall too
    • Why we need it: Physical space centers woodbine, announces way to participate in space, lower barrier to posting , printers at woodbine, physical way to vote 
  • Role to consolidate online/physical walls (TBD)
  • Signal chat for discussing proposals (TBD)
  • Physical process only to start, worry about digital wall later 
• Vote outcome: pass

how to prioritize agenda items (15mins)

• FA:
• Setting agenda in advance important
• Debate over voting as individuals or having WG reps vote 
  • voting as individuals makes fewer meetings necessary for the WG reps
  • Impetus for individuals to vote may force ppl to read proposals 
  • large WGs may have more sway
• Visuals: Pins, stickers, markers on proposal to prioritize proposals
  • Counting dots of everyone can be arduous v reps
• Need clear description of who can vote on this at Woodbine
• Vote outcome: pass

quorum (5mins)

• FA:
  • Take attendance, Outreach if ppl aren’t showing up
  • Explain difference b/w Tabling v blocking
  • Possibility of bad faith actors not showing up to keep something from moving forward
  • This qourum proposal is a working rule but we can address something fishy or bad faith if we sense it
• Vote: pass

how roles get decided (5mins)

• FA:
  • Systematize rotating roles
  • Training, shadowing, collaborating to get ppl doing roles 
  • Not spokes planning people filling roles
  • Will figure out next roles at the end of the meeting
• Vote: pass

how meeting dates are decided (2mins)

• FA:
  • Alternate days occasionally so no one is blocked off
  • Feedback mechanism to change (via proposal)
  • Alternate b/w two days in a broad poll via chat
  • How can we actually book up the calendar? Issues with blocking rentals? (TBD)
• No vote: Withdrawal to discuss further

how long are the meetings (3mins)

• FA: none
• vote: pass 

how spokes communicate outside of meetings (10mins)

• FA: 
  • Worries expressed that discussion chat protocols need to be enforced
  • Admins can figure out as they go, but some norms/protocols should be set in advance 
  • Reword so there is no confusion about the representatives inviting new ones 
  • suggestion that any discussion should be wirtten inside the proposals themselves
  • Can the discussion chat be a free space to discuss? provides place for Working groups to discuss together 
  • Does it cause an issue with some admin metabolizing comments into meetings? Too much work, could be messy 
  • discussion chat could be a “free play space”
  • Prep people for change i.e. “this is an experiment” 
  • What is the relationship b/w this and the coordinators chat? (TBD pending directors sit down and refining the scope of the spokescouncil) 
    • Anyone can join the spokes chats v coordinators chat is currently only people who signed MOUs  
  •  QR codes to join chats 
• Vote: pass

sitdown with directors (10mins)

• We will have this meeting sit down meeting with the directors soon
• Parallel work happening b/w spokes and directorship
• Accountability, empowering people to show up and know how to be supportive - spokes can solve that 
• Invisibilized labor needs to be made visible, spokes can solve that
• Legal, finance, liability autonomedia - structure was lacking, may come together (Maria) 
• Repetition of not having things be transparent, People who cant be at the space like maria rely on other people , Dont want to have to repeat across so many chats (Maria)
• Lease and liability not up for debate (Maria)

first spokes council agenda (15mins)

• FA:
  • Needs reworking for cleaning project explanation of current cleaning situation
  • Directorship intro included with time for them to speak, need to coordinate how much time they need with consideration for what spokes planning had already prioritized  
  • Adjust time allotted for items
• Vote: pass 

Action item roundup:

• Digital wall for proposals (TBD)
• Explainer and flyer (ash and LP)
• Help briar make the physical proposal board (need volunteers)
• Edit proposals with FA post meeting (All)
• Meeting for spokes planning and directors to meet (Ash, Ella, Natalie)
• Finalize agenda for 1st meeting (ash, frank, paul)
• Proposal, "how meeting dates are decided", needs work to vote again, vote via chat asynchronously 
• Pick a date for first spokes meeting (TBD)
• Skills training ideas (TBD)