Present: Hannah, Jessica, Paul, Corey, Donny, Burgess, Carey, Andy, Sam, Delia
Working on last week's item. Officers' business will be done through officer e-mail accounts
(Andy) Relocate all composting to the composting pit. Examples, no composting in front of residences or in walkways.
Andy: The pit has been built on the south side of the complex; everything should be moved there for hygienic and aesthetic reasons.
Points of information/Clarifying question: Compost bucket outside the Commons was included in the original proposal. Andy says it would need to be emptied regularly, but there is no one assigned; head of Groundskeeping needs to assign someone.
Concerns/Friendly amendments: Worried that people won't use the compost pit if they are not allowed to do their own composting until they get it to the pit. Suggestion: those who want to compost should used covered containers. FA: We will allow a covered compost container in front of the Commons when there is a labor position for composting assigned to handle it daily. FA: Allow composting bins in front of units if they are covered and taken to the composting pit regularly. Discussion: if you have rotting compost in front of your apartment you can get yellow-carded.
Revised proposal: All composting containers on the property must be securely covered and emptied in the composting pit daily.
Proposal accepted as revised.
(Burgess) Replace the existing policy on guests with the following:
Notice of visitors arriving as guests of a member can be routinely addressed during the new business portion of weekly membership meetings. This does not need an agenda item.
Approval from any affected roommates should be sought for visits beyond an “overnighter” out of respect for the shared nature of many apartments.
There is a 3 consecutive day guest visit allowed without any notice to the Coop. Any non-members expecting to stay at La Re beyond the 3 day limit are required to be introduced during new business next weekly membership meeting.
The Coop may allow or deny requests for an extended stay. If there is objection to an extended stay, any member may offer an agenda item addressing the subject for consideration during a membership meeting. Use “yellow card” procedures for alleged violations of guest rules.
Rules regarding commons #106 and common areas apply to all guests. The hosting member is responsible for the behavior of and property damages that might be caused by their guests.
Burgess: He understands that three days may seem very short, but his intent in practice someone could be here for over a week before a meeting comes up where it would be discussed. As things stand now there may be three weeks before we discuss the guest's stay and behaviors, and a month before we can take action.
PI/CQ: Don't we already have language about responsibility for behaviors or damages caused by a guest? No, not in the house manual. Rental contract says that the renter is responsible for their own and their guests' behavior and any damages. What is the material change this proposal brings? Answer: The longest time that someone could be here without any discussion is 10 days.
C/FA: Nolan: We need to address the problem of people staying along time, but we already have a policy that says that if you're not a member you can't stay longer than 14 days. The problem may not be our current policy but its enforcement. The onus is on the potential guest to show up to a meeting as soon as s/he thinks s/he will be here longer than 2 weeks. Perhaps a MemCo should visit with the guest after 14 or even 7 days to ask them if they are planning to stay and informing them of the need to apply for membership. Burgess's reply: this involved roommates; his former roommate had guests who stayed without any discussion with him. And two weeks is a long time to wait before the current process begins. Reply: Nolan thinks that at 14 days the process is completed and the person can be asked to leave at that time. Before that there is nothing to enforce. Corey: He has also had a situation where a roommate's guest spent 26/30 days here, but never 14 days in a row. Carey: He thinks having someone come for discussion of a guest is a violation of privacy. Andy: Enforcement is a problem, and this may not resolve it, but we could make the expectation a shorter period of time, which would be a benefit to the community. Current enforcement process requires a yellow card, which requires three signatures, and a membership review is difficult and best avoided. Response: We have to be able to have these hard conversations if we are a co-op rather than turning them over to the courts. Concern: How long could an Associate stay without a contract for staying here and paying rent? Burgess: This proposal does not attempt to address Associates. Concern: I sometimes want guests to stay for a week, and I could come and introduce them but I don't want to because it's a lot of work. He could see that this could be enforced differentially depending on how well-liked the resident is. Response from Burgess: There is no problem with someone staying a week as his proposal is written. In a roommate situation privacy is a two-way street. Concern: Further agreement that this might be differentially enforced. Concern: Unclear how differential enforcement would happen on this proposal as compared with any other. FA: Make this four days within seven days rather than three consecutive days. Not accepted. Concern from Nolan: Intention to block because the intent and wording aren't congruent. Someone could be singled out for yellow card or membership review for a guest beyond three days. He would be willing to reconsider if there is better wording.
Revision of proposal from Burgess: If they are continuing to stay here past the three days they need to come to a membership meeting.
Proposal: Table this to allow Burgess time to craft it with others who have strong objections not to the intent but to the wording.
Two aspects need to be addressed: Policy and expectations are getting blurred. Wording is complicated and could be simplified.
As currently proposed, the visitor staying from Thursday through Sunday would cause a violation on Sunday, and the timing of a meeting would only occur a week later, which is not overly harsh. Proposed revision: In paragraph three the person required to come to the meeting could be the resident rather than the guest. Accepted by Burgess.
Item is tabled until next week.
(Corey) Propose either through amending the Associate Membership contract and/or House Policy that:
On the 21st of the month, Associates with an outstanding balance of over $100 shall have their Associate Membership Contract terminated.
Associates whose contracts are ended in this manner do not receive the “Former Associate” placement on the waiting list.
Corey: Current policy is that Associates are not bumped off the list for a year of non-payment or non-performance of labor.
PI/CQ: None noted
C/FA to replace the third paragraph: Any member who leaves the co-op not in good standing cannot sign a new contract until they have returned to good standing. Accepted by Corey. Proposal accepted as amended.
(Richard) Drop Commons key fee for all future members.
Paul discusses for Richard: We can make keys for a $1 and this is a disincentive to become a member.
PI/CQ: Originally the key deposit was refunded and deducted from the move-in. The key deposit was to cover potential damage in the Commons.
C/FA: Friendly amendment: Change the house manual to state that the key deposit will be applied to the move-in deposit. FA not accepted.
If we need to have a deposit to cover potential damages, the deposit could stand alone and not be tied to having a key, as they need a key to do labor.
FA from Paul: Drop commons key deposit for all future members.
Comment from co-MemCo: Speaks in favor, as this has been complicated to educate Associates, track the deposit, and Associates seem to get Commons keys without going through the deposit process.
Accepted as amended.
Three yellow cards: Sam, Delia, and Robbie keeping long-term guests.
Sam and Delia: Her brother Adam has been here longer than a month. She does not contest this statement. He has been staying to help and while transitioning to get his own place. They have not been to a meeting to discuss her brother being here. Question: How long will he stay? Adam: His plan is to move once he gets a full-time permanent job; has been here almost 4 weeks. He tries to be courteous and do some cleaning outside. Hannah: Coming to a meeting is a good first step; we would like you to sign something saying that you are committing to labor. This place works because we hold each other accountable to do some cooking, cleaning, etc., and we want to hold everyone to the same standard. Some members are not comfortable with his indefinite status. It is important that he come to another meeting to become an Associate; Adam agrees.
Robbie: Has had a long-term guest. He is not here to contest it.
Reminder: 8 pm Tuesday, 8/4, Coordinators' meeting
Ryan: We have an estimate from an energy-efficiency consultant; there is a recommendation for a comprehensive plan that includes everything from double-paned windows to solar panels. The company may help us find grants or other monies that would not create debt.
Jessica: Would like to make the hose more convenient. Recommendation that she talk to groundskeepers about doing it. She doesn't worry that the hose will be stolen. It needs to be rolled up so it won't be a hazard.
Hannah: There is a Friends of the Grove meeting and she would like us to attend it so that she can push the agenda forward that a co-op be included in the development of state land at 45th and Bull Creek. The meeting is Tuesday, 8/11.
Hannah: Would like to put together a visit to Claude tomorrow - Donny and Delia and are available. Please let Hannah know if you want to go.
Molly: Would like to reverse no-show from last week. Informed that this requires a vote and can't be done in New Business.
Andy: Every unit will get a $100 rent credit in September; there will be a liability release form to sign first. You can choose to keep paying the regular rent and thereby carry a $100 rent credit for the future.
Corey: If we can buy a projector for $850 we can use a donated 16' movie screen.