User Tools

Site Tools


September 10, 2017

Present: Chris, Hannah (minutes first part), Joshua, Russ, Cynthia (facilitating), Richard (minutes second part), Ryan, Paul (minutes), Kelsey, Catty.

Meet and Greet

Tesa (second meeting, approved), Lyndon (first meeting) and Kay Gil (first meeting, has cat, room, no gender preference for roommate, no allergies), Sylvia Carroll (second meeting, approved)

Review of Minutes

Minutes reviewed and approved.

Wiki Updates

Updated labor descriptions.

Click to open form

Click to hide form (useful for printing)

Note: $ must be escaped by preceding with a \. Example: \$100


Agenda Item 1

(Richard) Abolish the Kitchen Manager coordinatorship.

Richard: this position does not have obvious accountability.

Item passes.

Agenda Item 2

(Richard) Credit residents $5/bedroom for August lease addendum snafu.

Richard: Do not think this was legal as paper addendum was not distributed or signed til after $5 charge.

Paul: We've never had lease addendum signed before when we did raise rent.

Ryan: This is not worth data entry from the Finance team.

Richard: This is on principle that landlord should not be able to raise rents without paper addendum representing proper notice.

Paul: (reads relevant section of the contract)

Hannah: I don't think this is worth the work on principle.

Russ: Paul should be no-showed but nobody was left out of this process.

Hannah and Ryan block.

Item fails to pass.

Agenda Item 3

(David ) I'd like to break contract due to unclean living situation with roommate (following on from ill luck with my first attempt to move in with another who was smoking indoors). I've left because I will not live someone who does not do their share of cleaning.

Examples of what I had to clean: maggots that were already there in the kitchen; his feces on top of the toilet seat; the floors for the first time in my roommate's tenancy (4yrs?); mold in the bathroom (how many years had it been?). Bought the new shower curtain and the rings to go with it (as the old had rusted badly) and drain grille (all still there), after Drano-ing the anciently clogged drain. What he cleaned: nothing. Even the kitchenware/utensils had chunks of caked-on food.

I was unaware there was a problem with the drain pipe beneath the kitchen sink (apparently an old issue?)–until it exploded on me–even though he was present and never gave me a heads up. There was the blender at 3am, and the nightly shuffling about before and after midnight, farting and burping and sighing loudly. Every other night, he'd sleep in the common space, on an amoeba like couch (really his other bed) that takes up much of the room, and is clearly very much his place to be. It's effectively his second bedroom, even though he already has the larger one.

Maybe I'd have been fine with keeping my own kitchenware (never used, re:maggots/caked food bits marking his territory) in my room until the maggot problem was taken care of–which it seemed he would do, given his word, which turned out to be unreliable–he didn't even try. And so I thought to myself over and again that six months isn't that long–

but that was just before I entered the kitchen one night and turned on the faucet–to have water and whatever food shreds HE had put through the disposal spray out in a geyser against me and across the kitchen floor, which was briefly flooded but which wasn't cleaned by my roommate who continued to play his video game nearby and merely explained that this would happen when the water was backed up (presumably with what he'd put down there). That's when my patience snapped, about a week before Labor Day.

I'm a teacher with a lot of students, and that holiday weekend meant my one slim free chance to find a place quickly and move without completely losing my sanity with the maggots and the feces in unexpected places, first thing in the morning (on TOP of the toilet seat, a chunky spread, an area in excess of my outspread hand) and the insomniac shuffling and sighing and passing of gas and the man-spreading of all his stuff, my space in the fridge relegated to the narrowest spaces available, all his food-grimed kitchenware on every counter. Enough.

I've taken my chance, already moved out. Y'all have my security. Please be kind and waive the 0 fee, having tried to move in to the coop twice, having ill luck with two unreliable/negligent roommates. I'm hemorrhaging from the pocketbook with this new move and anyway perhaps my old unit should be for a single person since his stuff is already everywhere but the smaller bedroom. He effectively has two bedrooms as it is, sleeping out in the common space so frequently. Seriously. Don't just foist another person into that space; unless they really don't care about any of what's been related here. Or perhaps he should be paying for: training on how to be a better roommate, or eradicating the maggots. One night I couldn't get through that nearly broken doorway, the lock jammed, and texted him for help; could've sworn he was right on the other side, on his amoeba couch–instead he went to his actual bedroom and pretended to be asleep (even though the shuffling and sighing and burping started up again soon after, once my own door was closed, as if that was permission?). What was he doing? Why didn't he do the normal thing and help–especially given the fragility of the door frame? Thankfully, this is no longer something I'll have to ponder.

Please let this be the last time I have to discuss this in detail. It was stressful enough at the time.

My apologies to anyone who was annoyed by all this; this seems to be the only venue I have here for advocating for myself in this situation, hence all the detail. Sorry to subject everyone else to this. It's embarrassing.

Paul: David requested a contract break. I granted the contract break, he's asking us to rescind the $100 contract break fee.

Item does not pass.

Agenda Item 4

(Paul) Goal: Update the “consensus check” ground rules that we don't follow.

Rationale: Stripped to less legalistic language, our current consensus process states that for a consensus check: * If there are two blocks, the proposal is tabled. * Otherwise, if at least 2/3rds of the members /present/ (note it's not “members voting”) show their approval, the proposal continues. * Otherwise, if at least 1/4th of the members present show their disapproval, the proposal is tabled. * Otherwise, if at least half of the members present show their approval, the proposal continues.

To my knowledge, we have never fully applied these rules. I think they're overly complicated for not much gain. I know that multiple people, including me, have been tripped up or confused by them.

Proposal: Implement one of the following instead of the current rules: Voting option) If there are two blocks, or if 2/3rds of the members /voting/ do not show their approval, the proposal is tabled. -or- Consensus option) If there are two blocks, the proposal is tabled.

The voting option is closer to our de facto rules, and something like the first half of the consensus check definition. The consensus option is closer to full consensus with two blocks. After/if we accept one of the proposals for discussion - presumably in a straw poll - I'll happily take amendments to it.

Either way, it should be straightforward to update our consensus document with our decision. If people desire it, the final language can be subject to ratification as well.

This would have no effect on our voting rules in other areas, such as member reviews. Any rule change wouldn't take effect until the next meeting.

CQ: What is the difference between voting and consensusing?

Paul: That's what I'm asking people to weigh in on. This would replace the fall-through procedure.

Item tabled by Paul.

Agenda Item 5

(Joshua) Allow Raith from NASCO to stay in commons 9/26-27.

Josh suggests she spends night in Commons library.

Josh agrees to e-mail house a reminder that week.

Item passes.

Agenda Item 6

(Catty O ) Looking to get last weeks labor excused. I had to leave on a moments notice last week for Houston because my grandfather was in critical condition in the hospital and then passed later that week.

Excused by labor czar.

New business

Russ: Concerning the gas situation, we're probably going to need a team of plumbers. It's likely we won't pass inspection tomorrow (meter started at 10lbs, currently at 3lbs). We use less than a pound of pressure.

CQ: Someone told me we may be being taken advantage of.

Russ: I believe the plumber is saving us money as much as possible, but he is experienced with single-family homes as opposed to apartment buildings.

Labor czar: We need a new minutes taker! Maybe new cooks!

Ryan: Hannah and I are getting married in early October, so I will not be available to go to the courthouse for evictions. Someone else should be ready to since we have two at the end of September.

meetings/2017-09-10.txt · Last modified: 2017/09/11 18:26 by paulwuersig