Voting Thresholds for CBAs

[Ashish Shrestha]

I wanted to re-emphasize a point from today's meeting, namely the 2/3 majority required to trigger approval of a CBA by this group.  This is fundamentally an undemocratic policy, and an incredibly high threshold.  Are we really prepared to take a vote and say that the DSNC does not support a project, Copper Mill or other, because it only received 65% in favor and we needed 67%?  What kind of message does that send about the voice of our members, to say that all our voices count and yet the majority can be overruled when they outnumber the minority at just under a 2:1?  Even our US Senate, a body mired in deadlock due to its filibuster policy, only requires a 60% vote to make progress.

Given the attempt to speed up the certification process for the DSNC, I would ask that we take a minute to re-assess this part of the bylaws and either rely on a 50% majority or simply publish voting totals on CBAs without providing explicit yes/no guidance.  Anything else heavily stacks the vote in favor of one side and fails to properly represent the voice of the neighborhood.

Ashish Shrestha

[Carmen Phillips]

Hi Ashish!

It was nice to meet you on Monday! I would like to share some thoughts
about the choice to use a 2/3 majority for approval for a CBA
agreement, because it was a choice, not an oversight.

tldnr- 2/3rds will be challenging, and also will be worth it to be
able to ensure broad community support and have good representation.

The goal of the DSNC is to represent all of our neighbors as fairly as
possible in negotiations with the local government and developers.
It's a crucial way to make certain that everyone has the chance to be
heard.

I would argue that while greater than 50% is a simple majority, it
falls short when considering the full population of an area and their
needs. It serves the Davis Square neighbors better to maintain the 2/3
approval, as having to repeatedly work toward that goal ensures that a
broader group of people must be included, and thus benefit.

The CBA committee will go through many, many iterations of an
agreement before ever presenting it to the Council as a whole, and
there will be time to comment and negotiate. The agreement will also
be made of many parts, and members will hopefully find specific
portions that are meaningful to them. This is not a one shot thing,
and there will, and must, be time to make it work.

I'm not certain if your comment about public guidance referred to
official positions or informal “temperature taking”. Informally,
members have shared that they appreciate knowing where other members
are coming from, even if it is not binding. Anyone reading our
publicly available minutes, attending the meeting, or watching the
recording will have an unofficial idea of the current state of yes/no
as well as the thoughts of everyone there. Official yes/no guidance
would need to go through a review and a vote before being released, as
that would count as a formal DSNC position, and it would be a
deliberate choice to share it.

I'm glad that we both agree on wanting to be as inclusive of our
neighbors as possible and to make positive changes for Davis. I look
forward to finding more common ground in future meetings and
committees!

Warmly,
Carmen,
DSNC Board

> --
> Davis Square Neighborhood Council · https://DavisSquareNC.org · https://linktr.ee/DavisSquareNC
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Davis Square Neighborhood Council" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to davissquaren...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/davissquarenc/79bffe15-6de3-4e70-8a8a-2ba28f300e3bn%40googlegroups.com.