Next meeting & establishing some ground rules

[Elisabeth Parker]

Dear fellow gardeners:

Before our next meeting on Saturday, April 11th at 10am at the Pee Wee Golf club house, we need to establish a basic set of expectations & ground rules. These would be in addition to the general bylaws for the garden being developed by Seneca & her Steering Committee. Several people have expressed concern to me about the ... um ... general tone of our last meeting.

We need to strike a balance between the following important -- but often conflicting -- requirements:

1. Keeping meetings as focused & brief as possible out of consideration for everyone's time;
2. Allowing a bit of meet-and-greet time (maybe 10-15 minutes) so we can get to know each other & maybe share food & beverages;
3. Allowing sufficient time for comments, suggestions, & general brainstorming on the various meeting agenda items to ensure that everyone feels included in the decision-making; and
   
4. Ensuring transparency for all of our processes & decisions -- meaning that everyone knows what's going on & everyone has a say.
   

First of all, community projects (like our garden) are normally run democratically. Committees & their heads do not make final decisions: They present facts & make recommendations to the group, which provides feedback. When the feedback is duly considered & incorporated, the plans can be put to a vote. Alas, this can require several iterations, but at least it's fair & enables the group to achieve the maximum benefit from everyone's ideas & contributions.

I had originally set up our newsgroup/Web site to address concerns meetings running too long. I had hoped we could do a lot of our brainstorming & back-and-forth online & when our respective schedules permit. For example, someone uploads a file; posts a message saying that the file is available & asking for feedback; and then updates the file based on suggestions. I was hoping this could enable us to build a general consensus on decisions during the 4 weeks between meetings, thereby shortening the discussions required at the actual meetings. However, it turns out that many of us are not able to use the Web site this way (though it has been useful for making documents available, making announcements, etc.).

Since we have NOT been discussing meeting agenda items online, and we DO somehow need to allow sufficient time for agenda items to be fully discussed, we may need to have our meetings run longer than some of us would like. Discouraging open discussions & exchange of ideas for the sake of expediency is simply not acceptable.

In addition, objections and disagreements should be expressed with courtesy & respect towards others. This may require sharp-tempered folks (including myself) to think before speaking. The next time I hear ANYone being spoken to or about in a disparaging matter during a meeting or other public gathering -- whether directed towards myself, or towards anyone else -- I WILL speak up & it will NOT be pretty.

Thank you.

-- Elisabeth


*v* *v* *v* *v* *v* *v* *v* *v* *v* *v* *v* *v* *v* *v*
Visit my blog, Russian River Rattina at
http://rrrattina.blogspot.com/, for my takes on
news, issues, & happenings along the Russian
River.

[Moire]

Hello gardeners,

It seems our last meeting was an unpleasant experience for several of
us. It certainly was for me. I’ve thought a lot about it since the
meeting, wondering how we can do things differently so we can leave
our meetings happier and grow a strong community garden. I’d come to
the same conclusion as I believe Elisabeth is suggesting in her
message - that it would benefit us to have an agreed upon set of
expectations & ground rules for how we conduct our meetings. I was
thinking of things such as: only one person speaking at a time;
staying on topic; finalizing one topic before moving on to the next;
listening attentively; having an agreed upon process for decision
making – simple majority, consensus, etc.; having an agreed upon start
and finish time for the meeting. I’m sure there are other ideas to
consider.

I agree that it’s a good idea to allow time for meet-and-greet/
socializing. Perhaps this could be set up as come early or stay late
so those who have limited time would still be able to be part of the
actual meeting.

I do want to respond to some aspects of Elisabeth’s message. You
mention Elisabeth “that community projects are normally run

democratically. Committees & their heads do not make final

decisions….” I’m wondering if it’s your experience, or that of others
“that have expressed concern to” you, that the garden committees have
been making final decisions. If so could you give examples of this or
be more specific? It’s been my experience that so far work has
initially been done by committees then brought back to monthly
meetings for discussion and decision making. Some examples of this to
date are the garden plan, the garden sign & the Guidelines & Rules
document. In each of these cases the respective committee presented
their work & discussion continued over the course of more than one
meeting prior to any decisions being made. At the monthly meetings
members other than those serving on committees have expressed their
opinions regarding these topics.

You also say in your message that “discouraging open discussions &

exchange of ideas for the sake of expediency is simply not

acceptable.” Is this what you believe happened at the last meeting?
For me what was challenging were all the side conversations that
happened continually throughout the meeting. That felt like a general
lack of respect, even though I doubt that was the intention on
anyone’s part. It was the multitude of side conversations that made
it impossible to have a fruitful discussion as a group. For me,
especially acting as facilitator, it was frustrating and upsetting and
made it more than challenging to be “nice.”

Finally your message ends with, “the next time I hear ANYone being

spoken to or about in a disparaging matter during a meeting or other

public gathering … I WILL speak up & it will NOT be pretty.” If
you’re speaking about interactions at the last meeting, as I’m
guessing you are, then it seems a more beneficial approach might be to
speak specifically to those occurrences with the people involved
present so everyone can learn from it, as opposed to making this
threat as you do.

I’ve written this in the spirit of building community. I hope
everyone can read it that way.

Moire


On Mar 25, 2:53 pm, Elisabeth Parker <russianriverratt...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear fellow gardeners:
>
> Before our next meeting on Saturday, April 11th at 10am at the Pee Wee Golf
> club house, we need to establish a basic set of expectations & ground rules.
> These would be in addition to the general bylaws for the garden being
> developed by Seneca & her Steering Committee. Several people have expressed
> concern to me about the ... um ... general tone of our last meeting.
>
> We need to strike a balance between the following important -- but often
> conflicting -- requirements:
>

>    1. Keeping meetings as focused & brief as possible out of consideration
>    for everyone's time;
>    2. Allowing a bit of meet-and-greet time (maybe 10-15 minutes) so we can

>    get to know each other & maybe share food & beverages;

>    3. Allowing sufficient time for comments, suggestions, & general

>    brainstorming on the various meeting agenda items to ensure that everyone

>    feels included in the decision-making; *and*
>    4. Ensuring transparency for all of our processes & decisions -- meaning

> Visit my blog, Russian River Rattina athttp://rrrattina.blogspot.com/, for my takes on