Pride Minutes

Exec Meeting

Monday, November 22, 2010

12:03 PM, SUB 211

 

In attendance: Abby, Alejandro, Allen, Alejandro, Aria, Carlos, Daniel, JJ, Kendall, Kevin, Lesley, Richard R, Ryan, Seamus

 

Agenda

  1. Beer Garden Results

  2. RGAC issues

  3. Social coordinator checklist

    • Event records

    • Protocol

    • Poster distribution

    • Poster Design

  4. Statement from Co-Chair

  5. Discussion on exec meeting format

    • Voting

    • Safe Space

    • Check-ins

  6. VPD (Ryan)

Action items

  • None

 

Discussion

  1. Beer Garden Results

    • Made approximately $536.25 including float

    • Saw many new faces at the event, so word is getting out.  Bar was also busy.

    • Postering happened too late.

    • Started off slowly, but picked up later in the night.

  2. RGAC issues

    • SJC made a $700 donation to SPHR for the flotilla for Gaza next year. Both AMS President Bijan and the IAC attended an SJC meeting to override their decision to make a donation. Bijan is going to council and making a motion to block this transaction. In the past, our preliminary budgets have been submitted to the budget committee and passed collectively. AMS President now wants individual RGAC budgets and budget breakdowns to be approved by AMS Council by a 2/3’s majority.

    • This goes against the AMS Codes and Policies, section XI Articles 3 and 4 referring to Resource Groups’ finances and autonomy.

    • The transaction has already been frozen by VP Finance.

    • AMS President must go to AMS Council to suspend code to bring RGAC finances to Council.

    • AMS President no longer has the support of representatives of student council. It was recently voted against AMS President representing AMS in UBC land use agreements.

    • Results of the motion (tabled or not) will show up on Friday

    • Please spread the word, but avoid antagonistic actions, such as storming AMS Council.

    • Only the IAC supports Bijan, because they oppose SJC spending money on something they don’t support.

  3. Social coordinator checklist

    • Event records:would be useful to have an online document or binder detailing past events (financial breakdown, attendance, publicity, suggestions, general thoughts). The document would serve as a record for future coordinators.

    • Protocol: would build a sense of how to do promotions and to have some sense of unity in future years, easing the transition between outgoing and incoming coordinators. This would serve as a living document, changing as necessary.

    • Poster distribution:consider a sign in sheet for postering, including high-traffic buildings and possibly assigned locations. This also saves time if exec members go to buildings that have already been postered. May also add buildings that exec members are able to poster to the exec contact list. Posters could also be checked on to make sure they haven’t been covered.

    • Nabil will type up a list of his tasks over Winter break to add to the checklist. It’d be helpful to know his specific tasks so other tasks can be taken care of accordingly.

    • Poster design: more communication with social coordinators and publicity. Pride logo should also be placed in the corner of each poster to increase “brand awareness” and have more resonance on campus.

  4. Statement from Co-Chair

    • Daniel:Recently, many concerns and issues have been brought to exec meetings within a relatively short period of time, creating an antagonistic environment. Dan would like to change the dynamic to be more open and positive. Also apologizes for fostering any negative feelings or inspiring any fear or grief.

    • September 27:Apologizes for his reactions and behaviours during this meeting in which Ryan (Political Coordinator) brought forth a letter to be voted on. Would like to use this as a positive learning experience. This is an example of poor conflict resolution, because before the meeting there was no prior discussion of the conflict or how it might move forward in a mutually beneficial manner. Because of this, Daniel felt defensive and was out of line and would like to apologize for that. Instead of resolving it neatly, the issues were compounded and unresolved, acting as a deterrent to approach from other exec members.

    • Recent events:Abby (On the QT) came to us with concerns raised by other exec member in regards to feelings about the organization and the running of Pride. Daniel and Abby met several times over the course of three weeks. Wanted to have open, honest communication and to agree upon a resolution, but misconduct during the September 27 meeting blurred those intentions. Daniel would like to resolve the situation positively and move forward. These meetings proved to be very productive and we would also like future concerns to be discussed in this manner, making the time to discuss all sides of an issue and encourage feedback.

    • Recall petition:As clarification, the petition to recall Mallaz (former On the QT co-coordinator) was not taken lightly. It required a long and complicated process, including the agreement of 15 active members. All other avenues of action were considered before resorting to a recall vote. Because of the extraordinary circumstances, no other means of resolution were available.

    • Constitution:Should be a living document that we, as a group, own, believe in and trust. In the new year, we will be discussing the constitution and the by-laws. Some exec members have come with their own concerns regarding the constitution and if you have any suggestions, please let us know. Thank you.

  5. Discussion on exec meeting format

    • How do you want the meeting to be run? We’d like to use this as a feedback and discussion session.

    • Voting in exec members:

      • Seamus (GLOW) suggests that we should do all votes by secret ballot, which would require a change in by-laws.

      • Should be careful to elect new members judging by merit and not vote until we have some knowledge of their applicable skills.

      • Could have candidates step out of the room briefly while current exec members discuss the candidates’ qualifications

      • Richard (First Year Rep) suggests that candidates write a reference letter, including past experience and contributions. JJ (Treasurer) comments that SUS has applicants put forward a resume and application ahead of time so council can review the documents before the meeting and already have an idea of the candidate’s background.

      • Alejandro: some people may not be comfortable having to step out of the room while we discuss them.How they present themselves during this process may not be an accurate representation of how they would actually perform in the position.

      • Andrew: should have these suggestions in the procedures instead of the by-laws. If placed in the by-laws, it will require a sessional collective to change and not all of the voting procedures would be applicable for future years. Allen (Grad rep) comments that procedures can also be suspended by exec if it doesn’t apply to the situation.

      • Abby likes the idea of a letter to be reviewed before the meeting, but perhaps a personal statement would be more accessible than a resume. This also gives people who might not be comfortable in the meeting setting to have their qualifications come through in the letter.

      • Seamus suggests that we could have a trial period for new exec members at the beginning of each semester

        • Trial periods would lead to instability and it would be too easy to get rid of people. Exec are supposed to have a month of shadowing the outgoing exec member so this is unnecessary. We should also have confidence in voting someone in without a trial period.

    • Allen: need to be careful, because exec members last year felt that Pride was becoming too bureaucratic.

      • This is a valid concern, but these are also important changes in maintaining such a large exec. This will also ease the transition process from year to year.

      • Richard: his GSA in highschool was very unorganized and it fell to just himself to keep it running. After he graduated, the GSA fell apart. It’s important to not have the organization dependent on just a few people without some sort of infrastructure to ensure security in future years.

      • Aria (So-co and TQT): It’s a good idea to have some level of organization. The voting process is also separate from “bureaucracy” and very important.

      • Abby: It’s possible to have that level of professionalism without having it feel too bureaucratic. If any particular position is removed further from the general collective, creating a more hierarchical system, then the organization may become bureaucratic.

      • Allen: Although we don’t want the organization to become too bureaucratic, it may be impractical for all exec members to deal with certain issues and having specific positions clarifies who should be dealing with what.

    • Dan: we will begin to outline certain procedures that should be developed in the by-laws.

    • Safe Space(Kevin): It must be made perfectly clear that safe space rules apply not only to events and discussions groups, but also to the Pride office. New volunteers may not have known that, so this is clarification. Returning volunteers should already be aware and, even if they are not breaking safe space rules, they also have the responsibility to shut down any conversation that crosses those boundaries. The office is a social space open for everyone and it’s very unprofessional to air out our dirty laundry, especially with non-active members present. Although it is the constitutional duty for co-chairs to serve as Pride’s representatives to the greater community, all exec members must also be aware that they represent Pride whenever they attend events or hold office hours and thus have some level of accountability. Please bring concerns directly to the applicable coordinators or co-chairs and also maintain a safe and respective environment.

    • Abby: Would like to reach out to discussion group coordinators as well and have more people attend exec meetings. It would make it more interesting, productive and feel like we’re building a community.

      • Seamus would like more non-exec members to get involved as well,

    • Check-ins:We could also have something like a “talking circle” during check-ins. Along with introductions, members could say how their weeks are going, how they feel about the organization, suggestions or any business. This would make it easier for exec members to offer feedback and have a more closely knit group. We could also to check-outs at the end of each meeting.

  6. Vancouver Police Department (Ryan)

    • Ryan is working with the VPD in rewriting their stragegic plan. If any members would like to offer input, Ryan will be in the office collecting notes for the next hour.

Meeting adjourned at 12:57

 

Next Meeting

  • Date and time: Monday, September 29, 2010 at 12 PM

  • Location: SUB 211

  • Agenda: Check-ins

Pride Minutes

Exec Meeting

Monday, November 22, 2010

12:03 PM, SUB 211

 

In attendance: Abby, Alejandro, Allen, Alejandro, Aria, Carlos, Daniel, JJ, Kendall, Kevin, Lesley, Richard R, Ryan, Seamus

 

Agenda

  1. Beer Garden Results

  2. RGAC issues

  3. Social coordinator checklist

    • Event records

    • Protocol

    • Poster distribution

    • Poster Design

  4. Statement from Co-Chair

  5. Discussion on exec meeting format

    • Voting

    • Safe Space

    • Check-ins

  6. VPD (Ryan)

Action items

  • None

 

Discussion

  1. Beer Garden Results

    • Made approximately $536.25 including float

    • Saw many new faces at the event, so word is getting out.  Bar was also busy.

    • Postering happened too late.

    • Started off slowly, but picked up later in the night.

  2. RGAC issues

    • SJC made a $700 donation to SPHR for the flotilla for Gaza next year. Both AMS President Bijan and the IAC attended an SJC meeting to override their decision to make a donation. Bijan is going to council and making a motion to block this transaction. In the past, our preliminary budgets have been submitted to the budget committee and passed collectively. AMS President now wants individual RGAC budgets and budget breakdowns to be approved by AMS Council by a 2/3’s majority.

    • This goes against the AMS Codes and Policies, section XI Articles 3 and 4 referring to Resource Groups’ finances and autonomy.

    • The transaction has already been frozen by VP Finance.

    • AMS President must go to AMS Council to suspend code to bring RGAC finances to Council.

    • AMS President no longer has the support of representatives of student council. It was recently voted against AMS President representing AMS in UBC land use agreements.

    • Results of the motion (tabled or not) will show up on Friday

    • Please spread the word, but avoid antagonistic actions, such as storming AMS Council.

    • Only the IAC supports Bijan, because they oppose SJC spending money on something they don’t support.

  3. Social coordinator checklist

    • Event records:would be useful to have an online document or binder detailing past events (financial breakdown, attendance, publicity, suggestions, general thoughts). The document would serve as a record for future coordinators.

    • Protocol: would build a sense of how to do promotions and to have some sense of unity in future years, easing the transition between outgoing and incoming coordinators. This would serve as a living document, changing as necessary.

    • Poster distribution:consider a sign in sheet for postering, including high-traffic buildings and possibly assigned locations. This also saves time if exec members go to buildings that have already been postered. May also add buildings that exec members are able to poster to the exec contact list. Posters could also be checked on to make sure they haven’t been covered.

    • Nabil will type up a list of his tasks over Winter break to add to the checklist. It’d be helpful to know his specific tasks so other tasks can be taken care of accordingly.

    • Poster design: more communication with social coordinators and publicity. Pride logo should also be placed in the corner of each poster to increase “brand awareness” and have more resonance on campus.

  4. Statement from Co-Chair

    • Daniel:Recently, many concerns and issues have been brought to exec meetings within a relatively short period of time, creating an antagonistic environment. Dan would like to change the dynamic to be more open and positive. Also apologizes for fostering any negative feelings or inspiring any fear or grief.

    • September 27:Apologizes for his reactions and behaviours during this meeting in which Ryan (Political Coordinator) brought forth a letter to be voted on. Would like to use this as a positive learning experience. This is an example of poor conflict resolution, because before the meeting there was no prior discussion of the conflict or how it might move forward in a mutually beneficial manner. Because of this, Daniel felt defensive and was out of line and would like to apologize for that. Instead of resolving it neatly, the issues were compounded and unresolved, acting as a deterrent to approach from other exec members.

    • Recent events:Abby (On the QT) came to us with concerns raised by other exec member in regards to feelings about the organization and the running of Pride. Daniel and Abby met several times over the course of three weeks. Wanted to have open, honest communication and to agree upon a resolution, but misconduct during the September 27 meeting blurred those intentions. Daniel would like to resolve the situation positively and move forward. These meetings proved to be very productive and we would also like future concerns to be discussed in this manner, making the time to discuss all sides of an issue and encourage feedback.

    • Recall petition:As clarification, the petition to recall Mallaz (former On the QT co-coordinator) was not taken lightly. It required a long and complicated process, including the agreement of 15 active members. All other avenues of action were considered before resorting to a recall vote. Because of the extraordinary circumstances, no other means of resolution were available.

    • Constitution:Should be a living document that we, as a group, own, believe in and trust. In the new year, we will be discussing the constitution and the by-laws. Some exec members have come with their own concerns regarding the constitution and if you have any suggestions, please let us know. Thank you.

  5. Discussion on exec meeting format

    • How do you want the meeting to be run? We’d like to use this as a feedback and discussion session.

    • Voting in exec members:

      • Seamus (GLOW) suggests that we should do all votes by secret ballot, which would require a change in by-laws.

      • Should be careful to elect new members judging by merit and not vote until we have some knowledge of their applicable skills.

      • Could have candidates step out of the room briefly while current exec members discuss the candidates’ qualifications

      • Richard (First Year Rep) suggests that candidates write a reference letter, including past experience and contributions. JJ (Treasurer) comments that SUS has applicants put forward a resume and application ahead of time so council can review the documents before the meeting and already have an idea of the candidate’s background.

      • Alejandro: some people may not be comfortable having to step out of the room while we discuss them.How they present themselves during this process may not be an accurate representation of how they would actually perform in the position.

      • Andrew: should have these suggestions in the procedures instead of the by-laws. If placed in the by-laws, it will require a sessional collective to change and not all of the voting procedures would be applicable for future years. Allen (Grad rep) comments that procedures can also be suspended by exec if it doesn’t apply to the situation.

      • Abby likes the idea of a letter to be reviewed before the meeting, but perhaps a personal statement would be more accessible than a resume. This also gives people who might not be comfortable in the meeting setting to have their qualifications come through in the letter.

      • Seamus suggests that we could have a trial period for new exec members at the beginning of each semester

        • Trial periods would lead to instability and it would be too easy to get rid of people. Exec are supposed to have a month of shadowing the outgoing exec member so this is unnecessary. We should also have confidence in voting someone in without a trial period.

    • Allen: need to be careful, because exec members last year felt that Pride was becoming too bureaucratic.

      • This is a valid concern, but these are also important changes in maintaining such a large exec. This will also ease the transition process from year to year.

      • Richard: his GSA in highschool was very unorganized and it fell to just himself to keep it running. After he graduated, the GSA fell apart. It’s important to not have the organization dependent on just a few people without some sort of infrastructure to ensure security in future years.

      • Aria (So-co and TQT): It’s a good idea to have some level of organization. The voting process is also separate from “bureaucracy” and very important.

      • Abby: It’s possible to have that level of professionalism without having it feel too bureaucratic. If any particular position is removed further from the general collective, creating a more hierarchical system, then the organization may become bureaucratic.

      • Allen: Although we don’t want the organization to become too bureaucratic, it may be impractical for all exec members to deal with certain issues and having specific positions clarifies who should be dealing with what.

    • Dan: we will begin to outline certain procedures that should be developed in the by-laws.

    • Safe Space(Kevin): It must be made perfectly clear that safe space rules apply not only to events and discussions groups, but also to the Pride office. New volunteers may not have known that, so this is clarification. Returning volunteers should already be aware and, even if they are not breaking safe space rules, they also have the responsibility to shut down any conversation that crosses those boundaries. The office is a social space open for everyone and it’s very unprofessional to air out our dirty laundry, especially with non-active members present. Although it is the constitutional duty for co-chairs to serve as Pride’s representatives to the greater community, all exec members must also be aware that they represent Pride whenever they attend events or hold office hours and thus have some level of accountability. Please bring concerns directly to the applicable coordinators or co-chairs and also maintain a safe and respective environment.

    • Abby: Would like to reach out to discussion group coordinators as well and have more people attend exec meetings. It would make it more interesting, productive and feel like we’re building a community.

      • Seamus would like more non-exec members to get involved as well,

    • Check-ins:We could also have something like a “talking circle” during check-ins. Along with introductions, members could say how their weeks are going, how they feel about the organization, suggestions or any business. This would make it easier for exec members to offer feedback and have a more closely knit group. We could also to check-outs at the end of each meeting.

  6. Vancouver Police Department (Ryan)

    • Ryan is working with the VPD in rewriting their stragegic plan. If any members would like to offer input, Ryan will be in the office collecting notes for the next hour.

Meeting adjourned at 12:57

 

Next Meeting

  • Date and time: Monday, September 29, 2010 at 12 PM

  • Location: SUB 211

  • Agenda: Check-ins