Participation and Exit Policy 27 November 2005
This is a DRAFT for discussion purposes, and it is not approved yet. Please feel free to add comments following the link at the bottom of the page
Written by Joe Linton, per discussion with participation committee: Angel, Ann, Joe
- Note:* This document builds on the participation expectations approved at the August 2005 LAEV Retreat. , At that meeting, LAEV approved by consensus that eco-village residents are expected to participate in LAEV activities, with a minimum monthly participation being two of three of the following:
- attending Building/Community meeting,
- attending one community dinner,
- contributing 4 hours volunteer time.
Residents who consistently do not participate will be encouraged to participate or to exit. (Please see the exact wording – this is a summary.) This “Participation and Exit” policy document intends to address two related items: how do we encourage LAEV residents to participate? How do we exit LAEV residents who do not participate?
Part 1: Participation Policy Goals:
- Create balanced opportunities for individual participation and collective stewardship
- Build a dynamic community through diversity and cooperation
- Encourage LAEV residents to choose to participate or to exit the project
Part 2: Community Commitment to Foster Participation
2.1 Community will maintain a listing of approved volunteer opportunities, available to all current and prospective LAEV residents.
2.2 Community will host at least 4 volunteer work days. These will take place, at a minimum, quarterly. They will be scheduled in advance, with notice posted in the lobby and via email at least one week prior to the event. The quarterly work parties will be hosted by a rotating team of volunteers, similar to the community’s meeting facilitation team. Hosts will work with LAEV residents to identify priority projects for community work days.
Part 3: Exit Process for Non-Participating LAEV Residents
3.1 All intentional residents will participate in voluntary self-reporting of LAEV participation. Residents fill out a very short form and include it with each monthly rent payment. Possibly, a modest (such as $5/month) discount on rent could be used to encourage that residents consistently fill out their self-reporting forms.
3.2 Resident participation self-reporting forms will be reviewed every 3 months. This review will include all intentional residents, so as to avoid conflict and to not single out specific residents.
3.3 Any resident that, for two or more months in the quarter, does not self-report, or does not fulfill minimum participation expectations, will receive a letter requesting that they participate or begin the exit process. In addition, another LAEV resident will visit the non-participating resident and have a conversation to encourage participation and to attempt to clarify the non-participating resident’s intent.
3.4 Situation of each non-participating resident who received the letter and conversation will be reviewed after one month. If the non-participating resident has not chosen to participate, then she/he will receive a second letter, which will include scheduling a discussion and decision of that person’s exit at an upcoming meeting of the Building/Community meeting. .
3.5 At the scheduled Building/Community meeting, the non-participating resident may present her/his case before those attending, including clarifying any special circumstances. The Building/Community meeting will then require that the non-participating member leave the room, and will come to consensus decision regarding whether the Community will request that the non-participating resident exit LAEV.
3.6 Non-participating residents who the Community requests to exit LAEV will receive a third letter requesting that she/he exit, and notifying the exiting resident that she/he has 60 days to exit LAEV.
THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION HAS BEEN PRESENTED BUT NOT CONSENSED and is strictly for information only.[[
(At 12/07 LAEV Retreat with Tree Bresson, the following question arose, and Dale and Kathy offered to research a response. This is their first draft as to options for consideration.)
Q. How do Intentional Communities (or other voluntary groups) hold members accountable for upholding obligations and standards?
A. By signed documents that state consequences for noncompliance.
What the models below have in common is that the terms of the agreement are clear to all parties at the outset and formalized in a written document. There is a clear, transparent understanding to which all parties agree. Consequences then flow naturally from actions.
Monastic Model.
Signing vows was used at The Farm in Tennessee, an income-sharing commune of the seventies with a charismatic leader. These incuded a vow of poverty. This was a legal document, witnessed, countersigned, and filed in the central office. Vows state shared community tenets. (Wedding vows could be considered the entrance requirement for a very small intentional community.)
Sample vow:
Simplicity—a frugal and focused life. We strive to be a community that is unencumbered by excessive possessions and filled with passion and purpose. We’ll seek to align all our resources whether time, personnel, money, or energy around one dominant theme: sustainability.Consequence: Members failing to uphold vows are required to depart.
Mediating Body: Elected or appointed leaders.
Enforcement: By the community as a group.
Professional Model.
Swearing an oath is often used in professional societies. Engineers, lawyers, doctors, Realtors, engineers, and accountants are bound by codes and norms for conduct, and practitioners are obliged to join societies and take oaths to be licensed.
The Hippocratic Oath ends:
If I fulfill this oath and do not violate it, may it be granted to me to enjoy life and art, being honored with fame among all men for all time to come; if I transgress it and swear falsely, may the opposite of all this be my lot.Consequence: Failure to observe professional standards causes loss of licensure, livelihood and ability to practice openly.
Mediating Body: Appointees of professional society.
Enforcement: By the professional society’s employees and legal authorities.
Real Estate Model.
Signing a Covenant. A covenant, in contrast to a contract, is a one-way agreement whereby the covenanter is the only party bound by the promise. Co-housing groups and other communities or developments may require entrants to sign “covenants” as a condition of ownership or residence. Deed restrictions including covenants govern many homeowner and condo associations. Covenants often involve oaths, and are binding.
Sample covenant:
Keeping or housing of poultry, cattle, horses, or other livestock is prohibited on any lot.
Consequence: Eviction: forceful ejection.
Mediating Body: Elected board of directors or similar.
Enforcement: By courts, legal authorities (sheriffs).
Legal Model.
Signing a Contract. The implicit social contract holds that by remaining in a territory controlled by some authority, people give consent to be governed by it. Any contract can be written and signed by both parties, with stated consequences. A residential lease, for a dorm room, apartment or house, is a contract. Many intentional communities require a membership contract, some for indefinite periods, others renewable at given intervals. Eviction grounds may be discretionary or mandatory and usually include non-payment or late payment of rent; violation of rules after warnings have been issued and ample time given; remaining after the agreement expires. Full discussion is at http://www.ic.org/pnp/cdir/1995/27butcher.php
At the Farm, Albert Bates writes:We had, and have, a written contract with every member, since 1971. The current bylaws, which I mostly wrote in the early 80s, deal more with membership rights, responsibilities, process and appeals than any other subject.
Consequence: Eviction, ejection.
Mediating Body: The incorporated group’s officers, or the Owner or Lessor or representative.
Enforcement: By courts or by the community (sheriffs or elected members of the community).