Campus Climate Network Governance Structure
From ClimateNetworkWiki
The governance structure for the Campus Climate Network is evolving as we learn the best ways to work together to accomplish our goals. After all, form should follow function and we are developing new functions for the Network.
Contents |
Decisions we have made
These are governence principles we have reached consensus on
- At all levels of governance full consensus decision making will be used. This does not preclude the abilities of campuses to act on other campaigns, just means that decisions that affect the actions of the whole network must be unanimous. (approved by consensus)
- Create two-tiered membership – one that is learning/observing, and another that is active in decision-making and working group activity. (who is going to decide who is a member?) (what is the value of excluding someone from the decision-making process? People would just have to commit the commitment document) (approved by consensus)
Decisions to be made
These are areas where we still need to develop and agree on a proposal. The following proposals come from a working group meeting held on Oct 20th. Present were Jamie Biggar, Tria Donaldson and Alex Vigneault
Definition of a "member"
What was suggested at the Summit: Members are organizations, in a face-to-face meeting all representatives of organizations are part of the consensus. (unapproved).
- To elaborate: It was discussed that a ‘member’ would be a specific group or organization on a campus (ie UBC Common Energy or TRU Eco.) instead of a campus or post-secondary institute (UBC, or TRU). This was meant to factor in that there might be multiple groups on a campus who want to partner with us, and that we are specifically partnering with a student group. There were some concerns about this section.
- There was concerns about how this would limit the ability of individuals to participate.
Proposal being brought forward by working group:
a. The Network is comprised of partner groups or organizations.
There can be multiple groups from one post-secondary institution.
Each member group will sign on to the commitment statement as approved in the Roles
and Responsibility section.
b. All individuals who are participate in a meeting or a call will be part of consensus based
decision making, but for the purposes of quorum member
organizations will be the unit of measurement
Roles and Responsibilities of Members
It was agreed that we would create a commitment document that all members will sign on to, and this document will include: a. Mission b. Vision c. Membership requirements (attendance requirements) d. Participation and decision-making model
Suggested Rights/Roles: to participate in the network’s decision-making processes; to have access to information generated by the network; to interact and share resources with other network members
Suggested Responsibilities: to follow through on commitments to the network; to participate as fully in meetings and discussions as possible; to embrace openness and honesty in interactions with other network members
More responsibilities (based on Energy Action Coalition) – have to commit to certain things
- commit to principles
- commit to being present at 2 face-to-face meetings per year
- commit to not miss 3 consecutive conference calls of the full network
- one person empowered by their group to make decisions on their behalf.
Quorum
- Straw Poll in favour of 50%+1 (13 for, 11 against)
- Participants at summit were given the options 2/3 or 50%+1
- Decision was NOT made
Associated with membership process? Does quorum have to include every school we’re trying to include in the network? EA has associate members and full members – is this something we want to explore?
Quorum discussion: What should constitute quorum for phone calls?
- A percentage of schools
- A number of schools? 4?
- A set number of schools from outside the lower mainland?
- Having a specific point person from each partner school responsible for attending call. Have quorum be 50 per cent of these people plus have calls open for any one who wants to attend and they can still vote.
Proposal being brought forward by working group:
a. Quorum will be 4 member-groups, at least 2 of which are not UVIC, SFU and UBC-Vancouver
(to be revisited/updated at the next face-to-face summit)
b. To ensure that all individuals have a chance to participate, agenda items and
decisions to be made will be circulated 4 days prior to a meeting. Who ever
is motivating for the decision needs to seek feedback and let people know a
decision will be made.
c. After the meeting, whether it is a network call, a working group, or a face to
face meeting, all decisions made must be circulated for 3 days after the decision.
If anyone wants to block or send out an amended proposal, they can do this. Failure to
comment will be taken as full tentative consensus. (the word tentataive is being put in as
an amendment to highlight the ability to reopen discussion at any time in consensus
decision-making
Decision Making Power
- What can Working groups make decisions on?
felt that this concept needed to be fleshed out more. working groups should be able to delegate people to do work, and then report back to the group as a whole not all decisions need to be made at the network. but what does? action item: Tria will follow up with Jeca on the commitment statement. Have a larger conversation with larger group
- What decisions can be made on network calls?
Types of calls:
- Phone calls: Suggested area of decisions are communications, media, fundraising, campaigns
- Working Groups- suggested area of decisions are specific to their mandated objectives
- Regional Summits: Set the overall direction of the organization
Individual members are encouraged to participate in working groups and discussions, but for network based decision-making one representative from each organization will contribute to quorum.
Communication and Reporting Mediums
- Email: as needed, discussions leading up to decisions, but no decisions made
- Listserves: as needed, discussions leading up to decisions, but no decisions made
*SYC-BC: less active, info on upcoming events, meeting etc *BC Campus Climate Network: Active listserv, appropriate for discussions
- Wiki: info sharing and reporting, discussions, but no decisions made
Role of SYC
Maggie does a lot of great work for the whole network. How do we work with SYC? What is our relationship?
- Membership (SYC facilitated) – how does this impact governance?
- Affiliated groups
- Student groups
- Collaborators (individuals, other networks eg. Energy Action, Sierra Student Coalition)
Suggestions?
Important to remember that the BC Campus Climate Network started as a partnership between Common Energy and SYC and our governance structure should reflect this.
Minutes from the BC Campus Climate Summit, Oct 28
Proposals and Decisions:
- At all levels of governance full consensus decision making will be used.
- This does not preclude the abilities of campuses to act on other campaigns, just means that decisions that affect the actions of the whole network must be unanimous. (approved by consensus)
- Members are organizations, in a face-to-face meeting all representatives of organizations are part of the consensus. (unapproved).
To elaborate: It was discussed that a ‘member’ would be a specific group or organization
on a campus (ie UBC Common Energy or TRU Eco.) instead of a campus or post-secondary
institute(UBC, or TRU). This was meant to factor in that there might be multiple groups on
a campus who want to partner with us, and that we are specifically partnering with a student
group. There were some concerns about this section.
- Create two-tiered membership – one that is learning/observing, and another that is active in decision-making and working group activity. (who is going to decide who is a member?) (what is the value of excluding someone from the decision-making process? People would just have to commit the commitment document) (approved by consensus)
- Create a commitment document that all members will sign on to, and this document will include:
- Mission
- Vision
- Membership requirements (attendance requirements)
- Participation and decision-making model
(approved)
Random Notes (from summit and pre-summit working group
Random Notes:
Liaisons within campuses to the wider network
What is the network? People that share information and work toward a common goal
Decision-making framework Consensus decision-making (insert diagram here from wikipedia) How do we meet? Once per semester per person, once per semester on conference call Working groups can create their own ``terms of reference``
How do we make decisions? Do we have a minimum number of people?
Governance Structure: BC Campus Climate Network
PAC provincial action committee met monthly and came up with focused campaign on climate
Goals are already defined. There is a vision, a mission and 6 areas for collaboration (see provincial wiki)
Who is a member of the network?
What will be presented to the group? What needs to be decided by the group? THERE IS ONLY ONE NETWORK
What are the rights, roles and responsibilities? - Roles (of what or who): - Responsibilities: - To actively participate in the decision making and information sharing process
