This meetings blog is meant to keep everyone up to date to what was discussed at Velocipede collective meetings.

Collective Meeting Minutes - November 2nd, 2009
November 20, 2009

Collective Members Present: Doug Barcleft, Noah Bers, Gabby Vigo, Boson Au, Tim Barnett, Anton Schaller, Anna Ricklin, Peter Hegel, Lars Peterson, Eric Voboril, Dileep Monie

Visitors: Ben, Ginny, Joe Breeding, Penny Troutner, Gordon

Roles:
Facilitator:    Eric Voboril
Stack-taker:    Noah Bers
Scribe:        Peter Hegel
Timekeeper:    Anna Ricklin
Minutes:    Lars Peterson

Reports:
PR Committee:
See Draft on PR section of forums, or see Tim Barnett.

Education:
Listed in Free School Calendar
Eric: Yellow Breeches program went really well
Boson, Eric: There is a possibility that they may donate funds to the shop in the future.

Finance:

Risk Management Committee:  
Sexual Harrassment Policy is being worked on (Trey)
Peter: this is wrapped up in the code of conduct, draft is available

Shop Committee:

Programs:
Peter:    Build-a-Bike program has problems:
Solutions:    Clarify kids policy
Inform people UP-FRONT about time to build a bike
cheat sheet for greeter (Boson)
Proposal:
(Potentially)
6-7: front room stands reserved for build-a-bike
new position: Build-a-Bike mechanic
Group build-a-bike participants

Penny Troutner:
Nate Evans is presenting new bike legislation to the City Council
Penny would like to get the three-foot law entered into the MD general assembly again.
Nate is interested in getting feedback from us, as a group.
We should have a point person to represent us.
>>> Next Meeting:  Who will represent us?  Clarify how much we can legally lobby the city

Proposals:

Dileep: IRS 990: Three forms:  e-postcard (990N)
Eric: guidestar publishes all 990’s on their website.  This is generally seen as a good thing.
990EZ: little more information, not as lengthy as full form.
full 990 is a lot of work.
proposal: do full 990, continue to pay accountant to work on this
Questions:
Will we be able to do this in future years?  (Yes)
Why not do the short form? (less exposure)
Any additional Fees?    (No)
Any more work that we don’t yet know we need to do? (no)
Call for consensus:  We will proceed with full 990.

Dileep:  Do not allow anyone to work on the sidewalk with VBP tools.
Questions:  Is there not already a policy in effect?
Noah: clarify intent:  Is this about loitering? Losing Tools? People’s bikes being chopped down in front of the shop?
Dileep: Safety Issue, no legal right to sidewalk, protect our tools, protect us from liability
Tim: It’s good to have a policy that we can point to.
Lars: We do not need to rules to address these problems.  Agree with all the intentions, but feel that we already have the discretion to disallow damaging behavior.
Peter: We can’t enforce no loitering policy, since we often send people out of the shop.
Proposal is sent to sub-committee.
Proposal:  Order and use colored tags to indicate part status
Lars will order light green, orange, blue, and pink tags.  A full write-up and posters describing the system will follow.

Consensus reached, we will use this system

Boson: fundraising events for the shop.  Has begun informally surveying people in the community who would like to donate valuable parts for raffle,, etc.
Questions:
In the shop?  (no)
Will this be marketed to anyone who can afford to help us financially?  (medium)
Is this a specific proposal? (no, just to start planning)
Liability, licenses? (yes, this will be taken care of)
Concerns:
Will Boson be working with anyone else in VBP? (yes)
Will we accept that we may not make money from the event? (understood)
How much will this cost? (unknown, almost everything will be donated)
Call for consensus:
Consensus reached. Separate meeting to follow.

Proposal: Committee Budgets:
Boson: Permanent committees come up with a ballpark figure for their yearly budget by next meeting (December)
Clarification: This is for assessment purposes, projecting cash flow.
Question:    Shouldn’t we look at monthly figures beforehand? Quarterly?  1/2 year?
Modification of proposal:  1&2Q 2010.
Call for consensus (consensus reached)

Discussions
Standards of work:
Hubs must have been rebuilt.  Bottom brackets, headsets must be repacked.  Brake pads should be ’supple’ , any corroded cable should be replaced.
Let’s make a checklist for these things for when we are assessing bikes before they go out the door. (We already have one! look at it!)

Our dear landlord:
There is a puddle on the floor.  He is working on getting this resolved.

( Discussion about a co-op member who was particularly dishonest and disrespectful.)

Consensus is to inform the member that he may not come back until he speaks to the collective as a whole in the December General Meeting)

CODE OF CONDUCT (draft versions were handed out)

Eric: Being ‘hit on’ is way too subjective.
Anna: Short version is good.
Anton: Likes the plainspoken version. Would like to revise to refer to ‘unwanted romantic advances’ language.  Also, include possibility that one may be removed from the shop.
Tim: Likes tone of second version, but the wording of some of the others is better.
Boson: reciprocated flirting does not necessarily create a hostile environment.
Gabby:  Some women do not come to the shop specifically because they feel that they are being hit on.
Noah: Leave it at the door is important/
Doug: likes line-by-line pledges.
Lars: Likes them too.
Joe: we can’t necessarily be sticklers about this.  Who are we to tell people how to be?
Ginny: Likes first version.  ‘plainspoken’ version is somewhat patronizing.
Dileep:  Some of the language is unclear.

Question: what committee is handling this?  Risk management.

Discussion: Government bikes
Anna is writing a grant to reduce obesity in Baltimore City.  One suggestion is to supply bicycles free or at reduced costs.
City would buy bicycles with this grant money and provide them to people for free, could VBP facilitate this?
Lars: this would overextend our resources.
Doug: this would make us a contractor?
Peter: what’s the scope?  (hundreds of bikes, two years)
Boson: Potentially hiring someone to build up bikes.  Would they want to work with refurbished parts?
> A completely new organization would probably not be chosen to work with this grant.
Lars: This is not within the purview of our organization.  Not at all
Dileep: our shop is very underutilized.
Tim: ditto: could this benefit our mission?
Noah: This does address our goal (nod to Lars) More people on the roads means safer roads. Another income stream.
Ben. Many people feel that this would provide space+ tools when we are not here.  Concerns: where would we put this?
* There is no precedent for discussing this outside of the general meeting, and the proposal is due Dec 1.
Will meet again in two weeks for committee meetings, will discuss this then.

Let Tim know if you’re interested in discussing the mission statement.

Evaluation:
Didn’t start on time!
No one seems to have enough time to discuss everything.
X. wishes that he was here more often.
We need to meet more often so we don’t have to deal with these time issues
Our proposals should indicate how long they will take.
Two things: facilitator should be more hardassed. Proposals are being overanalyzed.
We should think about our proposals, their scope, and how long they will take.
Leave questions about details out unless they are relevant? Start on time and have more meetings.
Some details are necessary to understand the proposals. Meeting was scattered at first. We’re terrible at setting time limits.
Also: Proposal should be sent out to the list beforehand.  Always!
Process could be streamlined.
Let’s review our process flow before proposals.

Closed meeting; Doug Barcleft is now part of the collective
Committee Meeting in two weeks’ time (November 16th) We will discuss Anna’s proposal then.  Please attend.

Next general Meeting December 7th, at the shop unless otherwise announced.

--
[back]