[Imc] Meeting notes 12-21-01

[Peter Miller]

Please send any changes or comments to the list.  Also, somebody might want to extract the list of who volunteered to do what and send it to the list.  
-Peter


IMC Notes
01/21/01
at 218 W. Main (The IMC)

Attending (26 present):  Paul Riismandel, Brent McDonald, Matthew Murray, Mike Lehman, Paul Kotheimer, Peter Miller, Carol Pilgrim, Corey Hardin, Jackson, Crystal, Danielle Chynoweth, Brian Hagy, Ian McDermott, Tim Gotsch, Ellen Knutsen, Molly Stentz, Sarah Carsey, Sehvilla Mann, Ed Mandel, Mark Enslin, Sascha Meinrath, Eric Hiltner, Pauline Bartolone, Nancy Dietrick-Riebecki, Russ Dietrick-Riebecki, Maria Silva.

Paul Riismandel facilitated.

Additions/changes to a proposed agenda were discussed.

Sascha sent around a sign-up for people to staff the space. 

Updates
Space--Molly requested that we organize the production room, soon.  Brian, Paul K, Crystal, Molly, Peter volunteered and will set up a time to meet.  Danielle noted that the production room was unlocked when she arrived on Saturday morning.  People should follow the shut-down procedure if they're the last one out.  Sascha has a list of key holders, and Molly will manage the combination to the production room door.  Danielle suggested that the production/tech committees teach people how to use the production room.

Outreach--We'll leave for Springfield on Wednesday, Jan. 24.  Paul will drive.  People will leave no later than 4 p.m. from the IMC.  The trip is to help folks in Springfield start their own IMC.  They've widely publicized our visit.  Web allies:  Sascha asked that somebody locate web sites to link to the IMC.  Paul Riismandel, Tim Gotsch, Carol Pilgrim, and Sascha volunteered to do it.  National Association of Black Journalists:  Sascha has been in contact with the local student group, and they're interested in working with us.

Fundraising--Sascha: Open house raised over $650, net gain was over $300.  We're currently at $1450/month.  Molly:  We sent our first grant application last week.  Fundraising meets Monday, Jan. 22 at 7:30 p.m. at IMC. Will discuss guidelines for general membership 

Librarians--Ellen:  Group meets at 5:15 every Thursday.  At last meeting, decided not to circulate our collection because we don't know who it should be circulated to.  Next meeting, will discuss organizing materials at IMC.  Group is soliciting journal subscriptions--see list of needed journals, next to bathroom.  

Tech--Zach issued a report that Paul read.  The big issue will be labor for electrical work.  On-line community calendar.  People have said that IMC needs to host a public-updateable calendar of events.  Problems are arising from people multiple-booking the IMC space.  Danielle asked for someone to take over email list maintenance; she will train her replacement.  

Equipment--Peter donated to IMC a device to record phone conversations; he asked that it not be removed from the IMC.  Brent emphasized the fairly urgent need to build a darkroom.  Ian, Russ, Molly, and Brent will plan it; and Eric and Mike will help build it.

News--Plan a news meeting.  People interested in news production will set a meeting time after the general meeting.

OPEN HOUSE
A huge success!  We raised a net of about $300 through sales of t-shirts and stickers, and cash into the donation box.  Picked up two new founding funders!  Attendance was 70-80 people, probably more because of people coming and going.  WEFT staff, Octopus staff, WILL-AM staff, MicroFilm publisher, Community Times publisher were all here.  The food was great, people were reading the news stories, people were generally impressed.  

To do better, next time:  get a list of everyone who came in the door.  We probably missed a large number of people.  Keep track of public suggestions for the space.  Put up wish lists for things we need, in addition to periodicals.  Be able to tell people when we would be open.  

Perhaps open houses can become somewhat regular events.  Crystal suggested that we display our work, periodically.  Final open house notes:  Garbage needs to be emptied, recycling and compost need to go.  Please take it home!

ORGANIZATION PROPOSAL:
Paul and Ellen wrote up a proposal which they circulated via email.  The questions to address:
1) Should the group be broken down into a "steering group" and "working groups"?
2) Who's in the steering group and what does it do?

Paul presented the proposal, and lengthy discussion followed (see attached appendix for a rough transcript).  People expressed some reservations about the need for a steering group and its composition, but they generally supported the idea.

People should send their desires for the general meetings to Molly (molly at onthejob.net).

At Pauline's recommendation, proposals for improvements to the organizational proposal should be written up and sent to Paul Riismandel (p-riism at uiuc.edu).  Anyone who wants to help incorporate ideas into the proposal should contact Paul or Ellen (knutson at shout.net/278-2274)

Next time, Molly will present peoples' desires for a the Sunday meetings. Paul, Ellen and anyone else who wants to help will try to craft a revised proposal for presentation next week.  

All were encouraged to read all email messages about the organizational proposal, before the next meeting.

fin.

Peter will facilitate next week, 1/28/01, Noon at the IMC.

Meeting concluded at 2:20 p.m.



Appendix:  Discussion of the organizational proposal

The reasons for having a steering group are: to streamline operations, to protect ourselves as a group in a formal way from being "raided" by groups with a hostile agenda (cf. KOOP in Austin's takeover by the christian right).  Sascha added that it enhances communication within the organization, and it helps make decisions about how to allocate funds.  Ellen added that as IMC membership grows, IMC will not be able to include them in decisions (it's too unwieldy).  A representative system helps give voice to larger groups of people.  It helps to avoid stalemates.

Mike stated that people need to be empowered to take the initiative to do the work.  The proposal makes a good balance between authority and responsibility--people are included in decisions, but the organization has mechanisms to get things done quickly and effectively.

Paul K. raised several questions and stated that he isn't convinced of the need.  What constitutes a concern that requires that someone be excluded from a decision.  

Paul R.:  It's not about exclusion, rather, 1) if 200 people join the IMC, all 200 can't be involved in decisions.  2) What subgroup would we choose to make decisions?

PK would rather accomplish the goals of the proposal without formalizing a steering group.  

Brent said that the proposal is good--it rewards those who do the work and offers mechanisms for others to become involved.  

Eric argued that it's important that decisionmakers have an investment in the process.

Mike:  Decisions need to be made.  The proposal is good because it favors consensus but allows a mechanism to make decisions in the absence of consensus.  Fears that individuals will obstruct the group, and make us vulnerable to hostile takeover.

Brian: What would the general membership meeting do? (Why necessary?) And would six people be making decisions for all?

PR: General membership has ultimate executive power--approval of policies, e.g., and keep cohesion of group.  Steering group plus people with an investment in a decision make decisions; if no consensus among this larger group, then the steering group can make a decision.

Tim: Has been involved in other organizations--it's about ceding responsibility or power to working groups.  If the general public that comes to steering committee meetings...

Why steering group not necessary?  PK: Convinced that a subgroup with authority should exist.  Concerned about a steering group being used to break stalemates.  Consensus is real in this way:  When a potential or prospective member has an objection, they can speak by extracting their resources (their time or money).  We need to be careful about consensus being complete.

MS:  Reservations about proposal.  People with the loudest voices might end up on the steering group; wouldn't want to segregate them because they attract people and help orient and plug-in newcomers.  At next meeting, would like to have a go-around finding out what people want to do at these general meetings.  Decisionmaking?  News?  Other?

PR:  Term limits in proposal may help resolve.

People should send their desires for the general meetings to Molly (molly at onthejob.net).

At Pauline's recommendation, proposals for improvements to the organizational proposal should go to Paul Riismandel (p-riism at uiuc.edu)

Danielle:  We should keep a running list of principles of organization that we find important so that we don't get caught in technical legal arguments.  Rather we should collect principles that guide us:  e.g. (roughly--I didn't catch them all accurately) We try to resolve conflicts, we come together in good faith, we assume that we have reasons to trust each other, that we're committed to media production, every person is responsible for thinking of the long-term health of the organization.  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/imc/attachments/20010121/e2605c18/attachment.html>