Please Donate and help us:
Present: Russ, Richard, Joshua (facilitating), Marilyn (minutes), Ryan, Corey, Gatlin, Lauren, Madeline
Phone meeting, 1st meeting, with Serene Hammond, friend of Mel's, hopes to move in with her at least temporarily while getting re-established in Austin. No pet allergies, has a cat, will have funds for rent initially and will look for a job. She is a gardener, knowledgeable about soils and organic pest mgmt. She has worked in technology mgmt, helped build a house, and is an excellent cook. Hopes to move back here from Northern California in the next month.
Keegan, interested in becoming a member, never in a co-op before, no pets or pet allergies, prefers to share a unit, works at Alamo Drafthouse on Slaughter, unsure what labor he would do, can do housework, yardwork.
(Corey) Require that the co-op provided wifi network be protected with a password distributed to all members of the co-op.
Corey: Some people who have been on our property doing illegal activities, and the free wifi is a draw; some of them have torrenting from our network. He has tried turning off the wifi in the middle of the night and watching them leave immediately.
Clarifying questions, points of information: Richard – there have been people in the laundry room sitting on the washers and dryers but not using them but using wifi (and sometimes smoking, per Marilyn's observation).
Concerns, friendly amendments: Richard – we could instead hide the SSID (name of the wifi) and change it, leaving it readily accessible to members but not as available to nonmembers. Friendly amendment from Richard: With or without adding a password, we should hide the name. Accepted by Corey, assuming that our system will accommodate the change. The amendment was accepted by consensus. Friendly amendment proposed but withdrawn by Joshua, that the tech officer should change the password every six months. The proposal was adopted by consensus.
(Richard) Reduce Ryan's no-shows of Richard from 22 to 15, allow for makeup labor to counter it as stipulated by house rules.
Richard: When Labor Czar he openly used a method to no-show himself 15 hours, the number of Mondays on which he was late with a report, which was in September, and he thinks Ryan's number was arbitrary. He also thinks that he is owed fairness, because other Officers did not no-show themselves in 2016.
Clarifying questions and points of information: Ryan: How does this affect the 28 no-shows on the recent log? Richard: He would reduce it to 15, processed . Ryan: There was no report, so he did not know that a weekly one hour no-show was being accounted for five months. Richard: He has given himself a no-show every week that he was late on a report. Ryan: Is that a no-show for every late report? Richard: No it is a no-show for every week. Ryan: What about the January late reports? Richard: Megan no-showed me.
Concerns and friendly amendments: Ryan – Why were they so late? Richard – working 16 hours a day during election season, and then overwhelmed by the backlog. Marilyn – uncomfortable about that question being asked in a public forum in case there is a really personal reason. Lauren – Thinks it's a fair question. Corey – this is off-topic. Ryan: He thinks that these no-show fines are not excessive because labor reports were more than a month late, and at the same time there were no reports from the treasurer. Joshua – This exposed a hole in our policies; there has to be a method of accountability for the Labor Czar. Richard – the Steward would be the person to hold an officer accountable. Joshua – we need a system for this; we do well on no-shows because anybody can hold anybody on no-shows, but relying only on the Steward leaves us with only one point of accountability. It is important that Ryan assessed no-show fines be as a goad to get the job done. Ryan – The House rules do call for finance reports, but the finance team's priority at the time was getting things done to avoid IRS penalties. He did release reports in November or December, but the Labor reports did not come in as Richard promised, and at that point Ryan fined him. Gatlin – Both Ryan and Richard took on projects that prevented them from getting reports out on time, and both were doing parts of their jobs (tallies but not reported) and were penalized for the failures. Corey – Ryan calculated the missed work, notified Richard of the fines, and Corey wants to know if Richard paid them. Richard: I did pay them. Lauren: Why is this proposal being brought forth? Richard: Ryan came up with a figure at his own discretion, and Richard counter-proposed how he had no-showed himself but Ryan did not accept it. Richard: He is willing to table this if we would rather have a full 2016 officer review. The proposal was accepted.
Ryan: The recommendations that Hannah presented to the Economic Development Commission to better enable co-op development will go next to the City Council on Thursday, and we will be given more information so that we can go to the Council meeting and lend our voices.
Richard: A few ago hours he received the past Grounds Labor report and will send out the final report on those hours.
Gatlin: A company called Go Big Solar would like to rent our roof, pay Spear to install solar, and then manage the solar equipment. They would sell us the power back at a fixed rate that is better than the city's but not as good as if we could finance our own purchase and installation, giving us perhaps a 40% reduction in our energy costs. He will go ahead and continue conversation with Go Big Solar. Madeline: Perhaps we could negotiate a rent to own solution? Gatlin says yes, that is possible, over a 7-10 year period. We have the perfect roof for this installation. Joshua: How long would the fixed rate apply? Gatlin: At least 3 years. Corey: Concerned about how the contract will account for split metering among different renters. Russ: Is there a piece about equipment insurance liability (hail, tornado, etc.)? Gatlin: Probably a lot, and something NASCO might be involved with. Russ: We could perhaps get a rider to our insurance.