Open Efficient Meetings

+++++

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Comments will be [bracketed].

“I.) SAMPLE AGENDA FOR 1 MONTH”

[ Suppose the Monthly meeting is on the 2^nd Monday of the month. For example, Mon. 9 Jan.2012]  

“II.) SAMPLE TIMELINE”

[ This is a timeline to force openness into the process, allowing time for members to peruse and debate proposals]  

“III.) SAMPLE AGENDA FOR 1 MONTH – [Commented]”

“IV.) SAMPLE TIMELINE – [Commented]”

+++++

I.) SAMPLE AGENDA FOR 1 MONTH

A.) PROPOSALS – BUSINESS ITEMS

1. PROPOSAL #1January

            3 speakers, 3 speakers against, 1 minute for each speaker, VOTE.  

2. PROPOSAL #2January

            3 speakers, 3 speakers against, 1 minute for each speaker, VOTE.

n. PROPOSAL #nJanuary.

            3 speakers, 3 speakers against, 1 minute for each speaker, VOTE.

B.) GOOD OF THE ORDER, ANNOUNCEMENTS

C.) NEW BUSINESS ITEMS.

1. PROPOSAL #1February

            2 speakers, 2 speakers against, 3 minutes for each speaker, NO VOTE.  

2. PROPOSAL #cFebruary

            2 speakers, 2 speakers against, 3 minutes for each speaker, NO VOTE.

n. PROPOSAL #nFebruary

            2 speakers, 2 speakers against, 3 minutes for each speaker, NO VOTE.

II.) SAMPLE TIMELINE

-- 3^rd MONDAY OF NOVEMBER

A. on the web, 1 week window opens for agenda suggestions for sections B and C the Dec. meeting.

B. NEW BUSINESS ITEMS (NBIs) can be proposed for the 2^nd Monday of December meeting. 

- NBIs must be published to the web and must be complete.

- These proposals will show up in the December Agenda in section C, “PROPOSAL #1January …

-- 4^th MONDAY OF NOVEMBER

A. 1 week window closes for agenda suggestions for sections B and C the Dec. meeting.

-- 2^nd MONDAY OF DECEMBER

A.) PROPOSALS – BUSINESS ITEMS

1. PROPOSAL #1December

            3 speakers, 3 speakers against, 1 minute for each speaker, VOTE.  

2. PROPOSAL #2December

            3 speakers, 3 speakers against, 1 minute for each speaker, VOTE.

n. PROPOSAL #nDecember

            3 speakers, 3 speakers against, 1 minute for each speaker, VOTE.

B.) GOOD OF THE ORDER, ANNOUNCEMENTS

C.) NEW BUSINESS ITEMS.

1. PROPOSAL #1January

            2 speakers, 2 speakers against, 3 minutes for each speaker, NO VOTE.  

2. PROPOSAL #2January

            2 speakers, 2 speakers against, 3 minutes for each speaker, NO VOTE.

n. PROPOSAL #nJanuary

            2 speakers, 2 speakers against, 3 minutes for each speaker, NO VOTE.

-- 3^rd MONDAY OF DECEMBER

A. on the web, 1 week window opens for agenda suggestions for sections B and C the Jan. meeting.

B. NEW BUSINESS ITEMS (NBIs) can be proposed for the 2^nd Monday of January meeting. 

- NBIs must be published to the web and must be complete.

- These proposals will show up in the January Agenda in section C, “PROPOSAL #1February …

-- 4^th MONDAY OF DECEMBER

A. 1 week window opens for agenda suggestions for sections B and C the Jan. meeting.

-- 2^nd MONDAY OF JANUARY

1. PROPOSAL #1January

            3 speakers, 3 speakers against, 1 minute for each speaker, VOTE.  

2. PROPOSAL #2January

            3 speakers, 3 speakers against, 1 minute for each speaker, VOTE.

n. PROPOSAL #nJanuary.

            3 speakers, 3 speakers against, 1 minute for each speaker, VOTE.

B.) GOOD OF THE ORDER, ANNOUNCEMENTS

C.) NEW BUSINESS ITEMS.

1. PROPOSAL #1February

            2 speakers, 2 speakers against, 3 minutes for each speaker, NO VOTE.  

2. PROPOSAL #cFebruary

            2 speakers, 2 speakers against, 3 minutes for each speaker, NO VOTE.

n. PROPOSAL #nFebruary

            2 speakers, 2 speakers against, 3 minutes for each speaker, NO VOTE.

WHY WE HAVE TO DO IT - THE REAL REALITY

I have been to too many meetings in 30 + years with no agendas, last minute proposals and amendments to proposals, all of which took too much time to accomplish too little.  I believe that these time killing meetings also minimize or eliminate participation for too many citizens.

In the summer and fall of 2003 out here in Seattle, the were at least 20, maybe 30 meetings I went to for Howard Dean.  Each meeting was attended my over 100 people, at each meeting one of the first questions was "How many are new...?", and at each meeting over 1/2 of those present would raise their hands.  As a math teacher, I frequently wondered how it was possible that 1/2 the crowd was always new?

Maybe so many were new because, while the meetings were fun bash fests of the right, it was a rare meeting when most left with something (what) to do, a where to do what, one or more people (who) to do what with, a time or times (when) to do what, and instructions on how to do what.  Frequently the only thing people were told to do was "have a meeting".

I am not criticizing the great effort and the great purpose of so many.  However, given the dismal grassroots "efforts" of the Democratic Party and of the unions during the last 2 or 3 decades, too little of this great effort and great purpose was as effective as it could have been.  Maybe we should have been doing things like mobilizing the tens of millions of low income citizens who don't vote?