2016-01-24 Toronto350.org meeting regarding partner groups Present: Lila, Milan, Ben (via phone) Does moving to a partner group model even make sense? * What's the alternative? Continuing as-is? Total independence for the U of T, Ryerson, and Step Up Canada? The intent of the partner groups draft text was principally to list the sort of issues we need to sort out * If we can turn it into a framework that groups will all be happy with, that could be a good way forward Tresanne's concerns * We may lose donors if it seems only pipelines and OTPP are campaigns of Toronto350.org * It will be important do the messaging about it * If we do set up this framework, Divest York could be another partner group Why 'partner groups' and not 'campaigns'? * Corporate governance: these campaigns aren't controlled by the board, they don't follow our decision-making procedures, and they don't follow our financial procedures * Also, they have independent decision-making bodies, contradictory constitutions, and contradictory membership requirements * Have campaigns ever done this? We are still growing up into the incorporated non-profit model * The board has overall management and financial responsibility * Another motivation is setting up a general framework for spinning off campaigns once they have reached a sufficient level of independence * U of T and Ryerson have reached a level of institutional independence To what extend does the Ryerson group have an elected executive, an independent constitution, a bank account? * They are not fully in compliance with Ryerson rules, in part because Ben isn't eligible to be on the executive anymore (though, in practice, he is serving as central coordinator) * They are hoping to access $500 per semester in funds from the Ryerson Student Union The pipelines campaign sometimes takes actions not publicly linked with Toronto350 * Also, in some ways they are directly linked to the 350.org mothership One question is whether we even want to remain an incorporated NGO Ben has looked at the draft text and is OK with most of it * Will members of partner groups be Toronto350 members? * For instance, if Toronto350 wanted to break a partner group connection with U of T, would U of T members be able to vote This framework wouldn't change the membership requirements for Toronto350 * If someone attends two partner group meetings, and completed the membership survey, would they be Toronto350 people? * Few Ryerson, Step Up, and U of T divestment people have ever been to a Toronto350 meeting or event * It may be best to require attendance at two Toronto350-specific events Re: the draft text: "Delegate membership: Only members of partner groups who are also delegate members of Toronto350.org shall be permitted to vote in any of the ways in which Toronto350.org delegate members can." * Alternative: "Only delegate members of Toronto350.org are entitled to vote as part of Toronto350.org decision-making procedures, but people who meet the membership requirements of Toronto350.org and those of the partner group are entitled to vote in both organizations." * "Attending partner group events does not count toward satisfying the membership requirements for Toronto350.org" * As written, if Toronto350 was voting on ending a partner group relationship, only delegate members of Toronto350.org would be able to vote Should attending partner group events count? * One of the big problems we are meant to resolve with this is that we see so little of members of the more independent campaigns * We need to design this with consideration for any future partner group situation we may want, not just in terms of campaigns that already exist * We could try hosting more Toronto350 events which relate to partner groups * It's possible Toronto350.org will be revising their membership to require people to complete the membership survey annually * Is there a risk of people "swamping a vote" if all members of a partner group also became members of Toronto350 as well? * In the event that Toronto350 is considering dissolving a partner group relationship, we would want it to be a multilateral discussion anyway What would this mean for campaign leads, who are currently on the executive? * Tresanne is finding it hard to get in touch with the exec, and has been finding that people aren't fulfilling the tasks set out for them * First paragraph under "Cooperation": "Meetings: Members of partner groups may attend any Toronto350.org meetings or events which are open to the public. At the discretion of the president of Toronto350.org, they can be invited to be present at (but not vote at) executive meetings. At the discretion of the chair of the board, they can be invited to be present at (but not vote at) board meetings." * This doesn't speak specifically to the question of campaign leads * Would partner group representatives be equivalent to leads of campaigns still fully part of Toronto350? * We don't know if Tresanne plans to restructure the exec to no longer include campaign leads * Perhaps we should leave her as much flexibility about this as possible for now Ben is increasingly sympathetic with Tresanne's thoughts about not having campaign leads on the exec, in part because he doesn't want to feel guilty about not attending * We can run this by Tresanne to see if she thinks there should be more details * Perhaps there should be a requirements about availability? What if we can't get through to liaisons for months at a time? Financial management * From the by-laws: 7(b) "Cheques and other outgoing financial expenditures shall be authorized by the Treasurer or another signing officer as registered at our banking institution." * U of T has established a bank account (they have received the money that was already allocated to them by Toronto350) * Do Step Up Canada or Ryerson have bank accounts? * Ryerson does not currently have a bank account, but it would be good for them to get soon * For now, they are operating on the basis of people paying out of pocket and being refunded by Toronto350 * Having separate bank accounts could help with financial reporting and transparency by making clear when any money is being transferred This whole structure is based on Toronto350 and partner groups being separate organizations, and then being linked by at least one campaign * What happens, for instance, if the UofT350.org divestment campaign ends? * Toronto350 has been inconsistent in describing "campaigns" as both the group of people involved and the effort itself * The executive and board both feel in the dark about what is happening in most campaigns * Should there be provisions for reporting responsibilities in this document? Maybe as a necessary part of campaign strategy agreements? Transparency * "Toronto350.org shall be transparent with its own membership about what form of support is being provided." * Tresanne's comment: "who decides this? to350 membership vote?" * Is this a matter of decision-making, or is it a question of how much needs to be reported? Establishing partner group relationships * Present text: "A partner group can be created based on an existing campaign by following the appropriate decision-making procedure within Toronto350.org." * We could say that possible partner groups can submit a proposal, to be voted on by the Toronto350 membership at a decision-making meeting * U of T 350 would probably do this * Step Up Canada may be planning to separate entirely * What if campaigns are not getting back to the board / executive? Would campaigns in this position actually submit proposals? * Would a campaign strategy agreement need to be part of the proposal to create a partner group? What would campaign strategy agreements involve? What if there are divergent ideas about tactics or strategies between Toronto350 and partner groups? * Should we specify that neither Toronto350 nor the partner group can unilaterally alter this document? * Does this make sense for campaigns that have been effectively taken over by partner groups? * If Toronto350 is taking no action aside from providing funds and/or support, then what's the point of having a partner group system at all * If Toronto350 is doing no independent work on a campaign, why not spin it off totally separately into a new organization * If all the decision-making will be at the partner groups, why do this? * One reason: it could deal with Tresanne's concerns about losing means of fundraising, being able to publicize successes, etc? * There would be a liaison who would report back to Toronto350, and partner groups could send volunteer opportunities to Toronto350 * It could also help direct volunteers to Toronto350 * What if there are partner groups where Toronto350 members aren't eligible for membership? * Why would the Toronto350 membership/board/exec negotiate a strategy agreement with others at Toronto350 who have no active role in the campaign? * The board has never done strategy, and it has been focused more in the campaigns than the exec What is the relationship to the 350.org mothership? * Toronto350 has a relationship with the mothership, which could be shard to some extent with partner groups How does this relate to Tuesday meetings? * Ben thinks they are inefficient and limit our ability to grow, and a partner group system could help address this Toronto350 needs to meet a higher standard of corporate governance than a student club * Would this system set up the Toronto350 board / exec to be responsible for things which they actually have no control over? * Maybe the level of scrutiny Toronto350 needs to meet means it should be as separate from allied campaigns as possible Maybe we are inappropriately combining two types of campaigns, ones which we are handing off entirely versus ones where Toronto350 will actually be doing work * For instance, we may want to run an Energy East campaign but also be partners with a group working on the same thing? If the requirements of incorporation are so stifling, perhaps remaining incorporated is a mistake * Toronto350 has been unable to run a coherent strategy session It seems we came into this meeting with totally different ideas about how much control Toronto350 would have over campaigns undertaken in cooperation with a partner group * Other people who have thought this over may be similarly confused If Toronto350 isn't going to have any influence over how partner groups run their campaigns, Milan doesn't see any point in adopting this policy - they should just become separate. We could still provide financial and other kinds of support. Who should we run this by? * Definitely Toronto350's treasurer, accountant, and board * Milan just wrote the initial document off the top of his head in response to some of the governance problems we have been facing Who would actually approve it? * Since incorporation, it has been unclear what role the membership plays in decisions which are ultimately up to the board * This should be discussed with Tresanne and the board Next steps? * Take some time to think this over * Share it with more people * Have another meeting on this in a few weeks