This is a collection of resources that describe our pre-DG governance system. Unfortunately, our pre-DG system grew organically, with spotty documentation. We will attempt to fill in the gaps as much as possible

From our original vision: "Honoring our varied experiences, we intend to follow a consensus-based process respectful of all points of view."

The original, outdated version of consensus decision-making can be found in the By-Laws, Article III.

Key documents:

• Consensus Decision-Making Process - 2012

• Committee Structure

• Committee List - circa 2011

• Task Force Guidelines (created by the CLC in 2012)

• Design Review Process (adopted by consensus in 2004)

• Decision Board Process

Delegation of Decisions

Committee Delegation was originally defined in section 3.6 of the By-Laws. In practice, we never used these stringent guidelines, as written. Note that committees with delegated authority have defined memberships, but that all community members are welcome at committee meetings.

The Decision Board is a communication process that allows a committee to post a topic or proposal, and solicit concerns - and participation by people who have concerns - before the committee takes action. Using the Decision Board, committees are able to make less-controversial decisions in their own meetings, with minimal risk of triggering an appeal. The process is inclusive, in the sense that all members of the community are informed, in advance, about the committee's desired action - and have an opportunity to participate. Different levels of participation are available to non-committee members: 1) Write an opinion - to be read and considered by the committee before it makes a decision; 2) Attend the committee meeting(s) and participate in making the decision; 3) Pause or stop the process in order to resolve a serious and immediate objection. A person's response will depend on the severity of their concern/objection, coupled with the degree of trust the person has for the committee.

Standards for Distinguishing Full-Community and Committee Decisions

In the early days, we informally talked about two dimensions: cost and controversy. If a decision seemed very costly, very controversial, or significantly both, it was thought best to raise it to the full community. At one time, we had a standard (is it written, anywhere?) that if a single person in a committee felt that the issue should be escalated to a higher level, it was escalated.

The Decision Board and Design Review processes are designed to expose upcoming committee issues to the full community and solicit feedback - including feedback about whether the issue should be decided by the committee or the full community.