1. Attendees

Kelleigh Eastman

JR Lee

Scott Kashnow

George Kleb

Jane Shaab

Abigail Breiseth

Jane Buccheri

Chuck Callahan

Sonia Eaddy

Edith Gilliard-Canty

Gregg Herlong

Heather Kangas

Bill Marker

Nancy McCormick

Donnell Nance

Richard Parker

Dan Rodenburg

 

Lou Packett

Khandra Sears

Michael Seipp

 

 

  1. Welcome and Introductions

Kelleigh opened the meeting and welcomed everyone.

Chris took attendance.

 

  1. Approval of the Minutes
  • Correction to Adar’s Title – Just remove it since she was presenting as a consultant for us and not in her role with the ABC
  • Motion by Jane S to approve the minutes from July – 2nd by Richard. Abigail abstained – All others in Favor – the motion passes.

 

  1. Review of the proposal from Adar Ayira
  • Kelleigh and Michael presented the proposal.
  • Finance committee will be meeting shortly to be able to let us know what the availability of funds are to engage someone if we want to.
  • Richard – two questions –
    1. The proposal indicates that board and staff will meet separately. It’s more helpful if we do it together and it might reduce the cost…It’s probably the healthiest thing…Ask her to reprice
    2. Also why 4 key community representatives – we might need seven from the community organizations on the Partnership.
  • Scott – comments
    1. Thinks this is a good plan but it’s twice what we talked about spending.
    2. Like the idea of Richards of putting everyone together and maybe that would cut the price in half.
    3. Maybe we should also get a second quote.
  • JR – different direction – Doesn’t think we need this at this point in time.
    1. He sees conflict but not racism –
    2. He remembers talking with Catherine Pugh – before she was Mayor about the work of the partnership – he mentioned this to date himself. He’s been involved for a while.
    3. We ‘the board’ don’t have a working relationship with the staff…
    4. We are not just volunteers…we built this organization…
    5. We used to get excited over grants $2K
    6. Now we are doing too many rules –
    7. Doesn’t see our core issue as racism and doesn’t believe we are solving for the right problem.
  • Abigail – if there is a difference between staff and board – it can be difficult to advocate for the experience you are having when your paycheck depends on it
  • Jane S. – agrees with Abigail.
    1. Transparent inclusion – there may be elements that may require us to have separate sessions. But for most of it we should all be together.
    2. Agrees with JR comments – we really need to understand organizational development. How does a really healthy organization develop?
  • Dottie – Remembers when we functioned more like a family – but now our opinions seem to drive us and she has seen a change since Black Lives matter…
  • Donnell – noticed several individuals that are very clickish.
  • Richard: Motion to return her proposal with the response to combine the sessions with board and staff. Either 0 additional community members or 7.
    1. George 2nd.
  • Bill: towards JR comments hopefully doesn’t need to be either/ or. We would be in the cycle of a new board…
    1. Lots of more value could come from the retreat.
  • Scott – on the question in Richards motion of whether we include 0 or 7 more people I think 0 additional people — for now. It’s about just the SWP Board and Staff first.
  • JR – the sticking point is pricing – are we willing to pay the $22,000
    1. Should we look at other options.
  • Richard accepted the amendment for 0 additional people.
  • George – second the revision – get our own house in order. Not to exclude anyone…but we need to get ourselves together –
    1. We need to look at the Paycheck protection program – and whether we will have that forgiven – he thinks for now don’t stress too much over the money – we should be able to do something…even though the topic is racism – conflict will be a part of the sessions…
    2. We should also remember this is not about us – we are here to serve the other 17000 people in our neighborhoods.
  • Jane B. – her concern is that it’s a lot of money to spend and it may not solve the boards problems…What are we trying to accomplish?
  • Dottie – How many community representatives are on the board right now?
  • Richard – there will be all seven from the neighborhoods plus the reps from the committees. It’s the whole board.
  • Chuck – has the motion been re-seconded –
    1. It has
  • Vote: JR Against. Jane B and Dan Abstained – All others in favor.

 

  1. Education Committee (Racial Equality Action Plan & Suggestions) – Abigail
  • Thanks Abigail: for creating this document. Give her an opportunity to explain since she was not here last month.
  • Abigail – Our major ideas are going through a racial equity assessment process. Increase participation especially youth involvement;
  • Scott – As one of the committee chairs I would love to have more participation – nothing structural is necessary to facilitate this but recruitment is the key.
  • Richard agrees with Scott – doesn’t think that there is anything structural that would need to change. The tough part will be finding them.
    1. Would also like to have more participation
  • Bill – Youth yes – college age also. Broader definition of youth.
  • Dottie – everything is virtual but they figured that the kids could get on Zoom. Now is a good time – Youthworks – Camille was interested – St Lukes – Amanda has youth at Slyck.
  • Abigail there is no limit to the number of youth that can be involved.
  • Heather – was a part of climate change coalition in college – and was thinking it was a great way to get involved. She just wrapped up working with youthworks – 9 students working on social determinants of health. Maybe we can start with them.
  • Governance Response – Khandra –
    1. development of procedures to bring advocacy/ policy issues to the board for support — the general feeling is that we have done this in the past and we need to be making sure that the chairs can do this and bring them to the board.
      1. Complete Streets legislation is one example of this.
    2. Develop a grievance and reconciliation process – need clarification who is the conflict between. We want to be sure we are solving the correct problem.
      1. We had a presentation from Baltimore Mediation Corp. – possibly use their services…
    3. There is lots of talk about Communication – we previously voted to establish a committee to discuss this issue and maybe it’s time to activate it.
      1. Perhaps ask Curtis to update the committee on our current communication procedures
    4. Develop clear policies for the executive committee – when should they act – governance plans to develop standard operating procedures so there is less confusion
    5. Any questions?
  • Chris – the staff did just go through a conflict resolution training and it was very enlightening.
  • JR – what if there is a conflict with governance.
    1. Any thing that comes out of governance goes to the board for approval.
    2. JR does not agree with those that have suggested that when we go into executive session that should be open to the public. Or that what is discussed should be shared with the public.
      1. It should not be
      2. He is disappointed that people are attacking EC.
  • Bill – Governance committee is discussed in the bylaws.
  • George – We would be comfortable having an at large member of the executive committee – community representative. Right now 3 of 4 of the members of the EC
    1. Pres and VP are always – the community would always have a majority –

 

  1. Governance Committee
  • Committee and Board Elections – will be coming up soon
    1. Virtual voting – We tested the zoom polling function and it seemed to work for all except people who call in using their phones.
    2. Upon reviewing the Bylaws the committee noticed that Section 5.03 has language that is either incorrect, inconsistent, or unclear with how the committees have been holding elections. Committees have had the choice to hold elections either by hand vote or by secret ballot. Section 5.03 includes the language ‘using an open ballot’. The committee assumes this was intended to mean that nominations are open, up until the moment of the election, which is consistent with the intent of the partnership. The governance committee voted to add a clarifying statement indicating this as part of a SOP.
      1. Section 5.03. Program Committees. The Board of Directors shall, at the annual meeting, establish Program Committees. The Program Committees shall be responsible for leading the organization in community development activities that further the Vision, Mission and Goals of the organization. Program Committee Chairs shall serve a term of one year or until his/her successor is duly elected annually by a majority vote of Committee members who have attended at least three Committee meetings during the previous twelve months. Program Committee Chairs may nominate themselves or be nominated by another member of the Committee and go through an election by the qualified membership using an open ballot. There shall be no voting by e­mail or proxy. Program Committees shall have only one chairperson elected to serve on the Board of Directors.
    3. Richard – this is not interpretation – It’s either open ballot or secret ballot.
    4. Scott – There is an amendment –
      1. Khandra (motion) – the governance committee is recommending an amendment to the bylaws – removing the words ‘using an open ballot’ from section 5.03 of the bylaws to be in line with how we have been conducting elections – allowing the committees to continue to decide whether their elections will be open or secret.
      2. Members questioned whether Khandra can bring a motion – Bill stated that she can – according to the bylaws she has all the rights of a board member except voting.
  • Scott offers to bring the motion as well to resolve any question.
  1. Bill Marker offered a second separate amendment
    1. Section 4.01, sentence two:  The officers shall be elected by the Board of Directors by open ballot, so that there will be a public record of Board Members’ votes for officers.
  2. After some discussion it was agreed that both amendments are on the table but cannot be voted on at this meeting the bylaws state that they can be voted on 30 days after they are introduced.

 

  1. Committee Reports
  • None –

 

  1. Community Announcements
  • Scott – not a community announcement but a personal announcement – I will be honored by the Boy Scouts for having the spirit of scouting in a virtual event in September – I’ll send the invite by email.
  • Jane B. 29th of August doing a social distancing on the parking lot of Hollins Market.
    1. Reopening of the Hollins Market will be September 1st.

 

 

  1. New Business/ Old Business
  • Dottie – In Poppleton they tore down two houses between Carlton and Carrollton Lenny’s barber shop.
    1. Scott – lets revisit the story of the barber shop – document and celebrate it somehow….

 

  1. Adjourn 8:48

Kelleigh adjourned the meeting and asked the guests to disconnect so the board could go into executive session.

Scroll to Top