Consensus 101

by Raven Glomus

One of my commune mates asked me to write this in preparation for work that we are doing on our decision making process. This is just the basics of achieving consensus. There are nuances you learn as you go along.

Consensus is a process of discernment, involving listening to each person that is affected, in order to reach a decision that everyone agrees with or, at minimum, can live with. Consensus doesn’t necessarily mean total agreement, but it means everyone’s concerns must be heard and everyone must feel that they can abide by the decision.

The first step in the consensus process is that someone brings a proposal to a meeting.  The proposal is discussed and concerns are heard. The proposal is usually modified to meet the concerns.

Eventually, when it feels like the proposal has reached a point where most people’s concerns have been addressed, there is a call for consensus.  There are three possible responses that can be made: agreeing, standing aside, or blocking.  

Agreement means that you are in favor of the proposal as it is by the time it has gone through the process or at least can go along with it.  

Standing aside means that you still have concerns but you are willing for the process to go forward.  Usually the concerns of those standing aside are noted. If more than one or two people feel that they need to stand aside, it is usually a sign that consensus hasn’t been reached and the proposal may need to be further modified.

Blocking is a way that any person can stop the decision from being made.  Blocking is very serious and should only be done for principled reasons. Caroline Estes (a consensus teacher) claims that if you have blocked for six times, you have used up your lifetime quota. If a person continually threatens to block decisions, that is usually a sign that the person probably shouldn’t be part of the group, since they disagree so strongly with everything.

Generally it is said that blocking can only legitimately be done for two reasons: the proposal goes against the basic principles of the group or the blocker believes that the proposal going through would destroy the group.  I will add a third reason that only occurs during a membership process: that you feel that you would not be able to live with the person applying for membership. 

Consensus has been the decision process at Acorn for many years, is usually used by the Federation of Egalitarian Communities in their meetings, and has been used or considered by many other communes.  Glomus Commune is now considering it as our method of decision making.

Two resources for more information about consensus are: On Conflict and Consensus by C. T. Lawrence Butler and Amy Rothstein and ”Consensus Basics” by Tree Bressen.

____________________________________________________________________________

Thanks for reading! This post was made possible by our patrons on Patreon. The Commune Life team works hard to bring you these stories about our lives in community, and that work couldn’t happen without support from our audience. So if you liked this article, and want to help us make more like it, head on over to https://www.patreon.com/communelife to join us! 

Deep gratitude to all of our patrons:  

Communities

  • Compersia Community
  • East Brook Community Farm
  • The Federation of Egalitarian Communities
  • Twin Oaks Community

Communards 

  • Aaron Michels
  • Brenda Thompson
  • Caroline Elbert
  • Cathy Loyd
  • Em Stiles
  • Jenn Morgan
  • Janey Amend-Bombara
  • Jonathan Thaler
  • Joseph A Klatt
  • Julia Elizabeth Evans
  • Kai Koru
  • Kathleen Brooks
  • Laurel Baez
  • Lynette Shaw
  • Magda Schonfeld
  • Michael Hobson
  • Nance & Jack Williford
  • Peter Chinman 
  • Raines Cohen 
  • Suzi Tortora
  • Tobin Moore
  • Warren Kunce
  • William Croft
  • William Kadish
  • William Scarborough

Thanks! 

Consensus 101

The 2019 FEC Assembly

by Raven East Brook 

Following the Social Technology Conference, the Federation of Egalitarian Communities held its 2019 Assembly–also at Twin Oaks. This year, unlike last year’s Assembly, it was a fairly easy and agreeable process. 

Two very concrete accomplishments from the Assembly were passing the FEC budget for 2020 and changing Article 7 of the criteria for going from Community in Dialogue to Full Member Community. 

20191213_114105
The budget in process

The original first sentence in Article 7 was: “Have, at minimum, three members, none of whom are in a romantic relationship or family.”  What we changed it to was: “Have, at minimum, five adult full members who have been in the community a minimum of six months, understand the community systems, and have access to equal participation in the community’s processes.”

This seemed more specific to us as well as more likely to make sure that new communities would be truly equitable. 

We also explored a possible process for a community facing dissolution and looked at the Reforming Community status.  We agreed to spend up to $2000 for support to reforming communities in the first two years of being a reforming community.

Finally, we agreed that Rejoice would remain the FEC secretary until after the Spring Assembly. 

IMG_0157
Rejoice (from the 2018 Assembly)

One of the best parts of the Assembly was getting to hang out with folks from various communities.  This year we had a couple of folks from The Common Unity Project (TCUP) join us, as they are exploring being part of the FEC. 

In the evenings during the Assembly, communities and projects did check ins, updating us and giving us more of a sense of what was going on around the FEC. We heard from Twin Oaks, Mimosa, The Common Unity Project, East Brook, East Wind, Acorn, and Cambia, as well as a report from Keenan (a Twin Oaker) about his plans for creating a community in Costa Rica. 

It was nice to have such a low stress Assembly. I suspect that having the Social Technology Conference just before it really helped. I think we all left feeling good about what we accomplished. 

20191212_180645

 

The FEC delegates hanging out in Julia’s room 

In the back: Julia (Twin Oaks), Raven (East Brook), Cody (East Wind), and Morning (Rainforest Commons)

In front: JB (East Wind), Maximus (East Brook), Rachael (East Brook), and Scott (Acorn)

(Picture by Rejoice)

____________________________________________________________________________

Thanks for reading! This post was made possible by our patrons on Patreon. The Commune Life team works hard to bring you these stories about our lives in community, and that work couldn’t happen without support from our audience. So if you liked this article, and want to help us make more like it, head on over to https://www.patreon.com/communelife to join us! 

Deep gratitude to all of our patrons:  

Communities

  • Compersia Community
  • East Brook Community Farm
  • The Federation of Egalitarian Communities
  • Twin Oaks Community

Communards 

  • Aaron Michels
  • Brenda Thompson
  • Caroline Elbert
  • Cathy Loyd
  • Em Stiles
  • Jenn Morgan
  • Janey Amend-Bombara
  • Jonathan Thaler
  • Joseph A Klatt
  • Julia Elizabeth Evans
  • Kai Koru
  • Kathleen Brooks
  • Laurel Baez
  • Lynette Shaw
  • Magda schonfeld
  • Michael Hobson
  • Nance & Jack Williford
  • Peter Chinman
  • Sumner Nichols
  • Tobin Moore
  • Warren Kunce
  • William Croft
  • William Kadish
  • William Scarborough

Thanks! 

 

The 2019 FEC Assembly

Social Technology

by Raven East Brook 

The FEC 2018 Assembly was difficult and contentious. There were accusations of racism, sexual misconduct, and transphobia. People denounced one another and the conference site had to be moved because of problems involving one of the communities. It was obvious that we needed to do something different. 

Several of the folks involved decided to have a conference this year before the Assembly. The initial idea was that we would look at things like dealing with racism, how to do mediation, and other useful things. The organizers decided to call it the Social Technology Conference. It would be held in December at Twin Oaks. Here’s my report on what happened. 

The actual conference focused primarily on dealing with racism and white supremacy with an emphasis on building connections and looking at how trauma makes doing all this difficult. We also had sessions on understanding consent, on how to do facilitation, on using ritual for healing, and on drumming and dancing to get us in our bodies. 

IMG_0393
Rachel, Evi, and Natalie 

Our facilitators for the conference were Natalie, Evi, and Rachel.  They worked closely with the Twin Oaks diversity team of Alexis, Bell, and Hailey. The facilitators began by looking at the stories that block our connection with each other and how our culture disrupts solidarity. We then looked at the role of trauma interfering with empathy. There was information on the biology of trauma, how it pulls us out of our normal “window of tolerance”, sending us into an alarm state that could escalate into the fight or flight response which often led to a state of “freeze” or collapse. 

20191208_145022
We then tried to look at strategies for self-regulation and how to build our capacity for listening and empathy. From there we began looking at white supremacy and how it interfered with our ability to be with each other and how it led to us using microaggressions, small racist behaviors, to defend ourselves. We looked at how we could support each other in changing and how we could make our communities more welcoming to people of color. 

One of the unusual features of the conference was that, for the first time at Twin Oaks, there was People of Color Only space that existed for the time of the conference. Hailey, Bell, and Alexis were available to meet with people of color to look at their concerns. 

Midway through the conference, we had a Liberation Arts Drumming session with Macaco, a Brazilian drummer from Charlottesville, Virginia, followed by us watching a video focused on the story of an African American man’s difficulties with a couple of our communities. We then had a four hour workshop with Amani from Soul Fire Farm, a community in Petersburgh, NY.  She led us in looking at overt and covert white supremacy and how our communities could work to dismantle racism and white supremacy. Both she and the facilitators left us links to many resources. 

IMG_0386
Amani 

20191208_145055
Some Resources 

After this, we did work on building resilience, on looking at how to improve decision-making, as well as having the workshops on facilitation and ritual. The diversity team led a panel on racial justice and changes we could make in our communities. We ended the conference with a report back on next steps we planned to take in our communities, a closing circle, and a group photograph.

20191209_130252
A Group Photo 

20191209_130303(0)
A Group Photo with Enthusiasm 

____________________________________________________________________________

Thanks for reading! This post was made possible by our patrons on Patreon. The Commune Life team works hard to bring you these stories about our lives in community, and that work couldn’t happen without support from our audience. So if you liked this article, and want to help us make more like it, head on over to https://www.patreon.com/communelife to join us! 

Deep gratitude to all of our patrons:  

Communities

  • Compersia Community
  • East Brook Community Farm
  • The Federation of Egalitarian Communities
  • Twin Oaks Community

Communards 

  • Aaron Michels
  • Brenda Thompson
  • Caroline Elbert
  • Cathy Loyd
  • Em Stiles
  • Jenn Morgan
  • Janey Amend-Bombara
  • Jonathan Thaler
  • Joseph A Klatt
  • Julia Elizabeth Evans
  • Kai Koru
  • Kathleen Brooks
  • Laurel Baez
  • Lynette Shaw
  • Magda schonfeld
  • Michael Hobson
  • Nance & Jack Williford
  • Peter Chinman
  • Sumner Nichols
  • Tobin Moore
  • Warren Kunce
  • William Croft
  • William Kadish
  • William Scarborough

 

Thanks! 

 

Social Technology

Cotton Seed Budget

The 2019 FEC Assembly took place during December.  Here’s a picture from it, from the Commune Life Instagramaccount:

Cotton Seed Budget

A Diversity of Communities

by Raven 

I recently put a question on Facebook, “…which is more important, diversity within a commune or community or a diversity of communes and communities?”

Here I want to talk about what I mean by a diversity of communes. The Federation of Egalitarian Communities recently began looking at one of their principles, principle #5, which reads that each community: “Actively works to establish the equality of all people and does not permit discrimination on the basis of race, class, creed, ethnic origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity.”  While this principle seems well intentioned, what about a community that focuses on, and may only include, people who desire a safer space for those of their identity? (This is currently being re-interpreted to potentially include some of the communities mentioned below.)

What about communities that are primarily, or perhaps exclusively, for people of color or trans and/or queer folks?  This has been a bit of a problem in the past because some of the Tennessee queer communities had expressed interest in the FEC but some people in the FEC felt that their focus on queer identity violated the “anti-discrimination” clause in principle #5.

09mag-09sanctuary-t_CA0-jumbo
Picture from a New York Times article on the Tennessee communities 

What about a community like Soul Fire Farm, which describes itself as a BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) centered community farm? They haven’t expressed interest in the FEC, but what if they did?  When people of color express uncomfortableness in primarily white communities, what about supporting communities that are primarily or exclusively for people of the global majority? 

I have also met some people from Jewish focused communities that shared income. It would be great to invite them to check out the FEC. Again, these communities would violate the “anti-discrimination” clause.  The upshot is that the FEC is talking about changing this to an “anti-oppression” clause. 

_DSC1083
Soul Fire Farm 

My vision is of a communities movement where there were Black communities, Jewish communities, queer communities, communities of women, communities filled with trans and genderqueer folks, and many other possibilities.   

Don’t get me wrong.  I really want to see diverse income-sharing communities becoming a reality  and would love to live in one, but I also think that having a diversity of communities is an important step in this process. I don’t think that a large community that is mostly white but has one or two African-American members is a diverse community. I would rather see a variety of communes where people felt safe and valued for who they are. 

I would rather see a diversity of communes and communities.

____________________________________________________________________________

Thanks for reading! This post was made possible by our patrons on Patreon. The Commune Life team works hard to bring you these stories about our lives in community, and that work couldn’t happen without support from our audience. So if you liked this article, and want to help us make more like it, head on over to https://www.patreon.com/communelife to join us! 

Deep gratitude to all of our patrons:  

Communities

  • Compersia Community
  • East Brook Community Farm
  • The Federation of Egalitarian Communities
  • Twin Oaks Community

Communards 

  • Aaron Michels
  • Brenda Thompson
  • Caroline Elbert
  • Cathy Loyd
  • Em Stiles
  • Jenn Morgan
  • Janey Amend-Bombara
  • Jonathan Thaler
  • Joseph A Klatt
  • Julia Elizabeth Evans
  • Kai Koru
  • Kathleen Brooks
  • Laurel Baez
  • Lynette Shaw
  • Magda schonfeld
  • Michael Hobson
  • Nance & Jack Williford
  • Peter Chinman
  • Sumner Nichols
  • Tobin Moore
  • Warren Kunce
  • William Croft
  • William Kadish
  • William Scarborough

Thanks! 

 

 

A Diversity of Communities

Communal Cooperation

by Raven Cotyledon

I have sometimes described some of the communes as a combination of a housing co-op and a worker co-op.  There are certainly elements of both in the Virginia communes. In fact, if you buy Twin Oaks tofu you will see that Twin Oaks Community Foods describes itself as “A Worker-Owned Cooperative!”

 

extrafirmtofu
Twin Oaks Tofu label 

I have lived in three different Boston area co-op houses. Co-op houses (also known as collective houses–especially in NYC where there is something very different called cooperative apartments which are more like condos) are great, but communes involve even more sharing.  In fact, you could say that communes are an even more cooperative form of cooperative. 

Communes cooperate in almost every way I can think of.  Income-sharing, in particular, involves a lot of cooperation between the people who are doing it.  We cooperate in sharing the work of maintaining and cleaning where we live, in feeding each other, in planning together, and in supporting one another.  We care for each other in many ways and we depend on each other. 

Many co-ops are organized around the Seven Cooperative Principles, adopted by the International Cooperative Alliance. I believe that in many ways, communes meet or exceed all of these principles.

7-cooperative-principles

First, a voluntary and open membership. Voluntary, absolutely. Communes are not cults. No one will keep you there.  Open is a little more tricky. Communes, like co-op houses, involve living together. A consumer co-op is easy. Anyone should be able to join. Cooperative businesses have to be a little more selective–not everyone can do every job. Living together means you have to be able to live in your home with each person, so co-op houses and communes need to be more selective still. That said, there is a large push for diversity in the communes. Membership decisions are made about the ability to get along, not about a person’s race or religion or sexual orientation. 

Democratic member control–phrased in early documents as “One man, one vote.” Here the communes do a lot better than that.  They are even more democratic. First, they are open to all genders–not even just men and women, but trans folks, genderqueer, non-binary, two-spirit, and more.  And most communes don’t vote. The majority use consensus, which I believe is more democratic and more cooperative than voting. 

Members economic participation is next, called distribution of surplus in the older documents. This is where income-sharing communities really exceed and excel. Everyone in a commune shares in the economic surplus which is distributed as equally as possible. All the members of a commune get to participate economically as much as they want. 

The fourth principle is “Autonomy and Independence” which is absolutely part of the commune scene. This is the problem that the FEC faces. No one is in charge in the communes. This is the “Egalitarian” part of the Federation of Egalitarian Communities. 

 The fifth principle of the Cooperative Principles is “Education, Training and Information”.  This is as needed in the communes as it is in the co-ops. One of the biggest requests in the FEC budget is for one type of training or another. 

The sixth principle is “Cooperation among Cooperatives” and this is as desirable and sought after in the communes as it is with the co-ops.  In fact, this could be the very purpose of the FEC. 

Finally, “Concern for Community” seems almost too self evident in the communes whose very nature is about building community. 

7-Cooperative-Principles-1-1ukrmu5

All this is not to knock co-ops, but to point out that if you have done co-ops, especially co-op houses, and you want even more cooperation, maybe you should look at the communes.

____________________________________________________________________________

Thanks for reading! This post was made possible by our patrons on Patreon. The Commune Life team works hard to bring you these stories about our lives in community, and that work couldn’t happen without support from our audience. So if you liked this article, and want to help us make more like it, head on over to https://www.patreon.com/communelife to join us! 

Deep gratitude to all of our patrons:  

Communities

  • Acorn Community
  • Compersia Community
  • Cotyledon Community
  • East Brook Community Farm
  • The Federation of Egalitarian Communities
  • Twin Oaks Community

Communards 

  • Aaron Michels
  • Brenda Thompson
  • Cathy Loyd
  • Em Stiles
  • Jenn Morgan
  • Jonathan Thaler
  • Julia Elizabeth Evans
  • Kai Koru
  • Kathleen Brooks
  • Laurel Baez
  • Lynette Shaw
  • Magda schonfeld
  • Michael Hobson
  • Nance & Jack Williford
  • Peter Chinman
  • Sumner Nichols
  • Tobin Moore
  • Warren Kunce
  • William Croft
  • William Kadish

Thanks! 

 

Communal Cooperation

Status

by Raven Cotyledon

At the close of my final article on the Detailed FEC History, I wrote: “The current status of the FEC communities (as far as I know and subject to change with little or no notice): Full member communities–Twin Oaks, East Wind, Acorn, and  Compersia; Re-forming communities–Sandhill and Mimosa; Communities in Dialogue–Oran Mor, The Mothership, Ionia, Rainforest Lab, Open Circle, Cambia, Le Manoir, East Brook Community Farm, and Cotyledon.”

What do these statuses mean? What is the difference between a Full community and a Community in Dialogue? What is a Re-forming community? And what is an Ally (or Allied) Community?  That’s what I want to explore here. (Warning: in great detail.)

Most of this information has been taken from the FEC website and more information can be found there. (Yes. As long as this is, I left out a bunch of things.)

From the section on Joining the FEC:  “The first step in becoming an FEC Community is to contact the FEC Secretary… The FEC Secretary is responsible for guiding you through the process, or connecting you with a delegate from another community to do so.

“There are six things that we expect from a community before applying for full membership in the FEC.

*  A member of your community completes a questionnaire, and sends out written information that you have about your community…  

* The members of your community make some kind of collective binding agreement, with a defined process for changing that agreement, that represents a written affirmation of the FEC’s seven basic principles.

* A representative requests for your community to officially become a Community-in-Dialogue with the FEC, at least one year before applying for full membership in the FEC.

* Members of your community develop and maintain an active relationship with the FEC or at least one FEC community by attending monthly conference calls, visiting other communities or doing labor exchange, written communication, attendance at our annual assembly, conferences attended or hosted by other FEC communities, or other forms of sharing.

* One or more delegates chosen by your community attends annual assemblies of the FEC.  A community can apply for membership in the FEC during the second assembly to which they send delegates.

* A representative of the FEC designated by the delegates visits your community, and co writes a report to the FEC and its member communities about your community and your adherence to FEC values.

* Consensus of the existing FEC communities is necessary to accept a new community, both as a Community-in-Dialogue and as a full member community in the FEC.

“For your community to become a full member in the FEC, delegates will evaluate your community on the basis of these requirements and criteria.  Once accepted the new community is granted full member rights and privileges from that point on.”

But, before we go into Full Membership Status, here’s a lot more on Communities in Dialogue.  The status of Community in Dialogue was created at the January, 1980 Assembly.

EastBrook Sign
East Brook is a Community in Dialogue 

 

From the section on Community-In-Dialogue Status:

“If a community is seeking FEC membership but is not yet at the point where the Assembly will approve its application, that community may apply for Community-in-Dialogue (CID) status. For a community to be accepted as a CID, the Assembly need only be convinced that the community is actively working toward meeting the membership criteria, and that there exists a mutual desire for cooperation between the community and the FEC.

“The Assembly shall not be obliged to accept a community as a CID, even if it is working toward meeting the membership criteria, if it is felt that the community in question is actively contradicting those criteria (e.g., using violence, being governed by a leader or minority, discriminating on any of the grounds outlined in the Federation’s basic principles).

“A Community-in-Dialogue shall:

1 Maintain an active relationship with at least one FEC community through activities such as visiting or labor exchange, written communication, attendance at conferences, etc.;

2 Attend FEC assemblies if they so desire, and participate in discussions on a limited basis;

3 Pay an annual base tax of $100, plus $5 per working member.

4 Be eligible to participate in FEC projects specifically designated by the Assembly (e.g., conferences, training programs, etc.) on the same basis as members, but with the understanding that FEC members receive space priority… and

5 Have their status reviewed annually by the Assembly.

A Community-in-Dialogue shall not:

1 Vote upon or ratify decisions of the Assembly; or

2 Be eligible for transportation subsidies without approval.”

TOOT1
Twin Oaks is a Full Member Community 

From the section on Full Membership:

“CID status essentially has been the category we hold interested communities in while they are working to meet all the criteria for full membership. There is no fixed limit on the amount of time a community can have CID status; presumably, as long as the delegates see no reason to revoke that status, they can be CID as long as it takes until they can be accepted as full members.”

“The only guidelines the FEC Constitution gives about new communities joining is that they must meet the seven core principles of the FEC. The decision is made through normal decision making structure we establish for all our decisions.”

“Communities desiring full membership in the FEC should:

  1. Be a Community in Dialogue for at least one year, and meet the requirements for communities in that category, such as attending Assemblies, participating in FEC discussions, having at least one site visit, etc.

 

  1. Have the seven FEC principles as core values of the community in their Bylaws (or equivalent fundamental documents). This does not have to be a word for word copy…  but the community should be able to demonstrate that those principles are part of the community’s written core values.

 

  1. Be actually following the above seven principles.

 

  1. Have group ownership of all land, property, and other major resources.

 

  1. Have a detailed income-sharing model in place, preferably already functioning for some time before applying for full membership.

 

  1. Appear to be sufficiently stable, in terms of population, economics, and other relevant factors.

 

  1. Have, at minimum, three members, none of whom are in a romantic relationship or family.

 

  1. Not have different tiers or levels of membership, or significantly different privileges based on membership length, beyond the provisional to full member process. Once people are full members, they should have the same basic level of political and economic equality.

 

  1. Not have any blanket restrictions on people joining based on sex, gender, age, race, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other similar discriminatory categories.

 

  1. Have systems in place to provide for the health and medical needs of all its members up to at least the requirements of PEACH. Since FEC membership guarantees automatic membership in PEACH, and since one of the presumptions of PEACH is that member communities are taking care of the health needs of its members up to the catastrophic level where PEACH kicks in, this is something we need to evaluate.

 

  1. Be able to address a variety of less tangible factors that the delegates believe are necessary. There are likely going to be many situations where a community seems to be in a somewhat borderline situation with some of the above criteria, or there may be issues about things that we can’t think of in advance.”

Aviva1
Ganas is an Allied Community 

The Allied Community or Ally Community status was created at the September, 2004 Assembly.  There isn’t a lot written about this status on the FEC website, but if you look at the Our Communities page, you will see Baltimore Free Farm, Ganas, Living Energy Farm, Terra Nova, and the Walnut Street Co-op listed as Ally Communities.  From what I have heard, this status was created at the request of Ganas, which is not (by their own admission) an egalitarian community, but has a long relationship with Twin Oaks and the FEC and wanted some status within the FEC.  Terra Nova and the Walnut Street Co-op also have had a long history with the Federation of Egalitarian Communities. When Living Energy Farm realized that they were not going to be able to become income-sharing, at least for a long time yet, they requested this status. And, honestly, Baltimore Free Farm is on the page in that status because there is no income-sharing group there now, but there are people there that hope they will in the future. This is not an official status for them. They are literally there because I didn’t want to completely take them out since they might return in the future.

img_20160624_172209361
Sandhill is a Re-forming Community 

The Re-forming Community status is the newest status having just been created at the November/December, 2017 Assembly.  It was created to address difficulties with two full communities which had dropped down to only a few folks, less than the required amount: Mimosa (formerly Sapling, which Acorn had put a lot of energy into) and Sandhill (one of the oldest communities in the FEC).  It is so new that there isn’t yet a section on the Our Communities page (even though there is supposed to be one).

From the section on Re-forming Community Status:

“Becoming a Re-forming Community is a voluntary action taken via the full member community’s own internal decision making process, although members of other communities may gently encourage them to consider the idea.

“Re-forming Communities will be given a separate section on the web site, and are encouraged to include a paragraph in their long description explaining why they are currently a Re-forming community.

“The FEC will make special efforts to assist Re-forming Communities in returning to the principles of The FEC.

“Re-forming Communities may elect to begin paying dues equal to those of a Community in Dialog and their rights and privileges will be reduced to those of a Community in Dialog. Re-forming Communities may choose to continue paying Full Member dues and retain the rights and privileges of full member communities. The delegates may check in about this at each assembly.

“In order to regain their status as a full member of the FEC, a Re-forming Community applies in the same way a CID applies for full membership, but the application can be made at the FEC Assembly or on a Conference call. Re-forming Communities who have elected to reduce their dues to the CID level must pay the dues that would have been due during the current fiscal year had they remained a full member community.

“Full Member communities who experience major turnover may find the experience of re-forming to be more like starting a new community than coming back into alignment with The FEC principles. Such a community may also elect, by their own decision making processes, to change their status to Community in Dialog by submitting a CID application.”

If you have read all the way to here, I am sure that you are truly interested in the Federation of Egalitarian Communities.  You may be wondering about the Seven Principles mentioned several times here. Rejoice has promised to write seven posts about these principles, analyzing each of them. I look forward to publishing them here in the future.

Meanwhile, again, if you have any questions about any of these statuses, I suggest that you go to the relevant section on the FEC website (follow the link) where there is even more information, or ask in the comments.

____________________________________________________________________________

Thanks for reading! This post was made possible by our patrons on Patreon. The Commune Life team works hard to bring you these stories about our lives in community, and that work couldn’t happen without support from our audience. So if you liked this article, and want to help us make more like it, head on over to https://www.patreon.com/communelife to join us!

Deep gratitude to all of our patrons:  

Communities

  • Acorn Community
  • Compersia Community
  • Cotyledon Community
  • East Brook Community Farm
  • The Federation of Egalitarian Communities
  • Twin Oaks Community

Communards

  • Aaron Michels
  • Brenda Thompson
  • Cathy Loyd
  • Em Stiles
  • Jenn Morgan
  • Jonathan Thaler
  • Julia Elizabeth Evans
  • Kai Koru
  • Kathleen Brooks
  • Laurel Baez
  • Lynette Shaw
  • Magda schonfeld
  • Michael Hobson
  • Nance & Jack Williford
  • Peter Chinman
  • Sumner Nichols
  • Tobin Moore
  • Warren Kunce
  • William Croft
  • William Kadish

Thanks!

 

Status