Following our Autumn Members’ Meeting, members took part in an online vote where they were able to add comments and arguments alongside their votes. Below are the proposals that members unanimously (including those who abstained) agreed on:

A. How do we make decisions

Context:

Out of 44 members:

• 24 members attended the Summer Members’ Meeting (ie 55% of members).
• 32 members voted – not everyone voted on everything (ie 72% of members). 
• 20 members both attended the summer meeting AND voted (ie 45% of members).
• 12 members voted but did not attend the summer meeting (ie 27% of members).
• 4 members attended the summer meeting but didn’t vote, including 2 of whom reported tech issues (ie 9% of members).
• 3 members have left the network since we launched in June (ie 7% of members).
• 23 members attended the Autumn Members’ Meeting (ie 52% of members).

A2. We will continue to use the Deep Democracy method to make decisions, and ask members who ‘lost’ a vote what they would need to come along.

B. Which decisions are delegated to who

Context:  At the last vote, members felt the questions about what gets decided by all members vs. by the Transition Team were too bundled together. Members at the Autumn Meeting suggested voting on each point separately this time.

B3. Decisions regarding any payment for roles and work needed (that’s not already approved) will be made by all members.

B4. Decisions on which venue we use for Members’ Meetings will be made by the Transition Team.

B5. When it comes to meeting new funders for GM SC, all members should be informed, and can choose to attend on behalf of GM SC.

B6. When it comes to finding new potential non-financial partnerships for GM SC, all members should be informed, and can choose to attend on behalf of GM SC.

B8. When it comes to speaking at events on GM SC’s behalf, all members should be informed, and can choose to attend on behalf of GM SC.

B9. The Transition Team will continue to lightly edit and check member blog posts for alignment with GM SC’s mission, vision, and red lines before publishing them on the website.

D. New Organising Circles

Two new organising circles have been ratified by members: Direct Action Against Fascism and Survival and Solidarity Infrastructure.

E. Ideas from members for the future of GM SC

When Lankelly Chase decided to stop operating as a funder, they gave GM SC £540,000 to support us in putting our vision and mission into practice.

Two proposals on how to use those funds emerged during the Autumn Members’ Meeting; three others were submitted in advance; and one was about how we organise together.

E1. Members voted to maintain the existing £50 per-organisation expense allowance for each quarterly Members’ Meeting, allocating £8,000 annually to support attendance.

E2. In terms of using the funding given by Lankelly Chase to support us in putting our vision and mission into practice, members voted to redistribute it among ourselves, either equally or with an agreed weighting to be decided later, with the option for any member to return their share to the network.

E4. Members voted against resourcing the proposal called “Cultivating change agroecological food production and collective kitchen for food system transformation”.

–
Other proposals (A1, B1, B2, B7, C1, C2, D1, E3, E5 and E6)  will need to be reviewed at the next Members’ Meeting to reach unanimity, unless those who ‘lost’ the vote are comfortable enough with the majority decision to go along.

In terms of engagement numbers, there was a drop in the number of members who voted without attending the meeting. Otherwise, the engagement remained similar to the Summer Members’ Meeting and the Summer Voting Period.

Out of 44 members:

– 23 members attended the Winter Members’ Meeting (ie 52% of members), 6 sent their apologies.

– 26 members voted, not everyone voted on everything (ie 59% of members). 

– 18 members both attended the summer meeting AND voted (ie 41% of members).

– 5 members voted but did not attend the summer meeting (ie 11% of members).

– 4 members attended the summer meeting but didn’t vote (ie 9% of members).