Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2014-12-02 Work Session
Kodiak Island Borough Assembly Work Session Tuesday, December 2, 2014, 7:30 p.m., Borough Conference Room Work Sessions are informal meetings of the Assembly where Assembly members review the upcoming regular meeting agenda packet and seek or receive information from staff.Although additional items not listed on the work session agenda are discussed when introduced by the Mayor,Assembly,or staff,no formal action is taken at work sessions and items that require formal Assembly action are placed on regular Assembly meeting agenda. Citizen's comments at work sessions are NOT considered part of the official record.Citizen's comments intended for the"official record"should be made at a regular Assembly meeting. Page 1 . CITIZENS' COMMENTS (Limited to Three Minutes per Speaker) 2. AGENDA ITEMS 3 - 14 a. Leisnoi Presentation Regarding Timber Practices in Chiniak - Mr. Von Veeh Leisnoi Presentation 12-2-14.pdf 15 - 16 b. FY2016 Budget Calendar Assembly Budget Calendar.pdf 17 - 37 c. Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly Consensus Majority Definition.pdf 38 - 68 d. Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures Existing Assembly Non Profit Policy.pdf Nonprofit Funding Notes Skinner.pdf FY2008 to FY2015 Non Profit Resolutions.pdf FY2015 Informational Spreadsheet FINAL.pdf NP Fund App 040914 Master Copy.pdf e. Borough Legal Opinions Distribution Process 3. PACKET REVIEW PUBLIC HEARINGS Ordinance No. FY2015-07 Reestablishing Boards, Committees, and Commissions as Established in the Kodiak Island Borough Code of Ordinances Title 2 Administration and Personnel Chapter 2.100 Boards, Committees, and Commissions. NEW BUSINESS CONTRACTS Contract No. FY2015-19 Trailer Mounted Diesel Trash Pump Procurement. Page 1 of 68 Contract No. FY2015-20 Landfill Software Procurement. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION Ordinance No. FY2015-08 Amending Title 3 Revenue and Finance, Chapter 35 Real Property Tax, Section 3.35.050 Board of Equalization to Add and Additional Alternate Seat on the Board. OTHER ITEMS Confirmation of the Mayoral Annual Appointments to the Various Boards, Committees, and Commissions. Confirmation of the Mayoral Appointment to the Parks and Recreation Committee (Sharon Wolkoff). Confirmation of the Mayoral Appointment to the Planning and Zoning Commission (Jay Baldwin). Confirmation of the Assembly Appointments to the Citizens Board of Equalization and Personnel Advisory Board. 4. MANAGER'S COMMENTS 5. CLERK'S COMMENTS 6. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 7. ASSEMBLY MEMBERS COMMENTS Page 2 of 68 r N 7 O (D t�"\I'7`,.'t--' :. 'VC cr4. N LEISNOI 7 I N C O R P O R A T E. 0 m w f p4<s A L r Ir ,�♦y-raa. f y 1'y i sl (O t� } xlk } ,�a wr i,"«,^I,F .. Y �„+ g' .' � � 1,J �r«'t,�'-.x�� 1r+t"y�"�° i7 ,yy,/ C;. - at _ �M1ttF Ott u r ! .k,1.��.� Y e 's at`tx i"2 .W l -c4Y YT!'4� �•F� ' .}11�� i i 'C3 y; 1. 5 m $ hr lli r kS+k. r1w rr�M i wl r.':: #ts v (�Ir ,f k '� 'h4"� 'R+ x. :. x G"Ty�.Nr� 16i :F.� .St}.. 71 A a' t`W: i :'i,�,¢¢.s Pr + fir} T�,h"j Era-Sc. �t ...M h'R.�a21�., . ~''`(i 3iq 7�.`'': u.A Z I 'f li .T: } � Yff f why 3 "SAF J' J JY v A + S. 1"«Q \ 1 q tK}. ... t%„. F , x" '4 ip gat a l n2iP? Lf ;194'r N[ zt „;;4 t •nh+. 1-.1)) ! +�', .. i x i5 ,� .. a i.1 1/` g�Azoil 1} ,r t �i.R'0yJrJ�t�,,�bi `t+.. y �a4,Zz$7.4itaPrtn..'C' 1 ',"k:. `:' iF r' x 44'' rl a ;:: ,. It •0L r r1' �3, 1.itItt *'53*e _ !4 k W !t L ^' t4. Ft i t �� u aA� ' ,F� j c a n.e • *' tR1444,41. - kyr . I I (• 1 a.,.Y�. -. y tr tb ^}x` i (l jz" ` n� ' '' � :-.11-;:,‘)r,-, } j'S ', *'` ' f ,i ' }_1! 3 �/ 7y`N:'Pp a �`,i 7 ,, .0,.,-, '7:',..,-it ,t fT t D. '{..r ij 4,t Y fi w .7" S 4‘}';L110,c4:::‘ 1r ,-it I-I.4'.141"h11,* -. t+ d t}d'*k I.t, "`� �#.,t ;'" r t :t3:476/• nt" e } 0,x ' SI r.Fa } ' x,'t' r� �N'�t {q#y cwt a+. li • 2 a ^,.+ > RLft N .0;41 „Irk., � �1 . � I�p.Iti,{Y. �� � 1 �^" O �j °� ?"*".-:"A" ;1.174%. � ��� �p � k� �- �i �!y�.'el •� N 2 ,"A�4 +� ' �'i 1 i, -V .,c z >#•TRy .1 �bf �1 N.qlot . �, . if�x �:-- ' i tf *a! . +'4 ,fit^}(""ffy�,�a T* i t q t �lt i s.; ; _. r�y�,t pg'jt y3� * �f • B a. F.4 ' lit4-.42,“4"244‘k t 1I" ; e" a- }f f. {pic ''1"T."' 4 ' �„L•$•�`.t, .r�y�Jj'J"'FF'!rvty :,RW �f - ` .N1/4p f" '' "} �T, `I.q`��1�. f t 4 _ A a q"}�,7"d) it 014.5!�f" ' 44 •-90"'".j�'t r ANY � Zb t� yfI �� { �4 ik.a ,v ty } `.Iv,.1C�<-�y"iu4 tA��`^.i; v! ' •1 '',#;;;- f-. x `.\ `; 4 ,�Fe'• fi `tti OG��7 y`N1 ��'>„ �i4 t 1 .� {,lye N N 9SI Jf •�knalle �'f +'4' �ftt ' .t\`'.P� tit .'!r J" 4 y f 3+ &` .■ t e C 4� i } ,t +f� it;' II7c tit Y, sekt �� •I i kYt. '-,tt�, n Y 0` ✓Caril k""'= V ,e�}� >� ... . �' .:ti.\ "'5% C'.4. r �, t,�;' q. .., :'i ':• �.— :v Z 1/2 .Y � , } `fit - / y ��p /+ T��r." 'IL" ‘. 1.\\„„.�F� t P "�'Y. O > � •°' .."'...2t,--.. � a;�'�i a� �$ u 4c?�• �Q.ii� t t GI ��� �I 4C.t �.� Q �< ly T A '" gni $5?e ,�j $ '0 ' N v r CD 0 '0 fes,,, a • Cama'i LEISNOI INCORPORATED 73 Thank you for the opportunity to present today! We will address the following: — Leisnoi's History n • 5. — Timber Operation — Timber Regeneration — Shareholders — Investment — Other m C Z CD 0 n m 17ecemhcr 2014 Lcisnoi 1v Gt m m 0 0 v �I m .A(`vrrhr t �irfratat CDCD Leisnoi's History LEISNOI 7 INCORPORATED (D co m a • Leisnoi's ancestors come from Woody Island • Established in 1974 through the passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) — Purpose of ANCSA 5 • subsistence, cultural, social and economic benefits n — Leisnoi has defended itself as a Native Corporation in the courts for over 30 years • Land is rich in timber • Corporate purpose and responsibility is to provide Shareholders with benefits while managing our land and preserving our cultural heritage C z Cr cr« y December 2014 Leisnoi 3 tv 93 r m rn' O 0 Leisnoi's Timber Operation LEISl- QI a INCORPORATED (D d a • Timber contract started in 2010 • We expect operations to end in 2016 EL; • Harvest operations already under contract and DPO's have been accepted by the State • Only harvesting timber in the Chiniak area • Leisnoi is leaving substantial areas in Chiniak along streams, beaches, lakes, and private property • Following state regulations and have not had any violations • Working with DOT • Alaska Forest Resources & Practices Act (FRPA) • Board committed to responsibly manage its natural resources ri December zot4 Leisnoi 4 r co N O0 co co Timber Regeneration LEISN OI A INCORPORATED (D co co 5 • Leisnoi has planted approximately one million Sitka Spruce seedlings • We are replanting in old harvest fields and new fields • Leisnoi employs a professional planting crew • Our estimates indicate there will be an additional one million 0 seedlings planted • Preliminary results of the planting • Committed to meet State of Alaska replanting requirements 7 C z v « _ y December 2014 Leisnoi 5 4t N G) r 0 St Str--s- 124 0 -0 Ia T E D CI 2014TimberLi ,E, 01 RS, Regeneration ......... ...- N. :1,° ,q4.-,--..... 4.,“.. x , .....:_, ...4...„.,,- '..",t4... ,, .flirt/at-id , _,,, , . to(D ,, : _;'..i __!.. la .'„ .17'. --- ----,--..,..a,„...... ."-til air.t.,4---.- je-'....--op- ,,,-... I a 5. I. . . - ,,-,:5-,..," _.„2„. t..' „rsr P. a on tfii-3/4.'- - . "••,:-2;i.- 1,t1"'- -•Liirifite rir-c. 74 - it,,-. -ci, ",--.4,‘ H One mi//ion seedlings .. i ---.......r• .- ...AP., _ • 3 plartted by 2014 , ....:.v, . •, „ wilt.:4;" ,i „was. . , --2,s44: ,;, '-r-*--- • - - • tva-s.- 0- ti-svritti_ ,t-,--,.1-...: ev.-44 17 - -..:C.-...--- ' CD -0 @ '-='--10.4..t '',../.'":'-;t4.,„..,'- r".;.,' . I . t -Zii,.:,,,,nit4Th-" • ):'7.''' ;?s- "-:' ii'ti . 'if =C) WC) ' ' ra, It tic."R.., ..IMI ‘1 -.)r..„ '''" *---,ityl.--.'7. -. . ,...f,t,',',„-_"1::. :z :-_:,....-.- -- ..•-rs.c.-,-- .-.:-. ... w utd,#),,..“-71. 13C. sr trditof!fltta-----• ---- -. ,'-' - t-' 4" ...'}k 5. , ',„•4.40kstfak'141,11, ' .,..,7'-= r.-. . •—• --------r, ,j-, - ..-• ' -ai1/4vitler...kstr14..-, ...4 147--- -cc..N.-..<.a . ' . ,-4,f, .....-,.. ."-.1 . , • ,, ttirtrar n. --- -3,f` - ,..' ' '-'•t , --W ' •1.-4f;4: '' T- 4:161.4'W.11;:tr"t•l't • 1 - -citt>$ . ." t . s... t&A'-''''..ors, „,,ts'Ass4r" l'''\ ",\!7„.... s,- r't 't.t. l'. 11- ,. . ,,-,'..r' 4tr * , , , - "r.re" ffie.;4`,1Y • ' .:f.`It'07;61,-tAre • ' -a 1.:“." k 4° A i. ' Ww-777-n-r:17----",,,„„„4,....-......„,,__ I r .'1/4 ,,. lAr -0.‘.4- . • i >--- •4-0'An'as '47-4: N.11,t • . ,,,,,,„ i,?.,-„ R4.e. „., , ..-t,\'' tt,* N, -'‘7-':"4:3b' '1. 12-- 3 ''W 2:. ' 1,:, — ''''.'"'C.,' 1t• .;.- -. ....... .. m-.A.t.e1.:: ti..7- '..4,-,van,-41',E ,- -1 ‘3../ t ir ,,.. :t:A., ii,,,...g..(1 ..] „ ..,,,:t. .. ...t,:sri: , 7. „. ..L11.41,5ta,,,,, _...t.,. /.,.„ / ... I., .--Ai.gr.. V7. ,.„7.1,r ,,,,,,J;s....).A4:.?.:ct`it;:::7,';',' 0 -c w co co t:efe li - (./ . t.r.---P—____J . '- .• j,-.:.. y . lc! .. • .".13".. -ritc• f ' v in-a-7=--- H.: , ni 0 ...,._ a it licisnoi n) December 2()14. ib r m N E.OTt_ a ark—oral-0 Acciaat;a4. 7 v2014 Timber Regeneration LEISN of 7 INCORPORATED X m Ep v a 7 • H Natural ' �.. Y sri L'1 4 o- regeneration �,„n44,Ka ,,,..,.,� 4,,,'"-.7-\e•-„ _ -`, 6'+ + ar..yy '�j' ® yin o ” '.tie v & ,. , - a + r a . . growth in Chiniak � , -'�,;m- t. r' ~-; h4 ,A ,*"' ;::...p.' ' r'�'` ' � - t ' 't U ->1 i r v s g4.." +sy. 'Y3- "?.t ° xe M. ..tii rti �„M`i^ " G -N... : 1 '' -:::---- o. e 4:µ i ` aP x o- n 4 :m c ': w - rr Cerci * sem 3{ e�� h � k re ' -at tit":.d s u ,rs, i' t r', 14 ,. ,'',. ,'•°e,rf -t ♦:, - • i' ..:!'1,..4-.':#0, 11'as11, • t ° p@Y kc -r Y4 . e t . y f. AC �w e u T*iij 1� l>t,, ,v t`i.i. ,,Y• .. �s. ym\ ,e Y} a.:;. Y S'AYl�: -:'9` 'µ?ro R a.. 7. P g .74: ' : s-A. _.. ,,'s,. tea. r f . « .. t t e i t ate.. a. .,, "`1 .� \ G) -cr en ''.fi �iit� di'I te 3'�AT—' e tyro Y e Nl/:'-t + f 42r . , gni N � /� / A* 'w I “.•10aJy �? 4 n r / Z .n v.” .. .� a o. t 1 iJy/•� ,/`et _ e§.Dl ,lF/b'.t., c� ,wntiS`r nM� 0 n a y m December 2014 Leisnoi 7 It N r CD N 7 O N 2014! Timber Regeneration LEISI� OI I N C O R P O R A 7 C D �J a '^c - ; �` ,a �, F es" :�:-ask -'�, : . 'i . • '- -w *.'. (p ' �" „4 max: `�" g„^°-�`'3=- ,�y� , ca € t Ma� '4i... ws, 4P- '" x a (0 co -! 20 Year 01d Sitka a ' ,,,'"?..r41: >:" .• ° "? '" .> .n,;}n i. Q Spruce Trees r.`1+s.+ -:"^"1,,,.....„04-(r-,".. € x` 47,10}1•• w h �'•... f ;M N . xxa.y,. $. Planted on �.�w f�fOC_Year IshinC� "'"t � i-nle'g' 4.'.,.}. ' ::S3+ '+`4 h' �`"y'*g$ i.,• � t i nu �q�.. -7--,-;,..-t.7.7 n`1LG ititt , iCa " s e 1. +c' W" 43 li r� h ;Y M-4.'Y .1 ,d -7r"-,727°°14-2.*".-.4,1—.7. n . t r . .', y " . 7Ter ( !- x N ltiID • s' .(:V`1 h it K 5. g tZ "YI , t i ivomtp#Attik*Isistettist;:4,444.7g zit ,:ef`if o h' ,U t kt # X 'h t.,:. t ,:*X 'b'. 4. " .sf., z .-4,44f., i z )16 co o � .1,„.... f lir, �/ru� -C.x;fY V C ...C': s ...., rM '+MJ�. C ..k i\kritiffrOIN1,11. lifiStat:7.,,, V�" t11 5.. !: _ a �R 111 December 2of4 1,eisnoi 8 I ) 1 Iy r cD 0 v cn LEIS\ OI Shareholders INCORPORATED cD 5 • Leisnoi has over 400 Shareholders rs • Paying an annual dividend • Shareholder employees • When surveyed, Shareholders looked to Leisnoi to provide services beyond dividends: o Elder Benefits 5. o Jobs o Scholarships o Shareholder Land Program o Death Benefits z � m a m December 2014 Leisnoi 9 a) r co CO' z ow Real Estate Investments LEISNOI INCORPORATED 71 lD a • In spring 2014, the Leisnoi Board of Directors announced plans to reinvest the revenues generated by timber into real estate • These investments will provide an income stream and allow the s corporation to diversify its business portfolio C-)D- 5 ;v • Improved and diversified profitability will support programs today and for future generations of Leisnoi Shareholders T Co m 2 ti O rrl December2o14 Leisnoi 10 N Al r cD N O LE1S1 , V J Other0 INCORPORATED (D 10 to • KIB Code Revision Update • Land access and permits • Security Team • Vandalism, littering and stealing 5 • Participation with community 5 ;v • Questions? -t o s n December 2014 Leisnoi Pi) ctiktitabt LEISNOI ITN I (....„.v7.-.4 r CD (7) 0 FD 0 CD at ab X ;tote i 4 ..4% ii:i.: Ceo : rn_ RATED .... ...h. . (D auk,— . . .. on .. ... •- iis ° 4 t CO ., ,111111& •••1 ' ,,. ". .• r ad, 4 Epee Ilep. . 4' ,r •4. ink.'^:- ,frcz.,..•...e1S. to. i • 0 It', ." - er,„ 10 'cfr 1 NY--,,:l ken!../...,,iiiem.rtpg-er4, t 4, up ....„ - •••• - a., „+epri ittr-u.S.A.,1Z 1.c•94--;.•;z"c *4-4',7•04,040,...<-74tita...- ,,,..2,14:51-4 CD r—tft,-44,-,h,„4,Lciirr,c4. -0 ^, %... 'o' Ei 0 ir, sir t ,,,,,,,*,,. A- „... .„.. e.i. ,„,, .„,„..w, _ ,,,...„5 ,- . ,..„.--„,.., • ott}:4 -04,.:tt IV •: ,0,,-.,t.,4.,,,• 1••-t•Tt‘et lit 1.1.124tt149ViterThtb. ,7,4{7,1eg•.1.1'ti‘70.....,43:14,-;-,..`:: 4. ...,,:tipty......,tit, ..e. sis.u. co —ow.,,,_ -• NJ .**Vt 4,....:4a*"."1.* . 4. .” * '4,e**•Itirprki ,' 04:0 1 :..1**1.%•"..Itte a :147t,,it-i' e itc,1/24,4 4-tir.'s4.,r''',{,••7-0 -"" tt - li,f4;±-4p,T.,/7-.4.11.1?.,,h z. ' . ..E -xra,n,:t- D- 6 5 „,-'Ar•-":11T-`,4, 'N. ','1.4774144"; 4'1 *,(e irS 1, :,:idi ill:/;C:' romitli fvtlio144011%ceirtiri. .4;44-44:1 7, it14.•:"I's )1. 'ye ii,,,, stt.44,trt *as i ;VI icem• ''''',. t 2- )7,';74„.. s41.;..c.4- ;., ..,,, t....,, • 1.1. 7 , .1k4.1ter1W-4,vilt”-,2,:ii4,44 .1 ;,,* r...4 ./.,.-ctc-.Y.; -it ,, ,- ,,,c't 444#4.--%,tr-,,,,:,:4e, ..f.,- ,i.,, -808, J.)...,-,, *N+^""' \-ingli.-1'tb,"' -'' :roLot"-.-----$41:.'1,11' - ";"'1/47-;-• rn t, 44,li f::14' .i.-*".1/4.. ,, i.'7i 7.A.,.€ .1:1""rw't':-Ir."74.•!-. Nrgyber,,,.:es 1Sr .. .4,v ,---4‘...941,--r- :11140;;a13, it 4•..4..'49 4;i ev".7"" frtir'Seis.-Cht4:, %tate ' nr; .\P A t ' 17 `salaSIT I CA''9 114 t \X" ' .14" ' •••• a ya, \ , , ‘ .4. e -.4. i•- , A' t ttC Citejt ir 4,. „3 \ °It t',„,,,,_. ....-r.7 „i414. 1 eny mil, .4„.}:,, .2),4. . #. wacA, .r. 4- ' nu ,... , ., i. i.„3„?....„, %pa. „ I. rt ....,,r , „li ,,,,,p _ i i.,_ . ".. . .to,ft33...... „.... .,,... 31 , . 1„ 2„ 3.t, , . otit r/ 4.4 , iii rt,;,,,,....„, ,,..,&• '114"441, it - ( hank tv 4 tz "waikAits) ,.,71 - ',At,- , •. t -th, (CDCII 11'1/4,%VA tii.,,e., 1'04 • t \ t • .•••:14(° .41 t t '.'•ttl..':• 0' : vtlitAtti (a— '', "217 '1,*k444:44:Atir' of8c ,.7;‹, , .1r28 •4t- .\- ). • vtt,4%.? ,es AGENDA ITEM #2.b. FY16 BUDGET CALENDAR • • FY15 DATES OM, January KIB Strategic Planning January Adopt a KIB Communities CIP List January KIBSD preliminary budget to School Board by January 15 DoR Publishes Revenue Sharing Population Determinations January IS Personal Property Tax Returns due January 15 Application for real property(tax)exemptions due mid January - . Assessor's property tax projection to Finance mid January KIB Budget Message to Dept Directors from the Manager 3rd Tues January January 20,2015 State legislative session begins January 21,2015 Governor's State of the State address late January Finance Director distributes budget worksheets late January State subcommittees review Governor's Budget Request late January Initiate KIBSD funding discussions February Adopt a Federal CIP List February KIBSD budget hearings February 15 - Shared Fisheries Business Tax application due mid February Departmental budget requests due to the Finance Department late February KIB revenue forecast to Assembly February 28 KIB Personal Property Tax Return due February 28/29 Assessment Roll complete/notices mailed late Feb-early March - SWAMC annual economic summit late Feb-early March Legislative Reception in Juneau February-March Manager and Dept Heads finalize departmental budgets March 1 Distribute non-profit funding applications March KIBSD budget revisions mid March data due for PILT application,if funded March 31 Service Area budget requests due to Finance March 31 Quarter end for severance tax and bed tax late March-early April State Spring Revenue Forecast April _ KIBSD budget approval April 15 Tax Assessment appeals due mid April April 19,2015 State legislative session ends late April KIB Non profit requests due by April 30 Manager's proposed budget to Assembly by April 30 KIBSD budget to KIB by April 30th April-May Assembly-Department Review • Page 15 of 68 FY2016 Budget Calendar AGENDA ITEM #2.b. 1 GENERAL DATES FY15 DATES f i 1st Monday of May May 4, 2015 Board of Equalization meets(for assessed value appeals) early May May 7,2015 KIB work session on School district minimum funding mid May May 14,2015 Assessment Roll is certified mid May May 14,2015 KIB resolution identifying the minimum funding to KIBSD mid May KIB Budget Ordinance introduced mid May KIB publish public notice June 1 June 1,2015 State Revenue Sharing application due by June 10th KIB public hearing and adoption of budget June 30 Quarter end for severance tax and bed tax June 30 Revenue sharing determinations July 1 KIB Fiscal Year begins,budget execution July 1 State fiscal year begins July 15 KIBSD budget to DoEED late July State budget process begins August 15 1st half property tax pmt due September KIBSD Needs Assessment September Adopt a State Legislative Priority(CIP)List September 30 Quarter end for severance tax and bed tax late Sept-early Oct State Fall revenue forecast • 1st Tuesday Oct October 7, 2014 Local Elections October KIBSD strategic planning by 4th Friday of Oct October 24, 2014 KIBSD 20 day count of students to DEED October 15 Single payment property taxes due Tues after 1st Mon in Nov November 4,2014 State General Election November KIBSD budget handbook distributed November November 17-24,2014 AML annual conference November 15 2nd half property tax pmt due 1st Monday of December December 1, 2014 Gubernatorial Inauguration by December 15 Governor releases operating and capital budget December 31 Quarter end for severance tax and bed tax Page 16 of 68 FY2016 Budget Calendar AGENDA ITEM #2.c. ,: Kodiak Island Borough d ` �'2-41/4.1% � ,f` Office of the Borough Clerk .t 710 Mill Bay Road ', vp" rW1/47.0„,„"A': "�` Kodiak, Alaska 99615 l '"1 Phone (907) 486-9310 Fax (907) 486-9391 DATE: November 25, 2014 t MEMO TO: Mayor, Assembly,and Manager' FROM: Nova M.Javier,MMC RE: Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly The Mayor and Deputy Presiding Officer requested discussion on what"consensus" means to bring all members of the Assembly up to the same understanding of the term. I have provided you backup documentation in your packet. Historically, consensus of the Assembly was understood as an agreement of the majority of the Assembly. Robert's Rules of Order (RRO) does not delve into the definition of consensus. The word"consensus"can only be found in the introduction page of the book. I provided "consensus decision-making" information in the packet if the Assembly wishes to discuss this process. Yr Clarify definitions for the following: • Consensus of the Assembly • Majority of the Assembly D Other processes that you may want to review and discuss: • The need to differentiate ceremonial and position letters coming from the Mayor • Mayor obtaining authorization from the assembly per KIBC 2.20.040 o Is discussion at a work session as an agenda item sufficient? o Is bringing it up under Mayor's or Assembly members'comments sufficient? o Should it be an action by the Assembly resulting from a debate and vote with the prevailing majority forming the official position? Page 17 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly 0 `–°a _ _ ism x-m°� ._ "w '}' ":�*l ' s ` 5` •a ve.*w,'"'ag� r3 o O l/ an $ 1 iy N 1 14 IC '"p a 's..�R d.H+S 7 >a, a :1 7 Y''wY;` K t O)4%; + ora N s y •. Mer'�tw k z#.....*,/,..ti r*an�i y i>. � 4 z„ rc i. Nu - < c k t ,� 'ka �^ 1 FN` t.' ,n�,ytirye `4hr t 0 c� xu* <i ,*,; ra A k y u 7"b f S e y b o ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER Pe 0y � I INTRss000TWN 0 AC 4 This was not the contradiction that it may at first seem.Robert was ' S I surely aware of the eadyavlutionary development ofparliamentarypro. PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING PARLIAMENTARY LAW Y'-• (p R reduce in the English House of Lords rewriting in a mov<mewt from aa t"consensus:,to its original sense of unanimous agreemen "'ward a de- The odbook es of parliamentary law found in this bk will,on analysis, i s+ ' ,14 N e osion by maturity vote as we know it uxlay.This v oluuon came about be seen to be constructed upon a careful balance of the rights of persons ' CD g from a recognition that a requirement of un"'"'ity or near unanimity or subgroups within an n anization's or an assembl 's total membershi 3 3 can become a form of gunny in itself,In an assembly that tries to make That is, hoc when are h d nn a regard for he gh : p IT `g such a requirement the noms,a vanes of misguided feelings—reluctance + c ' cG to be seen as opposing the leadership,a notion that causing controversy PPu g 6 y olthc majority, } to will he frowned upon,fear of seeming an obstacle to unity—can easily . of the minority,nri C lead to decisions being taken with a pseudocossensus which in reality mbearalh•a strong minorip•—grmter than one third, t, fl • of individual mcmhcrs, x implies elements ofdefavlt ohwh satisfies no one,and for which no one • of absentees,and r' s really assumes respnnsibibq.Furthermore,what is apparently taken to { `a of all these together. f ' ¢+q" be the sense of the meeting may welt be Bade more+han a least common itf p denominator"of such generality as to contribute Bale to the solution of The means of protecting all of these rightsoti.':, in appropriate measure g the practical problem involved,thereby leaving such matters to officers forms much of the sobstanee of parliamentary law,and the need for r f" or staff or the meeting's organizers to work out according to their own this protection dictates the degree of development that the subject has a intentions Robert SVC,onthe other hand,that the evolution of majority I ,a undergone. ', vote in node"'with lucid and elanfjang debate—resulting in a decision i "� Parliamentary procedure enables the overall membership of an a representing the view of the deliberate majority—fat more clearly ferrets s wganizaucin—expressing its general will through the assembly of its 'a our and demonstrates the will of an assembly It is through the applies- members—both to establish and empower an effective leadershipas it tion of genuine persuasion and parliamentary technique that General ,,. rcIt wishes,and at the same tune to tragi exactly telt degree o(direct control { ` Robert was able to achia'c decisions in meetings he led which were so over its a ffars that it chooses rescue to itself. I free of divisiveness within the group. Ultimately,it is the majority raking parr in the assembly who decide k ` the general will,but only following upon the opportunity for a deliber 1 ro ative process of full and free discussion Only two thirds or more of diose i i� present and voting may deny a minonty or any member the right of such �f '� 4.' discussion. In this connection,there is an underlying assumption ofa rigbr that T •. 1 aimeven though it may not always be prudent or helpful for it to be {, -3Rpr Y exercised,Each individual or subgroup has the right to make the max- 4w. t n 0 • imam effort to have his,her,or its position declared the will of theF m assembly to the extent that can be tolerated in the nuereets of the entire los 3 2 bodypf n3 Yl tp Another important principle is that,as a protection against instabil- k - -, 1O1 (DI. it)'—arising,for example,from such factors as slight variations in anon Y dance—the requirements for changing a previous action are greater than t ' f� W .. -those for taking the action in the first place. y CO1 II II Y I. c -s- . N _. n C m S' 0 S 0_ C) 0 S co (D S rn c tn C rn oo O (I3 PAste PROVISIONS AND room Nn[INY.S 21 4. '�` f' ja ms4 CHAPTER rt a.y. D "� : rt Minimum Composition of a Deliberative Assembly / ,' i QUORUM OF MEMBERS. The minimum number of ; }t ri n " n. THE CONDUCT OF BUSINESS erau eeassemblyfor busirtRIAL he ress to besent Ate validlhee y transacted tings of a(is the 5 sr r rs `< INA DELIBERATIVE ASSEMBLY iquonou of the assembly.The requirement of a quorum is a e a, cprotection against totally unrepresentative action in the name � of the body by an unduly small number of persons. In both t ., . houses of Congress,the quorum is a majority of the mem- j a rr `< 444btrs,bythe United States Constitution, a¢ C" � 'r ' l� Such a quorum is 10 t ��, r ' (appropriate in legislative bodies but too large in most colon- . {" - � LI . 4tary societies.In an ordinary society,tlterclbre,a provision of e 'a • (die bylaws should specify the number of members that shall '' h •:r:•' � (constitute a quorum,which should approximate die largest t ' yP.-,l [umber that can be depended on to attend any meeting 15 l °'t .° 'v tr 1 •,except in very bad weather or other extremely unfavorable L w, „a • ` (condidons.In the absence of such a provision in a society or � '1..r..°14 '# - ' rusembly whose real membership can be accurately deter- :'/:'' 'ix 1 3 t §3.BASIC PROVISIONS AND PROCEDURES memo at any time chat is, in a body havtn(, an enrolled rl +a,/ :TS r membership composed only of persons who maintain their 20 a .jil The basic parliamentary concepts and practices are tutor: rrnmrs.as members us a prescnbed.trunner—'cfse quonus�ss!a y ( tr > s; connected in such a way'that a complete statement of th1 ' lort[Y, FitheYentire(Inem6etslup liylthe(eomm'onjparba-i 5 rules that relate to any one of them frequently involves refer,' ° tum'<I?.`^'•:In the meetings of a convention,unless the by: cote to several otherconcepts.This section contains an uaoah hvvs of the organization provide otherwise,the quorum is a explanation of a number of these topics,which are given�a7 'f majority of die delegates who have been registered at the con- 25 ° y 111,:*;.:‘, AA h a a^1 more detailed treatment later in this book. # vrnuon as in attendance,irrespective of whether some may (,_ In reading all that follows throughout this manual ilt -A ave departed.In a mass meeting,or in a regular or properly rr �Iled'meeon of an organization whose bylaws do not pre- i '--i.-'4`-'-7.1 'v s. fo should be borne in mind that—as in any treatment of anyf g S• + r sscnbe,a uorum and whose membershipis Ioosel• deter- S•, subject—a statement of a rule generally cannot to ludo alk q ) possible exceptions to the rule.Whenever a particular store- 2 (mmeds(as, for example, in many church congregations or 30 r men[appears to conflict with a more general statement else Idumni associations),there is no minimum number ofinem- i' r (IRS who must be present for the valid transaction of businessk; ” 1 n where in the book, therefore, the particular statement' ED • IS governs in the matter to which it states that it applies(see also, ° va`u it is usually expressed—the quorum consists of thou " c .s C) on f- p.589)- „, wt?,attend the meeting.(The rules relating to the quorum !a r" ry m CD r— ,,$,Zoe more fully stated in 40) 35cP) ') ,yet 2, TI n Co m 3 N AGENDA ITEM #2.c. 2.30.030 Types of meetings. D. Work Sessions. The assembly may meet informally in work sessions, at the call of the mayor, deputy presiding officer, or by three members of the assembly, to review forthcoming programs of the borough, receive progress reports on current programs or projects or receive other similar information from the manager; provided, that all discussions and conclusions thereon shall be informal. Work sessions are public and no formal action shall be taken by the assembly. 2.25.040 Representation of assembly position. A. The official position of the assembly is that taken as a result of debate and vote, with the prevailing majority forming the official position. B. Views and opinions of individual members of the assembly are not the official position of the assembly. C. The assembly may authorize a member of the assembly to serve as the official assembly spokesperson on a given issue. D. Before claiming to speak for the borough, borough assembly, and/or borough residents or announcing the position of the borough in any written or electronic communication, any assembly member must obtain authorization from the assembly. 2.20.040 Duties. A. The mayor shall act as ceremonial head of the borough. The mayor shall preside at all assembly meetings, and sign ordinances and other documents on the borough's behalf upon assembly authorization. The failure of the mayor to sign an ordinance or resolution does not invalidate them. B. Before claiming to speak for the borough, borough assembly, and/or borough residents or announcing the position of the borough in any written or electronic communication, the mayor must obtain authorization from the assembly or base such communication on a good faith belief that the mayor is speaking on behalf of the assembly. This subsection shall not be interpreted as restricting the mayor's right to state his or her personal opinion on any issue. C. Members of boards, committees, and commissions, except for members of the board of adjustment, members of the board of equalization, and elected service area board members, are appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the assembly in accordance with KIBC 2.100.030. Page 20 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Wikipedia:What is consensus?- Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page I of4 Wikipedia:What is consensus? From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia While this essay is not a Wikipedia policy or guideline itself, it is intended to supplement the WP:CONSENSUS page,to which editors should defer in case of inconsistency between that page and this one. Consensus is the community resolution when opposing parties set aside their differences and agree on a statement that is agreeable to all, even if only barely. Disputes on Wikipedia are settled by editing and discussion,not voting. Discussion should aim towards building a consensus.Consensus is a group discussion where everyone's opinions are heard and understood,and a solution is created that respects those opinions. Consensus is not what everyone agrees to, nor is it the preference of the majority. Consensus results in the best solution that the group can achieve at the time. Remember, the root of"consensus" is "consent".This means that even if parties disagree,there is still overall consent to move forward in order to settle the issue. This requires co- operation among editors with different interests and opinions. What consensus is not Not a majority vote See also: WP:NOTDEMOCRACV and WP:CANVASS Consensus is not a majority vote. Every opinion counts. Consensus accounts for dissent and addresses it, although it does not always accommodate it.An option preferred by 51% of people is generally not enough for consensus. An option that is narrowly preferred is almost never consensus. A vote may help to organize discussion around specific proposals, but this can sometimes breed conflict and division. One problem with a yes-or-no vote on a proposal is that there may be a consensus for a middle option. Even a"middle ground" option can be insufficient,as forcing people to choose between options may prevent new ideas from coming forward that would gain more support. Another problem with voting is that it might prevent a real discussion,as voters do not have to justify their position. This prevents people from evaluating the underlying reasons for a vote, and criticizing weak or inaccurate reasoning for a vote. It also prevents people from coming up with alternative ways to satisfy the voter's concern,with a less divisive course of action. The best way to determine consensus is to actually read and understand each person's arguments, even if they are divided on the surface. A consensus can be found by looking for common ground and synthesizing the best solution that the group can achieve at that time. Not unanimity See also: WP:CAME and WP:POINT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What is consensus%3F 11/24/2014 Page 21 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Wikipedia:What is consensus?- Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 2 of4 Consensus is not the same as unanimity. Every discussion should involve a good faith effort to hear and understand each other. But after people have had a chance to state their viewpoint, it may become necessary to ignore someone or afford them less weight in order to move forward with what the group feels is best. Sometimes a rough consensus is enough to move forward. Insisting on unanimity can allow a minority opinion to filibuster the process. If someone knows that the group cannot move forward without their consent,they may harden their position in order to get their way.This is considered unacceptable on Wikipedia as a form of gaming the system, as well as tendentious editing. There is even a three revert rule to limit efforts to stonewall the editing process. Editors should make a good faith effort to reach a consensus. That means that the dissenting party has to state how the current proposal fails to meet the interests of the wider group,rather than merely stating they will not accept it. But after a good faith discussion, sometimes the dissenting party must consent to move forward even if they disagree with the specific course of action. Not all or nothing If the group can identify areas of agreement,they should move forward where the group shares the same view. A complicated dispute might involve several issues, and some issues may be more controversial than others. But a disagreement on one issue should not prevent consensus on another issue. It is not helpful to expect complete and total agreement on every aspect of the dispute. Work with the issues where there is common ground,and revisit the lingering issues later if necessary. Not permanent See also: WP:CCC Consensus can change. Past decisions are open to challenge and are not binding,and changes are sometimes reasonable. When challenging an old consensus, it may help to explain what you think has changed in that time. Not the king of Wikipedia See also: 6i'P:CONEXCEPT Even where there is a consensus among a group of editors, their preferred outcome is not always acceptable on Wikipedia. In specific cases, other decisions have precedence. For example,consensus cannot override decisions by Jimbo Wales,the Board, or the Developers. Not a walled garden See also: WP:CONEXCEPT and WP:CONLIMITED A consensus by a small group of editors cannot override policies and guidelines that have been agreed to by a wider range of editors. For example,a few editors may consent to edit warring,but it does not override the project-wide consensus against edit warring;a small group of editors may wish to promote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_is consensus%3F 11/24/2014 Page 22 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Wikipedia:What is consensus? - Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 3 of4 an original theory or host personal information,but these activities are not permitted under Wikipedia policy. Editors who wish to change established policy should instead make efforts to update and modify policy reflecting project-wide consensus and actual practice. Not a contest See also: WP:FORUMSHOP and Wikipedia:Gaming the system It may be tempting to solicit opinions from Wikipedians or administrators who agree with your viewpoint in order to get your way. It may also be tempting to ignore the consensus found at one forum, and solicit a new discussion at another forum. This violates Wikipedia's behavioral policies and guidelines. Sometimes it is appropriate to try a different dispute resolution process after one has failed. But there is a difference between reasonable dispute resolution and gaming the system, and it is important that Wikipedians understand that difference. Not hypothetical While everyone on Wikipedia has the right to be heard,this does not mean that discussions remain open indefinitely until we hear from them. Nor does it mean that a consensus should be overridden by an appeal to "Wikipedians out there" who silently disagree. There is no way to determine whether or not this is true. Thus, if you believe that the current discussion does not represent real opinion, you should either prove that by referring to an existing discussion or suggest starting a new discussion with a wider audience. Using the consensus-building process How to achieve consensus • When in doubt,defer to the policies and guidelines. These reflect the consensus of a wide range of editors. • Make use of the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle: I. Be bold in your editing. 2. If you disagree with someone's changes, revert or modify it. 3. Rather than edit warring, begin a discussion. Be patient. Reach a compromise, and begin the cycle again. • In a discussion,begin by understanding the group's interests, and work towards a proposal that meets those collective interests. I. Freely exchange your interests and concerns. Also try to understand policies and guidelines that represent the interests of the Wikipedia community at large. 2. Offer a proposal that best meets everyone's interests and concerns,to the extent that they are reasonable. 3. Modify the proposal based on further feedback from the group. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What is.consensus%3F 11/24/2014 Page 23 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Wikipedia:What is consensus? - Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 4 of 4 4. If necessary,begin a new discussion and repeat the consensus building process with a wider range of editors. Consult Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for advice. How not to achieve consensus • Don't edit war. • Don't simply state your position over and over,without explaining your underlying concerns and interests. • Don't canvass in an inappropriate way other editors who agree with you. • Don't give up when people disagree on a specific proposal. • Don't take a hard line position to extract concessions from other editors.This often backfires,and undermines the reasonableness of your viewpoint. • Don't question the other party's motive. See also • Wikipedia:BOLD,revert, discuss cycle • Wikipedia:Don't revert due to "no consensus" • Wikipedia:IPs are human too—unregistered contributors in consensus processes Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:What is_consensus% 3 F&o ldid=600318463" Categories: Wikipedia supplemental essays i Wikipedia essays Wikipedia essays on consensus • This page was last modified on 19 March 2014 at 15:38. • Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License: additional terms may apply. By using this site,you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia© is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. http://en.Wikipedia.org)wiki/Wikipedia:What is consensus%3F 11/24/2014 Page 24 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page I of 13 Consensus decision-making From Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Consensus tierision-n,a king is a group due i,s ion-making process that seeks the consent of all participants.Corse n nus may be defined professionally as an acceptable resolution,one that can be suppuned,even if nor the"favourite"of each individual.Consensus is defined by Merriam-Webster as,first,general agreement,and second,group solidarity of belief or sentiment.It has its origin in the Latin word cdnsbnsus (agreement),which is from ainserniu meaning literally fee/ttogether)"It is used to describe both the decision and the process of reaching a decision.Consensus decision-making is thus concerned with the process of deliberating and finalizing a decision,and the social and political effects of using this process. Objectives As a decision-making process,consensus decision-making aims to be:121 • Agreement Seeking:A consensus decision making process attempts to help everyone get what they need R1 • Collaborative:Participants contribute to a shared proposal and shape it into a decision that meets the concerns of all group members as much as possible tit • Cooperative:Panicipants in an effective consensus process should strive to reach the best possible decision for the group and all of its members,rather than competing for personal preferences. • Egalitarian:All members of a consensus decision-raking body should be afforded,as hutch as possible,equal input into the process.All members have the opportunity to present,and amend proposals. • I nelusise.:As many stakeholders as possible should be involved in the consensus decision-shaking process. • Participatory:The consensus process should actively solicit the input and participation of all decision-make rs.1 ' Alternative to common decision-making practices Consensus decision-making is an alternative to commonly practised adversarial decision-staking processes.l'1 Roherr'r Ruler of Order,for instance, is a process used by many organizations.The goal of Roben's Rules is to structure the debate and passage of proposals that win approval through majority vote.This process does not errgil as ice the goal of full agreement.Critics of Robert's Rules believe that the process can involve adversarial debate and the formation of competing factious.These dynamics may harm group member relationships and undermine the ability ofa group to cooperatively implement a contentious decision. Consensus decision-making attempts to address the problems of both Robert's Rules of Order and top-dose models.Proponents claim that outcomes of the consensus process incl Ude:111161 • Better Decisions_Through including the input of all stakeholders the resulting proposals may better address all potential concerns. • Better Implementation:A process that includes and respects all parties,and generates as much agreement as possible sets the stage for greater cooperation in implementing the resulting decisions. • Better Group Relationships:A cooperative,collaborative group atmosphere can foster greater group cohesion and interpersonal connection. Historical examples Perhaps the oldest example of consensus decision-staking is the Iroquois Confederacy Grand Council,or Haudenosaunee,which has used consensus in decision-making using a 75%super majority to finalize decisions,Pll 9 potentially as early as t Id2.lnl Examples of consensus decision- making can likely be found among many indigenous peoples,such as the African San.'" Although the modem popularity of consensus decision-making in Western society dates from the wooers s liberation movement of the I970s 1°I and anti-nuclear movement1121 the origins of formal consensus can be traced significantly further back.113t The most notable of early Western consensus practitioners are the Religious Society of Friends,or Quakers,who adopted the technique as early as the 17th century.The Anabaptists,or Mennonites,too,have a history of using eonsenet¢decision-nakingll'I and some believe Anabaptists practiced consensus as early as the Manors'Synod of I52_7.1I'I Sante Christians trace consensus decision-making back to the Bible.The Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia references,in particular,Acts 151'sI as an example of consensus in the New Testament.The tack of legitimate consensus process in the unanimous conviction of Jesus by con Iris priests11e1 in an illegally held Sanhedrin coun(which had roles preventing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus decision-making 11/24/2014 Page 25 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 2 of 13 unanimous conviction in a hurried process)strongly in aueneed the views of pacifist Protestants,including the Anabaptists(Mennonites'Amish), Quakers and Shakers.In particular it influenced their distrust of expert-led courtrooms and to"be clear about process"and convene in a way that assures that"everyone must be heard"(2.](Imp://www.anabamistnetwork.comModc/166). The Oxford English Dictionary credits Mollie Unmet(1922-2012)with following quotation regarding consensus:''No single group has the right to ignore a consensus of thoughtful opinion'!19 Decision rules The level of agreement necessary to finalize a decision is known as a decision rule)'It sl Possible decision rules for consensus vary within the following mage: • Unanimous agreement • Unanimous consent(Sec agreement vs consent below) • Unanimuu,v agreement Minus one vote or two votes • Unanimous consent minus one vote or two cotes • Super majority thresholds(90%,80%,75%,two-thirds,and 60%are common). • Simple majority • Execui ive committee decides • Person-in-charge decides In groups that require unanimous agreement or consent(unanimity)to approve group decisions,if any participant objects,they can block consensus according to the guidelines described below.These groups use the term consensus to denote both the discussion process and the decision rule. Other groups use a consensus process to generate as much agreement as possible,but allow panic ipanls to finalize decisions with a decision rule that does not Inquire unanimity.In this case,someone who has a'block'or strong objection must live with the decision. Agreement ss.consent Giving consent does not necessarily mean that the proposal being considered is one's first choice.Croup members can vote their consent to a proposal because they choose to cooperate with the direction of the group,rather than insist on their personal preference.Sometimes the vote on a proposal is flamed,-Is this proposal something you can live will,'?"'This relaxed threshold fora yes vote can achieve fill consent.This full consent,however,does not mean than everyone is in full agreement.ent.Consent nest be'genuine and cannot be obtained by force,duress or fraud'11' Near-Unanimous Consensus Healthy consensus decision-making processes usually encourage and out dissent early,maximizing the dance of accommodating the views of all minorities.Since unanimity may be difficult to achieve,especially in large groups,or unanimity may be the result ol'coercion,fear,undue persuasive power or eloquence,inability to comprehend alternatives,or plain impatience with the process of debate,consensus decision-making bodies may use an alternative benchmark of consensus.These include the following: • Unanimity minus rune(or U-I),requires all delegates but one to support the decision.The individual dissenter cannot block the decision although he or she may be able to prolong debate(e.g.via a filibuster).The dissenter may be the ongoing monitor of the implications of the decision,and their opinion of the outcome of the decision may be solicited'at some future time.!letting markets in particular rely on the input of such Ione dissenters.A lone bettor against the odds profits when his or her prediction of the outcomes proves better than that of the majority.This disciplines the market's odds. • Unanimity minus tan(or U-2),does not permit two individual delegates to block a decision and tends to curtail debate with a Ione dissenter more quickly.Dissenting pairs can present altemale views of what is wrong with the decision under consideration.Pairs of delegates can be empowered to God comnnorl ground that enables them to convince a third,decision-blocking,decision-maker to join them. If the pair can't convince a third party to join them,typically within a set time,their arguments are deemed unconvincing. • unanimity minus three,(or U-3 I.and other such systems recognize the ability of four or more delegates to actively block a decision.U-3 and tosser degrees of unanimity are usually lumped in with.statistical measures of agreement,such as:809,meat plus one sigma,two-thirds, or majority levels of agreement.Such measures usually do not fit within the definition of consensus. Consensus blocking and other forms of dissent hUp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus__decision-making II/24/2014 Page 26 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 3 of 13 Groups that require unanimity allow individual participants the option of blocking a group decision,This provision motivates a group to make sure that all group members consent to any new proposal before it is adopted.Proper guidelines for the use of this option,however,are important.The ethics ofconsensus decision-making encourage participants to place the good of the whole group above their own individual preferences.When there is potential for a block to a group decision,both the group and dissenters in the group are encouraged to collaborate until agreement can be reached.Simply vetoing a decision is not considered a responsible use of consensus blocking.Solite common guidelines for the use of consensus blocking include PIR°f • Limiting the option to block consensus to issues that are fuudantental to the group's mission or potentially disastrous to the group. • Providing an option for those who do not support a proposal to"stand aside"rather than block. • Requiring a block from two or mom people to pun a proposal aside. • Requiring the blocking party to supply an alternative proposal or a process for generating one. • Limiling each person's option to block consensus to a handful oftimes in one's life. Dissent options When a participant does not support a proposal,he or she does not necessarily need to block it.When a call for consensus on a motion is made,a dissenting delegate has one of three options: • Declare reservations:Group members who are willing to let a motion pass but desire to register their concerns with the group may choose "declare reservations"If there are signi(leant reservations about a motion,the decision-making body may choose to modify or re-word the proposal 1:11 • Stand aside:A"stand aside"may be registered by a group member who has a"serious personal disagreement"with a proposal,but is willing to let the motion pass.Although stand asides do not halt a motion,it is often regarded as a strong"nay vole"and the concerns of group unemhers standing aside arc usually addressed by modifications to the proposal.Stand asides may also be registered by users who feel they are incapable of adequately understanding or panic pal ing in the proposal Rnl:v11241 • Block:Any group member may"block"a proposal.In moss models,a single block is sufficient to stop a proposal,although some measures of consensus may require more than one block(see previous section,Deerreost oder). Blocks are generally considered an extreme measure—only used when a member feels a proposal endangers the orgy n talion or its participants,or violates the mission of the organization(i.e.,a principled objection).In sortie consensus models,a group member opposing a proposal oust work with its proponents to find a solution that works for everyone,”l Consensus Process There are multiple stepwise models of how to make decisions by ennsensus.They vary in the amount of detail the steps describe.They also vary depending ten lion decisions are finalized The basic model involves • collaboratively generating a proposal, • identifying unsatisfied concerns,and then • modifying the proposal to generate as nmch agreement as possible. After a concerted attempt at generating full agreement,the group can then apply its final decision rule to determine if the existing level of agreement is sufficient to finalize a decision. Specific models Consensus decision-making with consensus blocking Groups that require unanimity corn ntonly use a core set of proved o es depicted in this flow chap F"tR'll°st Once an agenda for discussion has been set and,optionally,the ground rules for the meeting have been agreed upon,each item of the agenda is addressed in tum.Typically,each decision arising from and agenda item follows through a simple structure • Discussion of the item:The item is discussed wills the goal of identifying opinions and information on the topic at hand.l'he general direction of the group and potential proposals for action ai a often identified during the discussion. • Formation of a proposal:Based on the discussion a fumed decision proposal on Ilse issue is presented to the group_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus decision-making I 1/24/2014 Page 27 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 4 of 13 • Call for consensus:The facilitator of the decision-making body calls for consensus on the proposal.Each membet of the group usually must actively state their agreement with the /- o'rc1efps proposal,often by using a hand gesture or raising a colored card,to avoid the group interpreting s • silence m inaction as agreement.The number of blocks is counted to determine if this step's ^Or"•" • consent threshold is satisfied.If it is,dissenters are asked to collaborate ott a minority position or I ` -•' statement so that any unique m abated concerts with proceeding with the agreement or any cats. a vn�• hams can be addressed/min tad.this can even happen eeu rrf he consent 5/ti-co h I/L unant In, l i especially if many w Hers mond avide. WaleCiaa. N•cw • identification and addressing of concerns:If consensus is not achieved,each dissenter ra ..• sz.c presents his or her concerns on the proposal,potentially starting another round of discussion to nm s. •w..: I t .f 111 address or clarify the concern. 'i • • \lndiiealinn of the proposal:The proposal is amended,rephrased or idered in an attempt to i� ma* roti. address the concerns of the decision-makers.The process then returns to the call for consensus �L--- - -- —II makin Flowcghartprocessof basic consensus decision- and the cycle is repeated until a satisfactorydecision passes the consent threshold for the group. Quaker-hawed model Quaker-based consensust r'I is effective because it puts in place a simple,time-tested structure that moves a group towards unity.The Quaker model has been employed in a variety of secular settings.The process allows hearing individual voices svlule providing a mechanism for dealing with disagreementat°ilpallaxl The following aspects of the Quaker model can be effectively applied in any consensus decision-making process,and is an adaptation prepared by liar)ham College: • Multiple concerns and information are shared until the sense of the group is clear. • Discussion involves active listening and sharing information. • Nouns limit number of limes one asks to speak to ensure that each speaker is fully heard. • Ideas and solutions belong to the group:no navies are recorded. • Ideally,differences are resolved by discussion.The facilitator("clerk"or"convenor"in the Quaker model)identifies areas of agreement and names disagreements to push discussion deeper. • The facilitator articulates the sense of the discussion,asks if there are other concerts,and proposes a"minute"of the derision. • The group as a whole is responsible for the decision and the decision belongs to the group. • The fat ilitalon can discern if one who is not uniting with the decision is acting without concern for the group of in selfish interest. • Ideally,all dissenters'perspectives arc synthesized into the final outcome for a whole that is greater than the suis of its pat-B.1291 • Should sante dissenter's perspective not harmonize with the others,that dissenter may"stand aside"to allow the group to proceed,or may opt to"block"."Standing:side"implies a certain firm of silent consent.Some groups allow"blocking"by even x single individual to halt or postpone the entire process PCI Key components of Quaker-based consensus include u belief in a common humanity and the abiliy to decide together.The goal is"unity,not unanimity.")insuring that group members speak only once until others ace learn encourages a diversity of thought_The facilitator is understood as serving the group rather than acting as person-in.charge fat In the Quaker model,as with other eonsensts decision-making processes,by articulating the emerging cntseisus,members can be clear on the decision,and,as their views have been taken into account,are likely to support itVq Modern Large-Croup Quaker Processes EUM/E iC Friends conduct business in yearly meetings of perhaps 100 to iW participants.Over the last three centuries they have evolved'a number of practices peculiar to their aims.The following practices are traditional in both New York Yearly Meeting and in New England Yearly Meeting: • A typical yearly meeting session has a presiding clerk,one or two recording clerks and a reading clerk on stage.Pa nit ioning the souk load with exti a clerks loss els the stress level on the presiding clerk. • Business sessions start with a period of corporate silent worship. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making 11/24/2014 Page 28 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 5 of 13 • A period of silent worship,perhaps thirty seconds,is allotted by the presiding clerk after each person speaks.This slows the pace ol'the business meeting down and allows people to contemplate people's messages. • The use of wireless microphones helps to slow down the pace ofthe meeting.Volunteer microphone runners arc instructed to walk at a reasonably slow pace toward someone standing and waiting to be recognized. • The clerk often recognizes who speaks first,then second,then third. • A pastoral care team upholds the presiding clerk,or simply the clerk,in prayer. • Attempts are inade to take minor editing functions off of the floor of the'nesting Minutes are polished by a committee before presenting them on the meeting floor All suggested small corrections are incorporated either on the spot by the caucusing clerks,or at a special impromptu meeting after the current business session ends.Corrected minutes are then brought back onto the floor of the meeting at a later date. • Major,complex concerns result in a called threshing session,a meeting of people nmst concerned about the issue. • New England Yearly Meeting has discovered the benefits of anchor groups,groups of about ten participants who meet even'day during a multi-day yearly meeting.People sometimes need to vocalize their personal opinions on issues to a few other people,in part because people think aloud. Even'20 or 30 years,each yearly meeting's consensus practices ate re-codified in a new edition of that yearly meetings Faith and Practice book. CODM Model The Consensus-Oriented Decision-MakingHl model offers a detailed step-wise description of consensus process.It can be used with any type of decision ode.It outlines the process of how proposals can be collaboratively built with full participation of all stakeholders-This model lets groups be flexible enough to make decisions when they need to,while still following a format based on the primary values of consensus decision-making. The CODM steps include: I. Fronting the topic 2 Open Discussion 3. Identifying Underlying Concerns 4. Collaborative Proposal Building 5. Choosing a Direction 6. Synthesizing a Final Proposal 7. Closure Overlaps with deliberative methods Consensus decision-making models overlap significantly with deliberative methods,which are processes for structuring discussion that may or may not be a lead-in to a decision. Roles The consensus decision-staking process often has several roles designed to make the process run more effectively.Although the name and nature of these roles varies from group to group,the most common are the facilitator,a timekeeper,an entpath and a secretary or notes taker.Not all decision-making bodies use all of these roles,although the facilitator position is almost always tilled,and some groups use supplementary roles. such as a Devil's advocate or greeter.Some decision-making bodies opt to rotate these roles through the group members in order to build the experience and skills of the participants,and prevent any perceived concentration of power.ttAI The connnon,ashes in a consensus meeting are: • Facilitator:As the name implies,the role of the fate It tab r is to help make the process of reaching a consensus decision easier.Facilitators accept tespons i bit ity for moving through the agenda on time;ensuring the group adheres to the mutually agreed-upon mechanics of the consensus process,and,if necessary,suggesting alternate or additional discussion or decision-making techniques,such as go-arouuds,break- out groups Or vol e-playing.l3atl3'i Some consensus groups use two co-facilitators.Shared facilitation is often adopted to diffuse the perceived power of the facilitator and create a system whereby a co-facilitator can pass off facilitation duties if he or,she becomes more personally engaged in a debate 0.s' http://en.wildpedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decisicm-making 11/24/2014 Page 29 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 6 of 13 • Timekeeper:The purpose of the timekeeper is to ensure the decision-making body keeps to the schedule set in the agenda.Effective tint ekeepery use a variety of techniques to ensure the meeting runs on time including:giving frequent time updates,ample warning of short time,and keeping individual speakers from taking an excessive amount of time)25i • Empath or'\'ibe Watch':The ens path,or'vibe watch'as the position is sometimes called,is charged with inn n i toring the'emotional climate'of the meeting,taking note of the body language and other non-verbal etas of the participants.Defusing potential motional conflicts,Maintaining a climate flee of intimidation and being aware of potentially destructive power dynamics,such as sexism or ray isut Within the decision-making body,are the primary responsibilities of the empath psl • Note taker:The role of the notes taker or secretary is to document the decisions,discussionand action points of the decision-making body. Tools and methods Non-verbal techniques Kon-verbal means of expression can also reduce contention or keep issues from spreading out in time actoss an entire meeting.Various methods of agenda control exist,mostly relying on an explicit chairperson wi lh the pow et 10 interrupt off-topic or rambling discourse.This gels more difficult if there is no such chair and accordingly the attitude of the entire group must be assessed by each speaker.Verbal interruptions inevitably beeoane common,possibly in the form of grumbling,muttering,and eventually sharp words,if there is no effective means of cutting off persons making false Mental statements or rambling off topic. The Levi Band Signal Tecluriquc(LI1ST)employed by Otesha Id](Imp flotesha_caseontenrnseeting-facilitation)"allows meeting participants to register their intent to make two distinct kinds of eouvuents:those that are directly in response to someone else's comment('reactive comments') and those that are separate thoughts('unique comments')_Intent to register a reactive comment is signalled by a different hand signal than is intent to register a unique comment.We used an index finger for the former and a full hand for the latter_"This clears direct responses to a contentious continent faster—and makes if harder to insert it in a long speakers'list and count on a long delay between the utterance and the challenge to create the appearance of agreement. "Twinkling fingers",smut ally,is a nonverbal way of expressing strong agreement,similar to applause but without the interruption and possibly less intimidation of disagreement than applause or cheers can create[4](httpl/www.oteshaorg.uk/blog/I 107/randoin/twinkle4 winkle-little- fitigers-consensus-in-actimt.html).The Occupy movement has used these methods. Closely related are the human microphone methods,which make a large group less reliant on amplification or other technologies,and may require people to exactly repeat or"amplify"comments They may not agree with,so others can hear.A rnpl fees ore banned in many public places uithutti penniu,so this method allows a group to literally'occupy'm locution it instils,stherave not he able so meet in,Effectively,the verbal capacity of the people attending is marshalled to amplify one person as a time,with the understanding that any person in the crowd with anything to say would receive a similar courtesy. For more derail on these methods and their ewe sn Apecrfrc proce,.,.es see the section Hund Signals helots.. Functional Consensus Flowchart What is often wantinglinissing in consensus discussions is a means of efficiently moving through the process.A blueprint to powerfully oerconic the logistical and social challenges of consensus decisions,making it practical,efficient,and efleetire in today's world,is depicted in the consensus flowchan"Game of Consensus." Colored cards Some consensus decision-narking bodies use a system of colored cards to speed up and ease the consensus process.Most often,eaclt member is given a set of three colored cards:red,yellow and green.The cards can be raised during the process to indicate the member's input.Cards can be used during the discussion phase as well as during a call for consensus.The cards have different meanings depending on the phase in which they are used,t151 The meaning of the colors are: • Red:During discussion,a red card is used to indicate a point of process or a breach of the agreed upon procedures.Identifying offtopie discussions,speakers going over allowed time limits or other breaks in the process are uses for the red card.During a cal I for consensus,the red card indicates the member's opposition(usually a"priuci pled objection")to the proposal at hand.When a member,or members,use a red card,it becomes their responsibility to work with the proposing committee to conte up with a solution that works for everyone. • Yellow:In the discussion phase,the yellow card is used to iodic ate a ntem bee's ability to clarify a point being discussed or answer a question being posed.Yellow is used during a call for consensus to register a stand aside to the proposal or to focally state any reservations. • Green:A group member can use a green card during discussion to be added to the speakers list.During a call for consensus,the green card indicates consent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus decision-making 11/24/2014 Page 30 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 7 of 13 Some decision-making bodies use a modified version of the colored card system with additional colors,such as orange to indicate a non-blocking reservation stronger than a stand-aside.ral Hand signals Hand signals are ofien used by consensus decision-making bodies as a way for group members to nonverbally indicate their opinions or positions. They have been found useful in facilitating groups of 6 to 250 people-They are particularly useful when the group is nnilli-lingual 1+°I The nature and meaning of individual gestures varies from group to group.Nonetheless,there is a widely adopted core set of hand signals.These include.wigglutg of the fingers on both hands,a gesture someliines referred to as"twinkling",to indicate agreement;raising a fisi or crossing both forearms with hands in fists to indicate a block or strong disagreenteull and making a''T''shape with both hands,the"tine out"gesture,to call attention to a point of process or order.P71(111I'21 One common set of hand signals is called the"Fist-to-Five"or"Fist-of-Fise".In this method each member of the group can hold up a fist to indicate blocking consensus,one finger to suggest changes,two fingers to discuss minor issues,Once fingers to indicate willingness to lel issue pass without further discussion,four fingers to affinn the decision as a gond idea,and five fingers to volunteer to lake a lead in implementing the decision 1431 A similai set of hand signals are used by the Occupy Wall Street protesters in their group negotiations.° Another Co innton set of hand signals used is the"Thumbs"method,where Thumbs Up=agreement;Thumbs Sideways=have concerns but won't block consensus;and Thumbs Down=I don't agree and I wont accept this proposal,This method is also useful for"straw polls"to take a quick reading of the group's overall sentiment for the active proposal. A slightly more detailed variation on the thumbs proposal can be used to indicate a 5-point range(I)Thumb-up=strongly agree,(2)Palm-up= mostly agree,(3)Thumb Sideways="on the fence"or divided feelings,(4)Palm down=mostly disagree,and(3)Thumb down=strongly disaiercc. Other useful hand signs include: Clarifying Question-using your hand to form a"C"shape to indicate that you have a clavi lying question,often this hand sign means that a nelson is invited to ask their question before a vote is taken. Point of Information-pointing your inde,a finger upwards to indicate that you have some important factual info nna tion that relates to the discussion or decision at hand. Process Point-forming a triangle with your hands or hands and aims to indicate that you have an important concent with the meeting 01 decision- making process. Dotmocracy sheets Dotmocracy sheets are designed to complement a consensus deeis on making process by providing a simple — way to visibly document levels of agreement among participants on a large variety of deas.l'sl Participants'write down ideas on paper forms called Datmoorucy.Ir n and fill m one dot per sheet to m Id I U -a--- '117T-- record their opinion of each idea on a scale of"strong agreement", bagreemenl -neutral "disagreement-, It -strong disagreement or bconfusioild.I ort icipants sign each sheet they dot and min'odd brief comments. . I F� The result is a graph like visual representation of the group's collective opinions on each idea- Ii The Step-kr-Slep()nicest and Rules defined in the Doanocracy I Iandbookl+Bt reinforce consensus decision- - ," 4 making by promoting equal opportunity,open discussion,the dialling of mann proposals,the identification1 _ _t and the encouragement of ilea modification I C pitted norm y h t of concerns - Fall-back methods Sometimes some co limon form of voting such as First-past-the-post is used as a fall-buck method when consensus cannot be reached within a given time frame.l+71 However,if the potential outcome of the fall-hack method can be anticipated,then those who support that outcome have incentives to block consensus so that the fall-back method gets applied,Special fall-back methods have been developed that reduce this incentive. I+s1 Specific Applications of Consensus Japan Japanese companies no molly toe consensus decision-snaking,weaning that everyone in the company is consulted on each decision.A ringi-sho is a circulation document used to obtain agreement It must first be signed by the lowest level manager,and then upwards,and may need to be revised and the process slaved over.Nsf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus decission-making 11/24/2014 Page 31 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 8 of 13 TEFF rough consensus model In the Internet Engineering'ask Force(IETF),decisions are asst ued to be taken by rough costavrai-s uI'I'he IETF has studiously refrained from defining a mechanical method for verifying such consensus,apparently in the belief that any such codification leads to attempts to"game the system"Instead,a working group(WG)chair or BA(chair is supposed to articulate the"sense of the group." One tradition in support of rough consensus is the tradition of humming rather than(countable)hand-raising;this allows a group to quickly tell the difference between"one or two objectors'or a"sharply divided community",without making it easy to slip into"majority rule"GtI Much of the business of the IETF is carried out on mailing lists,where all parties can speak their view nn all limes_ Decision Making in Psychology and Counseling:The Social Constructivism Model In 200 Robert Rocco Cottone published a consensus-based model of professional decision-staking for counselors and psychologists.1i21 Based on social constructivist philosophy,the model operates as a consensus-building model.as the clinician addresses ethical conflicts Ihrough a process of negotiating to consensus.Conflicts are resolved by consensually agreed on art trators who are defined early in the negotiation process. BUM Collaborative Stakeholder Engagement The United States Bureau of Land Management's policy is to seek to use collaborative smkeltolder engagement as standard operating practice for natural resources projects,plans,and decision-making except under unusual conditions such as when constrained by law,regulation,or other mandates or when conventional processes are important for establishing new,or reaffirming existing,precedenl.ls'1 international Standardization The ISO process for adopting new standards is called consensus-based decision-m ak i'g,l'H In the ISO system consensus is defined as General agreement,claractenzed by the absence of sustained opposition to substantial issues by any inlporlanl part of the concerned interests and by a process that involves seeking to take into account the views of all parties concerned and to reconcile any conflicting argunteuhl'sI Whet decision-staking is subject to ballot by member bodies,a requirement for super-majority support generally appl ies.V°I During the ISO Standardization Process,if a Draft Intcmation al Standard does not receive 75%of she rote,it is not approved,returning to lower stages.[s71 Criticism Consensus blocking Critics of consensus blocking often observe that the option,while potentially effective for small groups of motivated or trained individuals with a sufficiently high degree of affinity,has a number of possible shortcomings,notably • Preservation of the Status nun:In decision-making bodies that use for it tat consensus,the ability of individuals or small minorities to block agreement gives an enormous advantage to anyone"-ho supports the existing state of affairs This can mean that a specific state of affairs can continue to exist in an organization long after n majority of members would like it to dtange.ls"1 The incentive to block can however be removed by using a special kind of voting process[181 • Susceptibility to widespread disagreement(hying the right to block proposals to all group menthers may result in the group becoming hostage to an inflexible minority or individual_When a popular proposal is blocked the group actually experiences widespread disagreement, the opposite of the consensus process's goal.Furthermore,"opposing such obstructive behavior can be]construed as an attack on freedom of speech and in turn[harden]resolve on the part of the individual to defend his or her position."Hi As a result,consensus decision-making has the potential to reward the least accommodating group members while punishing the most accommodating. Consensus is not Groupthink Consensus seeks to improve solidarity in the long run.Accordingly it should not be confused with unanimity in the immediate situation,which is often a symptom of groupthink.Studies of effective consensus process usually indicate a shunning of unanimity or"illusion of unanimity'"Irrl that does not hold Ip as a group conies under real world pressure(when dissent reappears).Cot'Doctorow,Ralph Nader and other proponents of http://en.wiki pedia.org/wiki/Consensusdecision-making 11/24/2014 Page 32 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 9 of 13 deliberative democracy or judicial-like methods view the explicit dissent as a symbol of strength.Lawrence Lesssig considers it a major strength of working projects like public inkis.151]Seitult,l"Jt Starhawktal and other practitioners of direct action focus on the hazards of apparent agreement followed by action in which croup splits become dangerously obvious. Lhatecer one thinks of the mens of seeking a unanimousagreement in a particularstuation,m general unanimous,or apparend unanimous, decisions have numerous drawbacks hey may he symptoms of a systemic bias a rigged process(where an agenda is not published in advance or changed when it becomes clear who is present to consent),fear o!speaking one's mind,a lack of creativity(to suggest alternatives)or even a lack of courage(to go further along Inc sante toad to a more extreme solution that would not achieve unanimous consent). Unanimity is achieved when the full group apparently consents to a decision.It has disadvantages insofar as further disagreement,improvements or better ideas then remain hidden,but effectively ends the debate moving it to an implementation phase.Sonic consider all unanimity a form of groupthink,and some experts[5](litip://www.tandfonline.com/doi/absi10.1080/01463379009369748)propose"coding systems_for detecting the illusion of unanimity symptom."In Consensus is not Unanimity,consensus practitioner and activist leader Starhawk wrote_ Many people drink ofconsensus to.simply an extended voting method rn which every one mug cog their totes the some way.Since ununimin' aphis kind onlp rarely occurs in grants with more that one member,groups that try to nae f/ti kind ofprocuu usually end up being either extremely frustrated or coercive.Either dere cions are never made(lending to the durtriwe oft/re group.its nuu¢-rnon into o Anciul group that doe,v not accomplish any tasks),Ot y are made coa'errly,or some group or individual don:inures the rest.Somerton,,a majority dominate N, soroetimc. 0 minority, contetinre.r ar inditddunl who employs "she block".But no mailer hon'it slate,it iA NO7'convensus.[6] (hop://www.starhaok org/aetivisot/trainer-resources/consensus-nu htnnl) Confusion between unanimity and conscruus,in other words,usually causes consensus decision-making to fail,and the group then either reverts to majority or supennaj ority rule or disbands. Most robust models of consensus exclude uniformly unanimous decisions and require at least documentation of minority concerns-Some state clearly that unanimity is not consensus but rather evidence of intimidation,lack of imagination,lack of courage,failure to include all voices,or deliberate exclusion of the contrary views. The most famous unanimous decision in the Western canon illustrates all those failures;New'Testament historian Elaine Pagels cites the Sanhedrini s tmani mous vote to convict Jesus of Nazareth.To a Jewish audience familiar with that court's requirement to set free any person unanimously convicted as not having a proper defense,Pagels proposes that the stop'is intended to signal the injustice of unanimous rush to agreement and Jesus'lack of a defender.UN She cites the shift away leant this view and toss:ods preference for visible unanimity as a factor in later "demoni anion"of Jews,pagans,heretics(notably Gnostics)and others who disagreed with orthodox views in later Christianity.Unanimity,in other words,became a priority where it had been an anathema. Some foetal models based on graph theory attempt to explore the implications of suppressed dissent and subsequent sabotage of the group as it takes action[7](Idn//ieeexplore.iece.org/xpl/login jspa,tp=&ammnber-5641917(tpununbei=5639466tturl=http';63A%2F% 2Fieeexplore.ieee org%2Fie15%2F5629466°s2P5641665%2F05041917.pdN%3FIp%3D",'o'6amumber%3D5641917%26pummmber%3D5629466) Extremely high-stakes decision-staking,such as judicial decisions of appeals courts,always require some such explicit documentation.Consent however is still observed that defies factional explanations.Neatly 40%of Supreme Court of IIS decisions,fur example,are unanimous,though often for widely varying reasons."Consensus in Supreme Court voting,particularly the extreme consensus of unanimity,has often puzzled Court observers who adhere to ideological accounts of judicial decision making."[8](http>/www_jstororg/discover/102307/2669346? aid=3739432&aid=2Raid=3737720&aid=4&sed=47698918057047).Historical evidence is mixed on whether particular Justices'views were suppressed in favour of public unity.[9](littp://onlinelibrary.w iley.com/doi/10.I I I I/j,1740-1461201I.01249.,v/tld l) Another ntell ad to achieve more agreement to satisfy a strict threshold a voting process under which all members of the group have a strategic incentive to agree rather than block t 'However,this makes it very difficult to tell the difference between those who support the decision and those who merely Iactically tolerate it for the incentive.Once they receive that incentive,they may undermine or refuse to implement the agreement in various and non-obvious ways.In general voting systems avoid allowing offering incentives(or"bribes")to change a heartfelt vote_ • Abilene paradox Consensus decision-making is susceptible to all foots of groupthink,the most dramatic being the Abilene paradox.In the Abilene paradox,a group can unanimously agree on a coupe of action that no individual member of the group desires because no one individual is willing to go against the perceived will of the decision-making body.lv+l • Time Consuming:Since consensus decision-making focuses on discussion and seeks the input of all participants,it can be a time- consuming process.This is a potential liability in situations where decisions must be made speedily,or where it is not possible to canvass opinions of all delegates in a reasonable time.Additionally,the time commitment required to engage in the consensus decision-making process ran sonnet rotes act as a barrier to participation for individuals unable or mwilling to make the commitment lel However,ever,once a decision has been reached it can be acted on more quickly than a decision handed down.American businessmen complained that in negotiations with a Japanese company,they had to discuss the idea with everrone even the janitor,yet once a decision was made the hap://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decision-making 11/24/2014 Page 33 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making-Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 10 of 13 Americans found the Japanese were able to act much quicker because everyone was on board,while the Americans had to struggle with internal oppositioniee6 Majority voting processes Proponents of consensus Jecisien-ntakiu''riear procedures that use majority rule as undesirable for several reasons.Majority voting is regarded as competitive,rather than cooperative,framing decision-making in a winllose dichotomy that ignores the possibility of compromise or other mutually beneficial sol utions.la'f Carlos Santiago Nino,on the other hand,has argued that majority rule leads to better deliberation practice than the alternatives,because it requires each member of the group to make arguments that appeal to at least half the partici pants.lost A.Lijphart reaches the same conclusion about majority nlle,rioting that majority'ode encourages condition-building jer1 Additionally,opponents of majority rule claim that it can lead to a'tyranny of the majority',a scenario in which a majority places its interests so far above those of an individual or minority group as to constitute active oppression.Some voting theorists,however,argue that minority rule may actually prevent tyranny of the majority,in part because it maximizes the potential for a ntinoritr to form a coalition that can overturn an unsatisfactory decision.toil Advocates of consensus would assert that a majority decision reduces the con n n i Intent of each individual decision-maker to the decision.Member of a minority position may feel less commitment to a majoriy decision,and even major.ip'voters who may have taken their positions along party or bloc lines may have a sense of reduced responsibility for the ultimate decision.The result of this reduced contmitneut,according to many consensus proponents,is potentially less willingness to defend or act upon the decision. See also • Consensus based assessment • Liberum veto • Consensus democracy • Major consensus narrative • Consensus government • Nonviolence • Consensus reality • Polder Model • Consensus theory oftnnh • Seattle process • Contrarian • Social representations • Copenhagen Consensus • Sociocracy • Libertarian socialism • Truth by consensus Notes 1. -"Consensus-Definition"(hop:/Arww.merdam- 8. ^.NI.Paul Kecster(2008)."League of lie aebstei cons/dictionary/consensus).Slerriam-Webster Diction:1o. Iroquois"(hap.//www.paulkeeslerbooks cornChap)lroquoishtmp- Retneved 2011-08-2s Nfolrmr5—Discovering dm tusks'ofdie Crpmis-North Country Press. ▪ •a"Consensus Decision-making How to use consensus ISBN 9781595310217. process'(MtpJ/wvvsr consensusdecisionntaking org/). 9. ^Brace It. ohansen(1995)."Dating the Iroquois Consensusdeci sienmaking.org.Retries cd 2011-08-29. Confederacy"(Imp/Anew ratical org/mwp_srorldskiNatians'Dating IC lit n. `a Hartnett,T.(2011.Consensus-Oriented Decision Making. Akaesasnc Notes.Retrieved 2007-01-17. Gabriela Island.BC,Canada:New Society Publishers. 10. ^"Consensus Tradition can Contribute to Conflict Resolution,Secretary- 4. ^Rob SandcOn."Comcnsus Basics.him edienn of successful Consensus General Says in Indigenous People's Day proems"Ontp:/Avow is ntg/nicaProccss'Consensusbasics hmnd Ingredients Nlessage"(hup:/hvasvun org/News/Press/doesr2002(sgsm 8332doe,htm) d'arthwenInsenunual Cognition nes Association guide to eoruennsr. (Press release).United Nations.2002.Retrieved 2007-01-17. NortImen Intentional Communities,association.Retrieved 2007-01-17. I I. ^Das id Graeber;Andre(Grnbacic(2004)."Anarchism,Os The 3 ^"Articles on Sleeting Facilitation,Consensus,Santa Cruz Revolutionary Movement Of The Twenty-first California"flutp://www groupfaeilitatiun.net/dnicles%^2oonoa Century"(hlgdswavw mat(orglcontenthhowarticle chn%tendD4796). 20Ntectiug",62Otracilitntion.haul).Grnnpfacilitation.net.Retrieved 2011- ZNet.Retrieved 2007-II1-17. 08--29. 12. ^Sanderson Beck(2004)."Anti-Nuclear 6. ^Tree&essen(2006),Consensus Decision Ntakusg Protests"lWtp://san,beckerg'GPJ29-AntiNnetearPtntest hod). lhttptreepsoup info/bpics'Conseaan_Decison_hlaking-CH.pdp Sanderson Beck Retrieved 2007-01-19- :I, 7. ^"How Does the Grand Council 13. ^i°Ethan lalitchell(200/i)."Participation in Unanimous Decisiou- U'ork:"(6ttp//sisitatinns huffnet net/Great_Lav_of Pcacet" Slaking:The New England Monthly Meetings of aniele=lam_does_rand council .cork) Great hoc ofl'eace.Ker roused Friends"(lute((www phillea canldisplay_anicle plrp"unicle_id=ldt 2007-01-17. Philica.Retrieved 2007-01-17. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus decision-making 11/2412014 Page 34 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page II of 13 14 ^Abe J.Dueek(1990).'Church Leader ship:A Historical 28. ^"'fhe Proces_s"0hnp:lseedsforchmrgeorbuk/rreeteonsenskproc). Perspective"(http://www.directionrourna l org/anicle1676)_Direction. C'u,00stoaj hoc,o/in.1 Joking Seeds for Change.2005-12-01.Retries ed Retries ed 2007-01-17_ 2007-01-17_ I5_ ^Ralph A Lebold(1989). 29. ^v°Quakci Foundations of Leadership(1999)..4 Companionsj "Consensus"(hupsYMeb.archive.org/web/200703❑LLW601dtttp,/hsww ga pna(erhroued(eonsensus noel Raherr}Roles or Order_ content-Imp/hsrwv.gamco org/encycl opediatcontentsC666751Ehtn9). (hug rens.earlham.edu967Econsense/rrrcomp.shod)Richmond, CdoJw/anabrmiindlennonile Fsrchgrcdto Online.Global Anabaptist Indiana:Earlham College_Retries cd on 2009-03-01_ Nlennonite Encyclopedia Online.Areh'sed from the original 30. ^Wood it,,,-,P.(1999)_"Building Consensus Among Multiple Parties: (http://www_gameo org/index asp? The Expeiicuce of the Grand Canyon Visibility-Transport content-Imp//wssc gamedorgrencyclopediateontents'C6667M11E hind) Commission."(httplhnwx.earlhamedut_consensetpeterw.slnml) on March 13,2007.Retrieved 2007-01-17. Kellogg-Firstborn Program in Quaker Foundations of Leadership. 16. ^°°Elaine Pagels(1996).The(login r fSomn.Hot ChrisOrnv Retrieved an 2009-03-01_ Demoni:ed,/ews,Pagans.am/Heretic., 31. ^Bern-,F.and NI.Snyder(1999)."Notes prepared for Round table: (Imp/Mocks gnogle.eabookstabmit/Tbe_orrgiit_of Salan,htoir Teaching Consensus-building in the id=vH8N73-b428(2).Random I louse.ISBN 0-679-73118-0.Rein:,ed 23 Classroom"(hop:/irsna_earlhamedu/-consensetpareaclrshmil)National April 2012_ Confeienec on Teaching Public Administration,Colorado Springs, 17. ^(Consensus ad idem:a protocol for development of consensus Colorado,Starch 1998.Renamed on 2009-03-01. statements.Can l Surg 2013;56(68365 32 ^v 6 Consensus Decision Making http:/h5over,zcoags.coot/publicalom✓_ttb550e2d/306550e2/6l (haps-/Meh.archiseorgtrxeb/201411126104336hpp.globaW-Ivs- I8. ^Kanee,S.(201 p_Facilitator's Guido to Participatory Decision-making. colossus opera-mi01.nerhs23-05- San Francisco,CA:lossey-Bass_ 082069E0°-I/treegroupinfo/65157x982iConsemvs_Deeison_Nlaking- 19. ^Narberg s.AVynnb,[199212 S.C.R.226(Supreme Court of Canada) CH.pdf)By Tree Group,Quaker group facilitators.Downloaded 26 Oct. 20. ^Christian,D.Creating a Life Together.Practical Tools to Grow 2014 Eroaillagcs and Intentional Communities.(2003).Gabriola Island,BC, 33. ^Quaker Foundations of Leadership 11999)."Our Dostinmivc Approach Canada New Society Publishers (http.//w sow.earlham edt0o7 Econsense/d i sifea shtrnl).Richmond. 21. ^Rlchad Bnmeau(2003)."If Agreement Cannot Be Indiana:Earthen)College,Retries ed on 2009-03-01. Reached"(bttpsd/web archive orghveb/20070927025409dntp9/ssvw_augm 34. ^Maine gov What is a Consensus Process. (DOC).ParfecgmmmOecieao,l/ak/ng nr a Cans-Culurra/Liurmn. (Imp://www.mainegookonsensioggpcin_conseosus_home.htm)State of Canada World Youth.p.37.Archived from the original Maine Rest Practices.Retrieved on.2009-03-01. (hop://wwvr_augosmna car dvrbmnea,ddocuntentsrP DNB 201 ntt2oan"i6 35. ^hupl/,rvscconsensusbook co itt!''Cstpsensos-Oriented Decision,- 201n eecultural°i20coatest doe)on September 27,2007.Retries cd 2007- Slaking:The CODNI Model for Facilitating Groups to AA'idesprend 01-17, Agreement" 22. ^Consensus Development Project(1998)."FRONTIER:A New 36 ^°°Sheila Kim igen(2004)."How'1 o Use a Consensus Process To Slake Definition"(htry:/hssvtmntiensorg/docnmenukonsensns.hot). Decisions"(Sup//sssv community ails.act/madingroom/amhis eftles/200c Frontier Education Center_Retrieved 2007-01-17. Coinnnmiry Arts Neneark.Retrieved 200/-01-17_ 23. ^Rachel Williams:Andrew McLeod(2008)."Consensus Decision- 37. ^' CO Waller."Guides:Steeling M1laking"(hap://www:nvvcde..coop/Rasnurees'CSS'CSS081nvo2Consensus_ Factlitation" brtp//wwsa_otesha.ear/hike+touabike+mm+resources/meed (PDF).Cooperative Sinner Series.Northwest Cooperative Des elopment The Oteslu Project Retrieved 2007-0I-17. Center.Retrieved 2012-12-09. 38. ^Bei it Lakes'(19754"sleeting Facilitation-The No-Magic 24. ^Dorcas,Ell}mari(2004)_"Amazing Graces'Guide to Consensus Nletlad'(hup://wsysreclaiming org/resourceskonsensus/blakey.hnnl). Process"(hupl/ssscwebofoz erg/consensus shon l)_Retrieved 2007-0I- Nemork Seniee Collaboration.Ren iered 2007-01-17. ❑' 39 ^"Color Cards"(hop.Iivssw.mosair-connnons orgtno de/Jd7.Mosaic 25 ^°°"The Consensus Decision Process in Commons.Retries ed 2007-01-17_ Callousing'(hup/Fsssv.cohonsing.cntconsensus.hnn).Canadian 40. ^[Ian IDvcreamy,"Non-verbal cunmmunication-a solution for complex Coltousing Network.Retries ed 2007-01-28. _roup settings",Zhaba facilitators collective,1999.1 26 °`C:l'.Lawrence Butler,Amy Rothstein."On Conflict and AI. ^Jan II,Erikk,Hester,Ralf,Pinda,Anissa and Pana."A Handbook for Consensus"(hnpl/wsysdc orglpnp/ocacr).Food Not Bombs Publishing Direct Democracy and the Consensus Decision kerne,ed 2011-10-31_ pumess"(hpp//wswwv:haba ca/uploads/media/Shared_Path.pdf)(PDF). 27- ^"What is Zhaha Facilitators Collective.Retrieved 2007-01-I n. Consensus,"(https,//web_archive.orgfiseb200610151053521hpp//www'th 42 ^"I land Signals"(httpJ/seedsforchangc.erg.uktfreelhatdsig pdt)(PDF) pago atticles&i1D=A).'Ibe Coin Place.2005.Archived from the Seeds fin Change.Kerrie]ed2007-01-I8. original(http:Utheanarelusdibapcorg/llbianle-t-butler-and-ams- 43 ^"Guide for Facilitators:Fist-to-FiveConsensus- rothstein-on-conflie I-and-consensus-a-handbook-on-formal-consensus- Building"Qntp_/hwssw'ft eechild org/Firestarter/Fist2Fise htnn).Retrieved decuionm)nn October 15,2006 Retrieved 2007-01-17. 2008-02-04_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_decis ion-making 1 1/24'2014 Page 35 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 12 of 13 44. ^Erin Alberty,"Occupy, SLC protesters vilify elite,camp with destitute" 611. ^'Welds Cline,Rebecca I(1990)_[❑ The Salt Lake Tribune,October 28,2011 (http;/hcwsv landfonline con✓doi/ahs/101080 108001463379009369748) (http;//vvsvw.shrib.eom/lydh/hens/52799991-75/pork-pioneer-homeless- Detecting groupthink:Slethods for observing the illision of unanimity. occupy hCommunicationrl csp) Communication Quarterly,Volume 38,Issue 2,1990. 45. ^httpl/donnoemcy.org Domrocracy favi litatoe`s resource website 6 I. ^Joseph Michael Reagle,Jr.;Lawrence Lessig(30 September 2010). 46. ^Imp-//dommemq-.ergPoandbook Good faith Collaboration;The Culture of lnkipedsa 47. ^Saint S,Lawson JR(1994)Rules fir reaching consensus:a modern (hnp9hosks google cots,/books7id=ntl7SITy8XsICSpg=PA100) MIT approach to decision making Pfeiffer,San Diego Press.p. 100.ISBN 978.0-262-01447--22.Retriesad 16 June 2011. 48. ^•°r Heiteig 1,Simmons LW(2010).Some Chance For Consensus 62. ^Schutt,R.(August 31,2010).Consensus Is Not Unanimity.Making (http//dx doi orgr10.1007(x00355-010-0517-y)Snc Choice li'el/35. Decisions Caopemlisely 49. ^"Ringi-Sho"(hop:/hsswjapanese I23.enmlri ngishe hunt). (hnpl/www.emalp jectorgrpapers/process,Consensus NbWnaninti ry ht Japanese 123 corn.Resdeved 2011-08-29. The Vernal Education Project Papers un Nonviolent Action and 50. "RFC 2418."IHTF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures" Cooperatis a Decision-,\laking. 5 I ""The Tao ofIETF:A Nos ice's Guide to the Internet Engineering Task 63. ^Starhawk Consensus A non unanins ipv Force"Ontp.(/ns.v.ietforgitao html).The Internet Societe 2006. pntpl/www.starhask ingluelisism trainer-resources/consemus-nu,henl) Relieved 2007-01-17. -a practitioner's interpretation of Schutt. 52. ^Coaone,R.R.(2001).'I he social cousuuetisism model of ethical 64. "Raney,Jerry B.(Summer 19741."Alm Abilene Pamdos and ether decision making."Journal of Counseling and Development,"vol.79,pp. Meditations on Nlanagement".Organizational Dinunogs 3(I)..63. 39-45. doi;10.1016 0090-2616(74)90005-9(Intry/(dx.doi erg/10.10163i2F0090- 53_ ^"Bureau of Land Nlanagement National Natural Resources Policy for 2616%2874°32990005-9) Collaborative Stakeholder Engagement and Appropriate Dispute 65 ^"Consensus Team Decision Resolution"(bap//uwsvblm go/pgdma/etemedial'h'bhnhce/1'l anning_an Ntakiny'(Itttp'/Fvsw.auafmiliaurawdasegaterndu/smmi-Idr- Bnreau of Land,\lanagement_2009 den/ps3ch l I.hltnl).Strategic Leadership and Decision II National 54. ^International Organization for Standardization(September 28,2000) Defense University.Retrieved 2007-01-17. Report of die ISO Secretary-General to the ISO General Assembly 66 ^Tontaliu,Barry;Knicks,[.like(2008)."Consensus or indn ideally (hop-//wwsv.iso org/isorlis eGrdgetfle?IlNodeld=2I553SI1Volld=2000). drixendecision-" The IYorldls Business Cultures and Hos.lo Unlock 55. ^"Reaching Them.13urogood Publishing,.p.109.ISBN 978-1-85418-369-9. Consenstss'(hnryl/sn ss iso org/sites/Consumers5 tandardsrenr 1-5- 67. "Friedrich DegeNmr di(2006)."Consensus:a colourful farewell to reaching-consensus bun).Retries ed December 2012. majority 56. ^"Directives and rule"(hupslhseb arch'se.org/web20061206132304/hap://nsw.oikomne Policies"(hupl/waysss iso orgrisorbomerstanderds_development/resnurees- managenteta/all-news-englishrdisplay-,single-engluh- for-technical-nwrk/isri_Iec_d ircelives_and_is_s,pplemmnelrtrn). nen t browse/4/ankle/1634(coasensus-a-colourful-fa-I.Iumt).World Revie'ee December 2012. Council et Churches.Arch's ed from the original 57. ^"A Bric1 11i5505y of ISO (httplhcsysv.a lkowrene org/eninewshwsss-marmgement'al l-ness- (httpd/www.sis.pin edu/-mbsel ass/standardsrman ineichsohistr.htm)', english/di spluy-single-engli sh-new sshrosyse/4/anicle/1634/consensus-a- Chapter 0 of"The 15(5 14000 Series of Standards",C.L Manincic. colourful-fa-Thrill])en 2006-12-06.Retrieved 2007-01-17. 58. "The Common Wheel Celleenise(2002)."Introduction to 68. ^McGann,Anthony J.The Logic of Democracy:Reconciling[quality. Consensus"(hnpsl/eels are hise.erg/sdeb/20060630154451(http//8eoeisies. Detiberntion,and Minority Protection_Arm Arbor:University of The Collet/ire Book on Collective Piocev Arabs eel from the original Slichigan Press.2006.ISBN 0-472-06949-7. (hop//worse geocitiesstuntcollecti.ehook/introducfomroconsesus hent) 69. ^i5 Anthony J.SlcGanm(2002)."The Tyranny of the Snpennajor sty; on 2006-06-30.Retrieved 2007-01-17. How ilajerily Rule Protects 59. "Alan McCluskey(1999)."Consensus building and verbal .Majorities"Qnnp.//repositories cdliborg/eg✓vies¢nntenregi? desperud's"(httpl/swwconnected.org/gosernTonsensushunl). anicle=1001 Sr context=esd)(PDF).Cones for the Study of Democracy_ Retries ed 2007-01-17. Retrieved 2008-06-09_ External links • "Consensus Decision Makin'(hap;//seedsforchange.org.uk/fiec/causeos)-Seeds for Change Wlklmcdia Commonshas 1 • Shared Palls,Shared Goal(help://ovww zhaba.ez/uploads/medi;/Shared Path.pol)-a short pamphlet S media related to Conse,,suo on consensus • "Comeuffus Dee is ion Making"(litlp//sreegro up in fo/topies/Consens us_IJee ison_Making-CH.pdt)-chapter by Tree Bressen from The Change Handbook.2007. • "Consensus Dec isiolrMaking;What,Wlp',How"(http./ltrecgroop info)opiesfeonsee sus-In-sharing-law_pdf)-section by Tree Bressen from Practicing Tan'in the.Sharing Economy by Orsi&Kassan,2012. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus decision-making 11/24/2014 Page 36 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #2.c. Consensus decision-making- Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia Page 13 of 13 • On Conll ict and Consensus.(http://www.consensus.net/pdf/consensus.pdfr—C.T.Lawrence Butler and Amy Rothstein(1987)Food Not Bombs Publishing.Also available in.Intl format(hops://n eb archive.org/web/20060823141818ihttp//www.w:ndreilagh org/consensus.pdf) at the Wayback Machine(archived August 23,2006) • "The Formal Consensus Website"(littp://www.consensus.netl)—Based on work by C.T.Lawrence Butler and Ann'Rothstein • "Papers on Cooperative Decision-Making"(Imp://www.velnalproject.orgipapers(Process.html)—Randy Schutt • "Consensus-Oriented Decision Making:The COON(Model lir Facilitating Groups to Widespread Agreement'(http://www.c onsens shook.coin()Corson us I look.com • "A Virtual Learning Center for People Interested in Making Dceisins by Consensus"(hup'.//www.consensusdeci sionmaking.org/)— ConsensusDccisionMaking.Org • "One Vote for Democracy"(http//wwwtdiemer.ca47ocs/Diemer-OneVoteforDemocracv.hlnQ—Ulti Diemer • "Some Materials on Consensus"(hup://www.earlhai edW—consense/ntats.htnt)—Quaker Foundations of Leadership,1999.Richmond, Indiana Iadlwm College. • Functional Consensus--Designs for efficient,intentional,and powerful decisions(http://www.functionalconsensus.org) • Consensus building and Open Space Technology in Modena(Italy),in order to promote intercultural dialogue (hup://blogconciliazione.com/2012/05/consensus-building/-The inteniesv with Marianella'clavi and the video about the o5'1',by\Vilna Mussuwo(hup//bluindace org/aboutms-production-wil rot-it assucco/)for Iimgad Project(Imp://www.etiginteiilwikii),added inside the Nog for Arbitration of Milano(habil(littp://www.camera-aibitrale.i U),a bl og specifically dedicated to Alternative.Dispute Resolution,2012 • Consensus-Based Decision-Making Processes(hup://www.edupdf.org/41.13/consensus-based-decision-making-processes()-The Consensus Council,Inc Retrieved tion"hap//et.w i kipedia.org/i index.php2t islesConsensus_decision-making&ol did=63-4045042_" Categories: Consensus I Anarchist theory I Community organizing I Decision theory I Delibenitive methods I Evaluation methods I Group processes I Nicetings I Working groups I Collaboration I Egalitarianism • This page was last modified on 16 November 2014 at 06:26. • Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAl ike License:additional terms may apply.Ity using this site,you agree to the Tenns of Use and Privacy Policy.Wikipedia'®is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation,Inc.,a non-profit organization. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensusdecision-making 11/24/2014 Page 37 of 68 Definition of Consensus Decision of the Assembly AGENDA ITEM #24. NON-PROFIT FUNDING OUTLINE (EXISTING ASSEMBLY PROCESS) • Base non-profit funding on 3% of general fund expenditure budget, utilizing bed tax revenue to fund tourism related organizations. • Combine all 501(c)3 &4 organizations into one group in the budget. • Maintain a nonprofit funding committee to review applications ahead of Assembly budget meetings. • Review applications based only on current information, not on prior granted amounts. • Require organizations to fall under the powers of the Borough. • Include nonprofit applications for"Goods and Services Contribution" in this process. Including those who are receiving waiver of fees for dumpsters. • Require either audited financial records or P&L and detailed balance sheet. • Fund only specific projects or items. Require work plan or justification and measurement of results of funding. • Require project budget as part of application. • Create a contingency fund as part of 3%total that can be allocated as needed during fiscal year. • If an organization would like to apply later in the year for any unused funds, they would submit the same application and the subcommittee would review and make recommendation to the Assembly for approval. • Application review process will include a rating structure to rank applicants in case of a funding shortfall. Rev. 11/14/2014 Page 38 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. SUBMITTED BY ASSEMBLY MEMBER SKINNER Nonprofit Funding Community nonprofits offer important services throughout the Borough and carry out programs that enhance the community and that the Borough itself is not in a position to provide. The Borough has finite resources to support nonprofit activities and the Assembly has a responsibility to establish clear and fair policies governing how nonprofit funding is allocated to ensure all nonprofits have equitable access to Borough resources. 1. Review Open Meetings Act Requirements. Review applicability of OMA to advisory committee meetings, including public notice requirements and open(to the public)deliberations 2. Expand Membership of Non-profit Subcommittee to Entire Assembly. The Assembly as a whole reviews and decides non-profit funding allocations each year 3. Establish Conflict of Interest Policy. Adopt policy to avoid actual and perceived conflicts of interest related to monetary awards to community nonprofits 4. Re-define Basis of Available Fund Calculation. Current process and previous discussion defines amount as 3%of General Fund,which would be approximately$175,000 rather than$400,000 5. Establish Funding Cap. Individual organizations receive no more than percent or dollars of total amount allocated in a given year 6. Contracts vs. Annual Application Process. Increase stability and predictability for grantee organizations and the Borough by establishing multi-year contracts 7. Allocate 100%of Funding at Beginning of Year. Eliminate contingency set-aside and allocate the total dollars available to requesting entities at the beginning of the year Page 39 of 68 Non Profit Discussion- Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. Introduced by: Manager Gifford Requested by: Assembly Drafted by: Finance Director Introduced: 07/05/2007 Adopted: 07/05/2007 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH RESOLUTION NO. FY2008-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ASSEMBLY APPROVING FISCAL YEAR 2008 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH NON-PROFIT FUNDING WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough is fortunate to enjoy the efforts of many benevolent non-profit organizations that provide services that enrich our lives; and WHEREAS, Kodiak area charitable non-profit organizations provide humanitarian services that many of our community members rely upon; and WHEREAS, these organizations provide expanded education, cultural, and health services that cannot be provided through the ordinary governmental budget; and WHEREAS, these organizations expand the services that can be provided, with limited funds, through the utilization of volunteers; and WHEREAS, the viability of these services is fundamental to the quality of life enjoyed in the community; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH that the Kodiak Island Borough fiscal year 2008 budget includes contributions to non-profit organizations in the amounts indicated on page two of this resolution. ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH THIS FIFTH DAY OF JULY, 2007 • KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH • • I .Asia ATTEST: ome M. Selby, Mayo Nova M. Javier, CMC, .orough Clerk Kodiak Island Borough, Alaska Resolution No. FY2008-01 Page 1 of 2 Page 40 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures z 0 r 3 F )8 NON-PROFIT FUNDING BUDGET DEli p FY08 NON- FY08 Application Grant FY05 FY06 FY07 PROFIT ASSEMBLY Received? 501(c)3 Financials Re ort nFUNDING FUNDING FUNDING included? P Organization REQUEST FUNDING due 4/09106 on fileRecd? w a 0 HEALTH&SOCIAL SERVICES w o- x 1 American Red Cross $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $7,000 $ 7,000 $ 7,000 4/5/2007 yes yes yes in 2 Brother Francis Shelter 34,584 37,895 $38,000 40,000 40,000 4/5/2007 yes no no D 3 Hope Community Resources 5,000. 5,000 $5,000 5,000 5,000 4/2/2007 yes. yes yes o m 4 Kodiak Area Transit System 9,996 10,000 $10,000 10,000 10,000 3/21/2007 yes yes yes O 5 Kodiak Baptist Mission-FOOD BANK 25,000 25,000 $25,000 31,000 27,000 4/9/2007 yes yes yes coc 6 SAFE HARBOR 22,110 21,060 $21,060 21,060 21,060 4/5/2007 yes yes yes co N = Providence Counselling Center r 0- D 7 Kodiak Island Health Care Foundation - 25,000 $10,000 30,000 15,000 4/11/2007 yes yes yes Ed Clinic - F m8 Kodiak Women's Resource&Crisis Cente 41,248 42,554 $46,000 50;764 50,764 4/6/2007 yes yes yes„ m 9 Salvation Army 9,060 9,060 $9,060 12,000 9,060 4/17/2007 yes yes yes a c 10 Senior Citizens of Kodiak 27,720 27,720 $28,000 28,000 28,000 3/21/2007 yes yes yes N 11 Special Olympics , 6,780 6,780 $7,500 11,000 7,500 4/23/2007 yes yes yes 12 Threshold Services 10,315 10,315 $10,315 10,315 10,315 4/10/2007 yes yes yds 13 Humane Society - - - 5,100 2,000 4/9/2007 yes yes n/a HEALTH&SOCIAL SERVICES SUBTOTAL $ 194,313 $ 222,884 $216,935 $ 261,239 $ 232,699 Budget $ 227,620 Available $ (5,079) EDUCATION,CULTURE&RECREATION 14 KANA WIC&1LP(FAMILY CENTER) $ 7,200 $ 12,000 $12,000 $ 12,000 $12,000 4/4/2007 yes yes yes • 15 KMXT Public Radio 7,500 7,500 $7,500 7,500 7,500 4/9/2007 yes yes yes 16 Kodiak Arts Council 12,000 15,000 $15,000 15,000 15,000 4/9/2007 yes no yes 17 Kodiak Football League 2,000 3,000 $3,000 3,000 3,000 4/19/2007 yes no yes 18 Kodiak Girl Scouts 1,000 1,000 $1,000 1,200 1,000 4/9/2007 yes yes yes 19 Kodiak Head Start 8,135 9,623 S9,000 9,000 9,000 4/5/2007 yes yes yes r 20 Kodiak Island Sportsman's Association 2,000 4,000 $4,000 4,000 4,000 4/9/2007 yes yes yes O 21 Kodiak Little League 3,000 3,000 $3,000 7,500 3,000 4/30/2007 yes no yes • 22 Kodiak Historical Society 4,500 4,500 $4,500 5,500 5,500 4/9/2007 yes yes yes D Baranof Museum o• 23 Kodiak Maritime Museum 2,000 2,000 $1,000 1,500 1,500 4/9/2007 yes yes yes -0m 24 Kodiak Teen Court - 3,600 $5,100 5,100 5,100 4/19/2007 yes pending pending n -00 N 25 Audubon Society - - $0 1,300 1,300 4/19/2007 no no Ws COco o ro m 26 Dig Afognak - - $0 566 566 5/8/2007 no yes n/a- Z a N o EDUCATION,CULTURE&RECREATION SU 49,335 65,223 $65,100 $73,166 $68,466 Q a Budget $87,000 n rn Available $18,534 co $5,079 Ill! Total Available $13,455 it -- N Q AGENDA ITEM #24. Introduced by: , Manager Gifford Requested by: Assembly Drafted by: Finance Director Amended: 07/1712008 Adopted: 07/17/2008 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH RESOLUTION NO. FY2009-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ASSEMBLY APPROVING FISCAL YEAR 2009 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH NON-PROFIT FUNDING WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough is fortunate to enjoy the efforts of many benevolent non-profit organizations that provide services that enrich our lives; and WHEREAS, Kodiak area charitable non-profit organizations provide humanitarian services that many of our community members rely upon; and WHEREAS, these organizations provide expanded education, cultural, and health services that cannot be provided through the ordinary governmental budget; and WHEREAS, these organizations expand the services that can be provided, with limited funds, through the utilization of volunteers; and WHEREAS, the viability of these services is fundamental to the quality of life enjoyed in the community; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH that the Kodiak Island Borough fiscal year 2009 budget includes contributions to non-profit organizations in the amounts indicated on the attached page of this resolution. ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH THIS SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY, 2008 • KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH \�� i/ ATTEST: J-".me M. Selby, tr- = Nova M. Javier, Mf , Borough Clerk Kodiak Island Borough,Alaska Resolution No. FY2009-01 Page 1 of Page 42 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures Z 0 o 13 0 O N N FY2009 NON-PROFIT FUNDING BUDGET DETAIL (ATTACHMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. FY2009-01) N FY09 Application Grant FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09gSSEMBLY Received? 501(c)3 Financials Repoli Organization FUNDING FUNDING FUNDING REQUEST FUNDING due 4/28/08 on file included? Recd? 0 HEALTH&SOCIAL SERVICES 1 American Red Cross $2,500 $7,000 $7,000 $7,000 $ 7,000. 4/9/2008 yes yes yes rp' 2 Brother Francis Shelter $37,895 $38,000 $40,000 $45,000 40,000. 4/8/2008 yes yes yes o' 3.Hope Community Resources ' .$5,000 $5,000., $5,000 $5,000 5,000.. 4/15/2008 yes' yes yes" 4 Kodiak Area Transit System ., -}'$10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $15,000 10,000'. 4/1/2008' . . yes'!.. yes -1 yes;' ca- 5 Kodiak Baptist Mission(Food Bank) $25,000 $25,000 $27,000 $31,000 27,000. 4/21/2008 yes yes yes 6 Providence Counseling Center(Safe Harbor) $21,060 $21,060 $21,060 $21,060 21,060 4/9/2008 yes yes yes 0 . 7 Kodiak Island Health Care!Foundation .- i 25,000 $10,000. $15,000 $30,000' 15,000 4/20/2008 0 (Clinic), $ _ -yes yes yes, al8!Kodiak Women's Resource&Crisis Center '.$42,554 $46;000 $50,764 $50,764 50,764 ' 4/21/2008 ,ayes yes yes",'! C 9 Salvation Army $9,060 $9,060 $9,060 left blank 9,060 4/7/2008 yes no yes tD 10 Senior Citizens of Kodiak $27,720 $28,000 $28,000 $28,000 28,000 4/1/2008 yes yes yes rn 11 S ecial Olympics `'' 6,780 $7,500` $7,500 $7 500 7,500 4/21/2008 P Yrnp" $ yes no yes• ? 12 Threshold Services '$10 ,315 $10,315' $10;315 $25000 ' 10,315 4/21/2008 „lyes •::yes yes 13 Humane Society $0 $0 $2,000 $6,382„' .2,000 4/18/2008 yes yes yes HEALTH&SOCIAL SERVICES SUBTOTAL $222,884 $216,935 $232,699 $271,706 $ .232,699 Budget ':$233,000 Available $ - 301 EDUCATION,CULTURE&RECREATION 141KANA(WIC/ILP/Family Center) ;', $12,000;, $12,000, $12,000 $12000 $ ",'.12,000 14/21/2008 yes yes .`yes"',". 15 Kodiak Public Broadcasting $7,500 : $7;500 $7,500 $20,000 7,500 4/21/2008 :yes' 1' yes ; ' !,yes 16 Kodiak Arts Council $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 15,000; 4/21/2008 yes yes yes 17-Kodiak Football,League $3;000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 3 000 4/28/2008 i,;yes :no Yes, 18 Kodiak Girl Scouts $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1;000 1,000 4/21/2008 ,''yes ';,yes yes 19 Kodiak Head Start $9,623 $9,000 $9,000 $9,000 9,000','. 4/21/2008 yes yes yes 20 Kodiak Island Sportsman's Association $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $3,000 4;000' 4/21/2008 yes yes yes 21 Kodiak Little League ,$3000 $3,000 $3000 - $7,500 3000; 4/21/2008' yes,,r. yes.. yes': 22 Kodiak Historical'Society(Baranof Museum) $4,500 $4,500 $5;500 $5;500 5,500 4/25/2008 yes!!.. yes" yes 23 Kodiak Maritime Museum $2,000 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 1,500 4/28/2008 yes yes yes 24 Kodiak Teen Court' $3,600 $5,100 $5,100 $5,1005,100 4/21/2008 yes yes yes 25 Audubon Society $0 $0 $1300 $1300 =1,300 4/21/2008 . no . .,:,'--.yes yes,. 26!Native Village of Afognak(Dig Afognak) $0 $566 $566 .566 4/28/2008 . no yes yes; n '0 EDUCATION,CULTURE&RECREATION SUBTOTAL $65,223 $65,100 $68,466 $84,966 $68,466 o to Budget $8'1,000 rn m a *requesting space rent in lieu of cash donation Available $12;534 O G.) o n Total Available $12,835 coco y Note:At the July 17,2008 meeting,the Assembly amended the motion to increase KISA's funding to$4,000.There was a typo on the application,request was for$4,000 not$3,0( m It tV S. AGENDA ITEM #2.d. 1 Introduced by: Manager Gifford 2 Requested by: Borough Assembly Drafted by: Finance Director 3 Introduced on: 07/162009 4 Adopted on: 07/162009 5 6 7 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 8 RESOLUTION NO. FY 2010-03 9 10 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 11 APPROVING FISCAL YEAR 2010 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH NON-PROFIT FUNDING 12 13 WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough is fortunate to enjoy the efforts of many benevolent non- 14 profit organizations that provide services that enrich our lives; and 15 16 WHEREAS, Kodiak area charitable non-profit organizations provide humanitarian services that 17 many of our community members rely upon; and 18 19 WHEREAS, these organizations provide expanded education, cultural, and health services that 20 cannot be provided through the ordinary governmental budget; and 21 22 WHEREAS, these organizations expand the services that can be provided, with limited funds, 23 through the utilization of volunteers; and 24 25 WHEREAS, the viability of these services is fundamental to the quality of life enjoyed in the 26 community. 27 28 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 29 BOROUGH that the Kodiak Island Borough fiscal year 2010 budget includes contributions to 30 non-profit organizations in the amounts indicated on the attached page of this resolution 31 contingent upon the provision of each organization of its 501C3 documentation. 32 33 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 34 THIS SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY 2009 35 36 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 37 38 39 40 41 Jerome M. Selby, Bo 42 ATTEST: 43 44 45 46 47 Nova M. Javier, MMC, Boro gh Clerk Kodiak Island Borough Resolution No. FY2010-03 Page 1 of 1 Page 44 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. FY2010 NON-PROFIT FUNDING BUDGET DETAIL FY09 FY10 FY10 Application FUNDING REQUEST ASSEMBLY Received? 501(c)3 Organization FUNDING due 4130108 on file HEALTH&SOCIAL SERVICES 1 American Red Cross $ 7,000 $ 7,000 $ 7,000 04/01/09 yes 2 Brother Francis Shelter 40,000 40,000 40,000 04/08/09 yes 3°Hope,Comriiunity Resources - :5,000 .5;000 , 5,000- •04/23/09 _yes .'4 Kodiak Area Transit System 10;000 15;000, 15,000 ._03/26109', yes 5 Kodiak Baptist Mission(Food Bank) 27,000 35,000 35,000 04/30/ 09 yes 6 Providence Counseling Center(Safe Harbor) 21,060 21,060 21,060 04/30/09 yes . 7FKodiakilsland Health:--Care Foundation(Clinic) 15,000 30;000 $ 25,000 04/13/09. yes .;8Kodiak Women's Resource 8 Crisis Center 50;764 50;751 -.. - i50 751 --.04/17/09.•. yes 9 Salvation Army 9,060 10,000 10,000 04/03/09 yes 10 Senior Citizens of Kodiak 28,000 35,000 35,000 03/26/09 yes 11`.Special Olympics • , 7;500 „ 7 500, .7;500' ;;04/29/09 -: ;yes `'12.Thresholdservices - 10315, 10;315 ...":10,315 `04/30/09 -ayes 13 Humane Society 2,000 5,000 S4,000 04/27/09 yes HEALTH&SOCIAL SERVICES SUBTOTAL $ 232,699 $ 271,626 $ 265,626 Budget $268,000 Available $2,374 EDUCATION,CULTURE&RECREATION <14`.KANA`(WIC/ILP/Family Center) :: - $ 12;000 $ '12-;000 .5..,. 12,000 '04/22/09 yes 15'Kodiak Public Broadcasting - . 7,500 .7300; 7500 -:;04/30/09' yes 16 Kodiak Arts Council 15,000 15,000 15,000 04/29/09 yes 17 Kodiak'Football league :'3,000-. 3,000 3 000, 04128/09 " . '-yes` 18 Kodiak Girl Scouts - 1,000 1,000 1 000 04/21/09 - yes 19 Kodiak Head Start 9,000 9,000 9,000 04/07/09 yes 20 Kodiak Island Sportsman's Association 4,000 5,100 5,100 04/30/09 yes '21"Kodiak LittlepLeague -.- .',, - ,3;000. 7;500; $5,000 ':04130/09.; ,,..,yes 24 Kodiak Teen Court' 5,100 5,100 5,100 03/31/09 yes 4:25 Audubon'Society_ --•1;300 1,300- 1;300' ;.-:04/01/09:-" no 27 Kodiak Island Bed&Breakfast Assoc - 5,500 - 04/30/09 no 28 Kodiak Rodeo&State Fair - 10.000 - 04/30/09 no EDUCATION,CULTURE&RECREATION SUBTOTAL $ 60,900 $ 82,000 $ 64,000 Budget $73,434 'requesting space rent in lieu of cash donation Available $9,434 Total Available $11,808 Page 45 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #24. 1 Introduced by: Borough Manager 2 Requested by. Borough Assembly 3 Drafted by: Finance Director Introduced on: 07/15/2010 4 Adopted on: 07/1512010 5 6 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 7 RESOLUTION NO. FY 2011-03 8 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ASSEMBLY APPROVING 10 FISCAL YEAR 2011 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH NON-PROFIT FUNDING 11 12 WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough is fortunate to enjoy the efforts of many benevolent 13 non-profit organizations that provide services that enrich our lives; and 14 15 WHEREAS, Kodiak Area charitable non-profit organizations provide humanitarian services 16 that many of our community members rely upon; and 17 18 WHEREAS, these organizations provide expanded education, cultural, and health services 19 that cannot be provided through the ordinary governmental budget; and 20 21 WHEREAS, these organizations expand the services that can be provided, with limited 22 funds, through the utilization of volunteers; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the viability of these services is fundamental to the quality of life enjoyed in the 25 community. 26 27 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 28 BOROUGH: 29 1. The Kodiak Island Borough fiscal year 2011 budget will be amended to budget 30 contributions to non-profit organizations in the amounts indicated on the 31 attached page of this resolution contingent upon each organization providing 32 their 501(c)(3) documentation. 33 2. The budget for the Kodiak Maritime Museum, in the Tourism Development 34 Fund, will be increased from $2,000 to $5,000. These funds will come from the 35 contingencies line item. 36 . 37 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 38 THIS FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY, 2010 39 40 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 41 42 43 44 2 Vegy 45 ATTEST: Jet-erne M. Selby, Borough Ma r 46 47 48 I 41 Mk la 49 Nov. . Javier, MMC, Borough Clerk 50 Kodiak Island Borough Resolution No. FY2011-03 Page 1 of 2 Page 46 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. FY2011 NON-PROFIT FUNDING BUDGET DETAIL FY10 FY11 FY11 Application FUNDING REQUEST ASSEMBLY Received? 501(c)3 Organization FUNDING due 4/30/10 on file ' HEALTH 8 SOCIAL SERVICES 1 American Red Cross $ 7,000 $ 7,000 $ 7.000 yes yes 2 Brother Francis Shelter 40,000 50.000 50000 yes yes 3 Hope"Cemmun ty Resources .1.;.5:0001::' -.:5000 - - =:5000 yes yes 4-Kotl ak Area Transit System _ �' 15000�� 15000 •'15:000 yes yes 5 Kodiak Baptist Mission(Food Bank) 35.00D 37,500 37,500 yes yes 6 Providence Counseling Center(Safe Harbor) 21,050 86.400 25,000 yes yes 7 Kgdiak Island Health:Care Foundation(Clinic) •25:006":: 730'060;, .20:000'. yes yes S KodiakWomens.Re`source&Cnsls,Center ''50751. -65489 _ :60,000.. yes yes 9 Salvation Army 10,000 10.000 10,000 yes yes 10 Senior Citizens of Kodiak 35,000 35,000 35,000 yes yes 11 Kodiak Area Special Olymics -77'50Q y. 7 500 -:-P00 yes yes 12 Threshold Se ces r. , 10 315 :10 315 r 10;315 yes yes 13 Humane Socioty 4,000 5.600 4.000 yes yes HEALTH 8 SOCIAL SERVICES SUBTOTAL $ 265,626 $ 364,204 $ 286,315 Budget $268,000 Available -$18,315 EDUCATION,CULTURE 8 RECREATION 14 KANA(W IC/ILP/Family{Ce ter) $ ' 12000 $xl'•17-586'..."-' ,12000.S,..'12.000. Yes yes 15 Kodiak Pubilc Broadcasting ii A ....ti500' ;'17500' ' 't7 500 yes yes .>_ rt .. 16 Kodiak Arts Council 15.600 15,000 15000 yes yes 17 Kodiak Old Scouts 1,000 1,000 1,000 yes yes 18 KodlikjHeatl Start 9 000 - ',)9 000 `'-9j000 yes yes 19 Kodiak Little League ;�� t'., _ 5 000, +�"`4 500 , .':'4':500 yes yes 20 Kodiak Teen Court' 5,100 5,100 5,100 yes yes 21 Audubon Society 1,300 1,300 1,300 yes yes 22Kodiak,So118'Waler Canservailonoisiriet :',,::,:25356.:. x2.820. yes EDUCATION,CULTURE 8 RECREATION SUBTOTAL $ 55,900 $ 80,756 $ 58,220 Budget $77,400 'requesting space lent in lieu of cash donation Available $19,180 :ATE REQUESTS 23 Kodiak Football League 4 r :'3:000 3,000`.`y'4' :4 r.-- 06/15/10 yes 24 Kodiak Island Sportsman Associalton _ :5;:100_` .9;230':--' - 7/2/2010 501(c)(4) 51 Kodiak Island Borough Resolution No. FY2011-03 Page 2 of 2 Page 47 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #24. • • 1 Introduced by: Borough Manager 2 Requested by: Borough Assembly 3 Drafted by: Finance Director Introduced on: 07/07/2011 4 Adopted on: 07/07/2011 5 6 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 7 RESOLUTION NO. FY 2012-03 a 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ASSEMBLY APPROVING 10 FISCAL YEAR 2012 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH NON-PROFIT FUNDING 11 12 WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough is fortunate to enjoy the efforts of many 13 benevolent non-profit organizations that provide services that enrich our lives; and 14 15 WHEREAS, Kodiak Area charitable non-profit organizations provide humanitarian services 16 that many of our community members rely upon; and 17 15 WHEREAS, these organizations provide expanded education, cultural, and health 19 services that cannot be provided through the ordinary governmental budget; and 20 21 WHEREAS, these organizations expand the services that can be provided, with limited 22 funds, through the utilization of volunteers; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the viability of these services is fundamental to the quality of life enjoyed in 25 the community. 26 27 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 28 BOROUGH: 29 1. The Kodiak Island Borough fiscal year 2012 budget will be amended to budget 30 contributions to non-profit organizations in the amounts indicated on the attached 31 page of this resolution contingent upon each organization providing their 501(c)(3), 32 and financial documentation. 33 34 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 35 THIS SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE, 2011 36 -- 37. - KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 38 40 41 ATTEST: - Jere e M. Selby, Borou 42 • n 44 iii \I r 'O\- iX'UA7 � 45 Nova M. Javier, NMC, Borough Clerk 46 1 47 Kodiak Island Borough Resolution No. FY2012-03 Page 1 of 2 Page 48 of 68 Non Profit Discussion -Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. FY2012 NON-PROFIT FUNDING BUDGET DETAIL FY11 FY12 FY12 ASSEMBLY Application 501(0)3 Actual Financials Grant Organization FUNDING REQUEST FUNDING Received? on file Status included? Report HEALTH&SOCIAL SERVICES 1 Ameriren Red Cross $ 7,000 $ 7,000 S 7,000 yes yes 50103 yes yes 2 BrotherFancs Shelter 50,030 50000 50,000 yes yes 50103 yes yes It 3Ulo omm nNyResoUc`es} v- a {.y- SPA •5 4-�av -v`'.0 5000 .r s'v` Mesa,,50103 lyes - jes? 4 Kodak Area 13-su System ":* ,t.�4.k,:v 000 L15,030T? 4z 1 OS 00 svesg r yes 1_:5010 ;ses_3 yens 5 Kodak Baptist Miss on(Food Bank) 37.500 38,300 37,500 yes yes 501c3 yes yes 6 Prondence Counseling Center(SafeHarbor) 25,000 25,000 25000 yes yes 501c3 yes yes F K7 cduk 61 re Heath i.sre Fardati0(Chmc) 1 20000 e- 007 ` "-t v„x r20000.f yese i yeje, ,501c3-t' Lyes 'ryes= 'rgeoaiakW e,ss RsrceB Coas Cai yfi0000a-As60033DD '- -60O000 a e' ress p ^ oe. _ - ^. t/ f501c3`ygyes}Fs , 9 Salvation Army 10,000 10,000 19,000 yes National yes yes 10 Seruv Citizens al Kodiak 35,000 35.000 35,000 yes yes 50103 yes yes fi111Ko Aiea Pzial Q'ym2cs`` ''£ ,-z Avg t_.7.7 c. '- . �'a yes • . c3 •"°,7-AcYessa tin v'''�-101 1030) j.3.2 ' ` '103C -r ye`' 4-4es 50103 '$ es {es' 12 eshu77;stbcesu.- �r.-s. ?, ..y `ft' _ ai.t'. ... kY._.,. .I'7 13 Kodak Island Search and.Rescue - 1,000 • yes ? yes yes 14 Humane Sxiely 4900 5,000 4,000 yes yes 50003 yes yez HEALTH&SOCIAL SERVICES SUBTOTAL $ 286,315 $ 289,100 $ 286,300 Budget $286,315 Available $15 EDUCATION,CULTURE&RECREATION f15 KnNAQP(ICITRI amtly eder)hss. d $-§12000°.+S 412.0000 $K r3+L 'm12000 w.es ,.yes° 5G1c3)'4 a :p a F16 Kodak Pub�i Broad sir' s sYvts- -107500 2.500 J y 500 -^ p t0lc3 ties es t...,,. ..._.: r0 s eit'1 :vac- .s3,,,L Yes xY. s�-,�Y 17 Kodak Arts Cana 15,000 15,000 15,000 yes yes 50103 yes yes IS Kodak Girl Scats 1,020 1.000 1,000 yes yes 50103 yes yes p19K i tie,dS> F > L ..-"x" l„ 414.• 901.40 ,,--0,031 S� r9000 �}es /a' pa01c3 yes ,_-yes $20 Kodiak U9leae ue ritss . r`r y d m..?,'x s ,d '7e _ 00 he env Cfn _�rXu45WSt_°-e5.:e�e�ti .;G'4�0�__ret��x /ess�501c3�-a,Ves„_ rV�:� 21 Kodiak Teen CoA` - 5,100 5.100 5,100 yes yes 501c3 yes yes 22 Audubon Society 1,303 1,300 1,300 yes yes 50103 yes yes E233 iak SoBWa?osnahoDas il:. 2820+ � h2685 tT-Egf ,, :".- 5ce g ey1 d mas' yBfa 4, e 24KdmasIeM,SP smati&sar r 3r MJ000 - y 1rA ,yKSo550104ro WA ' 25 Kodiak Public Library Association - 25,000 - yes yes 50103 yes WA 26 Kodak Footbal League - 3.003 - yes yes 501c3 yes N/A EDUCATION,CULTURE&RECREATION SUBTOTAL $ 58,220 $ 96,900 r$ 59,085 Budget $59,085 'requests-9 space rent in leu of cash donation Available $0 Tourism Development Dg Alogrru< .'iV "y : .a $',' 66 $ '1556i$'e3n`p2F7Arji!"' -AVV&atnCalpx Yes a._�ri., > to9 rens... 6'' -� i,, wyt's,' • ess' c3' tis yes, wsHstmcal'Sac:erysl��.. ��� �" ,,.:.p.. 65170 _ .,6E� 4'v -<�651'0 yes.§, yes�r50�c3 �+7�s�'-„tYes.., Kodak Maritime Museum 0•/0 5.0)3, _ _,;_sM17,410.1 yes yes 50103 yes yes EDUCATION.CULTURE&RECREATION SUBTOTAL $ 12,066 $ 12,066 $ 13,910 Budget 513,910 48 Available SO Kodiak Island Borough Resolution No. FY2012-03 Paoe 2 of 2 Page 49 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #24. Introduced by; Administrative Official Requested by: Borough Assembly 2 Drafted by: Finance Director 3 Introduced on: 07/05,/2012 4 Adopted on: 07/05/2012 5 6 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 7 RESOLUTION NO. FY2013-03 8 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ASSEMBLY APPROVING FISCAL 10 YEAR 2013 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH NON-PROFIT FUNDING 11 12 WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough is fortunate to enjoy the efforts of many benevolent 13 non-profit organizations that provide services that enrich our lives; and 14 15 WHEREAS, Kodiak Area charitable non-profit organizations provide humanitarian services 16 that many of our community members rely upon; and 17 18 WHEREAS, these organizations provide expanded education, cultural, and health services 19 that cannot be provided through the ordinary governmental budget; and 20 21 WHEREAS, these organizations expand the services that can be provided, with limited 22 funds, through the utilization of volunteers;and 23 24 WHEREAS, the viability of these services is fundamental to the quality of life enjoyed in the 25 community. 26 27 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 28 BOROUGH that the Kodiak Island Borough fiscal year 2013 budget will be amended to 29 budget contributions to non-profit organizations in the amounts indicated on the attached 30 page of this resolution contingent upon each organization providing their 501(c)(3), and 31 financial documentation. 32 33 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 34 THIS FIFTH DAY OF JULY, 2012 35 36 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 336 7 39 �1 t 40 ATTEST, Jefome M. Selby, Borough Ma)lor 41 42 RIj1A 43 44 Nova M. Javier,$vIMC, Borough Clerk 45 • 46 Kodiak Island Borough Resolution No. FY2013-03 Page 1 of 2 Page 50 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #24. FY2013 NON-PROFIT FUNDING BUDGET DETAIL FY12 FY13 FY13 ',Application Financials Grant FUNDING RECUEST ASSEIABLY' Received? (c)3 Actual tncbded! Rapid Organization FUNDINGP dun 413W72 en the Status Recd? HEALTIi&SOCIAL SERVICES .,ar62,Uu.,e'rl. 1 American Red Cross S 7,000 $ 7,102 S 17000` yes yes 501c3 yes yes 78rothe: rantisSheLsa, SO,C00 60,000 54500:. yes ',es 501c3 yes yes 3HoeenryRseou ces : 000 -5;003$ 0 600 ; /es c es 50 103 :in ye3,i1 3 K�w1Aez Turrell Svs cm` y •15000 r15003� IS O00 e� es „gas T501c3 ,'-_yeq ��yes� S Kodiai Baptist SARs pn(Foie Bari() � 32500 8].SW y k3] 00 yes yes 50103 yes yes Counseling Center(Sae harbor) 25 UW 25.000 7,;(1t2 i5 000 6 Prcede ce les yes EOic3 yes yes 7 Modar(san`d-Health Cam Fostoat or(Oinic)^' - 20UC0a x0'003 *200001",es R yes \ ryes 50103 yes yes ,} g Nod is ioI e ss 7aes Ice B Casio Gn er '60000 y60,000 ru.60000Fs x„±yez -ve50703 �yes'u a les 9 Sal.aece Army 10000 10.000 'i'ytO 000j yes no National 5E/yes yes 10 5 c.CAIUens a Kodmk 35,000 35,000 350004 yes yes 301e3 yes yes Il Kira AreeSpec al ehmaws' " : 7500 ],�Ov� 7500 ; /es yes W1c° Yes lyes ? ! Y 12 fl esha'd Se.vices . z 10300 10,300 1f KC t _ r _Yeses Ves 501„03 y-,�,po yesi 13Kod a<island Search and Rescue r* to op Na n/a Na 14 Humane Society 4459) 5.000 1 4i: yes yes 50103 yes yes HEALTH&SOCIAL SERVICES SUBTOTAL $ 286,100 $ 328,402 $ 290000'* Budgetj$286315' Available z,i;..S4r485j EDUCATION,CULTURE&RECREATION t7 2' 35 NAPA@IICJD-P/ amity Center)j prw,a z Sy 120^0 $ 7210001E A12000,3260�4 Y 50 3 T.y 't 9 yes I 6 Kedla4 P'b&eadcast ngx 4„N r 4. d 7 5060°10 000 7°y 1500-�+Yyes"'13 A yes_ SOleS ' yes ys 17 KodiakAnn Council 15 {4 15.00' 1, 150.0 yes yes Solc'4 res yes 38 Kallak Gld Scouts IVO 1,000 wtis,s;(1,020:1 yes yes Said yes ye-s 19Kotlme Heac Silt 900' 9:000 •9O00 ' ' yes yes 501cs ./es yes 20Ko <(J.Ie.Leayve 4567 "5.000 4504 S Y� ' Yes 50103 b .yes 21 BocleX Teen Cour• 51J' S'6G 5l0 ycs yes 501 r,3 gas ye 22 Audubm Sotioty 1,3,1 1/5001,.. m yes 50103 no yes 73Koaa4561a:lWaterco,ea elonc15tnd 685 $0-20 y 3685 ., yes 'no 50103 ryes r r/es,_ 24 KOEirt isle+r'GpoRsral Assoc' . O3Ci c s 4_ yes no 501x4 ..no no P. b Kodak Fub:ie Library Association - ?504`" i Y� yes 50103 yes re H6let26 Kodiak Football League 3,509 r 4 ih Yes yes 50 1[3 yes me EDUCATION,CULTURE b RECREATION SUBTOT $ 59,085 1 75,400 $SejlE 78S; Budget $59081 'requesting space reel in lieu or cash donation Available e.,.$13001 7ourism Development b Cg Aog�k xar v $; 5 ,',1,,000 $i a Yes d l Na 5 yes yes Hsancelsoblay BOJ `6.500 �t 0500 �w yes yes 501030 y=:yes y'es:ra KodiakMailime Museum 7,410 15,000 7.110:_- •yes les 50103 yes yes EDUCATION,CULTURE&REC.REATIO'!SUBTOT $ 13,910 S 22,500.$''713,0104 Budget "513910- Available "Becase of:he Increase in personal props d y eaemtion limit Et Afugnak has nn propeny taxes due. Kodiak Island Borough Resolution No. FY2013-03 Page 2 of 2 Page 51 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. Introduced by: Borough Manager 2 Requested by: Borough Assembly 3 Drafted by: Finance Director Introduced on: 08/010013 4 Adopted on: 08;012013 5 6 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH RESOLUTION NO. FY2014-08 8 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ASSEMBLY 10 APPROVING FISCAL YEAR 2014 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH NON- 11 PROFIT FUNDING 12 13 WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough is fortunate to enjoy the efforts of many 14 benevolent non-profit organizations that provide services that enrich our lives; and 15 16 WHEREAS, Kodiak Area charitable non-profit organizations provide humanitarian services 17 that many of our community members rely upon; and 18 19 WHEREAS, these organizations provide expanded education, cultural, and health 20 services that cannot be provided through the ordinary governmental budget; and 21 22 WHEREAS, these organizations expand the services that can be provided, with limited 23 funds, through the utilization of volunteers; and 24 25 WHEREAS, the viability of these services is fundamental to the quality of life enjoyed in 26 the community. 27 28 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 29 BOROUGH: 30 1. The Kodiak Island Borough contributions to non profits will be allocated per the 31 attached spreadsheet and will be paid contingent upon each non-profit organization 32 providing a copy of their 501(0)(3) or 501(c))(4), and financial documentation. 33 34 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 35 THIS FIRST DAY OF AUGUST, 2013 36 37 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 38 39 40 41 ATTEST: Jerq e M. Selby, Borough Ma yr_ 43 42 � 44 Ili"- 171 45 Nova M. Javier, MMC, Eorrough Clerk 46 47 Kodiak Island Borough, Alaska Resolution No. FY2014-08 Page 1 of 2 Page 52 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #24. FY2014 NON-PROFIT FUNDING BUDGET DETAIL FY14 ASSEMBLY Organization FUNDING 1tAlubiq,Museum'&'ArchaeologicaliRepository s 1 54-,;;;:i2=,5004 2�P'.mcrica n�Red Goss,-Z �`;r'„fWgr 3 Brother Francis Shelter 54.000 4 Historical Society 6.500 �5 Hofie`Communrty Resou rCeS - -. -' 5;200' E ry.urnane Society:: ” - - • 51000. 7 KANA (WIC/ILP/Family Center) 12.000 8 Kodiak Area Special Olympics 7,500 ]9Kodiak AreaiiTransitASySemirri 15j000 lOaKooiak Arts CoiinCo: • - 16;500 11 Kodiak Baptist Mission(Food Bank) 41.310 12 Kodiak Girl Scouts 1,000 13 Kodiak Head Start 9 000 14 Kodiak<Island,Heath CareiFoundation (Cllrnc)i ,' ' 25 000- 15 Kodiak Maritime Museum 9,126 16 Kodiak Public Broadcasting 10,000 17 Kodiak Soil &Water Conservation Distract !'. 6 9007. 18'Kodiak WomensReource'&`CnsisCenter 60;000 19 PrmAdence Counseling Center(Safe Harbor) 25,000 20 Salvation Army 10,000 21tSeriior Citizens,of Kodiak'.. .35000 Total Budget $ 372,832 In-Kind Requests 2g Kodiak Teen Cou_Rre.-- . 24 Dig'P;fognak Total Requested 'requesting space rent in lieu of cash donation '-requesting property tax amount in lieu of cash donation 48 • • Kodiak Island Borough.Alaska Resolution No. FY2014-08 Page 53 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. C Introduced by: Borough Manager 2 Requested by: Borough Assembly 3 Drafted by: Borough Clerk 4 Introduced on: 03/20/2014 5 Adopted on: 03/20/2014 6 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 7 RESOLUTION NO. FY2014-08A •8 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND Q 10 BOROUGH AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. FY2014-08 TO 11 APPROVE THE NON-PROFIT FUNDING REQUEST FOR THE 12 HOSPICE OF KODIAK 13 14 WHEREAS, the Hospice and Palliative Care of Kodiak, Inc. d.b.a. Hospice of Kodiak 15 submitted its application for non-profit funding; and 16 17 WHEREAS, the subcommittee reviewed the application and recommended non-profit funding 18 of$10,000 to the Hospice of Kodiak; and 19 20 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 21 BOROUGH that Resolution No. FY2014-08 is amended to include funding for the Hospice of 22 Kodiak in the amount of$10,000. 23 24 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH - 25 THIS TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH, 2014 26 27 KODI)K ISLAND :2-QUG. 28 / / 29 1, 30 1 ' 11 �. 31 / -rrol FrieMeibrough Mayor 32 • 33 ATTEST: 34 36 . - 36 / 37 ova M. Javier, MMC :orough Clerk 0 1 1 Q Kodiak Island Borough,Alaska Resolution No. FY2014-08A Page 1 of 1 Page 54 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. 1 Introduced by. NP Subcommittee 2 Requested by NP Subcommittee 3 Drafted by: Borough Clerk 4 Introduced on: 05/1512014 5 Adopted on: 05/15/2014 6 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 7 RESOLUTION NO. FY2014-08B 8 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 10 BOROUGH AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. FY2014-08 TO 11 APPROVE THE SUPPLEMENTAL NON-PROFIT FUNDING 12 REQUESTS FOR THE GIRL SCOUTS OF KODIAK AND 13 PROVIDENCE KODIAK ISLAND COUNSELLING CENTER 14 15 WHEREAS, there is currently$18,594 left in the FY2014 Non Profit Funding account; and 16 17 WHEREAS, in August 2013, the Girl Scouts of Kodiak was originally funded $1,000 and on 18 April 29,2014,they submitted a supplemental funding request of$1,200;and 19 20 WHEREAS, in August 2013, the Providence Kodiak Island Counselling Center was 21 originally funded $25,000 and on April 25, 2014, they submitted a supplemental funding 22 request of$20,000; and 23 24 WHEREAS, the subcommittee reviewed the applications and recommended supplemental 25 funding in the amount of$1,200 to the Girl Scouts of Kodiak and supplemental funding in the 26 amount of$17,394 to the Providence Kodiak Island Counselling Center. 27 28 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 29 BOROUGH that Resolution No. FY2014-08 is amended to include funding for the Girl Scouts 30 of Kodiak and Providence Kodiak Island Counselling Center. 31 32 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 33 THIS FIFTEENTH DAY OF MAY, 2014 34 35 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 36 • 37 38 39 Af 40 4brrol Friend,:orough Mayor 41 42 ATTEST: 43 44 45 46 47 Nova M. Javier, MMC, Borough Clerk Kodiak Island Borough,Alaska Resolution No. FY2014-088 Page 1 of 1 Page 55 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. 1 Introduced by: Borough Manager 2 Requested by: Borough Assembly 3 Drafted by: Finance Director Introduced on: 06/1912014 4 Adopted on: 06/1912014 5 6 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 7 RESOLUTION NO. FY2014-32 8 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ASSEMBLY 10 APPROVING FISCAL YEAR 2015 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH NON- 11 PROFIT FUNDING 12 13 WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough is fortunate to enjoy the efforts of many 14 benevolent non-profit organizations that provide services that enrich our lives; and 15 16 WHEREAS, Kodiak Area charitable non-profit organizations provide humanitarian services 17 that many of our community members rely upon; and 18 19 WHEREAS, these organizations provide expanded education, cultural, and health 20 services that cannot be provided through the ordinary governmental budget; and 21 22 WHEREAS, these organizations expand the services that can be provided, with limited 23 funds,through the utilization of volunteers;and 24 25 WHEREAS, the viability of these services is fundamental to the quality of life enjoyed in 26 the community. 27 28 WHEREAS, the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly appropriated a total of $409,500 for 29 FY2015 and the initial funding to the Non-Profits listed below is $398,992 which leaves 30 $10,508 for contingency funding. 31 32 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 33 BOROUGH that the Kodiak Island Borough contributions to non profits will be allocated per 34 the attached spreadsheet. 35 36 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 37 THIS NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE, 2014 38 39 KODIAK ISLANBOROUGH 40 41 42 /IJ/ .i.._ 43 ATTEST: Errol Frien orough Mayor 44 V 45161 46 47 Nova M. Javier, MM , Borough Clerk Kodiak Island Borough,Alaska Resolution No. FY2014-32 Page 1 oft Page 56 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. FY2015 NONPROFIT FUNDING Brother Francis Shelter $ 70,000 Hope Community Resources 5,500 Hospice and Palliative Care of Kodiak 20,000 Island Trails Network 9,586 Kodiak Arts Council 16,500 — Kodiak Community Health Center 20,000 --- Kodiak Island Food Bank 45,120 Kodiak Soil and Water Conservation District 7,300 Kodiak Womens Resource and Crisis Center 60,000 Marian Center Inc. 5,000 Providence Kodiak Island Counseling Center 25,000 Senior Citizens of Kodiak 45,000 Kodiak Historical Society 9,945 Kodiak Area Transit System 25,000 Alutiiq Heritage Foundation 19,041 Kodiak Area Native Association 6,000 Kodiak Public Broadcasting Corporation 10,000 TOTAL $ 398,992 48 Kodiak Island Borough.Alaska Resolution No. FY2014-32 Page 2 of 2 `" Page 57 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. 1 Introduced by: Borough Manager 2 Requested by: Borough Assembly 3 Drafted by: Borough Cleric Introduced on: 11/06/2014 4 Adopted on: 11/062014 S 6 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 7 RESOLUTION NO. FY2014-32A 8 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH ASSEMBLY 10 AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. FY2014-32 TO APPROVE THE 11 NON-PROFIT FUNDING CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE KODIAK TEEN 12 COURT, AMERICAN RED CROSS, AND HUMANE SOCIETY OF 13 KODIAK 14 15 WHEREAS, the Kodiak Teen Court has requested the Borough to donate office space 16 for their program in lieu of a monetary contribution. This service would be paid from the 17 Building and Grounds account directly; and 18 19 WHEREAS, in FY2014 the Borough donated $7,101 to the American Red Cross. The 20 American Red Cross has again requested a contribution of$7,101 for FY2015; and 21 22 WHEREAS, the Humane Society of Kodiak has requested a contribution of up to $5,000 23 from the General Fund to pay the Solid Waste Fund for the incineration of up to 1,667 24 pounds of animal waste; and 25 26 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND 27 BOROUGH that Resolution No. FY2014-32 is amended to include contributions of Non 28 Profit Funding for the Kodiak Teen Court, American Red Cross, and Humane Society of 29 Kodiak. 30 31 ADOPTED BY THE ASSEMBLY OF THE KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 32 THIS SIXTH OF NOVEMBER, 2014 33 KODIAK ISLAND B•ROUGH 34 1 35 36 37 ATTEST: .$irrol Friend,'orough Mayor 38 I!/ 39 ` I . 40 Al) I :rad 41 ova M. Javier, MMC, rough Clerk Kodiak Island Borough,Alaska Resolution No.FY2014-32A Page 1 of 1 Page 58 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures Z 0 -0 0 O N O C .. _ .._..v s __ ..�.. .... ..........�.._.... �.._...._......_ ......,-•-__...ter--v..._..v�- ».._r..n.......__ _....._. _._--,. 0 NON PROFIT INFORMATIONAL SPREADSHEET ' - • ? 0 Hoard IRS Mission plan,strat planar or Latest financial grant r Members Letter Statement deur.plan attached? Reviewed statements report o NON PROFIT Attached? Attach Attached? Pls.specify. Financials attached? included 2015 REQUE314 FUNDIN General Fund 1 Autiiq Heritage Foundation Yes Yes Yes Strategic Plan 2014 Yes 2012 Yes $ 24,348 $ 2,500 Di 2 Brother Francis Shelter Yes Yes Yes rat Business Plan 2012- n/a 2013 Yes 70,000 54,000 D a 3 Hope Community Resources Yes Yes Yes at Plan 07/2012-06/20 Yes 2012&2013 Yes 5,500 5,200 4 Hospice and Palliative Care of Kodiak Yes Yes Yes trategic Plan 2013-201 n/a 2012 Yes 20,000 10,000 0 5 Humane Society of Kodiak Yes Yes Yes Strategic Plan 2014 n/a 2013 FY 2013 6,000 5,000 a 6 Island Trails Network Yes Yes Yes trategic Plan 2008-201 n/a 2013 n/a 9,586 - m 7 Kodiak Area Native Association Yes Yes Yes trategic Plan 2011-201 Yes 2013 Yes 12,000 12,000 co 8 Kodiak Area Transit System Yes Yes (Sr Citizens) trategic Plan 2011-201 Yes 2012&2013 Yes 25,000 15,000 9 Kodiak Arts Council Yes _ Yes Yes trategic Plan 2012-202 n/a 2013 Yes 16,500 16,500 10 Kodiak Community Health Center Yes Yes Yes 2014 Strategic Plan Yes 2011&2012 Yes 20,000 25,000 11 Kodiak Area Special Olympics No _ Yes No _ No n/a 2013 Yes 7,500 7,500 12 Kodiak Island Food Bank Yes Yes Yes Business Plan Yes 2013 Yes 45,120 41,310 13 American Red Cross Yes Yes Yes No Yes 2013 Yes 7,101 7,101 14 Kodiak Public Broadcasting Corporatior Yes Yes Yes trategic Plan 2012-201 Yes 2012,2013&2014 Yes _ 15,000 10,000 15 Kodiak Soil&Water Conservation Distr Yes _Yes Yes Work Plan 2014 No 2014 Yes 7,300 6,900 16 Kodiak Women's Resource and Crisis C Yes Yes Yes 5-Year plan Yes 2012&2013 Yes _ 60,000 60,000 17 Marian Center Inc Yes Yes Yes FY14 Annual Plan No 2013 n/a 5,000 - 18 Providence Kodiak Island Counseling Ce Yes Yes Yes Action Plan FY 2015 Yes 2011&2012 Yes 25,000 25,000 19 Kodiak Head Start Yes _Yes Yes _ 2013 Annual Report No n/a Yes 9,000 9,000 20 Salvation Army of Kodiak Yes _ Yes Yes No Yes 2013&2013 Yes 10,000 10,000 21 Senior Citizens of Kodiak Yes Yes Yes trategic Plan 2011-201 Yes 2012&2013 Yes 45,000 35,000 22 Threshold Services,Inc. Yes Yes Yes No n/a 2013 Yes 10,300 9,195 23 Kodiak Girl Scouts Yes Yes Yes trategy,Priorities,Plan Yes 2012&2013 FY 2013 - 1,000 - - - . .$.455,255 $367,206 24 Kodiak Teen Court Yes Yes Yes No n/a 2013 Yes 13 ' Tourism Development Fund m 11 Kodiak Historical Society Yes Yes Ves trategic Plan 2010-201 Yes 2012&2013 Ves 9,945 6,500 n c^ 13 Kodiak Maritime Museum Yes Yes Yes trategic Plan 2013-201 n/a 2014 Budget Yes 10,391 9,126 m C co m ri F. 4 N C AGENDA ITEM #2.d. �w3y 2014-15 KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH • APPLICATION FOR NON-PROFIT CORPORATION FUNDING •124 ` it; Application due to Finance Director by: April 25th, 2014 Please type all responses ORGANIZATION OVERVIEW • Organization Name: Physical Address: Mailing Address: Telephone: Fax: Email: Website: Federal Employer Tax ID Number: Contact Person: Is Organization a 501?Yes❑ No❑ I Specify Type: If yes, please provide a letter from the IRS signifying the organization's official non-profit tax exemption status. SERVICES Please provide a brief description of the organization's current programs in priority: The Kodiak Island Borough does not fund religious programs. Are the funds being requested going to be used for faith based services?Yes❑ No ❑ The Kodiak Island Borough can only fund those services, programs, or items that fall within the powers of the Borough. These municipal powers include: 1. Education 8. Parks and Recreation 2. General Administration and Finance 9. Economic Development 3 Tax Assessment and Collection 10. Animal Control 4. Planning and Zoning 11. Fire Protection and First Responder 5. Emergency Services Planning 12. Emergency Medical Services 6. Community Health 13. Road Maintenance and Construction 7. Solid Waste Collection and Disposal 14. Street Lighting Explain how the organization's services,programs, or items that fall within the powers of the Kodiak Island Borough. Are the organization's services delivered island-wide?Yes ❑ No❑ If not, please list the service delivery area: Non-Profit Application(Rev.04/02/14) Page 1 of 9 Page 60 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #24. Are the organization's services open to ALL residents of Kodiak Island Borough?Yes ❑ No ❑ If not,please explain why: Is your organization tourism related? Yes❑ No❑ If yes, please describe the tourism aspects of the organization. How does the organization collaborate with other local non-profits? How does the organization use volunteers? FINANCIAL INFORMATION Is the organization audited or reviewed?Yes ❑ No❑ If yes, please attach latest audited or reviewed financial report. If the organization is not audited or reviewed, please attach the organization's latest annual financial statements, including a profit and loss statement and a detailed balance sheet. Organization's fiscal year dates: Non-Profit Application (Rev.04/02/14) Page 2 of 9 Page 61 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #24. FUNDING REQUEST Funding request total amount: Specific programs,services, or item(s) in the organization's mission to be funded: Start date: End date: Number of people served: Work plan/justification(limit response to 500 words): Non-Profit Application (Rev.04/02/14) Page 3 of 9 Page 62 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #24. Measure of success or expected results(limit response to 250 words): BUDGET FOR REQUESTED GRANT Direct Costs Salary Wages Fringe Benefits Consultant Fees Travel Supplies/Materials Services Other(define) Total Direct Costs Indirect Costs Donated Time Donated Materials Total Indirect Costs Total Costs Non-Profit Application (Rev.04/02/14) Page 4 of 9 Page 63 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. • .OTHER FUNDING SOURCES List amount of funds the organization received from other sources for this past fiscal year: Federal State City of Kodiak • Other Grants •• Donations Gaming Permit Activities , Other(defined) i Total i . If you receive state or federal grants, list the percentage and amount of local match that was required for each grant the organization received in the prior fiscal year. • MATCHING GRANTS Grant Amount Matching Amount Match% Federal: State: Other: Total: Did the organization receive funding from the Kodiak Island Borough during the last fiscal year(July 1, 2013-June 30,2014)?Yes❑ No❑if yes,please complete the attached grant report and submit it with this application. Please describe briefly any fundraising activities the organization has conducted in Kodiak over the past eighteen (18)months and the results of those activities. Signature Printed Name Title Date Non-Profit Application(Rev.04/02/14) Page 5 of 9 Page 64 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH GRANT REPORT PAGE 1 OF 2 Please complete this report based on funds received from the Kodiak Island Borough during the period of July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014. Organization: ,2013-2014 Grant Amount Amount Expended Year to Date Balance j Accomplishments with grant funds using measures indicated in application(limit response to 500 words): Non-Profit Application (Rev.04/02/14) Page 6 of 9 Page 65 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. "'*- ° KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH 4a°:fir. GRANT REPORT d j PAGE 2 OF 2 BUDGET - Budget ,1Actual Direct Costs , Salary Wages II ;Fringe Benefits fl Consultant Fees Travel j (Supplies/Materials j f (Services i ;Other(defined) S .i i i •Total Direct Costs 1 , i Indirect Costs IDonated Time , ;Donated Materials Total Indirect Costs ,Total Costs If you have not expended all funds, please describe how and when you intend to spend the balance. Signature Printed Name Title Date Non-Profit Application(Rev.04/02/14) Page 7 of 9 Page 66 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #24. DID YOU ATTACH THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS? ❑ List of Board Members and Officers ❑ Letter from the IRS signifying organization's official non-profit tax exemption status ❑ Organization's Mission Statement ❑ Copy of the organization's long range plan such as a business plan, strategic plan, or development plan ❑ Attach latest annual audited financial report or financial review (if your organization is audited or reviewed) ❑ Attach organization's latest annual financial statements, including a profit and loss statement and a detailed balance sheet (if your organization is not audited or reviewed) ❑ Attach grant report (page 6 and 7) and submit it with this application if your organization received funding from the Kodiak Island Borough during the last fiscal year(July 1, 2013—June 30, 2014). Non-Profit Application (Rev.04/02/14) Page 8 of 9 Page 67 of 68 Non Profit Discussion- Policies and Procedures AGENDA ITEM #2.d. 2014 TO 2015 RATING CRITERIA FOR KIB NONPROFIT GRANT APPLICATIONS Applications will be ranked by the Assembly nonprofit subcommittee and final rankings will be provided to all Assembly members. 100 points possible per application. Category - -• - - Points Request falls within the powers of the KIB 20 Organization's track record of success including past Borough funding 15 Provided requested financial and organizational information 10 Specific as to how funds will be used 10 Clearly identified benefit to the community and benefit to KIB citizens and number of citizens 10 served Cost vs. benefit 10 Organization's fiscal and management capacity 10 Request fits the organization's mission 5 Active board and experienced staff to carry out request 5 Organization funded by a variety of sources 5 Total 100 Non-Profit Application (Rev.04102/14) Page 9 of 9 Page 68 of 68 Non Profit Discussion - Policies and Procedures KODI K ISLAND BOROUGH $fWJM!. ORK SESSION Work Session of: _De_, a( zo/9' Please PRINT your name Please PRINT youropame ti ��a��' � Aro Oiyepv, 4/1,9--r,kce-r? licti;11,111Nr. 712_ 0zy<iii ll I� S R iJ S c l M 1 v1 P N1; �iRu:�.. :ro 5, fat � Se p_ iIn„„.;ply, (3() (('1 ( AgA /v Ykl ski„, Piro114, / / ! ill, C_)4 O't-en 1 q'rfe� i alClld, �V I 400 (y� *gip, 1 JAS GAL b �,; il�i 1 ;, ,II it , V�o✓v v o AzcoFJp°Vlli tiR 1u ll ,[n/ h lll ;llll4'UIQpu'llP� • ar /lam/ / o �,.5�,.. �91Bupolu�l�� � 3�uElllllll',lu.. a V i ol!. lies\lieAVVIU �;n•. ("An Zlice f� J �N. MAX CC6uAID M' '1✓ C�-/ Or gCbNNCO .tNe2e<t\- i oNivej from Jo Pry0( 12/02/2014 Dear Members of the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly, I am writing this letter to address code statute 3.35.140 late payment penalties and interest for real property tax. 3.35.140 Late payments — Penalty and interest. If the first payment is not paid when due, the entire tax becomes delinquent and subject to a penalty of 10 percent of the entire tax and interest shall accrue on the unpaid principal balance, excluding the penalty, at the rate of 12 percent per year. If the first payment is paid when due but the second payment is not paid when due, the unpaid balance of the tax becomes delinquent and subject to a penalty of 10 percent of the unpaid balance, and interest shall accrue on the unpaid principal balance, excluding the penalty, at the rate of 12 percent per year. Partial payments shall be applied first to accrued penalties, then to interest, then to principal. Notwithstanding the acceptance of partial payment, the unpaid balance remains delinquent and the lien therefore enforceable in accordance with law. For the purposes of this section, a payment is paid when due only if it is physically received in the finance office by the due date or postmarked by the USPO, not metered machines, prior to midnight on the due date. [Ord. 99-02 §2, 1999; Ord. 93-36 §2, 1993; Ord. 86-25-0, 1986; Ord. 82-33-0, 1982; Ord. 80-22-0 §1, 1980. Formerly §3.20.090]. I believe this statute is inflexible in implementation and draconian in result. Property taxes are very high in the KIB and most property owners have their real taxes paid by a mortgage institution. The property owners that write checks to the Borough to pay these taxes are usually business owners or long time retired community members that have paid off their loans and often live on fixed incomes. There are very few property owners that will willingly jeopardize their property for non-payment of taxes. There are basically three reasons why property taxes come late, the owner simply forgot, there are sometimes extenuating circumstances like family emergencies, or they do not have the funds at the time the taxes are due. Borough code makes no provisions for the first two reasons, such as a grace period with a lesser penalty, and the instantaneous 10% penalty for someone already in financial distress makes no sense what so ever. If a family is struggling to pay their taxes, what good does a penalty of 10% do for one late day? My question to the Borough Assembly is this, are these penalties an incentive to pay taxes on time or punitive with the intent to raise more revenue? If the intent of the statute is to incentivize the taxpayer to get payment in on time, it falls woefully short. As the statute is written now there is no leeway for a payment even one day late. Payment is due on Wednesday at 5 pm, taxpayer late to the Borough office by 15 minutes, automatic 10% penalty. If a taxpayer is late a week, the10% penalty is assessed If a taxpayer is late 30 days, 10% penalty, 60 days and so on. There is no incentive for a taxpayer to get the tax paid in as timely fashion as possible. If the tax had been deemed late, the penalty is enforced, and the incentive is gone. Once the taxpayer is assessed the penalty there is no reason to hasten payment, one day or thirty days there is no difference. What brought this to my attention is my own situation with the property tax penalty. I have been paying KIB property tax for over 40 years. This year I paid the Borough $21,061.17. My mother passed away in August and my wife's mother passed away in September. We have been traversing the United States to deal with both estates and we had a miscommunication with the second payment of our property tax. I went to the Borough cashier with a check for the entire amount owed, but I was four working days late. I am hit with an $800 penalty bill, and I am appalled. Nobody in the Borough Offices can do anything, it is a statute (3.35.140), and you will have to speak to the Borough Assembly. I did a little research on other Alaskan communities and what their policies are. Buddy Cassidy suggested that I use Ketchikan as an example that Kodiak often uses. The Ketchikan Borough's policy for late payment of property tax is: if payment is received within seven (7) working days there is a 1% penalty, eight days to 30 days the penalty really escalates to 15%. The City of Kodiak has a 5% penalty for late sales tax for the first thirty days, and then 10% after that. I propose that statute 3.35.140 Late payments, be rewritten to be more flexible and understanding of a community that is both diverse and isolated. The penalty should be an incentive for taxes to be paid in a timely fashion, not a punitive action directed at the citizens of Kodiak. My proposal for the statute is a hybrid of Ketchikan and the City of Kodiak: If payment is not paid when due, there will be a 7 working day grace period where a 1% penalty/interest payment is assessed. If taxes are not paid within an eight to thirty day period there will be a 5% penalty payment due, and after the thirty day period an additional 5% penalty will be assessed. The Borough Assembly should carefully consider what exactly the late payment penalty is for. If the intent of the statute is incentivize taxpayers for on time payment it falls woefully short. It punishes citizens who may for a valid reason be slightly late as severely as someone willing to game the system for months. We live in a small community and can set our own standards and laws that reflect our values. s KIB NON-Profit Funding Organization 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 Total Alutiiq Museum 2, 500 19, 041 21, 541 Am Red Cross 2,500 2, 500 7, 000 7, 000 7, 000 7, 000 7, 000 7, 000 7, 000 7, 101 61, 101 Br Francis Shelter 34, 584 37, 895 38, 000 40, 000 40, 000 40, 000 50, 000 50, 000 54, 500 54, 000 70, 000 508, 479 Hope Community Res 5, 000 5, 000 5, 000 5, 000 5, 000 5, 000 5, 000 5, 000 5, 000 5,200 5, 500 55, 700 Hospice of Kodiak 10, 000 20, 000 30, 000 Island Trails 9, 586 9, 586 Network • KATS 9, 996 10, 000 10, 000 10, 000 10, 000 15, 000 15, 000 15, 000 15, 000 15, 000 25, 000 149, 996 KBM Food Bank 25, 000 25, 000 25, 000 27, 000 27, 000 35, 000 37, 500 37,500 37, 500 41, 310 45, 120 317, 810 PCC - Safe Harbor 22, 110 21, 060 21, 060 21, 060 21, 060 21, 060 25, 000 25, 000 25, 000 42, 394 25, 000 269, 804 KI Health Care 0 25, 000 10, 000 15, 000 15, 000 25, 000 20, 000 20, 000 20, 000 25, 000 20, 000 195, 000 Clinic Women's Resource 41,248 42, 554 46, 000 50, 764 50, 764 30, 751 50, 000 60, 000 60, 000 60, 000 60, 000 582, 081 Cntr Salvation Army 9, 060 9, 060 9, 060 9, 060 9, 060 10, 000 10, 000 10, 000 10, 000 10, 000 95, 300 Senior Citizens 27,720 27,720 28,000 28, 000 28, 000 35, 000 35, 000 35, 000 35, 000 35, 000 45, 000 359, 440 Special Olympics 6, 780 6,780 7,500 7, 500 7, 500 7, 500 7, 500 7,500 7, 500 7, 500 73, 560 Threshold Services 10,315 10, 315 10,315 10, 315 10, 315 10, 315 10, 315 10, 300 10, 300 7 9, 195 102, 000 Humane Society 0 0 0 2, 000 2, 000 4, 000 4, 000 4, 000 4, 000 5, 000 25, 000 i KAVA WIC & ILP 7,200 `12, 000 12, 000 12, 000 12, 000 12, 000 12, 000 12, 000 , 12,000 12, 000 6, 000 121, 200 KMXT 7, 500 7, 500 7,500 7, 500 7, 500 7, 500 7, 500 7,500 7, 500 10, 000 10, 000 87, 500 Kodiak Arts Council 12, 000 15, 000 15, 000 15, 000 15,000 15, 000 15, 000 15, 000 15, 000 16, 500 16, 500 165, 000 Kodiak Football 2, 000 3, 000 3, 000 3, 000 3,000 3, 000 0 0 3, 500 20, 500 League Girl Scouts 1,000 1, 000 1, 000 1, 000 1, 000 1, 000 1, 000 1, 000 1, 000 2, 200 11,200 Head Start 8,135 9, 623 9,000 9, 000 9, 000 9, 000 9, 000 9, 000 9, 000 9, 000 89, 758 KI Sportsmen's Assn 2, 000 4, 000 4, 000 4, 000 4, 000 5, 100 0 0 0 23, 100 Kodiak Little 3, 000 3, 000 3, 000 3, 000 3, 000 5, 000 4, 500 4, 500 4, 500 33, 500 League Kodiak Historical 4, 500 4, 500 4,500 5, 500 5, 500 0? 6, 500 6, 500 6, 500 6, 500 9, 945 60, 445 Soc KIB NON-Profit Funding Organization 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 d Total Kodiak Maritime 2, 000 2, 000 1, 000 1, 500 1, 500 0? 5, 000 7,410 7,410 9,126 36,946 Musuem Kodiak Teen Court 0 3, 600 5,100 5, 100 5, 100 5,100 5, 100 29,100 Audubon Society 0 0 0 1, 300 1, 300 1, 300 1, 300 5,200 Dig Afognak 0 0 0 566 566 0? 566 1, 698 Kodiak Water/Cons 2, 820 3, 685 3, 685 6, 900 7, 300 24,390 Diet Marian Center 5, 000 5000 TOTAL 243,653 298, 113 232,042 301,173 301, 174 329,636 356,612 352, 907 360, 908 401,440 399, 007 3, 570, 935 Minutes of this and other assembly meetings as well as copies of agenda items are available at the Borough Clerk’s Office or on the Kodiak Island Borough’s website www.kodiakak.us. The next regular meeting of the Kodiak Island Borough Assembly is scheduled on Thursday, December 4, 2014, at 7:30 p.m. in the Borough Assembly Chambers. At its Special Meeting of December 2, 2014, Kodiak Island Borough Assembly Took the Following Actions: AUTHORIZED the Mayor to Execute The Letter of Support for the Alaska Groundfish Data Bank Proposal 26 “Trip Limit”. Vol. FY2015, No. 10 December 3, 2014 Kodiak Island Borough Assembly Newsletter