Short Term Assistance Funding via MNA
I often see neighbors in a tough spot reaching out for assistance via Facebook groups or personal pages, the Neighborhood Association board oversees a fairly substantial account that has been accrued with neighbor donations and fundraising.
Typically this is used to cover event costs and services used by the board to maintain the enterprise, but I would like to see the utility of these funds expand to short-term assistance funding for members of the General Membership.
I've not fleshed out the legality, but there are a number of options for a 501c3 to be able to disperse funds, so I'm sure with the proper legal oversight it could be accomplished in some way (whether through donation or "employee payment".
This would also facilitate the push for all of the financial records of the MNA board transactions to be publicly available online (I believe this is happening soon if not already on the main site). All data would be available to the membership, i.e. available funds, costs, and current applications/purposes (priority could be given through proof of circumstances, i.e. SNAP or other low income programs).
The idea would be that an online platform or similar (like this one) would be used to seek a percentage approval for the dispersal of the funds where the general membership would democratically vote as to whether they think the dispersal is legitimate. Obviously this may need to have a special circumstance for emergency funding, but this can be addressed after the concept has gained approval.
The intent of this kind of program would be to help prevent displacement and houselessness at its source, which is often the result of too many bills too quickly (sudden sickness, injury, death in the family, etc.).
Is this something that would be feasible with this Association?
Benjamin Kerensa Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:17PM
Jonathan quickbooks are already live on the web that’s been setup for over nine months.
Benjamin Kerensa Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:18PM
The conversation is supposed to take place in membership meetings and places open to the public. (I know you see this somehow as mudslinging but I see it as a member and long time board member asking you to act with transparency as the playbook calls for and like past boards have)
Jonathan Ogden Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:20PM
This place is open to the public? It satisfies every ORS clause I've found about electronic communications, so I don't get your hang-up.
Also for both of you, I'm taking a literal (read: legal interpretation) of the bylaws, it seems you're both giving me a Personal. It literally says that in there, so I take it as I see it. https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/interpretation
Benjamin Kerensa Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:24PM
ONI defines public space not the statute. You keep mixing up public meeting and record laws with ONI Public Meeting And Record rules they are separate things and the MNA is subject to the latter.
ONI does not consider online platforms like this to be open to the public. Plus can anyone discuss here? You’ve already made it clear only members can and I’d point out a lot of members are still not invited. We have a thread on FB where people are upset they aren’t allowed to participate as members here yet.
I mean you talk about inclusion and input but are having discussions where many members aren’t even being allowed to participate.
Kevin Provost Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:25PM
Benjamin, I agree. As far as I'm concerned, our thoughts here carry no more authority than if we ran into one another in a coffee shop. If anything I said here were used to represent the "feelings of the neighborhood," I'd be upset.
As for legal vs personal interpretation, it's judges who get to make the latter -- everybody else's is personal. I think if the Board were to vote to change the mission of the organization, you'd find yourself in a pickle.
Kevin Provost Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:27PM
To Ben's point, above, I agree that --at very least-- you should be focused on clearing the "pending" memberships before starting or joining these threads. Once again, it's facilitation vs execution.
Jonathan Ogden Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:36PM
Ah that's a different question though at this time this is just the preliminary testing I had agreed to do (not full implementation), and no I'm not conflating the two requirements. You're referring to article VIII section G about meeting location, and that's what I'm currently bothering Paul about changing.
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/oni/article/97817
You do seem to be conflating what I've stated as the intent of this platform though, while eventually I would like to move to this being the meeting, currently it is not possible (but there is precedent for it in local government and elsewhere already). http://www.academia.edu/31336425/Local_councils_and_public_consultation_Extending_the_reach_of_democracy
ONI is overhauling soon, and I'm going to push to create less legal bs and more practical tools.
To the original point, bullet "f" would just require support from the membership. If folks are upset have them come register tonight, the records were in disrepair when we got them so it will be a continual effort to get the membership list back into alignment.
Jonathan Ogden Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:38PM
Also there's no intent to close this thread any time soon, it will be open and available once all of the current members are signed in, but I imagine usage rates will probably cap at like 85%.
We'll see, I guess?
Benjamin Kerensa Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:41PM
Paul doesn’t have authority to change it there is a city ordinance the covers how the ONI Standards are changed. It’s done by a committee of coalition directors and other stakeholders and your change I can tell you with a strong degree of certaintity would not be adopted. The city isn’t going to allow NA’s to take meetings online that’s less accessible than physical meetings and deprives those without internet access or limited access the ability to participate. Best of luck though but it really seems your putting the cart before the horse. This is why having committees with members to flesh out these ideas is important. In fact why isn’t this a discussion for your outreach committee?
Jonathan Ogden · Mon 12 Mar 2018 10:17PM
Lol, that's literally why this conversation is happening...