[NFB-DB] Canceling membership thread

[Sara Coleman]

As a new member of the division, I have been following these online conversations with great interest. 

To my knowledge I have not received a copy of the proposed constitution or been part of any discussions outside of the Zoom meeting where the constitution was discussed. 

I would love to be a part of any meetings or discussions leading up to National Convention and I am attending. 

What is the best way to connect with the group beyond the listserve?

Thank you all for your voices and I hope to get to know more of you during this reorganization process. 

Sara Coleman
scolemae at gmail.com


Subject: Re: [NFB-DB] Membership Cancellation?
Message-ID:
   <CAEe15j_rNW-y+6XyzkVBcCD_HqJBPBGejCTSziUtvxwu41iqkQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi everyone, Stuart here.

First, Lisa and Doula: thank you for touching our lives, being
vulnerable to others about one's medical condition is never to be
taken for granted. No one should dare label you "absent" with your
contributions to what apparently seems like today's impromptu
follow-up meeting. I certainly felt your presence here in my home and
in my heart! I can relate, and personally I'm going to be wishing you
both well and praying for your recovery! I so appreciate your sharing
part of yourself and your life with us today. Proof we can reach out
and touch others' lives from afar!

Second, thank you Rod, Tony, Scott, Tracie, Lisa, Diane, Doula, Carla
and Rocky for the discussion since I last made a peep on here: it
sounds like Rod, Tony, Scott, Tracie, Lisa and Doula are in full
support, with Diane and Rocky partially supporting but encouraging
more patience with no quantitative timeframe until reaching equal
participation and voting rights, and Carla indicating this cannot
happen before the convention meeting, but voicing understanding of the
concerns.

Third, Doula, it sounded like in Carla's estimation of what's
possible, NFB won't be inclusive of voting as the relevant votes have
to be taken at the convention meeting to reorganize and not at another
time? So, even giving the ability to participate or provide input or
feedback would take a vote still at the meeting and only of the
"first-class" citizens able to be physically present if they deign to
help us it sounds like? Or is even that part of the reorganization
still beholden to President Riccobono's wishes alone? If not, Shelia
and Carla may be able to take something back to what I'm understanding
is the NFB Board, and you are also able to take something to DEI to
advocate for all to gain equal representation? Is the timeframe on
that possible to be effective for the convention meeting if either of
those meet before it? What is the Multiple Disabled group doing for
their meeting at the convention if they vote on anything?

If the organization can't or won't be allowed flexibility and
inclusion at its formal inception (at least insofar as NFB permits or
tolerates it), since it's being reorganized anyway, might there be a
way to give it an inception where/when it won't be under duress? I
don't want to diminish in any way whatsoever the immense value and
contribution of each and every individual who will be able and allowed
to attend the convention and this meeting in-person nor minimize the
voice of anyone who can't attend. If a way to at least allow remote
participation, asynchronous or retroactive thought it may be, could be
permitted; then, feedback on the constitution upfront here can be
given before the convention, treating the convention meeting
effectively as a Working Group or Task Group meeting with a specific
purpose, but officially as a founding meeting, and then have a
follow-up to give life to the reorganized group after the convention?

In doing so, it may be possible to pay homage to the organization
hosting the division, yet give all members the opportunity to at their
own pacing think and contribute to the best of the collective's
ability to reorganize what will be the best to represent and advocate
for DeafBlind. For example, here are some ideas how it could be
structured:

1. Discuss the constitution we were all sent earlier this afternoon
after all can review it.

2. Review what Carla sent as the Recording (which, looks like a
transcript of sorts).

3. Discuss leadership roles in advance to ensure covering all the
intended roles so there aren't vacancies to start (though it may be
possible to plan vacancies potentially that would be filled later by
the Board and then fill those positions with informal votes that the
Board can then officiate with representative formal appointments
similar to how our republic here in the U.S.A. works).

4. Prepare a second draft or other items during the Working or Task
Group meeting where those in-person can use the time and resources
available to communicate and assure anyone who can't or don't
communicate well in text has every opportunity to contribute fully
their thoughts.

5. Have someone move and a vote be taken at the Working or Task Group
meeting to take a Final Vote in Principle (or a Final Vote Pending
Confirmation), if possible, on everything NFB demands must be met in
the meeting. If necessary, the result of the Working or Task Group
meeting could constitute an Agreement in Principle consisting of the
Constitution and any other documents deemed necessary to develop as
well as a Leadership and Succession Plan meeting the bare minimum that
division members could all vote on by mail or email at their choice at
a later time to finalize.

6. Most organizations have provisions for "cleanup" of an editorial or
minor nature for most things officially to be approved as a finalized
record, which might be reviewed at actually the next meeting to recap
an editorially correct version that everyone approves and agrees was
what happened and/or what was intended by all stakeholders to an
extent or simply be "finalized" 7 days after a specified vote is taken
for instance. So, an informal Post-Meeting Wrap-Up, Confirmation
Hearing or Validation Meeting may occur where any editorial or minor
things can be "cleaned up" for what was intended to prepare to be
passed into formal record. If that resulted in anything not agreed as
minor or editorial, then someone can move at a subsequent meeting to
restate what was officially passed or amend it accordingly so long as
there's at least an honor system that input from everyone, present
in-person or not and technologically savvy or not could have equal
input and time as each needs and receive a final copy my email or mail
as needed/preferred.

When I attended the last virtual NFB convention proceedings, I wasn't
fully aware how this would revert last year and this year, and I was
too ill the whole time leading up to and during last year's convention
anyway to note much of anything that occurred with the situation. I
apologize if my lack of capacity to address any of the matters going
on at that time escaped me when that time might have been put to good
use over the past year to the benefit of this group instead.

Thanks again and a good night to all!
EOM