WSM leadership, again...

It's that time of year again, for members ("owners") of Weaver Street Market to have their say about the organization's leadership, sort of. The Board of WSM is made is made up of 2 members elected by consumer owners, 2 members elected by worker owners, 2 board-selected members, and the general manager. That's right, the board selects some of it's own members. It's sort of like electing 6 town council members, letting the town manager vote, and then letting the council choose another three members - good for stability, bad for dissent.

This year owners get to vote for one of these two board candidates:
• James Morgan, an incumbent who has served 8 years on the WSM board.
• Billy Madden, a former WSM employee who wants to see the Board do more outreach to owners and the broader community.

There are a whole lot of things that WSM gets right, but I believe they can do better. It seems the board is especially out of touch with the owners. For example, their recent proposal to restructure ownerships was so unpopular, they withdrew it before the annual meeting. Then at the meeting, they acted as if this was a result of the owners not understanding the difference between a locally-owned co-op and huge multi-national chain.

Every year that I attend the WSM annual meeting (including this one) I leave with a vague feeling of being back in high school, like I've been condescended to and tricked out of my self-determination. I admire them for trying to balance social, environmental, and economic values. I know the issues are complicated, but one thing I'm quite sure of is that change is needed.

If you agree, you have until Saturday to cast your vote for Billy. I think you can find ballots by the main entrance of the Carrboro store, and I'll bet you can get them at Southern Village as well. You can also download this PDF with information about the candidates and a ballot to return by 9pm Saturday. (Can it be it a coincidence that the document with the ballot and candidate info also includes a long article by the incumbent? That is just the kind of thing that makes me think a shake up is overdue.)

Issues: 

Comments

My wife and I proudly cast our votes for Billy last night. I have no doubt he will be a breath of fresh air for WSM.

I also voted for Billy. Here's what I wrote my friends, encouraging them to vote for him as well:

Please consider voting for Billy Madden. Billy is a former cashier in the store and is familiar with many of the customers and their concerns. As a former employee, he will bring the perspective both of the consumer member and the worker, and he can speak to the latter concerns without the self-censorship to which worker-owners might be inclined given their place in the store hierarchy. Billy is also of a somewhat younger generation, one that I am pleased to see getting involved in the coop and that I believe should be encouraged.

Billy's opponent, James Morgan, is a leading figure in Carrboro. He has been on the board for a long time. I like James and do not in any way oppose him. But I think we have an important opportunity to give Billy Madden a chance this year.

I just want to add some context for anyone who is a newcomer to this discussion.

2004 board election: http://orangepolitics.org/2004/08/wsm-board-hiring/

A few years ago, I stumbled upon the WSM Annual Meeting, at which the members have the opportunity to select our two representatives to the Board. But I was then frustrated to find that the ballot was preprinted (with the names of the incuments) and it was too late in the game to propose new candidates. Some years I miss the notice in the newsletter, and so miss the Annual meeting and the opportunity to vote altogether.

To their credit, WSM is always improving. And in spite of the fact that I haven't had much input into it, I think their direction is generally a good one. But as a co-operative institution, I think WSM could do more to improve transparency and strengthen the democratic governance of the organization.

2004 annual meeting: http://orangepolitics.org/2004/10/run-your-local-gocery-store/

This is the same organization that has expanded into another store and an italian restaurant with no direction from it's members (it's owners I should say), and now they suddenly want more money? Maybe they shouldn't have spent it on two extra businesses that the co-op owners never asked for.

The recently proposed (and then revoked) restructuring proposal: http://orangepolitics.org/2005/06/weaver-street-market-looks-at-changes/

Now, despite the fact that the market is in a "stable financial situation," some major changes are under consideration. Two them bear directly on the nature of ownership in WSM. First is the raising of the membership fee by as much as 150 percent. The second is replacing the membership discount with a patronage dividend to be paid at year's end subject to the determination of the board of directors.

I'm so glad to hear WSM withdrew that horrible proposal. I'm going to be going up there this afternoon, so I'm glad that you posted this, so I can drop off my vote. I don't know either gentleman (although I remember when Mr. Madden worked there and he seems like a nice guy), but I'm voting for Mr. Morgan. I think that there's always room for improvements, and specifically I'd like to see (and taste) the quality of WSM's cafe food improved, but I think the board is, all in all, doing a pretty good job.

First of all let me say I'm grateful to Ruby Sinreich for introducing the WSM board election into orangepolitics.org. To me it's a sign that the Market is becoming increasingly recognized as a significant presence in the community. Second I'd like to say that I hesitated to contribute this because I'm one of the candidates in that election. The more I thought about it though the more I knew I needed to make some comments, and to make them before the polls closed so that my thoughts are not clouded by the results of that election. To all eligible readers of this, please vote, for whomever, before the polls close this Saturday at 9 p.m.
Sinreich makes the point that the board structure is “good for stability, bad for dissent”. Yes to the first, stability and sustainability are important goals for a core community resource. Bad for dissent? Would be if there were not ample opportunity for dissenting voices to be heard. Like all owners Sinreich has had the opportunity to participate in many owner forums over the last few years, not to mention the owner taskforce constituted early this year to specifically study ownership issues. Like all owners she also has the right to attend board meetings as an observer and to comment on those meetings to the board.
Sinreich says the Board is out of touch with the owners. Billy Madden has made a similar point, that we could do more to communicate with the ownership. To a large extent I agree, and the board is currently grappling with this challenge. Case in point: total comments, via email, snail mail, telephone hotline, and owner forums on the recent proposal on changes in the ownership structure were about 200 out of around 8,000 owners, clearly insufficient to establish a mandate in any direction. Not only that, owner views were widely divergent: some vigorously opposed, some enthusiastically supportive. No wonder the board felt we had a lot more work to do before proceeding in this matter. The annual meeting process that Sinreich found “condescending” was an attempt to continue that discussion towards a community consensus. I'm sorry that for Sinreich listening to a different viewpoint amounts to being “tricked out of my self-determination”, while I'm glad she endorses our attempts to balance social, environmental, and economic values.
Seeking that balance is the ongoing work of the board. I feel confident that this work will continue, regardless of who is on the board, because I have a great deal of confidence in our governance structure. I wish I could say that we had a formula in place for in-depth communication with our owners about the Policy Governance system which we employ, I can only say that I hope we can allocate resources to establish that communication in the near future. Any reader of this who might be interested in Policy Governance workshops or study groups please contact the board here
Finally I'd like to say that I have high regard for Billy Madden, he was a significant voice in the ownership values taskforce and I honestly believe that he is capable of becoming a fine board member. At the same time I feel that I still have value to contribute to the board, and if I thought I'd gone stale I would not be running for this position again. I recently stepped down from the Town of Carrboro Downtown Development Commission(now the Economic Sustainability Commission) because I felt that I'd reached my personal limits on that board and I would not hesitate to do the same at Weaver Street. In the meantime I hope to be re-elected. Whatever you decide, please vote.
I apologize for the length of this response. Couldn't figure out how to say it shorter. And of course this is a personal communication from me and does not represent a WSM board view.

James Morgan

James Morgan has our vote (household of two) for another term on the Weaver Street Market Board of Directors. It's a tough and time-consuming position, and James deserves much credit for having shaped the Market's community presence.

Let's keep in mind that Weaver Street Market is a privately owned business -- possibly not OP fodder, but so well operated that its name has become synonymous with "Carrboro."

Try again - here's the link for contacting the board on Policy Governance or any other issue - board@weaverstreetmarket.coop

Catherine, the WSM web site (and other materials) begs to differ with you. Right at the top, it reads "Your Community Owned Grocery Store."

WSM ownership - there's a difference between "community owned" and "publicly owned" and this is I think what Catherine was noting in her comment. Public entities such as OWASA and the Town of Carrboro are subject to state & federal laws regarding open access etc. WSM is not by these definitions a public entity, it is a cooperative corporation registered in North Carolina, owned by that subset of the public that chooses to become its ownership community. As such, WSM is specifically required to be accountable to its owners rather than to the public at large. Naturally, OP can turn its attention to to the proceedings of any entity it wishes, including WSM and Walmart for that matter. Any entity that operates in the public domain had better get used to being subject to public comment! That said, only WSM owners have the right to participate in its governance. And right now that includes voting in board elections, open until 9 p.m. tonight. To all eligible readers, don't forget to vote!

James, thanks so much for participating on OP. I hope you'll stick around after 9pm tonight. As someone who has been an owner of WSM for about 10 years, I think I have a pretty good idea of whether my input has been invited or welcomed. Here has been my experience:

A few years ago, WSM held these small "focus group" type meetings with owners ostensibly to get our input about changes they were condisering. But the meeting was actually an opportunity for them to pitch us with a new mission statement they had already developed. It emerged from that process pretty much intact because it had clearly had a lot of work already put into it before they ever showed it to us. It included a lot of justification for expansion, something that is clearly a goal for the WSM board.

Later that year (2001?), I discovered that there were these "annual meetings" going on. It was the first I had heard of it. I went to the meeting consisted mostly of a presentation about co-op models in other countries. I was able to FIND (was not given) a ballot which was printed with the names of two incumbents running for two open board seats. I was never asked to nominate a candidate, it was clearly forgone before I arrived.

After complaining about what I percieved to be the total absence of communication with members, I was told that WSM sends mailings to owners' homes, and I happily submitted my street address to the customer service desk. I think I did this twice. I have yet to receive a single peice of mail from WSM. (And I haven't moved since I bought my house in early 2001.)

I signed up for the e-mail list so now I at least get updates on promotions and events like any other customer. It's pretty disingenuous to claim that I have "the right to attend board meetings as an observer" (that sounds fun and interactive) since their meetings are never even advertised to the public or to the owners.

James interpreted my complaints about the annual meeting as not liking "listening to a different viewpoint." If there were any differing viewpoints expressed there, that's news to me. The only discussion we had there was about the difference between our local community-owned coop, and a large multi-national chain. We all had different ideas about why WSM sould suck if it was bought by Wal*Mart, but not whether it would suck. You couldn't find a diverging opinion in the house. It just shows how insular the board is if they think that was "listening" or "different."

I think this is just more of what the board calls an "attempt to continue that discussion towards a community consensus" - as long as the consensus is what THEY agree on.

Ruby, thanks for sharing the information about your not receiving the owner newsletter, this is a serious situation which explains a lot about your earlier complaint about board election process. It is supposed to be an open process and the newsletter is a fundamental link in that chain of communication, if you are not receiving it then it is not surprising that you are feeling disenfranchised. You'll have been missing a lot of other important information as well. I guess both board and management have always assumed that the snail mail newsletter is the bottom-line most reliable way of contacting owners about such issues as calls for candidates etc. Not everyone has email. There have been notices in the stores for the last two months on the election but they compete wih all the product information so not everyone reads them: the board has been discussing since June the need to allocate a much bigger presence in the stores to owner communication. If the newsletter is not getting out to all owners then we need to know - anyone reading this who is also not receiving the printed newsletter please contact the board at once.

Catch 22 - how do you find out if everyone gets the newsletter other than via the newsletter? [I once received a fax at my office with a sentence on the cover sheet which read, in effect, " please contact us at once if you do not receive this message".] I'm passing your comments on to the responsible individuals at the market for them to investigate and fix this problem. Again, if you are an owner and do not regularly (i.e. every month) receive your newsletter, please let the board know: board@weaverstreetmarket.coop. Please spread the word to friends and neighbors too.

Dear James,

I receive my newsletter through snail mail on a regular basis and appreciate the board's efforts to communicate with members. You might consider, though, that the newsletter looks so much like a sales flyer that many may not recognize it as a newsletter.

Ruby,thanks for inviting me to stick around, I will certainly monitor the site in the future now that I know about it. I did a site search and found you've had some interesting threads touching on WSM's place in the community in the past, wish I'd known, I'd have certainly joined in. I don't tend to publish my ignorance on strictly political affairs, mostly preferring to grumble privately, but I'll be very happy to participate in anything I do know something about, particularly on WSM and its governance. If Dan for instance wants to restart the discussion of whether WSM is a "true" cooperative and/or democratically structured I've certainly got some thoughts on that and I'll be happy to share them and to read attentively and learn from all other contributions. I'm impressed with the civil, thoughtful level of discourse on OP, wish I'd known about it earlier. I'd be very happy if it becomes a regular forum for communication around WSM and its community. I will certainly support that whether I continue to be a board member or not.

Terri, I agree that mixing the promos with the board communication in the newsletter is not ideal. Historically it's been done that way mostly for reasons of economy but as the coop grows and communication issues become more complex it's probably time to review that strategy.

I just happened to pick up the Fall 2005 issue of Business Ethics magazine and WSM is one of four companies honored, recieving the Living Economy Award.

I am grateful to WSM and esp. Ruffin Slater for his vision and implementation of it. I think WSM is generally very open to member input, which is precisely the reason why the ownership structure change was tabled for the time being.

Also, I think it is important to understand that there is a long term need for some of these changes. For instance, I can see how paying members back at every purchase, instead of at the end of the year, makes it very hard for WSM to effeciently plan for signifcant capital expenses. I can see how families and individuals are not necessarily paying equitable amounts. I can also see, and clearlly WSM leadership understands, the need for more discussion on this proposal.

I'm all for questions and improvements and I've forwarded my own share of questions to WSM, but I think WSM has more than earned our trust. I simply believe it is one of the great places in the world and that is a tribute to its leadership in our community.

Anyone heard the board election result?

James Morgan

 

Community Guidelines

By using this site, you agree to our community guidelines. Inappropriate or disruptive behavior will result in moderation or eviction.

 

Content license

By contributing to OrangePolitics, you agree to license your contributions under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License.

Creative Commons License

 
Zircon - This is a contributing Drupal Theme
Design by WeebPal.