review and comment and help us get Ariz y Sara Luz and Travis some childcare support <3 Gracias
Thank you Travis, for getting the proposal process for a DBC Land Stewardship Lead started here on the forum!
It feels like a pretty bare bones draft at this stage; I look forward to your leadership of the Land Stewardship Circle (LSC) guiding us through the refinement of the proposal for clarification on goals of the role and the allocation of resources needed to fulfill it.
A couple of points that come up as a look at the post itself:
As I understand it we have approved previous proposals through the LSC for Stewardship roles, and for stipend funding both at a land node level with DLuz and at the organizational level for DBC as a service providing collective. It would be helpful to link to those previous proposals, and to meeting minutes where they were discussed and approved.
It’s a little fuzzy as to whether this request is for the Land Steward role with a Stipend associated with it, or to approve a Stipend for this already designated role, or to approve paying you a Stipend personally Travis, as a person who has already been approved and has been filling this role via previous proposal and receiving Stipends previously (it should probably state that in fact, you have been receiving Stipends from DLuz for some time and that it is now being requested from the DBC instead). Any of these are valid, it’s just not clear yet without preceding proposal details as mentioned in point 1.
The proposal is posted in the LSC but not the Funding Administration Circle (FAC), so it appears that the funding is being requested from the LSC itself which would imply the Circle has a budget to allocate a portion toward this proposal. In this case, it would not need to go to the FAC and/or General Circle for objection seeking. IF however the funding of this proposal is being requested from the DBC overall budget, then it will need to be presented to the FAC and or General Circle for opinion and assessment across a greater set of considerations.
With these thoughts in mind, I suggest a few next steps:
- Add more detail to the Proposal regarding what has already been approved by the LSC and/or the FAC / DBC General, and what is specifically being provided and requested in exchange.
- Request the administratively inclined members of the LSC help build out an exemplary proposal that provides greater context to the role itself, the history of Travis’ exemplary service in the role, and from where the funds are being requested.
- If this is time-sensitive then let’s set some dates for when the online review period will close and what meetings people should attend to share opinions, objections to work through in person etc. perhaps also share to the FAC members so we can figure out:
- Is the LSC requesting a budget allocation from the DBC that includes these figures in order to approve as an autonomous circle – or is this proposal requesting funds from the DBC’s Funding Circle.
Sorry to be long winded, I will add more comments to the Proposal itself to help with this too!
I echo Danibelle’s comments and am curious how to clarify the questions posed. There might be more questions as the process unfolds.
I think that this proposal really needs someone from the DLuz team that is not Travis participating in crafting the exchange, as he is here representing the DBC LSC as lead steward receiving benefits that in part recognize his work stewarding the Commons held by DLuz now.
Seems that a very clear objective of this role is to drive the completion of a Land Node agreeement between the (not yet formed) DLuz Trust and the DBC.
Thanks for the clarity. Goddess willing ill update by next week.
thanks for your feedback Dani, and for checking it out Tim. i put forth another perspective.
the lead of a circles job is to move forward on the objectives of said circle in support of the DBC fulfilling its vision/missions. thats why ive been selected. we’ve gotten feedback on the LSC objectives, after multiple requests, and are ready to polish this document with a few of the active participants. this document, along with the human element (active participants and links) will carry us forward. i agree with most of what Danibelle puts forth, however i see the proposal as good enough for niow and safe enough to try. that’s why i was selected.
it hit me in the gut the idea of spending more time putting forth a proposal to maybe get paid for an essential role of a founder and demonstrated leader and giver. i had to call my therapist to help me maintain my sanity.
i and my family have been experiencing stress for months…living on last months pay, awaiting the next proposal to pass just in time to pay the rent and other bare nesceities. this i would say is on the degenerative end of the spectrum.
what i propose is that the most critical roles and players, with 3 years of demonstrated service and giving, for a period of say 6months, have a stipend of $600 as long as they continue showing up. tien, tim, and myself are and have been holding many critical pieces, that with more stability, we can find assistance for.
i also put forth the urgency to get our own token(s) activated. our service is worth sooo much more than this $600/month. maybe 10x as much which we could be receiving in this other currentsee. thank @Tien for his continual tracking, and we pray he finds relief from this task.
so i’m on forests computer, and hes leaving with it in a few minutes. so i need to wrap this up and wish dearly that this conversation could (have) been had in person/circle.
Id like to express that i’m on the point of withdrawal from the DBC, considering stepping away when i see/hear more being asked for, and the challenge that meeting my families basic needs has been. and so i pray and listen, awaiting an irrefutable sign to move forward or not.
of course it would pain me to step away, with so much potential and such a beautiful mission/visions. wether i stay with DBC or not, i know in my heart that i will continue on my 20+ year quest of bringing these missions/visions into form.
2 more points as forest showers:
1 the tenure conversation and putting DLUZ into trust, again, not a responsability of the LSC. of course yes, travis and the LSC need be part of the conversation.
2… time sensitive… yeah, though not urgent.
the heirarchy (order of the angels) that we need to make it through this challenging time is not an evil. we can have a decentralized heirarchy that redistributes power and wealth more fairly, and just as a tree grows forth from a tree, we need to care fully for the most critical part, and allow unecesary parts to be pruned as needed.
signing off. love yall. will check back soon
Summary of my takeaways from our circle to share feelings about this:
4 general themes:
1-Finding balance between flexibility, adaptability, and accountability.
2- organizational weakness?? Travis proposing that all “selected” roles come with some stipend/exchange…
3- Proposal/request that tim/tien/Travis (because they continue holding and supporting many intangible and essential functions within the dbc) take priority in receiving stipends in the case of shortages.
Looking to “tighten” the objectives based on who’s showingg up and has current bandwidth to work with focusing on the following:
working with juanpa, physically and logistically to ensure our forest gardens continue improving
Pheonix and tien with earthwaking
Ara and free the food
local and regional networking and Permaculture support for aligned projects
Mapping dluz with assistance ( tim/ Randall??)
Working towards apprenticeships
Advancing with hatchers and supporters regarding DLuz trust