[EMS Discuss] New Storage Rules for Eugene Maker Space

Austin McKimmey EMAIL HIDDEN
Wed Oct 30 16:30:32 PDT 2013


I am not saying I would be turned away on large projects, If I was doing
something that would take a month I understand I should pay more. If am
charged for a couple days to 1 week That can make a project less appealing.

But I think Bob made the point of the 48hour Active and Inactive space part.


On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Rick Osgood <EMAIL HIDDEN>wrote:

> Austin does make a good point about the Shelf space.  Floor space
> effectively takes up 1sqft from floor to ceiling.  Shelf space allows
> stacking of things on top so in a way we might say we have more of it.  I
> guess that depends on how many storage shelves we have vs floor storage
> space though.
>
> Austin's comment about possibly turning away because he'd have to shell
> out extra money for floor space is my primary concern with a model like
> this.  However, I think it's important for people to remember that there
> are two reasons we want to implement these rules:
>
> 1. Cut down on wasted space.
> 2. Alternate revenue stream.
>
> Remember we have some pretty ambitious goals for EMS and we are going to
> need a lot more money than we are currently making in order to reach these
> goals.  Remember that charging $25 (or whatever) for you to work on a long
> term large scale project isn't just to make it a hassle for you.  We don't
> want to gouge the members of course.  It's a way to make sure people who
> are using more resources help us to afford the space they are using while
> they are using it.  If we don't charge money for that space, we might not
> be able to afford to get the space and then you may not even have the
> option of working on a larger project.  It also has a side effect of making
> people really think about whether or not they need that space.
>
> I think in some cases members might be able to get other members to
> sponsor their projects if they can't afford it themselves.  Maybe you could
> get a couple other members to put up the $25 (or whatever) for you to have
> a month to get your awesome project done if you can't afford it.  I'm sure
> we can work something out one way or another to make sure money is not a
> huge limiting factor for our members.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Bob Miller <EMAIL HIDDEN> wrote:
>
>> I agree that we should have some sort of pro-rating structure.  I am
>> wondering if maybe we should have some minimum rental amount -- maybe
>> $10.  Otherwise poor Kevin (or whoever is 2014's treasurer) has a
>> boatload of bookkeeping for very little revenue.
>>
>> Combining this with Austin and Clif's point that the shelf space is
>> just as expensive per sq ft as floor space, I think something needs
>> adjusting. I don't know what the right adjustment is.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Rick Osgood <EMAIL HIDDEN>
>> wrote:
>> > I like the proposal now that I've read it.  I'm still curious about how
>> it
>> > would be billed if someone only needed space for a few days or a week.
>>  I'm
>> > also curious how that time will be enforced.  Also, what happens if
>> people
>> > are using all the space and there ends up not being enough room for
>> others?
>> > Do projects get a maximum time limit so we can get new people in the
>> space
>> > and make sure to share the space?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Mr. Clif <EMAIL HIDDEN> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Gang,
>> >>
>> >> So here are my two cents worth.
>> >>
>> >> Just to clarify the annual meeting is on Saturday Dec 7th, not the 8th.
>> >>
>> >> Some of our members were in favor of tiered dues, some were not. One
>> >> possibility here is to include a free bin with the next tier up, and
>> maybe
>> >> also include a discount on classes.
>> >>
>> >> I think that if members are going to get a free bin or box then they
>> are
>> >> required to always be members in good standing, eg don't skip any dues
>> and
>> >> have them paid up. Wheres lower tier members might not have that
>> >> requirement.
>> >>
>> >> I assume that the shelves would be two feet deep which would give you
>> the
>> >> same $2.50 per Sqft rate.
>> >>
>> >> I think constantly updating a date on a tag to show the paid through
>> date
>> >> is impractical. Perhaps we could have an item number that we can look
>> up in
>> >> a data base?
>> >>
>> >> I think that if we make our policy clear on left items and that we try
>> to
>> >> return them for at least 30 days then its probably legal to take
>> possession
>> >> of them after that. Something like this:
>> >>
>> >> "...EMS will make a reasonable effort to return the items for at least
>> 30
>> >> days past due."
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure about the members voting outside of an official meeting.
>> >> This could be a special meeting as long as it is official, but even so
>> >> getting a members quorum is often very hard, and not requiring one is
>> not
>> >> fair, so not sure what to do here. Just patitioning the board might be
>> an
>> >> option.
>> >>
>> >> At first I thought we could do the gallery like other maker spaces and
>> >> charge for it. But I do like it being kind of a group consensious to
>> show
>> >> off what we're doing. I think the board would decide what area(s) are
>> >> gallery space(s). I think that one year changes in the gallery is way
>> too
>> >> slow. Perhaps it could be updated at each regular membership meeting,
>> or
>> >> online votes. Like Bob I would be less concerned about official
>> meetings
>> >> here but not sure what is fair.
>> >>
>> >>     More thoughts later...
>> >>     Clif
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 10/30/2013 01:33 PM, Rick Osgood wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I should clarify that I'm not trying to tear apart this proposal.  I
>> >> actually like the overall ideas I'm just concerned about how we will
>> >> actually be able to enforce them.  Maybe we just need more details or
>> >> clarifications is what I'm getting at.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Rick Osgood <
>> EMAIL HIDDEN>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> First of all, what is a .md file?  I don't seem to have anything that
>> can
>> >>> open it and I'm not familiar with the extension.
>> >>>
>> >>> Second, I like this idea in general (based only on your summary).  I
>> get
>> >>> Sam's point that we might be restricting what activities will occur
>> at EMS
>> >>> based on who can afford to actually do those activities.  It seems a
>> bit
>> >>> unfair that someone with more money essentially has more options but
>> >>> honestly, we have to do SOMEthing.  We need to make sure things don't
>> just
>> >>> collect and sit around forever.
>> >>>
>> >>> How with the $2.50 be billed?  $2.50 per sqft per month? per week?
>>  What
>> >>> if I only use the space for 1-2 weeks but you want to bill me per
>> month?  Do
>> >>> I have to pay for the whole month or do you pro-rate it so I only pay
>> for
>> >>> the time used?  What if it's 1.5 weeks? Do we go per day at that
>> point or
>> >>> round up to the nearest week/month?
>> >>>
>> >>> Also, what if someone wants to keep their large project out for three
>> >>> days?  Two days are free, anything over that and we start charging
>> money.
>> >>> How much will we stick to our guns on that?  I can envision many
>> cases where
>> >>> someone's project sticks around an extra day or two.  Do we then
>> demand them
>> >>> to pay us $2.50 per square foot pro-rated or do we just let it go?
>> >>>
>> >>> I think it might be useful to include a provision that says the
>> >>> board/membership can vote to approve larger projects with the
>> requirement
>> >>> that the motion includes a "review date".  That way if EMS as an
>> >>> organization wants to work on or sponsor some large project, we have
>> a way
>> >>> to approve it.  Requiring the "review date" ensures that a project
>> which has
>> >>> gone stale or has lost momentum can be either booted out or start
>> paying
>> >>> rent.
>> >>>
>> >>> Lastly, EVERYTHING GETS A LABEL OR YOU LOSE IT!  I think this is fair
>> but
>> >>> I'm curious about possible legal ramifications   I'm guessing we
>> would only
>> >>> be able to get an answer to that by talking to a lawyer and we aren't
>> made
>> >>> of money so maybe we just have to consider it a disclaimer and hope
>> for the
>> >>> best.  Worth thinking about anyway though.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Sam Foster <EMAIL HIDDEN>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I have mixed feelings about the storage proposal. I think in general
>> I'm
>> >>>> in favor, but the rates do put larger projects (e.g bike/trailer)
>> out of
>> >>>> reach of my budget. On the flip-side, I think its appropriate that
>> the space
>> >>>> *not* be used for indefinite storage of materials/junk/inactive
>> projects by
>> >>>> members, so the rates are a reasonable deterrent (there's
>> self-storage units
>> >>>> for that). I assume these are the kind of considerations that led to
>> the
>> >>>> current proposal.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Somewhere in there I worry that we are putting a box around the
>> kinds of
>> >>>> things that can happen at the maker space. But I welcome the clarity
>> and I
>> >>>> assume no policies are set in stone from now till the end of time.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> /Sam
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 10/30/2013 12:11 PM, Bob Miller wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> At our membership meeting Dec. 8th, I am going to propose that we
>> >>>>> adopt some rules about storage.  I have attached a document which
>> >>>>> would amend the Policies Document.  I will propose that these rules
>> >>>>> take effect January 1st.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Since items up for vote have to be proposed 30 days ahead, we have
>> >>>>> until 11/7 to discuss this and refine it.  Discuss/refine away!
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> Discuss mailing list
>> >>>> EMAIL HIDDEN
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> http://eugenemakerspace.com/mailman/listinfo/com.eugenemakerspace.discuss
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> EMAIL HIDDEN
>> >>
>> http://eugenemakerspace.com/mailman/listinfo/com.eugenemakerspace.discuss
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Bob Miller                              K<bob>
>>                                         EMAIL HIDDEN
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> EMAIL HIDDEN
> http://eugenemakerspace.com/mailman/listinfo/com.eugenemakerspace.discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://eugenemakerspace.com/pipermail/com.eugenemakerspace.discuss/attachments/20131030/0574844f/attachment.html>


More information about the Discuss mailing list