Representative Team meeting
Bialystok, March 19 – 20, 2012
Minutes
Present:
Rubina Ter-Martirosyan – Armenia, Bozhidar Stojanov – Bulgaria, Gabriela Fellingerova and
Frantisek Havlín – Czech Republic, Heleriin Jõesalu – Estonia, Giorgi Meskhidze – Georgia,
Mate Varga – Hungary, Barbara Szczerbinska and Krzysztof Leonczuk - Poland, Leonid
Kalitenya – Republic of Belarus, Nicolae Cuta - Romania, Elena Shomina – Russia, Bojana
Jevtovic – Serbia, Chuck Hirt – Slovakia, Anna Karailieva – CEE CN Coordinator
Agenda:
First day – Monday 19 March

Introduction
Update on the work of all members’ organizations

Welcome, presentation and information from the host – OWOP

Update of 2011 activities from the CEE CN director
Chuck informed everybody about recent development
–
we got the second Operating grant
–
we printed a first phase of the Study of Citizens Participation and will continue
with second and third phase
–
CP Week 2011 – from members’ reports it seems that it is growing and there is
more and more organizations being active about this. We developed new
symbols of CPW thanks to EU funding.
–
we continue with development of the CP University
–
we agreed to be an incubator for ECON. Their work grown quite a lot. Mott has
supported their work for several years. The first two years, this support came
indirectly from US Mott who provided trainers. Last year Mott Europe supported
them through CEE CN but we did not understand that this was apparently one
time funding. This has created a problem for ECON as they must now replace
this core funding as it now appears that Mott does not intend to continue this
support.
–
e-participation projects using EU funding: Mate updated people about CPW
Hungarian e-platform and Chuck informed about e-participation questionnaire.
All members were encouraged to complete the on-line survey if they have not
yet done so.
–
work with CoE – we had been active around implementation of the Code
–
youth strategy – this task was started but not completed last year. It is still not
clear if there is some role for CEE CN in this issue. We will continue to work on
developing an answer to this questions and then develop a project together if the
answer is positive.
–
we continue to be successful to explore more funding options for the Network,
so Mott Foundation is not the only donor for our activities. We are also partner
in several projects with other organizations (CeRe, ALDA, etc)
–
–

exchange with U.S. – a group of U.S. community organizers will join us for CPU
this summer
we met with CEBSD in October 2011 in Brussels. One of the main topics was
how to utilize the upcoming 2013 European Year of Citizen. We agreed to
follow this up with another meeting in January 2012 where ECON would also be
invited. The meeting of three Networks (CEE CN, CEBSD and ECON) took
place in Budapest and decided to develop European Platform for Citizen
Participation.
Presentation of Empowered Citizens – European Platform for Citizen
Participation… plan for 2013 and beyond plus work with other partners
Mate presented the background of our partnership with CEBSD and ECON and talked more
how we created the EPCP. For now it is more symbolic platform but at the same time it is
something that we can build on. We would like to invent together how citizens and citizens
initiatives could be involved on the EU level of decision making processes. The proposed
plan is to be very active in 2013 and a number of specific suggestions have already been
suggested. However, the three groups have been clear that much more important is to create a
long term strategy for this cooperation.
The Representative Team members agreed that they supported the creation of this new
Platform and the direction that it is taking.
Elena suggested that maybe Network can make some recommendations for University
students to go for internship to Western countries where studies for community development
are much more developed that in our countries.

Administrative/operational issues
 Approval of the annual report 2011 and the annual budget 2012
RT approved the Annual report.
Comments and recommendation for next Annual report:
- to consider putting subsidized participation at CoE events as income,
- to clarify currency in financial report
Chuck explained the situation with Mott grant for next two years. They have proposed
reducing the allocation from $130,000 to $100,000 over the next two years. We were only
informed of this change at the end of February so this has created some significant problems
in making plans for the year and creating a new budget. We have asked Mott to re-consider
the allocation and are not certain of the outcome. After we will clarify funding from them we
will finalize 2012 budget and send it to RT.
 Taking into account the financial audit 2011
RT took into account the financial audit of the statement of finances 2011 and the report from
the independent auditor about verification of data correspondence in the annual report and in
the statement of finances.
 Management operation – leadership transformation
Chuck explained his personal situation that he will be taking a two month leave following his
wife’s upcoming surgery on her knees. He has asked Mate to be ready to step up and help
with management issues for interim period. Chuck announced his decision to partly retire
when he returns from the surgery recovery. The decision for seeking a permanent replacement
will need to be done by the Coordinating Team.
 Updating of Internal documents
CT proposed some changes in Internal rules regarding membership in CT. RT discussed it
and suggested to make in the future even bigger changes/ in a larger scale and in general.
 Election of a member of Coordinating Team
We got two nominations Ion Botnaru and Mirela Despotovic. Mirela was elected by a
unanimous vote.
 Comments from the Representative Team
After hearing all the reports, the RT expressed their satisfaction with the Executive Director
and Coordinator.

Introduce plan of activities for 2012/2013: general discussion on CEE CN
activities for 2012
Chuck presented the basic plan for this year. He asked for comments from members over the
next day and a half and there was agreement that the plan would be finalized by the end of the
meeting.
The basic plan of the Network:
- the second phase of the CP Study
- CPU on the second week of July
- CPW. Each of our organization should give some feedback what kind of impact do we
having with this week.
- Community organizing work – ECON
- CoE/EU issue
- E-participation
- Youth strategy

Field visit - OWOP office and sightseeing in Bialystok.
Second day – Tuesday 20 March

Working in groups on several issues related to the future work of the CEE CN
activities using café dialog method
 Reports from café dialogs and work with the whole group:
1.
Institutional development of the Network
-
-
So far we are more-less amorphous. We can be much more effective if we will be
more structured.
Organize strategic planning meeting
 to find how our Network should look like in 7 – 10 years
 to develop better structure
 to find way how to have more professional involvement of members
 how to coordinate our aims, goal and activities better (to make our activities
complementary)
Develop the „Road Map“ by 3-5 the most active members (Mate, Nicu, Giorgi +
Leonid)
Our level of operation should be relevant to level of EU institutions (political oriented,
structured, clever, etc.)
We need to have right and strong principles of operation
Suggestions for structure:
2.
1.
President (part of Association with voting right) versus Director (it could be hired
from outside)
2.
CT – 5 members:
 President – outside relations
 Vice president – fundraising
 Treasurer – financial issues
 Event manager – CT, RT, CPU, CPW, etc
 Coordinator working closely with Regional Coordinators
3.
Regional Coordinators (RC) – we should evaluate this structure and their work.
A few suggestions of RC tasks:
 To use fee money for travel to visit member organizations
 News from RC – a corner on the web site
 Make recommendations on new members from the region
 Look for partners for common projects
 To submit some project ideas
4.
Add to our structure an Expert Team (or Advisory Committee of Friends Club)
who will
 help promoting CP&CD
 bring innovations suggestions and ideas for members and Network.
Possible members: Ilona, Biljana, Hans, Miljenko, Barbara, Anastazia, Kirsten,
Elena, Chuck
5.
Membership – should be open for new members. We should find member in each
country of CEE – main task for 2012/13 to find an active people.
Latvia – Heleriin
Lithuania – Krzysztof, Leonid
Kosovo, Montenegro – Bojana, Miljenko
6.
Training Center – we can earn money by providing the training center
7.
Idea of the Community Development “Travel Agency”
CPW
1. Random notes:
- We need a (better) website for the CPW
- The CPW is in a busy month, that is bad according to management resources, but can be
an advantage, if we can link it with those other events
- It is easier to organize CPW when there are more members in one country, they can share
the tasks
2. What could increase member’s motivation? (that is the key, not time and money…)
What should be common?
- A simple common message for CPW – that should be short, translate and
understandable, but strong enough
- We should have common slogan(s)
- And we suggest to have common focus(es) for each year, which are wide enough to
include all countries (social economy, volunteerism, new media etc.)
-
We should have a common understanding and a common text about “What is
participation?”
Common, but better and shorter, and strong PR materials
More ideas on motivation and common threads:
- We should think again about a central event (eg. Exhibition in EU buildings on
participation)
- We should organize exchange (mobility) programmes in relation with CPW
- We should launch a competition for CPW plans, and the first 2-3 should be funded with
some seed money (1000 EUR)
- We should use social media for common actions (sharing good articles on participation,
launching petitions, voting, solidarity campaigns)
3. We should define a member minimum for CPW participation
We need one person from each organization to be appointed as CPW coordinator
That minimum could include:
- Informing organizations and networks
- Circulate common messages in social media
- Create a one minute film on participation and circulate it (it can be very simple)
- Put CPW logo to your profile on Facebook, Twitter etc.
- Complete or launch a simple questionnaire
- Post at least one article, message on CPW every day
- Organize at least one offline event (that can be an open advisory day in your office,
where you give advices on participation, or forums, actions etc.)
There should be a condition for CPU participation to be active within CPW
3.
Options for funding
1. Social economy - providing paid services for companies, social enterprises, trading unions,
NGOs, groups of activists:
 training and study tours ("community travel agency")
 researches
 consultancy
2. CSR for corporations:
 research
 consultancy
 audit
 evaluation
 partnership facilitation
 P.R.
3. Citizens Participation University:
 training for Peace Corps and EVS
 decentralised/itinerant courses
 partnership with U.S.A. universities
4. Projects:
 to replicate by network itself or by its members
 CEE CN applicant or partner at as many projects to cover its administrative
expenditures
What are we fighting for? – Relations with EU and CoE
4.
1. This is a difficult question for us.
2. Sharing good practice, for example our action study or the model of Bialystok EU info
center. Put this good practice on websites for access.
3. Clarify how local authorities can benefit from increased citizen participation.
4. Consider using the EU Neighborhood Program to prepare projects.
5. The Network should advocate with the CoE for more democracy in countries like
Armenia, Russia, Georgia and Belarus.
6. Citizens Network could serve as a bridge between new Member and non-Member
countries. We are doing some of this, but we are not always clear and direct about this.
7. Increased emphasis on EU relations leads to feeling of exclusion for non EU members.
8. Lack of understanding of how to benefit from being in the EU, especially for local
government. CEE CN may help in increasing this understanding.
9. Work towards establishing common standards for citizen participation.
10. Reframe the conversation from participation to civic activism.
11. Address deeper issues of being an EU citizen. Develop a project of what it means to be
an EU citizen.
12. Framework for participation at local level.
13. Fight for increased consciousness of being a citizen not just “surf”. Prepare citizens to
be ready to participate.
14. Consider increased involvement with European Neighbors’ Day.
15. This is partly a reporting question – we might consider quantitative issues for example
the number of active citizens and could be qualitative as well.
16. Think about connections between the three different dimensions: a) a code of good
practice; b) the standards for citizen participation; c) the new “social contract”.
Establish or help create toolkits to support this.
17. Fight for more funding for civic activism.
18. We need more media attention; for example, short videos for promoting participation.
19. Work with journalists to help them better understand what civic activism is – for
example make a special course just prior to CPU and give them the agenda for the
CPU.
 Continue working with the whole group
Preparation work for the new Platform.
We need to update our strategic plan. Regional Coordinators could take the initial task to talk
to the members to lead up the strategic planning issues and start collecting on the regional
basis. Giorgi will help with Dmytriy region.
How can we use CP Study:
- during CPU make presentation of some of best practices and offer to lead workshop in
members counties
- to send it to the CoE together with a letter
- expert group should be involved to the second phase
- to translate it into Russian – at least conclusion or executive summary
- to share it with our partners – it is on the web site
E-library was also discussed again. Possibly our web site could include this feature.

Finalization and Approval of Plan of activities 2012
The members unanimously approved the proposed plan of activities for 2012 with the
addition of attempting to fund and carry out an update of the strategic plan.