I think we want people to know something about CT and Glasser’s teachings before they vote on decisions about how the organization is run. For me, that is a minimum of some training; university courses, workshops, intensives, etc. So for the website, I would say that anyone who logs in is NOT a member until they take some training and pay fees for our teaching.
1. Then they could sign up and pay a membership fee. These people would be classified as associates (those in the process of training. I don’t think their membership fee should be more than $10-$20. I don’t think they should have a vote on decisions or policy. They could have access to providing feedback or opinions about issues, but no vote.
2. The first level of membership that should have a vote on policy would be the full member (CTRTC). That fee could be rather low, so that they would continue to pay and remain an active member for many years. Fee might be $30-40US
If CTRTC’s become facilitators for TCOYL they will pay the fee for that. (Not a different voting right or membership fee.)
3. The next level would be faculty who would pay $60US These people have more investment in the organization and we could say they have 2 votes if you want to, but one vote is ok as that would be more equal to the full members. We can be pretty certain that more faculty will pay attention to the voting opportunity and therefore we would have many more faculty votes on policy. This would provide them more strength in the decision making process by self-selection.
This makes the structure simpler and easier for people to understand. I don’t think we will be cutting off income from fees that would make a difference in our operating costs. The new website with the log in passwords has already defined what people can access on the site.
I think our efforts in the next couple years should be to make certification and faculty easier to acquire and that will increase our funding more effectively than changing all the fee structure.