Conflict of Interest Policy

1. Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to protect the integrity of The Troth’s governance, decision-making, and public trust by requiring the prompt disclosure of conflicts of interest, appropriate recusal where impartiality is reasonably in doubt, and fair handling of matters involving divided loyalty, personal entanglement, or material private interest.

This policy shall be read together with the Bylaws and all other duly adopted policies and procedures of The Troth.

2. Persons Covered

This policy applies to all Directors and Executive Officers of The Troth. It also applies, with respect to any specific matter in which they may influence a decision, recommendation, investigation, expenditure, appointment, discipline, or public action of the organization, to any committee chair, program lead, clergy member acting in an official Troth capacity, moderator, volunteer, contractor, appointee, or other person acting on behalf of The Troth.

3. What Is a Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when a person’s personal, financial, romantic, familial, organizational, professional, supervisory, adversarial, or factional interests may interfere with, compete with, or reasonably appear to interfere with that person’s duty to act in the best interests of The Troth.

A conflict may be actual, where the competing interest is presently affecting the matter; potential, where the competing interest could foreseeably affect the matter; or perceived, where a reasonable person could question the person’s impartiality even if no improper motive is proven.

A conflict may exist whether or not money is involved.

4. Examples

Conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to:

• participating in a decision involving payment, reimbursement, contract, benefit, or purchase affecting oneself or a close associate;
• participating in a personnel, disciplinary, appointment, or evaluative matter involving a relative, romantic partner, former partner, close friend, household member, mentor, supervisee, or known adversary;
• participating in a matter involving another organization, kindred, coalition partner, publication, or project in which one holds office, influence, or substantial loyalty;
• using Troth office, information, access, prestige, or procedure to benefit oneself, allies, or favored groups, or to disadvantage rivals;
• participating in a complaint, investigation, adjudication, appeal, or governance matter where one is a complainant, respondent, witness, close associate of a principal party, or otherwise too entangled to act impartially.

These examples are illustrative and not exhaustive.

4a. What a Conflict of Interest is Not

A person’s belonging to a protected class such as spiritual tradition, race, ethnicity, gender identity or presentation, sexual orientation, ability, or socioeconomic status does not in itself solely constitute a conflict of interest.

5. Duty to Disclose

Any covered person who knows or reasonably should know of an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest related to a matter before The Troth shall disclose that conflict promptly, and before participating in deliberation, recommendation, investigation, decision, or vote on the matter.

Disclosure shall be made to the body or officer responsible for the matter. If the proper recipient is unclear, disclosure shall be made to the President and Secretary, unless one of them is conflicted, in which case disclosure shall be made to the next appropriate disinterested authority or directly to the Board.

Disclosure of a conflict does not by itself establish wrongdoing. It triggers review of whether recusal or other safeguards are required.

6. Recusal

A person with a conflict of interest shall recuse from the matter unless the disinterested persons responsible for the matter determine that the interest is too remote or insubstantial to require recusal.

Recusal ordinarily means the person shall not:

• deliberate on the matter;
• vote on the matter;
• attempt to influence the outcome;
• supervise the handling of the matter;
• select decision-makers for the matter; or
• access confidential information about the matter except as necessary for authorized recordkeeping or as specifically permitted.

A recused person may provide factual information if requested, but shall then withdraw from deliberation and decision-making.

7. Determination of Disputed Conflicts

Where recusal is disputed or uncertain, the disinterested members of the relevant body shall decide whether a conflict exists and whether recusal is required.

If the question concerns a Board matter, the remaining disinterested Directors shall decide. If the question concerns a committee, program, investigation, or other official function, the disinterested persons responsible for that process shall decide, consistent with the governing bylaws, policies, and procedures of The Troth.

8. Financial Conflicts and Related Transactions

No person covered by this policy may use their Troth role to secure an improper financial or material benefit for themselves or for a related person or entity.

Any transaction, contract, reimbursement, grant, or other financial arrangement in which a covered person or a related person has a material financial interest must be reviewed and approved in advance by disinterested decision-makers, who must determine that the arrangement is fair, reasonable, and in the best interests of The Troth.

Where reasonably available, comparable prices, alternative options, prior practice, or other relevant information should be considered before approval.

9. Recordkeeping

The Secretary, or another designated recordkeeper if the Secretary is recused, shall maintain appropriate records of conflict disclosures, recusal determinations, and approvals of conflict-related transactions or decisions.

For Board and committee matters, the minutes should reflect, as appropriate:

• that a conflict was disclosed;
• whether recusal was required;
• that the recused person did not participate in deliberation or vote if recusal was required; and
• the final action taken.

Sensitive personal details should be recorded no more broadly than necessary.

10. Annual Disclosure

Directors and Executive Officers shall complete an annual disclosure identifying outside roles, relationships, entities, or recurring circumstances that could reasonably create conflicts with Troth business.

All other persons covered by this policy remain subject to the duty of prompt disclosure under Section 5 whenever a specific matter gives rise to an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest.

Annual disclosure does not replace the duty of prompt disclosure when a specific matter arises.

11. Enforcement

Failure to disclose a conflict of interest, refusal to recuse when required, misuse of office or process in connection with a conflict, retaliation related to a good-faith conflict disclosure, or knowingly false or bad-faith allegations under this policy may constitute grounds for action under the Bylaws and other applicable policies and procedures of The Troth, including the Leadership Code of Conduct, the Procedure for the Investigation and Adjudication of Conduct Violations, and the Procedure for Votes of No Confidence.

12. Good-Faith Reporting and Non-Retaliation

No person shall suffer retaliation for making a good-faith conflict disclosure, requesting review of a possible conflict, or raising a good-faith concern about impartiality or divided loyalty.

Knowingly false, malicious, or bad-faith accusations may be addressed under applicable Troth policy.

13. Administration

The Board of Directors shall oversee this policy and may adopt forms, guidance, and implementing procedures consistent with it.

Where a more specific Troth bylaw, policy, or procedure supplies additional rules for recusal, impartiality, investigation, adjudication, or governance remedy in a particular type of proceeding, that more specific rule shall govern to the extent of any inconsistency.

The Troth Whistleblower Protection Policy

1. Purpose

This policy is intended to encourage and enable good-faith reporting of serious concerns so that The Troth can respond promptly, fairly, and responsibly. It exists to protect those who report suspected wrongdoing, support proper review of those concerns, and help ensure that violations of law, policy, organizational trust, or governance integrity are not ignored, concealed, or mishandled.

This policy shall be read together with the Bylaws and all other duly adopted policies and procedures of The Troth.

2. What May Be Reported

• suspected violations of The Troth’s Bylaws, Codes of Conduct, or other adopted policies or procedures;
• suspected fraud, theft, embezzlement, financial impropriety, or misuse of organizational assets;
• retaliation against a person who made a good-faith report, good-faith conflict disclosure, request for review, or participated in an investigation or governance process;
• abuse of office, misuse of authority, selective enforcement, concealment of misconduct, or interference with governance;
• conduct creating a serious risk to member safety, especially where a minor or vulnerable person may be affected;
• efforts to obstruct, manipulate, or improperly influence an investigation, adjudication, recusal determination, governance review, or other official Troth process.

3. Good-Faith Reporting

Any person making a report under this policy must do so in good faith and have reasonable grounds to believe the information disclosed indicates a possible violation or serious concern. A report need not ultimately be substantiated in order to be made in good faith.

Knowingly false, malicious, retaliatory, or bad-faith reports are not protected by this policy and may themselves constitute grounds for action under the Bylaws and applicable Troth policies and procedures.

4. Non-Retaliation

Retaliation against any person for making a good-faith report, making a good-faith conflict disclosure, requesting review of a possible conflict, raising a good-faith concern, seeking guidance, participating in an investigation, providing evidence, or taking part in governance related to a reported concern is prohibited.

Retaliation includes, but is not limited to, intimidation, threats, selective enforcement, exclusion from ordinary participation, removal of responsibilities for retaliatory reasons, public shaming, misuse of moderation or leadership powers, or any adverse action taken because a person raised or assisted with a good-faith concern.

Retaliation may constitute grounds for action under the Bylaws and applicable Troth policies and procedures, including the Leadership Code of Conduct, the Conflict of Interest Policy, the Procedure for the Investigation and Adjudication of Conduct Violations, and, where office-holding and institutional trust are materially implicated, the Procedure for Votes of No Confidence.

5. Reporting Channels
6. Associate President

The Associate President is the primary Officer responsible for receiving reports and initiating or coordinating the appropriate investigative response for matters involving suspected conduct violations, retaliation, abuse of office, or violations of Troth policy or procedure.

1. Secretary

The Secretary is the primary Officer responsible for maintaining the official record of the report, investigation, evidence, and procedural steps taken.

1. Direct Report to the Board of Directors

A report may be made directly to the Board of Directors when:

• the Associate President has an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest;
• the Secretary has an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest;
• the concern involves a Director, the President, the Associate President, or the Secretary;
• the concern involves accounting, financial controls, auditing, fraud, or misuse of organizational funds or property;
• the concern involves a minor, a vulnerable person, immediate safety risk, or another matter requiring urgent escalation;
• the reporter reasonably believes ordinary reporting channels cannot be used safely, fairly, or impartially.

6. Intake and Acknowledgment

Reports should be made in writing where reasonably possible, though an initial oral report may be accepted and then documented.

The receiving Officer or Director shall acknowledge receipt of the report within a reasonable time and shall document the date, nature of the concern, and reporting channel used.

Where the report is first received by the Associate President, the Secretary shall be notified for recordkeeping unless doing so would create a conflict of interest or compromise safety, confidentiality, or fairness. Where the report is first received by the Secretary, the Associate President shall be notified for investigation unless doing so would create a conflict of interest or compromise safety, confidentiality, or fairness. In conflict cases, the Board shall designate alternate personnel.

7. Confidentiality

Reports of violations or suspected violations may be made on a confidential basis. The Troth shall protect the identity of the reporting person and the confidentiality of the matter to the greatest extent reasonably possible, consistent with the need to assess, investigate, respond to, and resolve the concern fairly and responsibly.

Confidentiality may be limited where disclosure is reasonably necessary for safety, legal compliance, financial review, fair investigation, adjudication, appeal, recusal review, or other legitimate governance need. The Troth will not promise absolute anonymity in circumstances where that would be unrealistic or unfair, but it will limit disclosure on a need-to-know basis.

8. Investigation and Referral

Reports that allege conduct violations shall be handled under The Troth’s Procedure for the Investigation and Adjudication of Conduct Violations, including its provisions concerning recusal, evidence gathering, panel review, Board consideration, and appeal.

Reports that primarily involve interpersonal conflict without an alleged policy or Code violation may be referred to the appropriate conflict resolution process instead.

Reports involving accounting, internal controls, auditing, suspected fraud, or financial impropriety shall be reported promptly to the Board of Directors, and the Treasurer and any appropriate Board-designated reviewers shall assist as needed, subject to conflict-of-interest safeguards.

Reports involving serious loss of institutional trust in an Officer or Director, where the issue is not primarily whether a rule was broken but whether confidence in office can be maintained, may also be considered under the Procedure for Votes of No Confidence, as appropriate.

9. Conflicts of Interest and Recusal

Any person receiving, documenting, investigating, reviewing, adjudicating, or otherwise participating in the handling of a report under this policy must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest related to the matter.

A person with a conflict shall recuse unless the disinterested persons responsible for the matter determine that the interest is too remote or insubstantial to require recusal.

A conflict may exist where a person has prior involvement in the matter, a material personal relationship with any party, a financial interest, divided loyalty, factional entanglement, or any other circumstance that would reasonably call their impartiality into question.

When a conflict exists, the Board shall appoint an alternate investigator, recordkeeper, reviewer, or other appropriate substitute to ensure the matter is handled fairly.

This section shall be interpreted consistently with The Troth Conflict of Interest Policy.

10. Protection of the Reporting Person

No person shall be discouraged from making a good-faith report by being told that doing so is disloyal, disruptive, unfrithful, or harmful to the organization’s image. The Troth recognizes that reporting serious concerns is often an act of responsibility to the community.

Leaders in particular must not use office, status, moderation authority, social influence, access to confidential processes, or procedural control to silence, punish, or discredit a reporting person acting in good faith.

11. Documentation and Records

The Secretary, or a Board-appointed alternate in cases of conflict, shall maintain a confidential case file for each whistleblower report. The file shall include the report, acknowledgment, evidence received, procedural actions taken, recusal disclosures and determinations, findings, and final resolution.

Access to such records shall be limited to those with a legitimate need to know in order to carry out investigation, review, adjudication, appeal, recusal determination, safety response, legal compliance, or financial oversight.

12. Scope of Protection

This policy protects good-faith reporting whether the concern is substantiated, partially substantiated, or unsubstantiated after review or investigation. It does not require that the reporting person ultimately be correct. It requires only that they act honestly and with reasonable grounds.

This policy also protects persons who cooperate in good faith with an investigation, provide evidence, answer questions, make a good-faith conflict disclosure, request review of a possible conflict, or decline to conceal relevant information.

13. Administration

The Board of Directors shall oversee this policy and may adopt forms, reporting guidance, and implementing procedures consistent with it.

This policy shall be administered in a manner consistent with fairness, confidentiality, due process, non-retaliation, conflict disclosure, recusal where required, and the democratic governance of The Troth. It exists to protect the integrity, safety, impartiality, and proper functioning of the organization and to ensure that concerns can be raised without fear.

Troth Event Policy

Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to outline the guidelines and procedures for hosting events organized or sponsored by The Troth. This policy aims to ensure that all events reflect the values of inclusivity, respect, and community engagement that The Troth upholds.

Scope

This policy applies to all events organized by The Troth, including workshops, community gatherings, seminars, and online events.

Policy Guidelines

Event Planning

1.1 Approval Process: All events (not including Steward Program events) must be approved by the Events Committee of The Troth. A formal proposal must be submitted at least 90 days prior to the event date. 

For Moot meetups in relation to the Steward program approval needs to go through the High Steward with the same 90 day timeline or as part of an organized outreach campaign. 

1.2 Objectives: Clearly outline the purpose and objectives of the event, including target audience and expected outcomes. 

Inclusivity and Accessibility

2.1 Event Space: Events should be designed to be inclusive and accessible to all community members, regardless of race, gender, age, ability, orientation, gender identity, or background. Physical locations should be chosen with travel for Troth members in mind as high travel expenses can be exclusionary by nature. 

2.2 Accommodations: Organizers must ensure that appropriate accommodations are made for individuals with disabilities, including venue accessibility and alternative formats for materials (Large print hand outs, hearing assistance, etc). 

2.3 Food: Food preparation needs to be flexible enough to accommodate dietary restrictions when/if they present themselves. All food needs to be clearly labeled with a full ingredient list. 

2.4 Alcohol: If alcohol is used for any Ritual purposes a non alcoholic option needs to be proactively available and treated in the same manner as alcoholic options. For example- When blessing an offering for a blot, alcoholic and non alcoholic options should be mixed together in order to not create an exclusionary environment for members in recovery. 

2.5 Families and childcare: Children and individuals with children are vital parts of the Troth community. Events and programming must be either family friendly, or specifically labeled with age restrictions so that parents can be adequately warned that topics being discussed may not be child appropriate. 

Content Guidelines

3.1 Respectful Dialogue: All presentations, discussions, and materials must promote respectful dialogue and avoid hate speech or discriminatory language.

3.2 Content Review: Any promotional materials or content presented at events must align with The Troth’s values. Having a Troth representative (board member or designated event representative) attend presentations in order to step in and moderate and report any issues back to event leadership is recommended. 

Logistics

4.1 Venue Selection: Choose venues that are accessible, safe, and suitable for the event type. Ensure compliance with local regulations and safety standards.

4.2 Health and Safety: Adhere to all relevant health and safety guidelines,required by the venue as well as Federal, State, and Local governments. Pay special attention to food safety. 

4.3 Insurance: Ensure that Troth insurance coverage is in place as an Asset Protection effort towards the Troth and the event organizers. Verify that all insurance coverage in place meets the venue and local government requirements.

4.4 Drugs and Alcohol: Be sure that all event planning adheres to site specific and local ordinances around the use of alcohol and drugs. If alcohol is being served, the event needs to have a system approved by the Events Committee of designating attendees that are under the legal age limit. 

4.5 Childcare:  Any childcare offerings at events need to be administered and operated by individuals that have been background checked and meet local legal requirements for childcare. If childcare is not being offered at an event, advertising for the event should state so. 

No Troth function or ceremony will call for or permit a single adult, not a parent or authorized caregiver as designated by the parent, to be unsupervised with one or more children, unless duly authorized by said parent or caregiver.

Financial Considerations

5.1 Budgeting: Organizers must prepare a detailed budget for the event, including all potential costs and revenue sources and have that budget approved by the Events Committee and the Treasurer. 

5.2 Funding: Troth events need to be cost neutral to the Troth’s financial budget. The Troth can front load event expenses but all monies must be recouped through registration fees, raffles, or donations. 

5.3 Steward Program events : Events in association with and organized through the Steward program are covered through appropriations set aside through the Troth’s yearly budgeting process. Budgets and spending limits need to be preapproved by the High Steward prior to any monies being spent. 

Promotion and Communication

6.1 Marketing: Promote events through The Troth’s official channels to reach the target audience effectively. Contact a Board Member for help with posting when needed. 

6.2 Description of event:  Event descriptions need to include these informational pieces at a MINIMUM

Event date and time

Event Location

Schedule of events

Childcare options

Menu and food contact person (if applicable) 

Description of accommodations (Hotel name, where to make reservations, etc.) 

Links to registration method 

6.3 Registration: Utilize an event registration system to manage attendance and gather participant information. Currently the Troth uses EventBrite. The Events committee can help set this up. 

Evaluation

7.1 Feedback: After the event, organizers must collect feedback from participants to assess the event’s success and areas for improvement. Use of online forms is preferred in order to report back to the Event’s committee efficiently. 

7.2 Reporting: A summary report, including attendance figures, feedback, and financial outcomes, must be submitted to the Events Committee within 30 days of the event.

Compliance

All individuals and groups involved in organizing events under The Troth’s name are expected to comply with this policy. Non-compliance may result in the cancellation of the event and potential restrictions on future event planning.

Amendments

This policy may be amended as necessary to adapt to changing circumstances or feedback from the community. All changes must be approved by the Events Committee.

Approved by the Board of Directors in November 2023:

All members of The Troth are encouraged to engage with their communities in ways that promote the Heathen values of peace, understanding, and justice–but we will not dictate to our members how they must or must not engage in activism for causes they care about, provided said activism does not cause a conflict with the original oath of membership.

Members may not claim to be official representatives of the Organization without express permission. Permission may be obtained from the Organization to act as official representatives for activist events like Pride Parades, Sit-Ins, or peaceful protests via a petition.

These requests will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the Board of Directors, who may delegate this task to a subordinate department as needed.

The Troth reserves the right to participate in activism as an Organization through venues like interfaith partnerships that promote the Heathen principles of generosity, hospitality, democracy, equity, and peace.

The Troth will not partner with organizations, nor will we participate in actions that promote violence, racism, sexism, bigotry, or are otherwise in conflict with the Organization’s principles.

The Troth Frithstead Policy

Purpose:

To provide an actionable policy for the allowance or disallowance of weapons at all Troth sponsored events. 

History:

The Troth recognizes the longstanding holy proscription across Heathen traditions that weapons were prohibited in holy steads. Whether it was the procession of Nerthus as described in Tacitus, or the Althing described in the Icelandic Sagas: the proscription against weapons in holy space is consistent through the ages. And so it is today: we state this preference in order to promote the inclusion of all Troth members and to foster a welcoming, safe, holy and nonviolent environment.

Definitions:

For the purposes of this policy a “weapon” will be defined as “any device or instrument used for attack or defense, often with the intention to cause harm, damage, or kill.” Examples of objects falling into this category can be, but are not limited to: firearms, knives, swords and brass knuckles.

Firearms:

No firearm will be allowed at Troth Sponsored events. 

Ranged Weapons:

No ranged weapons (e.g. Bow and arrows, sling shots, spears) will be allowed at Troth sponsored events. 

Melee Weapons:

Melee weapons (e.g swords, knives, axes, maces and staffs) will not be allowed at Troth events. This covers all weapons sharpened or not. 

Mobility issues:

Any item that may fall into the category of a mobility assistance device such as canes or walking sticks will be allowed. It is expected that these items will be used as intended, and any use outside of its purpose as a mobility aid may result in those items being disallowed. 

Exceptions:

The Troth recognizes that there are times when an item designated as a “weapon” may be used for a ritual, sport (i.e. archery contest) or demonstration purpose. In these events the owner of such a weapon should reach out prior to the event and discuss its inclusion. The allowance of such a device will be at the sole discretion of The Troth’s representative(s) in charge of said event. Any permitted weapons at an event must be clearly announced in the event description.

Procedure for the Investigation and Adjudication of Conduct Violations

1. Investigative Authority and Recordkeeping

The Officer responsible for investigations into reported conduct violations shall be the Associate President, who shall serve as Lead Investigator. The Lead Investigator shall gather facts, collect relevant evidence, and interview witnesses as appropriate to the complaint.

The Officer responsible for maintaining the official record of the investigation, including all evidence gathered, shall be the Secretary of The Troth.

2. Recusal of Investigative Officers

If the Associate President or Secretary has a conflict of interest, prior involvement in the matter, a material personal relationship with any party to the complaint, or any other circumstance that would reasonably call their impartiality into question, that Officer shall be recused.

In such cases, the Board of Directors shall appoint another qualified party to carry out the investigative or recordkeeping role.

3. Conduct Review Panelist Pool

The Troth shall maintain a pool of Conduct Review Panelists.

Conduct Review Panelists shall be volunteers from among the membership of The Troth who are members in good standing.

Before serving, Conduct Review Panelists shall complete Board-approved training in implicit bias awareness, confidentiality, the review of evidence, the distinction between conduct violations and interpersonal disputes, and the relevant bylaws, policies, and Codes of Conduct.

4. Appointment and Screening of the Conduct Review Panel

For each complaint, the Lead Investigator shall appoint a Conduct Review Panel of three members from the pool of Conduct Review Panelists.

Panelists must be screened for conflicts of interest, prior involvement in the matter, material personal relationships with any party connected to the complaint, and demonstrated bias.

Any Panelist with such a conflict shall not serve.

5. Presentation of the Case to the Conduct Review Panel

The Lead Investigator shall present the Conduct Review Panel with the complaint, the evidence, and any relevant bylaw, policy, or Code of Conduct at issue.

To the extent reasonably possible, identifying details shall be redacted or limited before presentation to the Panel.

Complete anonymity may not be possible in all cases, especially in a small religious community, but confidentiality shall be preserved to the greatest extent consistent with fairness and responsible review.

6. Standard of Evidence and Panel Determination

The Conduct Review Panel shall determine whether a violation has occurred based on a preponderance of the evidence, meaning that it is more likely than not that the reported violation took place.

The Panel may also offer recommendations for resolution.

7. No-Violation Finding and Appeal by Complainant

If the Conduct Review Panel finds that no violation has occurred, the complainant or complainants may appeal that determination to the Board of Directors.

8. Violation Finding and Referral to the Board

If the Conduct Review Panel finds that a violation has occurred, the matter shall proceed to Executive Session before the Board of Directors.

The subject or subjects of the complaint, the Lead Investigator, and any other persons the Board deems necessary for fair consideration may attend for the portions of the session relevant to their participation.

9. Board Review in Executive Session

The Lead Investigator shall present the complaint, the evidence, the findings of the Conduct Review Panel, and any recommended resolution.

The Board shall have full, unredacted access to all facts and findings gathered during the investigation.

10. Rights of the Subject of the Complaint

The subject or subjects of the complaint shall have the right to review the substance of the allegations against them, to know which bylaw, policy, or Code of Conduct is alleged to have been violated, and to address the Board before it deliberates and determines what, if any, action should be taken.

11. Recusal of Board Members

Any member of the Board of Directors who has a conflict of interest, prior involvement in the matter, a material personal relationship with any party, or any other circumstance that would reasonably call their impartiality into question shall be recused from deliberation and voting on that complaint.

12. Board Authority and Departure from Panel Recommendation

The Board may accept the Panel’s recommendation or adopt an alternate resolution.

If the Board departs materially from the Panel’s recommendation, it shall record its reasons in writing in the confidential case file.

13. Possible Resolutions

Possible resolutions shall be proportional to the nature and severity of the violation and may include, but are not limited to:

• dismissal of the complaint;
• informal resolution by agreement of the parties;
• education, warning, or corrective guidance;
• temporary limitation of privileges;
• removal from office or appointed role;
• suspension or revocation of membership;
• any other remedy authorized by Troth policy or bylaws.

14. Appeal by Subject Found to Have Committed a Violation

A subject found to have committed a violation may appeal the Board’s decision.

The Board of Directors shall determine appeals in accordance with procedures established in policy.

15. Appeals from Board Decisions

If the Board is itself the body whose decision is being appealed, the appeal shall be heard by an appeal body appointed according to separate Board-approved procedure, or, if no such body exists, by a specially appointed panel of disinterested Full Members in good standing.

16. Relationship to Conflict Resolution Process

Nothing in this procedure shall be interpreted to require The Troth to treat every interpersonal dispute as a conduct violation.

Complaints that do not allege a violation of a bylaw, policy, or Code of Conduct may instead be referred to the appropriate conflict resolution process where doing so is more appropriate to the health, peace, and functioning of the community.

17. Confidentiality

All persons involved in investigations under this procedure shall maintain confidentiality to the greatest extent reasonably possible.

Information shall be shared only as necessary to investigate, review, deliberate, resolve, or appeal the matter fairly and responsibly.

18. Purpose and Governing Principles

This procedure is intended to create a fair, consistent, and trustworthy process for the handling of reported conduct violations.

It exists to protect the rights of complainants, respondents, leaders, and members alike, while preserving the diversity, safety, and health of The Troth.

The Troth Conflict Escalation and Resolution Procedure

Section 1. Purpose

The purpose of this Procedure is to provide The Troth with a fair, structured, and community-centered process for addressing serious, non-misconduct interpersonal conflict between two Troth members when that conflict has escalated to the point that it threatens the peace, stability, general order, or functioning of The Troth as a religious organization. This Procedure exists to preserve community where possible, reduce harm to the wider body, and provide a credible path toward de-escalation, mediated resolution, or, where necessary, organizational action.

This Procedure is not intended to resolve every disagreement in Heathenry, nor every dispute between members. It exists for a narrower class of conflict: disputes between two Troth members that have become sufficiently serious, irreconcilable, and disruptive that allowing them to continue unresolved would place the broader community at risk.

This Procedure shall not be used to bury misconduct, suppress good-faith reporting, or force reconciliation where safety, dignity, justice, or proper accountability require a different response. 

Section 2. Guiding Principles

2.1 Service to the community

This Procedure shall be administered for the good of The Troth as a whole, not for the vindication, humiliation, or defeat of either party. Conflict resolution within The Troth is meant to serve the well-being of the community and not become a contest in which one person “wins” by destroying the other.

2.2 Due process and fairness

The Troth recognizes that genuine accountability requires fair process, agreed rules, and a refusal to scapegoat either party. All persons involved in a matter under this Procedure shall be treated with dignity and shall be entitled to a process grounded in articulated concerns, appropriate review, and good-faith decision-making.

2.3 Coexistence rather than forced agreement

The purpose of this Procedure is not to force ideological agreement or to litigate every underlying dispute. The purpose is to help the parties reach a common understanding of the conflict and determine whether, and under what conditions, they can remain in the religious community together without continued harm to The Troth.

2.4 Early de-escalation

The Troth favors resolving conflict at the lowest appropriate level before it spreads further. De-escalation should begin when conflict stops being a good-faith effort at understanding and begins turning into defensiveness, faction-building, dogpiling, righteousness-seeking, or a struggle to “be right” rather than to resolve the issue.

2.5 Good-faith participation

This Procedure depends on the willingness of the parties to engage in good faith, to respect the process, and to value continued membership in The Troth enough to abide by a resolution if one is reached.

2.6 Context matters

Not every conflict belongs in a resolution process. Some situations call for self-protection, conduct enforcement, immediate safety response, or referral outside The Troth rather than mediation. The appropriate strategy depends on the nature of the conduct and the context in which it occurs.

2.7 Need-to-know confidentiality and accountable governance

This Procedure shall be handled with appropriate confidentiality, documentation, recusal, and need-to-know sharing, consistent with The Troth’s Leadership Code of Conduct and clergy obligations.

Section 3. Scope

This Procedure applies only to serious interpersonal conflict meeting all of the following conditions:

• a. the conflict is primarily between two individual persons at the center of the dispute;
• b. both central parties are current members of The Troth;
• c. the matter is a true interpersonal conflict rather than primarily an allegation of misconduct, policy violation, abuse of office, or criminal conduct; and
• d. the conflict has escalated to the point that it threatens the stability, general order, peace, well-being, or functioning of The Troth as an organization or religious community.

This Procedure may be used where the conflict originated inside or outside a Troth space, provided that the conflict is now materially affecting The Troth, Troth spaces, Troth leadership, Troth ministry, or the ability of members to remain in community together. This Procedure may inform pastoral response by Troth clergy in conflicts encountered through clergy work, but formal invocation of this Procedure is reserved to matters where The Troth has a legitimate organizational interest and actual authority to act.

Section 4. Matters Excluded from This Procedure

This Procedure shall not be used to address matters that primarily involve:

• a. criminal conduct;
• b. harassment, threats, intimidation, discrimination, bigotry, hate speech, or material disruption;
• c. false factual allegations made with reckless disregard for truth;
• d. misuse of The Troth’s name, logo, platforms, or apparent authority;
• e. privacy or confidentiality violations that expose members to harm;
• f. retaliation for good-faith reporting;
• g. abuse of power, officer misconduct, institutional bullying, selective enforcement, or misuse of moderation or disciplinary authority;
• h. any matter governed primarily by the Members’ General Code of Conduct, the Leadership Code of Conduct, safeguarding rules, disciplinary procedures, or applicable law.

Where a reported matter includes allegations of misconduct or Code of Conduct violations, the matter shall be referred to the Troth Conduct Investigation Procedures. 

If a matter initially presented as interpersonal conflict is later found to include substantial allegations of misconduct, abuse of power, retaliation, or Code of Conduct violation, the Board or other receiving authority may pause or terminate this Procedure and redirect the matter to the appropriate process.

Section 5. Definitions

5.1 Interpersonal Conflict

“Interpersonal conflict” means a serious dispute between two Troth members in which the central issue is the deterioration of their ability to relate, communicate, cooperate, or remain in community together, and which has escalated beyond ordinary disagreement to the point that it threatens harm to the wider Troth community or the functioning of the organization. An interpersonal conflict under this Procedure does not primarily consist of allegations of crime, misconduct, abuse of power, or Code of Conduct violation.

5.2 Serious, irreconcilable, and articulable

A matter is “serious, irreconcilable, and articulable” when the issue can be described clearly, has resisted ordinary efforts at resolution, and has grown beyond a passing disagreement such that continued inaction would likely damage the peace, order, or functioning of The Troth.

5.3 Good-faith participation

“Good-faith participation” means participation that is honest, respectful of the process, oriented toward resolution or workable coexistence, and not aimed primarily at humiliation, delay, spectacle, or engineering a pretext for expulsion or further conflict.

5.4 De-escalation

“De-escalation” means intervention intended to reduce emotional flooding, defensiveness, dogpiling, faction-building, or performative conflict so that the underlying issue can be addressed without further harm to the parties or the community. De-escalation may include pauses, moderator action, cooling-off periods, or referral to clergy or leadership.

5.5 Mediation

“Mediation” means a structured process facilitated by a neutral third party whose role is to keep the parties on track, prevent endless litigation, clarify the actual disagreement, and assist the parties in reaching an agreement or workable path forward for continued coexistence within The Troth.

5.6 Executive Session

“Executive session” means a confidential session of the Board or a duly authorized Board process used to consider a qualifying conflict matter and, where appropriate, to create a protected space in which the parties may speak candidly without unnecessary public pressure or performance.

5.7 Manifest bad faith

“Manifest bad faith” means conduct during the process that clearly shows an unwillingness to participate sincerely in resolution, including deliberate sabotage of the process, refusal to respect agreed boundaries, using the process solely to produce spectacle or punishment, or seeking to manipulate the outcome so that the organization cannot function.

5.8 Conflict with The Troth

“Conflict with The Troth” means a matter that is not merely interpersonal, but involves alleged Code of Conduct violations, abuse of power, officer misconduct, or similar conduct directed against the standards, governance, or institutional integrity of The Troth. Such matters are outside this Procedure.

Section 6. Reporting of Conflict Concerns

Any current member of The Troth may report a qualifying interpersonal conflict when that member reasonably believes the conflict has escalated beyond ordinary disagreement and now threatens the peace, stability, general order, or functioning of The Troth. Reports may be made by one of the central parties to the conflict or by another member who has directly observed the conflict’s effect on the organization. 

Reports under this Procedure shall be made to the Board of Directors, or to an officer designated by the Board to receive conflict reports. If a report is initially made to a Steward, Moderator, or member of the Clergy, that person may assist the reporting party in determining whether the matter appears to fall within this Procedure and, if appropriate, may refer the matter onward to the Board or designated officer.

A report should include, to the extent reasonably possible:

• a. the names of the two central parties to the conflict;
• b. a concise description of the issue in dispute;
• c. the reasons the reporting party believes the issue is serious, irreconcilable, and articulable;
• d. the reasons the reporting party believes the matter now threatens the peace, order, or functioning of The Troth;
• e. any relevant Troth spaces, events, ministries, or leadership functions affected by the conflict;
• f. any steps already taken to resolve or de-escalate the matter; and
• g. whether the reporting party is aware of allegations that may instead require referral to the Members’ Code, Leadership Code, disciplinary procedures, safeguarding procedures, or civil authorities.

A report need not prove the matter in full in order to be received. Its purpose is to trigger triage, not to prejudge the outcome.

No person shall be penalized merely for making a report in good faith, even if the matter is later found not to fall within this Procedure. The Members’ Code and Leadership Code both protect good-faith complaints and reporting.

Section 7. Initial Review and Triage

Upon receipt of a report, the Board or designated receiving authority shall conduct an initial review to determine whether the matter:

• a. falls within this Procedure as a serious interpersonal conflict;
• b. should first be addressed through informal de-escalation or pastoral intervention;
• c. should be referred to mediation at a later stage if lower-level intervention fails; or
• d. must instead be diverted to a different Troth process, including but not limited to the Members’ General Code of Conduct, the Leadership Code of Conduct, disciplinary procedures, safeguarding procedures, or any process required by law or by the bylaws.

In conducting triage, the receiving authority shall ask at minimum:

• 1. What is at issue? The issue must be serious, irreconcilable, and articulable.
• 2. Who is involved? The central conflict must be between two current Troth members.
• 3. What is at stake? The conflict must threaten the stability, general order, peace, or functioning of The Troth as an organization or religious community.

If the receiving authority determines that the matter primarily involves alleged criminal conduct, harassment, intimidation, discrimination, hate speech, material disruption, false factual allegations, privacy/confidentiality violations, retaliation, abuse of power, misuse of Troth authority, institutional bullying, selective enforcement, misuse of moderation powers, or other Code of Conduct issues, the matter shall not proceed under this Procedure and shall instead be referred to the appropriate Troth process. The conflict-resolution track shall not be used to dilute, delay, or displace proper accountability under the Troth’s existing codes and companion procedures.

If a matter contains both interpersonal conflict and possible misconduct, the Board or designated authority may separate the issues, pause this Procedure, or direct the matter first into the applicable conduct or disciplinary process. Where necessary to protect members or the organization, conduct-related concerns shall take priority over mediation.

Section 8. Early Warning Signs and Threshold for Intervention

The Troth recognizes that debate, disagreement, and strong differences of opinion are normal within a diverse religious community. Conflict resolution under this Procedure should not begin merely because two people disagree, speak sharply, or hold opposing views.

Intervention becomes appropriate when a conflict begins to show signs that it is no longer functioning as ordinary disagreement and is instead becoming destabilizing to the parties or to the community. Warning signs may include, but are not limited to:

• a. additional members becoming drawn into the dispute;
• b. battle lines, camps, or factionalism forming around the parties;
• c. dogpiling, pile-ons, or spectator escalation in Troth spaces;
• d. the discussion shifting from mutual understanding to efforts to “win,” shame, recruit, convert, or prove righteousness;
• e. increasing defensiveness, emotional flooding, or inability to pause productively;
• f. repeated attempts to “talk it out” that only worsen the conflict;
• g. spillover into multiple Troth spaces, ministries, or public-facing environments;
• h. visible interference with Troth work, volunteer collaboration, ministry, or member well-being; or
• i. conduct suggesting that unresolved continuation of the conflict will place the broader Troth community at risk.

The threshold for formal use of this Procedure is reached when the conflict has risen to the level that it must be addressed because leaving it unresolved would threaten the stability, peace, general order, or functioning of The Troth.

Section 9. Informal Resolution and Early De-Escalation

Before the formal mediation stage is invoked, The Troth shall, where appropriate, favor lower-level and less adversarial means of reducing harm and restoring workable communication. The purpose of early de-escalation is not to force premature reconciliation, but to prevent further damage while determining whether the matter can be resolved without formal Board action.

Informal resolution and de-escalation measures may include:

• a. encouraging the parties to pause direct engagement for a defined period;
• b. requesting that the parties refrain from continuing the conflict in Troth spaces;
• c. directing moderators to slow, pause, or close channels or threads in Troth-controlled spaces in order to interrupt dogpiling and emotional escalation;
• d. encouraging the parties to restate the issue more clearly and identify what is actually in dispute;
• e. referring one or both parties to a Steward, Moderator, or member of the Clergy for support in de-escalation;
• f. identifying a temporary communication boundary pending further review; and
• g. recommending training, coaching, or facilitated conversation where appropriate.

When de-escalation is attempted, the parties may be instructed not to use the pause as an opportunity to continue inflaming the matter elsewhere in a way that predictably spills back into Troth life. 

Nothing in this Section prevents a person from taking reasonable steps for self-protection or from declining informal engagement where self-protection, safety, or dignity requires stronger boundaries. 

Section 10. Escalation Path

The Troth adopts a layered escalation path for serious interpersonal conflict. The expected order of intervention is:

Members / Stewards / Moderators → Clergy → Board → Mediator

This path reflects the principle that conflict should be addressed at the lowest appropriate level first, while preserving the Board’s authority to intervene sooner when the seriousness of the matter requires it.

10.1 Member-level resolution

Members are encouraged to address ordinary conflict directly, respectfully, and early when doing so is reasonably safe and appropriate. The Troth should support members by providing basic conflict-resolution education so that fewer disagreements escalate into organizational crises.

10.2 Steward and Moderator intervention

Stewards and Moderators may assist in identifying when conflict has crossed from ordinary disagreement into destabilizing escalation. In Troth-controlled spaces, they may use ordinary moderation and stewardship tools to interrupt dogpiling, slow harmful exchanges, create cooling-off periods, and refer the matter onward when needed.

Stewards and Moderators are not final adjudicators under this Procedure unless separately authorized by policy. Their role is early intervention, containment, referral, and support.

10.3 Clergy pastoral intervention

Where lower-level intervention is insufficient or where the matter would benefit from pastoral care, Troth clergy may provide conflict support within the scope of their training and ministerial role. Clergy may help the parties clarify what is at stake, frame the issue in a way both can understand, and explore whether a path toward coexistence remains available.Clergy intervention under this Procedure is pastoral rather than investigative, adjudicative, or clinical. The Clergy Manual states that Troth clergy provide ethical and values-based guidance, are not a substitute for professional therapy, must know their limits, and must make appropriate referrals when a person’s needs exceed what the clergy member can competently provide.

A member of the clergy may recommend to the Board that executive session or formal mediation be invoked. If the clergy member successfully helps resolve the issue, no further report is required beyond what Troth policy otherwise mandates. When recommending advanced mediation, the clergy member need not disclose confidential details beyond what is already otherwise properly before the Board. Penitent privilege, pastoral confidentiality, and any applicable legal limits shall be respected consistent with Troth policy and applicable law.

10.4 Board review

The Board of Directors, or a Board-authorized process, is the body that determines whether a reported conflict warrants formal organizational intervention under this Procedure. The Board may:

• a. decline to invoke the Procedure;
• b. direct further informal de-escalation;
• c. refer the matter to clergy or another lower-level intervention;
• d. invoke executive session for confidential review;
• e. determine that mediation should be pursued; or
• f. divert the matter to the Members’ Code, Leadership Code, safeguarding, or disciplinary procedures where appropriate.

10.5 Mediation

Mediation is the advanced conflict-resolution stage and should be used only when the matter falls within this Procedure, lower-level intervention has not been sufficient, and the Board determines that formal mediation offers a meaningful possibility of restoring workable coexistence or at minimum producing a clear record and recommendation for next steps.

Section 11. Recusal, Conflicts of Interest, and Impartial Process

Any Board member, officer, clergy member, steward, moderator, or other participant in the administration of this Procedure shall disclose any personal, financial, romantic, organizational, factional, or other conflict of interest relevant to the matter consistent with the Conflict of Interest Policy.

Any such person shall recuse from decisions, recommendations, mediation, or confidential review where that person’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned. This includes, but is not limited to, situations where the person:

• a. is one of the central parties;
• b. has a close personal or adversarial relationship with one of the parties;
• c. has already publicly taken sides in a manner inconsistent with neutrality;
• d. has a leadership role that is itself part of the dispute; or
• e. may be a witness to conduct that belongs in another Troth process.

 

Section 12. Executive Session and Invocation of Formal Process

When the Board determines that a reported conflict may qualify for formal intervention, the Board may convene in executive session or direct that a confidential Board-governed process be used for preliminary review. The purpose of the executive session is to create a protected setting in which the matter can be considered seriously, candidly, and without unnecessary performance pressure on the parties.

The Board may invoke the formal process under this Procedure only when it determines that:

• a. the matter falls within the defined scope of serious interpersonal conflict;
• b. the issue is serious, irreconcilable, and articulable;
• c. the central parties are two current Troth members; and
• d. the conflict threatens the stability, peace, general order, or functioning of The Troth.

Upon invoking the formal process, the Board may direct the next appropriate step, including mediated resolution, protective interim measures consistent with Troth policy, or any other measure authorized by the bylaws and companion policies.

Section 13. Selection and Appointment of Mediator

When the Board determines that formal mediation is appropriate, it shall appoint or approve a neutral mediator. The Board may use a trained volunteer, an outside professional, or another qualified person, provided that the mediator is credible, impartial, and capable of conducting the process with seriousness and fairness. The mediator should, to the greatest extent reasonably possible, possess the following qualities:

• a. good listening skills;
• b. good communication skills;
• c. integrity and impartiality;
• d. patience;
• e. credibility in the eyes of both the parties and the organization;
• f. ability to maintain neutrality and control personal bias;
• g. tact, empathy, and respect for opposing views;
• h. awareness of cultural, social, economic, and gender differences;
• i. ability to keep parties on track and prevent endless relitigation; and
• j. ability to discern issues that are not properly mediable.

Where reasonably possible, the mediator should also understand Heathenry well enough to grasp uniquely Heathen grievances, religious context, and the communal stakes of the dispute.

No person may serve as mediator if that person’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

Section 14. Preparation for Mediation

Before mediation begins, the Board or designated process administrator shall ensure that:

• a. the matter has been confirmed to fall within this Procedure;
• b. excluded matters have been diverted as needed to the Members’ Code, Leadership Code, disciplinary, safeguarding, or legal processes;
• c. the parties have been informed of the nature and purpose of mediation;
• d. any needed temporary boundaries or moderation measures have been set;
• e. the mediator has been selected and accepted; and
• f. the parties understand that the purpose of mediation is not victory, spectacle, or public bloodletting, but a workable path to coexistence if one is still possible.

The Board may require the parties to acknowledge, in writing if appropriate, the basic expectations of the process, including confidentiality expectations, behavioral boundaries, and good-faith participation.

Section 15. Interim Protective and Stabilizing Measures

At any point after receipt of a qualifying report, and before final resolution, the Board or a properly authorized Troth authority may impose temporary measures reasonably necessary to protect Troth spaces, Troth work, the parties, witnesses, or the wider community.

Such measures may include:

• a. directing the parties to pause direct engagement in Troth spaces;
• b. limiting interaction in specified channels, meetings, or teams;
• c. temporary moderation restrictions in official Troth platforms;
• d. closing or slowing channels, threads, or other Troth-controlled venues where escalation is occurring;
• e. temporary communication boundaries;
• f. suspension from a particular volunteer role pending review, where necessary to preserve neutrality or stability; or
• g. other temporary boundaries consistent with Troth policy and bylaws.

These measures are not findings of guilt. They are temporary steps meant to interrupt dogpiling, emotional flooding, factional escalation, or institutional paralysis while the matter is being reviewed.

Where a leader is subject to temporary restrictions, those restrictions shall be applied consistently with the Leadership Code’s commitments to fairness, transparency, documentation, and non-retaliation.

Section 16. Mediation Process

The mediation process shall be structured, focused, and directed toward whether the two parties can remain in the religious community together without continued harm to The Troth.

The point of mediation is not to litigate every past event, determine cosmic innocence, or force personal or ideological agreement. The point is to reach a common understanding of the disagreement and determine whether, and under what conditions, the parties can coexist in The Troth in a way that no longer tears the community apart.

At a minimum, the mediator should guide the parties through the following steps:

• a. Clarification of positions. Each party shall be asked to describe the other party’s position in terms that the other party recognizes as substantially fair.
• b. Identification of misunderstanding. The mediator shall help determine whether the conflict rests in whole or in part on misunderstanding, escalation patterns, shame reactions, or drift away from the original issue.
• c. Clarification of stakes. The mediator shall help the parties understand what is at stake for each of them and for The Troth.
• d. Conditions for coexistence. The mediator shall help the parties answer questions such as: “What do I need to see, hear, or feel from this person in order to remain in community with them?” “How can we exist peacefully?” “What are you willing to do?”
• e. Path forward. The mediator shall seek a practical path forward, not endless revisiting of who was right or wrong.

The mediator may meet jointly or separately with the parties as appropriate, provided the process remains fair.

Section 17. Good-Faith Participation Requirements

All parties participating in mediation under this Procedure are expected to participate in good faith.

Good-faith participation includes:

• a. sincere engagement with the process;
• b. willingness to hear and restate the other party’s position fairly;
• c. respect for agreed process boundaries;
• d. refraining from attempts to inflame the matter in Troth spaces while mediation is pending;
• e. refraining from retaliation, intimidation, or misuse of Troth authority; and
• f. willingness to work toward a stable and enforceable path forward if one can be reached.

Manifest bad faith may include:

• a. using the process solely to humiliate or punish;
• b. refusing all sincere engagement while pretending to participate;
• c. deliberately continuing public escalation or dogpiling during the process;
• d. attempting to manipulate the process so that both parties are removed rather than resolved; or
• e. exploiting leadership power, factional support, or procedural loopholes to sabotage the process.

Where the party is a Troth leader, good-faith participation also includes compliance with the Leadership Code’s prohibitions on institutional bullying, retaliatory conduct, selective enforcement, misuse of office, and weaponizing frith to suppress justified concerns.

Section 18. Written Resolution, Memorandum, or Coexistence Agreement

If mediation produces a workable resolution, the mediator shall prepare a written summary of the outcome for the Board or designated Troth authority. That summary should identify:

• a. the agreements reached;
• b. the responsibilities assumed by each party;
• c. any communication boundaries, behavioral expectations, or role limitations agreed to;
• d. any follow-up check-ins, timelines, or review points; and
• e. any policy recommendations revealed by the process for future Troth consideration.

The written outcome may take the form of a mediation report, a memorandum of understanding, or a coexistence agreement, depending on the needs of the case and the level of formality appropriate. 

No resolution under this Procedure may excuse, conceal, or nullify conduct that must instead be addressed under the Members’ Code, Leadership Code, safeguarding procedures, or the law.

Section 19. Failure of Mediation and Recommendations to the Board

If mediation fails to produce a workable path to coexistence, the mediator shall submit a written report to the Board or designated authority identifying, as appropriate:

• a. whether mediation occurred and whether the parties participated;
• b. whether any agreement was reached in full or in part;
• c. whether one or both parties engaged in manifest bad faith;
• d. whether the mediator believes coexistence in The Troth remains realistically possible; and
• e. any recommended next steps.

The Board shall then determine what organizational action, if any, is required under the bylaws and companion Troth policies. If the Board determines that the continued participation of one or both parties would materially impair the peace, stability, general order, or functioning of The Troth, the Board may impose appropriate remedies authorized by the bylaws and applicable policies, including restrictions, removal from roles, suspension, or removal from membership, as applicable. 

 

Section 20. Confidentiality and Handling of Sensitive Information

Matters under this Procedure shall be handled as confidentially as reasonably possible, consistent with fairness, safety, law, and the legitimate needs of Troth governance.

Sensitive reports, personal information, private communications, and mediation materials shall be shared only on a need-to-know basis with persons responsible for triage, clergy care, mediation, governance, safety response, or legal compliance. 

Participants in this Procedure shall not publicly disclose private communications, identifying details, or confidential materials from the process except as reasonably necessary for good-faith reporting, safety response, legal compliance, or civil-authority involvement where required.

Clergy communications shall be handled in accordance with pastoral confidentiality, penitent privilege where recognized, and applicable law. Confidentiality is not absolute. It does not bar sharing what is reasonably necessary for good-faith reporting, safety response, legal compliance, or referral into the proper Troth process where misconduct or criminal concerns are present.

All formal records generated under this Procedure shall be maintained by the Secretary of The Troth, or by a Board-designated alternate where the Secretary is recused or unavailable.

Section 21. Anti-Retaliation

No member or leader may retaliate against any person for:

• a. making a good-faith report under this Procedure;
• b. making a good-faith complaint under the Members’ Code or Leadership Code;
• c. participating in mediation or review;
• d. serving as a witness or providing information in good faith;
• e. asking questions about the process; or
• f. participating in governance related to the matter.

Retaliation includes overt punishment, informal pressure, misuse of office, selective enforcement, exclusion from ordinary participation, intimidation, smear efforts, or the use of status to chill dissent or reporting.

Any retaliation occurring in connection with this Procedure shall be treated as a separate matter and may be referred to the Members’ Code, Leadership Code, or disciplinary process as appropriate.

Section 22. Recordkeeping

The Secretary of The Troth shall serve as the designated record keeper for matters handled under this Procedure, unless the Secretary is recused or otherwise unable to serve in a given matter. If the Secretary is recused or unavailable, the Board shall designate an alternate record keeper for that matter.

The Secretary, or designated alternate, shall maintain appropriate records of matters handled under this Procedure. Such records should include, as applicable:

• a. the initial report;
• b. the triage determination;
• c. any interim measures imposed;
• d. any clergy recommendation or referral;
• e. the invocation of executive session or formal mediation;
• f. the appointment of the mediator;
• g. the outcome of mediation;
• h. any Board determination and resulting action; and
• i. any follow-up steps or compliance review.

Records shall be handled in a manner consistent with privacy, need-to-know restrictions, and responsible stewardship of sensitive information. The purpose of recordkeeping is not to build gossip archives. It is to preserve institutional memory, support consistent handling, demonstrate fairness, and prevent repeated reinvention of process.

Section 23. Training and Prevention

The Troth shall invest in conflict literacy and prevention at multiple levels of the organization so that fewer conflicts rise to the level of formal intervention.

 

23.1 Members

The Troth should make basic conflict-resolution education available to members, including training in listening, de-escalation, avoiding dogpiling, and recognizing when a matter belongs in proper reporting channels rather than public escalation. 

23.2 Stewards and Moderators

Stewards and Moderators should receive additional training in recognizing escalation, intervening early, slowing harmful exchanges, protecting Troth spaces, and referring matters onward without overreaching into discipline or adjudication.

23.3 Clergy

Troth clergy should receive more advanced training in conflict resolution as part of pastoral care and clergy formation. 

23.4 Leaders

Troth leaders should be trained not only in conflict handling, but in the specific leadership risks identified in the Leadership Code: misuse of authority, retaliatory behavior, selective enforcement, poor handling of sensitive information, failure to recuse, and weaponizing frith to suppress justified concerns.

23.5 Mediator capacity

The Troth may retain an outside mediator, train a qualified internal volunteer, or pursue both paths over time, but any mediator used under this Procedure should meet the standards set forth in Section 13. The working group discussed both professional mediation and the possibility of developing internal capacity.

Section 24. Relationship to Other Troth Policies

This Procedure shall be read together with:

• The Troth Members’ General Code of Conduct;
• The Troth Leadership Code of Conduct;
• the Troth Clergy Manual and clergy ethics provisions where clergy are involved;
• any Troth safeguarding procedures;
• any Board disciplinary procedures;
• the bylaws; and
• any office-specific or program-specific rules adopted by The Troth.

Where those documents conflict, the interpretation that best protects safety, fairness, lawful conduct, and the organization’s ability to function shall govern, unless the bylaws require otherwise.

This Procedure does not replace the Members’ Code or Leadership Code. It exists alongside them and is meant for a narrower category of serious interpersonal conflict that is not primarily misconduct.

Section 25. Statement on Frith, Hospitality, and Accountability

The Troth affirms frith, hospitality, community harmony, and restoration where restoration is truly possible.

Accordingly, this Procedure shall never be used to:

• bury misconduct,
• pressure people to endure abuse,
• silence justified complaints,
• force reconciliation where safety or dignity requires distance, or
• create a false appearance of harmony at the expense of truth and accountability.

Section 26. Effective Administration

The Board of Directors shall be responsible for ensuring that this Procedure is administered consistently with The Troth’s bylaws, companion conduct policies, and governance obligations. Leaders and clergy involved in this Procedure shall remain within the limits of their roles, disclose conflicts where required, respect confidentiality and reporting limits, and avoid any misuse of office or pastoral trust.