Minutes of Mosaic Commons general meeting

Sunday, February 6, 2000, 3:30-6:30 p.m.

Location: Linda, Zara & Steve’s house in Framingham

Meeting facilitator: Laura

Process facilitator: Kai

Notetaker: Lisa

Present: San, Kai, Emma, Pascal, Janet, Joel, Eliana, Linda, Zara, Laura, Mike, Ryan, Serena, Lisa, Andey, Joa, Ann Danielson (guest of Lisa & Andey)

 

0.         Prior to the meeting, printed materials were distributed into envelopes.

 

1.             Opening Activity

Mike. People paired up and conversed with the task of finding something unique that they had in common. Pairs then presented their findings to the group.

 

2.             Review colored cards  

Kai. A use for the orange card during discussions was introduced. This card can be used to indicate showing appreciation for someone’s contribution to the discussion.

 

3.             Review and approve minutes from last meeting

Lisa. Questions were raised as to the process for minutes approval. This discussion will be circulated via email, and perhaps a process can be decided upon for the next meeting. Linda requested time to read the minutes during break, and it was agreed that we would postpone approval of the minutes until after break. However we did not remember this, so the minutes from the January 23, 2000 meeting have not been approved. This should occur during the next meeting.

 

4.             Approve Agenda

Laura. The group agreed to hold discussion of item number five, ground rules, via email first, and then bring it to next week’s meeting to finalize. Otherwise the agenda was approved as presented.

 

5.             Discuss ground rules

Joel. Postponed until next meeting; email discussion to happen first.

 

6.         How should the group's relation to SVS be stated?

Andey summarized her email on this subject, and requested an initial go-around with each person stating their thoughts and responses. Consensus was reached on the following statement:

 

With regards to our relationship to the Sudbury Valley School: We agree that in a written history or biography of our group, an historical statement acknowledging our connection to the Sudbury Valley School ought to be included. Current suggested wording is: Mosaic Commons initially evolved from conversations among members of the Sudbury Valley School Community, including families whose children attended SVS, and has since grown and expanded to include families with many other educational philosophies. It was also agreed that individuals writing their biographies for our web page or other publications are free to include reference to SVS, and links to the SVS web page.

 

Janet initiated a discussion inquiring into the reasons this issue has emerged as important to some group members.

 

7.         Revise Mission Statement and Adopt It

Laura. The group was reminded that our mission statement is open to revision at any time. Consensus was reached on the following mission statement:

 

To create and live in a residential community (20-35 households) in the metro-west area (west of Boston) based on the cohousing style of living including:

 

·       a balance of shared, common space and private homes,

·       a common house integral to community activities,

·       housing design and development that supports community living,

·       child-friendly environment with adequate centralized play areas (inside and outside),

·       minimal impact of automobiles in and around our living and recreational areas,

·       group decision-making,

·       environmental consciousness,

·       social responsibility, and

·       financial responsibility.   

 

To create housing that is affordable to individuals and families with a range of incomes. 

 

To create a community that welcomes and supports diversity of age, race, religion, sexual orientation, ability, political persuasion, educational philosophy, family structure and financial status. 

 

Our intention is to support each other and embrace the need for extended family creating a healthy interdependence. 

 

8.             Committee Reports I       

 

8.a.            Coordinating Committee     

San. Discussion included a summary of the next big project of the coordinating committee, to clarify our mission and goals. Janet raised questions about Laura’s email regarding overload and the distribution of the work load of the coordinating committee.

  

8.b.             Diversity/Affordability         

San, Andey. Low activity on this committee currently. Linda attended a Habitat for Humanity event and has information from it.

 

8.c.             Website          

Mike. After some discussion and minor alterations in the proposed document, consensus was reached on the following Protocol for Distributing Documents:

           

Protocol for Distributing Documents

Following is the method for distributing official information, including

minutes:

 

1.     Meeting recorders or whoever type up their notes.

 

2.     Copy and send them as text inside a sv-coho email within 48 hours (NO attachments).

 

3.     Any comments/changes should be posted in a sv-coho email within 48 hours of #2 above.

 

4.     A member of the webpage committee (currently Catya) will then convert the text notes (and add changes making a reference note to the original text) into HTML code and will incorporate the revised document on the web site.

 

5.     At the next general meeting, the revised document will be subject to consensus.

           

Discussion of prospective member information survey form, a draft proposal of which can be found at http://mck.mit.edu/cohousing/coho_survey.html. There was a generally accepted suggestion that we make a basic form for people who express initial interest, and a more detailed form for people who sign the IOA. It was suggested that we hold general discussion over email of what each of these two levels of forms should include.

 

9.         Group Name

Consensus was reached that the group’s name will henceforth be Mosaic Commons.

 

BREAK

 

10.             Committee Reports II

 

10.a.             Professionals                        

Mike and Linda reported on their 1/28 meeting with Carter Scott, a Lexington-based developer. They stated that they were meeting with Oak Tree, a large developing company, on 2/7. Kai inquired about references on Carter Scott and other developers, and Mike responded that we were checking references, but had not heard back yet from the one reference Carter Scott had offered.

 

10.b.             Membership           

Janet and Linda distributed the a handout entitled “How to Get Involved with Mosaic Commons.” The proposal was not adopted, but several changes were agreed upon, and the group stated a hope that the proposal could be finalized at the next meeting.

 

The following changes were accepted by the group:

 

·       Under the category “Friend of Mosaic Commons,” the last paragraph in that section, the last two words should read “information form” instead of “membership form.”

 

·       Under the category “Friend of Mosaic Commons,” the last paragraph in that section, a sentence was added: “This $25 can be applied within a calendar year toward the $50 Associate Member fee.”

 

·       Under the category “Associate Member of Mosaic Commons,” in the introductory paragraph the fourth word, “households,” should be replaced with the word “people.”

 

·       Under the category “Associate Member of Mosaic Commons,” under the sub-category “benefits,” the sentence “The opportunity to build…” should be moved up above “The right to actively participate…”

 

·       Under the category “Associate Member of Mosaic Commons,” under the sub-category “responsibilities,” the first item in the list, a period should be added after the word “scheduled,” so that “Exceptions…” begins a new sentence.

 

·       Under the category “Associate Member of Mosaic Commons,” under the sub-category “process for becoming an Associate Member,” the first item in the list, the first sentence should instead read, “30 days active participation in general meetings and committee work.”

 

·       Under the category “Associate Member of Mosaic Commons,” under the sub-category “process for becoming an Associate Member,” the second item in the list, the words “membership form” should be changed to “information form.”

 

·       Under the category “Full Member of Mosaic Commons,” in the introductory paragraph the fourth word, “households,” should be replaced with the word “people.”

 

·       Under the category “Full Member of Mosaic Commons,” under the sub-category “benefits,” the sentence “The opportunity to build…” should be moved up above “Full participation…”

 

·       Under the category “Full Member of Mosaic Commons,” under the sub-category “responsibilities,” the fourth and fifth items on the list should begin with the words “Be familiar with…” rather than “Become familiar with.”

 

·       Under the category “Full Member of Mosaic Commons,” under the sub-category “process for becoming a Full Member,” the first item in the list, the first sentence should instead read, “30 days active participation in general meetings and committee work.”

 

·       Under the category “Full Member of Mosaic Commons,” under the sub-category “process for becoming a Full Member,” the third item in the list, the words “membership form” should be changed to “information form.”

 

There was discussion of making more specific the written requirements for committee membership, and Janet and Linda stated that they thought the point of this document was to offer general membership information, not fine details, and that those should be left to the by-laws.

 

There was a clarifying discussion of the intention of the sentence “Make a proportional share of the capital contributions as needed to finance project development,” which appears under the category “Full Member of Mosaic Commons,” under the sub-category “responsibilities.” The group agreed that this language is intentionally vague, as we have not yet decided whether “proportional” refers to proportional to one’s square footage, proportional to ones income, or divided into equal proportions regardless of other factors (ie. everyone required to pay 1/20^th of the total cost).

 

There was a question raised about the process for the community to accept or reject a potential member. The group agreed to discuss this via email.

 

There was discussion of whether the group might add an exceptions clause to the mortgage pre-qualification requirement of full membership. It was also suggested that a “responsibility” of full membership be added that dealt with communicating major changes in financial status to the financial committee (ie. some who pre-qualify for a mortgage now may not continue to pre-qualify if laid off, etc.). These issues were deferred to the finance committee.

 

 

On a separate membership committee issue, Janet brought up the question of where we currently stand on opening up membership. It was agreed that we cannot open membership until the membership document currently under review is accepted by the group.

 

The membership committee requests that in the next two weeks people offer them feedback on what new member orientation should include.

 

10.c.             Site/Land/Building

Not discussed due to time.

 

10.d.             Finance

Not discussed due to time.

 

11.       Time, place, agenda items for next meeting and social event

The next social event will be at Janet, Joel & Eliana’s house next Saturday. Janet will forward details via email. The next business meeting will be February 20^th 3:30 – 6:30, location to be announced.

 

12.             Review of Meeting & Closing

Not discussed due to time.