Back Mosaic

Minutes of Mosaic Commons General Meeting
March 18, 2001, 3:30-6:30pm

Location: Parmenter Health Services
Notetaker: Dwight & Stephanie
Facilitater: Scott
Present: Rosa, Catya, Scott, Lori*, Jason*, San, Emma, Pascal, Kai, Stephanie (* first meeting)

Decisions:

Consensus is at the invidiaul level, voting is at the individual level, membership is at the household level and
financial contribution is at the household level. The exception is that from a given household only one
individual needs to participate on committees. (This wording is not exact but will be incorporated into the
Operating Agreement and formal wording will be approved then.)

Action Items:

Coordinating


Secretary

Membership and Marketing

Finance

Land/Site

Professionals

Discussion:

1. Opening Activity:
Dwight picked from The Book of Questions

2. Review and Approve Minutes
Minutes Approved

3. Approve Agenda
Agenda Approved

4. Video from Tierra Nueva
We watched the video of Dwight and Steph’s tour of Tierra Nueva in California from December 2000. During the video we put together a marketing mailing.

5. Equity Membership

6. Membership Document:

-------------Break-------------

6. Membership Documents Continued:

7. Operating Agreement

Kai looked at operating agreements from other groups and looked at what kind of things they address that we do not. Some of them read very legalistic but we've agreed we don't need to write that way - however there ARE some legal type stuff that we probably do need to have in our operating agreement. Kai will work on this further this week.

Some things that other groups have in their OA that we do not:

1) Admission and Expulsion: all have language about admission and expulsion of members in addition to the financial issues most groups have a vote on who to admit or expel. Some specify some reasons for expelling household such as fraud/crime, etc. And that these are done by consensus (admitting and expelling). **Kai will write this up for our group to review at the next meeting.

2) Indemnification: i.e. that the group will stand up for a member that does somethign on behalf of the group - an individual is not held individually responsible unless they've really violated the trust of the group. Kai will look into this further.

3) Conflicts of interest: we need some rules about this

4) Cash calls- we have this but one thing we don't have is if a cash call can't met by the members the group can borrow money from an insitution. **Kai will formulate this for the cash call policy as well.

5) Failure to make payment: What happens when folks don't make their contributions - we have some language about this drafted now (but not adopted yet) - one of the things that Kai also saw addressed is that you fall back in seniority. We think this is reasonable. Steph raises question of what happens if people continue to pay $ but don't participate. Discussed this but didn't come to any conclusions.

6) Stepping-back: language about retrieving contributions after you "step-back", two ways to do this:

a) will get contribution back after completion of project

b) will get contribution back as soon as another member and/or household joins the project (i.e. replaces the outgoing person's contribution). We could phrase it such that it is up to our discretion on the timing of the return of the money.

Is membership by household or individual? We've discussed it and used it informally - currently financial contribution is by household, consensus is by individual, and that at least one member of a household must be at meetings/participating. If we come to a vote (if unable to reach consensus) do we vote as individuals or households? San points out that we need to formalize this language.

Proposal: Consensus is at the invidiaul level, voting is at the individual level, membership is at the
household level and financial contribution is at the household level. The exception is that from a given
household only one individual needs to participate on committees.

Folks seem to agree with the intent of this wording, but Rosa points out that it might make sense to toss this around a bit more for the purposes of voting. Also need to decide on what makes up a quarum - households or individuals. Decision: The proposal was approved - the exact wording will be worked into the Operating agreement and voted on then.

**All will discuss the rest of this debate (voting should be individual or household?) in email and will be on the agenda for the first meeting in May.

8. Committee Reports:

9. Time, Place, Agenda items for next meeting and social event:

10. Misc
This table will be added to a Unit Costs & Information document handed out at Introductory meetings:

Unit Type
Square
Feet
Preliminary
Price
5%
minimum *
Monthly
Payment
to 5% *
1 bed
  700
~$150k
$  7,500
$  500
2 bed
  850
~$168k
$  8,400
$  550
3 bed (small)
1040
~$192k
$  9,600
$  675
3 bed (large)
1400
~$245k
$12,250
$  850
4 bed
1800
~$301k
$15,050
$1000

home back to top
Copyright [dates], Mosaic Commons LLC
Contact us! * Email info or webmaster
Last modified: October 3, 2001