P2 Cluster Envelope
February 1, 2021 Community Meeting We approved by consensus the following proposal:
|
P2 Water System Buy-In
February 1, 2021
Community Meeting
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
February 1, 2021
Community Meeting
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
- Phase 2 will pay $92,400 to Phase 1 to tie into the Phase 1 water system.
- The CFT and Mac will have the authority, working with engineers, to determine how and where P2 will tie into the P1 water system.
2021 Steering Team Slate
February 18, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
2021 Steering Team Slate:
February 18, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
2021 Steering Team Slate:
- Becky Logan (returning member)
- Michael Walker
- Ronda Ramsier
- Nisargo Troy
- Maria Miller
Budget & Assessments Agreement Revision
March 22, 2021
Community Meeting
We approved by 80% Fallback Supermajority Vote the following proposal:
Revise the Budget & Assessments agreement by removing the word “Only” from the first paragraph in the Assessments section.
Add at the end of the first paragraph:
Children 5 years old or younger are excluded from the census.
Add a second paragraph:
Additionally, people with special needs may be excluded from the census. Special needs include various types of life-limiting impairments: physical, developmental, behavioral/emotional, and sensory. Because of the wide variety and degree of special needs, each situation will be considered on a case by case basis. If a household would like to have someone in their household excluded from the census due to special needs, the household must request an exclusion from the Steering Team. The Steering Team determines whether someone qualifies for a special needs exclusion based on whether the individual requires significant care or supervision above and beyond what’s typical for people of a similar age to meet their basic needs, prevent physical self-injury or injury to others, and/or to avoid placement in an institutional facility. After being granted a special needs exclusion, a household will notify the Steering Team if there’s ever any change in the person’s impairment that would cause them to no longer qualify for the special needs exclusion.
Revise the Financial section of the Specific Responsibilities and Authorities section of the Steering Team section of the Teams agreement by adding the following bullet:
Determine qualification for special needs exclusions (as detailed in the Budget and Assessments Agreement). – Full Authority
March 22, 2021
Community Meeting
We approved by 80% Fallback Supermajority Vote the following proposal:
Revise the Budget & Assessments agreement by removing the word “Only” from the first paragraph in the Assessments section.
Add at the end of the first paragraph:
Children 5 years old or younger are excluded from the census.
Add a second paragraph:
Additionally, people with special needs may be excluded from the census. Special needs include various types of life-limiting impairments: physical, developmental, behavioral/emotional, and sensory. Because of the wide variety and degree of special needs, each situation will be considered on a case by case basis. If a household would like to have someone in their household excluded from the census due to special needs, the household must request an exclusion from the Steering Team. The Steering Team determines whether someone qualifies for a special needs exclusion based on whether the individual requires significant care or supervision above and beyond what’s typical for people of a similar age to meet their basic needs, prevent physical self-injury or injury to others, and/or to avoid placement in an institutional facility. After being granted a special needs exclusion, a household will notify the Steering Team if there’s ever any change in the person’s impairment that would cause them to no longer qualify for the special needs exclusion.
Revise the Financial section of the Specific Responsibilities and Authorities section of the Steering Team section of the Teams agreement by adding the following bullet:
Determine qualification for special needs exclusions (as detailed in the Budget and Assessments Agreement). – Full Authority
Carport Roof Team Reserve Revision
April 12, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Revise our carport roof replacement Team Reserve to make it a carport roof and gutter replacement or repair Team Reserve.
April 12, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Revise our carport roof replacement Team Reserve to make it a carport roof and gutter replacement or repair Team Reserve.
Chat Guidelines Revision
April 19, 2021
Community Meeting
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
The P&C Team proposes that the community adopt a two-chat system, with an amendment to the included topics for the HW-CONNECT chat.
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Chat Usage Guidelines
SENDING:
April 19, 2021
Community Meeting
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
The P&C Team proposes that the community adopt a two-chat system, with an amendment to the included topics for the HW-CONNECT chat.
- HW-BIZ: the place to post Community-specific and time-sensitive information and announcements regarding HW business, decisions, budgets, team activities, meeting agendas and minutes, meals, work parties, celebrations, facilities maintenance, urgent rides needed, etc.
- HW-CONNECT: the place to post non-urgent requests for rides, food ingredients, tools, help with projects, etc.; outside information about non-HW meetings; invitations to engage around or have further discussions about religious, political, and cultural issues, as well as interests, hobbies, etc.; and sharing jokes, poems, pictures, articles, etc.; and generally, topics that might be of interest to some, but not all of the community.
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Chat Usage Guidelines
SENDING:
- Is your email a HW business-related issue (HW-BIZ) or a non-essential (HW-CONNECT) one?
- Should this be a face-to-face conversation? Is ‘chat’ the right forum for this conversation or topic?
- Plan to follow our Interpersonal Agreements when creating emails.
- Don’t react: queue first drafts (or write a second draft), review and review again before you send.
- Subject lines matter: Include all pertinent information in the subject line (who, what, when, where, why, how) so that the recipient can get a good idea about what the email is about without having to open it.
- If you request a response that does not require community input, ask responders to email or “ping” you privately via email, text or phone.
- Avoid clogging the chats with general acknowledgements, kudos or “thank you’s.” If you choose to reply with a “thanks!,” please put your note in the subject line (so others don’t have to open each email). If two to three “thank you’s” have been posted to the chat, please consider reaching out to the sender privately, so as to not clutter the chat.
- Whenever possible, unless you are providing additional information of perceived value to the community, it’s best to respond to the sender privately.
- Plan to follow our Interpersonal Agreements when responding to emails.
- If you are particularly moved by an email, express it privately in person, phone or private email—the sender will really appreciate it.
- Before you respond and before you “Respond All” — is this an HW-BIZ email or a HW-CONNECT email?
- When appropriate, quote from the original email for clarity.
- Proper punctuation and using paragraphs to separate your thoughts are friendly communications protocol and increase readability and comprehension.
- Try to avoid the use of ALL CAPS.
Pay Clint $75 for Line Locating Work
June 7, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Allow CFT to pay Clint $75 for his time doing line locates.
June 7, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Allow CFT to pay Clint $75 for his time doing line locates.
UTV Purchase Authorization
June 22, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Create an Extraordinary Spending authorization for the purchase of a Utility Task Vehicle (UTV). It is anticipated that the fire mitigation grant which was awarded to us will pay for 50% of the UTV up to $9000. The spending authorization for our share of the UTV purchase will be a maximum of $10,000. The Fire Mitigation Task Force will be responsible for the UTV purchase. The Pasture team will be responsible for the long term care and maintenance of the UTV.
The UTV Extraordinary Spending will be funded from the $1000 UTV Planning Reserve and a loan from our other reserves for the balance, up to a total loan of $9000. Money from this sum not spent directly on the purchase of the UTV will be held on Heartwood account for use on later equipment enhancements for the UTV. This provision terminates at the end of 2022.
We will create a Team Reserve for the eventual replacement of the UTV:
June 22, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Create an Extraordinary Spending authorization for the purchase of a Utility Task Vehicle (UTV). It is anticipated that the fire mitigation grant which was awarded to us will pay for 50% of the UTV up to $9000. The spending authorization for our share of the UTV purchase will be a maximum of $10,000. The Fire Mitigation Task Force will be responsible for the UTV purchase. The Pasture team will be responsible for the long term care and maintenance of the UTV.
The UTV Extraordinary Spending will be funded from the $1000 UTV Planning Reserve and a loan from our other reserves for the balance, up to a total loan of $9000. Money from this sum not spent directly on the purchase of the UTV will be held on Heartwood account for use on later equipment enhancements for the UTV. This provision terminates at the end of 2022.
We will create a Team Reserve for the eventual replacement of the UTV:
- Useful Life: 30 years
- Reserve Cap: $18,000
- Annual Contribution (Reserve Cap divided by Useful Life): $600
Revise Community Work Agreement to Allow Teams to Hire Members
June 23, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Change the Community Work agreement by adding the words shown in italics to the original text as follows:
Hiring Members
The community may choose to hire a member to get work done. In general, the member is paid no more than what the community could pay to someone hired from outside the community. In order to be hired, a member must have completed the required 25 hours per quarter of donated time in the previous three months. Teams have the authority to hire a member for up to $300 per job and need to post their decision to the chat prior to when the work begins. The decision to hire a member for more than $300 must be made by the community (not a team) and also must be made prior to when the work commences.
June 23, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Change the Community Work agreement by adding the words shown in italics to the original text as follows:
Hiring Members
The community may choose to hire a member to get work done. In general, the member is paid no more than what the community could pay to someone hired from outside the community. In order to be hired, a member must have completed the required 25 hours per quarter of donated time in the previous three months. Teams have the authority to hire a member for up to $300 per job and need to post their decision to the chat prior to when the work begins. The decision to hire a member for more than $300 must be made by the community (not a team) and also must be made prior to when the work commences.
Revise Fallback Resolution Process Section of Decision Making and Meetings Agreement
July 7, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Change the Decision Making and Meetings agreement to address some of the concerns brought up at the 3/22/21 Community Meeting where we reviewed the Fall Back Resolution Process. The proposed changes are in red.
WORKING WITH TOPICS AND MAKING DECISIONS
All voting members are given an opportunity to comment and/or express concerns on a topic. Intellectual and emotional input are both welcome. Decisions are to be made from the community’s perspective. A voting member may choose to red card or Stand in the Way of a decision when s/he believes that the decision would be seriously wrong for the group, not because s/he personally disagrees with it. A voting member may also choose to Stand Aside in making a decision, which means that s/he personally doesn't agree with the decision but doesn't see it as contrary to the stated values of the community.
Major concerns with a proposal are concerns that a voting member considers significant enough to warrant having the community or team work to resolve. A major concern is indicated by a red card that stops the process in a straw poll or consensus "vote." Major concerns are recorded, indicating who has concerns and what the concerns are. Each major concern is discussed until the person(s) holding the concern feels that the concern has been satisfactorily addressed, except in the case of a Fallback Resolution Process (see FALLBACK RESOLUTION PROCESS below). (CONSENSUS ENHANCEMENT PROCESS)
Because a red card stops the process until it is resolved, it is important to remember that a red card presents an opportunity to explore and understand more fully any issues with a proposal. How the community works with a red card has the potential to increase cooperation and connection within the group. Both the red card holder and the community must explore the red card concern with full seriousness and respect, in a spirit of mutuality. We respect each person’s right to hold a red card and with that right comes the responsibility to show up and participate in the process in a spirit of cooperation and collaboration for the good of the community.
Proposals at Community Meetings may not be modified and consensed at the same meeting, however, because of the need to allow for Absentee Voting (doesn't apply to Team Meetings). A consensus decision is made once there are no major unresolved concerns remaining.
FALLBACK RESOLUTION PROCESS (CONSENSUS ENHANCEMENT PROCESS)
If one or more members red cards a proposal, the red card holder(s) is responsible for organizing meetings with the Topic Guide(s) who presented the proposal or their appointed representatives, and any other interested members in a series of solution-oriented, consensus-building meetings. The purpose of the meetings is to work through the concerns and mutually agree on a revised proposal that addresses the same problem as the original blocked proposal. These meetings must take place within two months. Agendas for the meetings are posted to ensure that members who want to be part of crafting a modified proposal can be involved. Minutes of the meetings are posted to ensure that members are up to date on progress toward a modified proposal. It is recommended that four meetings are held, if needed, to find resolution and create a revised proposal. If no meetings are initiated in the first 30 days, the original blocked proposal is brought to the next available Community Meeting for a 80% Supermajority Vote.
If a revised proposal is created within two months of the red card, the revised proposal is brought to the community for consideration as a new proposal.
If resolution cannot be achieved and no revised proposal is created within two months of the red card, the original blocked proposal is brought to the next available Community Meeting for a 80% Supermajority Vote. Clarifying questions are permitted, but further exploration and comments about the proposal are not. The original blocked proposal passes, resulting in a community decision, if a supermajority of 80% of the members present at the Community Meeting vote for the proposal.
The two month clock for the Fallback Resolution Process (CONSENSUS ENHANCEMENT PROCESS) starts running in the case of any of the following:
July 7, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
Change the Decision Making and Meetings agreement to address some of the concerns brought up at the 3/22/21 Community Meeting where we reviewed the Fall Back Resolution Process. The proposed changes are in red.
WORKING WITH TOPICS AND MAKING DECISIONS
All voting members are given an opportunity to comment and/or express concerns on a topic. Intellectual and emotional input are both welcome. Decisions are to be made from the community’s perspective. A voting member may choose to red card or Stand in the Way of a decision when s/he believes that the decision would be seriously wrong for the group, not because s/he personally disagrees with it. A voting member may also choose to Stand Aside in making a decision, which means that s/he personally doesn't agree with the decision but doesn't see it as contrary to the stated values of the community.
Major concerns with a proposal are concerns that a voting member considers significant enough to warrant having the community or team work to resolve. A major concern is indicated by a red card that stops the process in a straw poll or consensus "vote." Major concerns are recorded, indicating who has concerns and what the concerns are. Each major concern is discussed until the person(s) holding the concern feels that the concern has been satisfactorily addressed, except in the case of a Fallback Resolution Process (see FALLBACK RESOLUTION PROCESS below). (CONSENSUS ENHANCEMENT PROCESS)
Because a red card stops the process until it is resolved, it is important to remember that a red card presents an opportunity to explore and understand more fully any issues with a proposal. How the community works with a red card has the potential to increase cooperation and connection within the group. Both the red card holder and the community must explore the red card concern with full seriousness and respect, in a spirit of mutuality. We respect each person’s right to hold a red card and with that right comes the responsibility to show up and participate in the process in a spirit of cooperation and collaboration for the good of the community.
Proposals at Community Meetings may not be modified and consensed at the same meeting, however, because of the need to allow for Absentee Voting (doesn't apply to Team Meetings). A consensus decision is made once there are no major unresolved concerns remaining.
FALLBACK RESOLUTION PROCESS (CONSENSUS ENHANCEMENT PROCESS)
If one or more members red cards a proposal, the red card holder(s) is responsible for organizing meetings with the Topic Guide(s) who presented the proposal or their appointed representatives, and any other interested members in a series of solution-oriented, consensus-building meetings. The purpose of the meetings is to work through the concerns and mutually agree on a revised proposal that addresses the same problem as the original blocked proposal. These meetings must take place within two months. Agendas for the meetings are posted to ensure that members who want to be part of crafting a modified proposal can be involved. Minutes of the meetings are posted to ensure that members are up to date on progress toward a modified proposal. It is recommended that four meetings are held, if needed, to find resolution and create a revised proposal. If no meetings are initiated in the first 30 days, the original blocked proposal is brought to the next available Community Meeting for a 80% Supermajority Vote.
If a revised proposal is created within two months of the red card, the revised proposal is brought to the community for consideration as a new proposal.
If resolution cannot be achieved and no revised proposal is created within two months of the red card, the original blocked proposal is brought to the next available Community Meeting for a 80% Supermajority Vote. Clarifying questions are permitted, but further exploration and comments about the proposal are not. The original blocked proposal passes, resulting in a community decision, if a supermajority of 80% of the members present at the Community Meeting vote for the proposal.
The two month clock for the Fallback Resolution Process (CONSENSUS ENHANCEMENT PROCESS) starts running in the case of any of the following:
- Community Meeting ends with an unresolved red card concern in a straw poll.
- Community Meeting ends with an unresolved red card concern in a consensus vote.
- Red card is posted in a posted decision proposal.

2022 HOA Budget
October 30, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
A) ASSESSMENTS
Monthly assessments will be:
Household of 0: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $0 Resource Usage Fee = $120 Monthly Total
Household of 1: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $56 Resource Usage Fee = $176 Monthly Total
Household of 2: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $112 Resource Usage Fee = $231 Monthly Total
Household of 3: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $167 Resource Usage Fee = $287 Monthly Total
Household of 4: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $223 Resource Usage Fee = $343 Monthly Total
Household of 5: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $279 Resource Usage Fee = $399 Monthly Total
Household of 6: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $335 Resource Usage Fee = $455 Monthly Total
It is estimated that this will generate a 12 month total of approximately $69,000.
B) OPERATING USES BUDGETS
Consistent with the Operating section of the Budget spreadsheet dated 10/14/21 (above), the total 2022 Operating Uses budget will be $50,833. Specific team Operating budgets are detailed in the spreadsheet. Teams are authorized to spend their Operating budgets as they decide consistent with their responsibilities listed in our Teams agreement.
C) EXTRAORDINARY SPENDING
The following Extraordinary Spending is authorized for 2022 (see detailed notes below):
FMTF - Contractural Services (Grant) $6,000
Total $6,000
C1 Team or task force with spending authorization is indicated.
C2 Spending authorization is effective immediately and ends on December 31, 2022, unless otherwise noted.
C3 Extraordinary Spending is to be consistent with the Extraordinary Spending Request submitted and this proposal.
C4 Because we received a grant to pay for almost all of the fire mitigation work, the Extraordinary Spending for P2TF - Fire Mitigation: Heartwood Lane & P1 ($20,360) that we approved along with our 2021 budget is being retired and replaced with the Extraordinary Spending for FMTF - Contractural Services ($6000). The authorization for FMTF - Contractural Services ($6000) will end on December 31, 2023. The authorization for Fire Mitigation: Heartwood Lane & P1 Loan is also being retired.
D) TEAM RESERVES
Annual contribution to Team Reserves will be $0 in 2022. This is in addition to operating profits that automatically get added to Team Reserves at yearend.
E) LOAN REPAYMENTS
We will pay back $1000 of the Water Well #5 Loan and $1000 of the UTV Loan.
October 30, 2021
Posted Decision
We approved by consensus the following proposal:
A) ASSESSMENTS
Monthly assessments will be:
Household of 0: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $0 Resource Usage Fee = $120 Monthly Total
Household of 1: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $56 Resource Usage Fee = $176 Monthly Total
Household of 2: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $112 Resource Usage Fee = $231 Monthly Total
Household of 3: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $167 Resource Usage Fee = $287 Monthly Total
Household of 4: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $223 Resource Usage Fee = $343 Monthly Total
Household of 5: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $279 Resource Usage Fee = $399 Monthly Total
Household of 6: $120 Homeowners’ Assessment + $335 Resource Usage Fee = $455 Monthly Total
It is estimated that this will generate a 12 month total of approximately $69,000.
B) OPERATING USES BUDGETS
Consistent with the Operating section of the Budget spreadsheet dated 10/14/21 (above), the total 2022 Operating Uses budget will be $50,833. Specific team Operating budgets are detailed in the spreadsheet. Teams are authorized to spend their Operating budgets as they decide consistent with their responsibilities listed in our Teams agreement.
C) EXTRAORDINARY SPENDING
The following Extraordinary Spending is authorized for 2022 (see detailed notes below):
FMTF - Contractural Services (Grant) $6,000
Total $6,000
C1 Team or task force with spending authorization is indicated.
C2 Spending authorization is effective immediately and ends on December 31, 2022, unless otherwise noted.
C3 Extraordinary Spending is to be consistent with the Extraordinary Spending Request submitted and this proposal.
C4 Because we received a grant to pay for almost all of the fire mitigation work, the Extraordinary Spending for P2TF - Fire Mitigation: Heartwood Lane & P1 ($20,360) that we approved along with our 2021 budget is being retired and replaced with the Extraordinary Spending for FMTF - Contractural Services ($6000). The authorization for FMTF - Contractural Services ($6000) will end on December 31, 2023. The authorization for Fire Mitigation: Heartwood Lane & P1 Loan is also being retired.
D) TEAM RESERVES
Annual contribution to Team Reserves will be $0 in 2022. This is in addition to operating profits that automatically get added to Team Reserves at yearend.
E) LOAN REPAYMENTS
We will pay back $1000 of the Water Well #5 Loan and $1000 of the UTV Loan.