Re: Question about household decision | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Philip Dowds (rphilipdowds![]() |
|
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 06:33:19 -0700 (PDT) |
I am wholly unqualified to provide legal advice to anyone, so if looks like I’ve said anything potentially interesting, be sure to double-check it with the legal experts in your jurisdiction. With this preamble as warning, here’s how I’ve seen it sorted out at Cornerstone, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts: Condominum ownership and occupancy exists by virtue of state enabling legislation. The Commonwealth’s primary concern for condos is that some identifiable entity has the power and the duty to protect the property, and the property interests of the owners. Most of the time, this is accomplished by the formation of an association “governed” by an elected Managing Board. How the Board is chosen, how it makes decisions, how it collects and spends money, etc, are not dictated in (much) detail in Massachusetts (as compared to a more stringently regulatory state like California). So in Massachusetts, the Commonwealth does not know or care anything about committees versus circles, double links versus sausage links, or consensus versus casting the I Ching. The main thing it cares about is, Is there a duly elected Managing Board in place, and is it acting to preserve the property and protect the interests of the property owners? At Cornerstone Cohousing — no surprise here, and common to other cohousing — many or most key decisions are made in plenary, by consensus, and many powers and duties are delegated (by the association, at plenary) to committees other than the Managing Board. Our Board does have a few unique powers and duties, but one of its “duties” is to ratify (“rubber stamp”) the decisions made and actions taken elsewhere. This fulfills the Commonwealth’s requirement of having an identifiable entity of ultimate authority and accountability, while at the same time allowing for a Cohousing-like distribution of power and duty broadly throughout the membership. Sometimes we call this the “weak Board” model — not as a pejorative, but as our shared intent. At Cornerstone, for better or worse, distribution of fiscal power and duty is broad, just like distribution of other power and duty. Cornerstone stays functional in part to a “budget” of volunteer hours, which for us, is just as essential as the budget of dollars. Additionally, keep in mind the four issues that condos — especially formational ones — are most likely to argue about: Guns; pets; smoking; and “noise” (subtext: kids). So self-governance is not always just about money. Voting? In Massachusetts, the “association” is made up of “units”, and for some circumstances, units “vote” according to weight of percentage interest. So the “vote” of a big unit counts for more than the vote of a small unit. At Cornerstone, our consensus efforts are almost always successful (or abandoned), and we rarely go to voting. In the rare case that a vote occurs, for us it's normally one household, one vote: What we vote on may not be a case falling within the requirements of the Commonwealth, and we do not recognize a split household. But for objections, it's always one member, one voice. Members living in the same household need not agree on the objection, and indeed we will sometimes have a case where one member objects to part of a proposal, and his/her partner does not join the objection. But like I said, this is what works for us in Massachusetts. What works for you in your jurisdiction could be quite different. Bottom line: You’ll probably find that the enabling legislation authorizing your existence as a condo or HOA provides plenty of latitude for you to behave like cohousing. Thanks, Philip Dowds Cornerstone Village Cohousing Cambridge, MA mobile: 617.460.4549 email: rpdowds [at] comcast.net > On Apr 5, 2018, at 9:59 PM, Chris Terbrueggen <christopher402 [at] gmail.com> > wrote: > > I am going to make my question more specific. When a cohousing organization > decides to become a condo association are there specific roadblocks to keep > in mind when trying to develop a sociocracy governance system? > > After reading the national cohousing list serve history, I noticed that > Sharon V. made a distinction between monetary or fiscal issues when it > comes to condo association decisions, compared to all other decisions. > > Concerning one decision or one vote per household. I trying to understand > how to grapple with this one, since I know that sociocracy uses consent and > not voting. How could we resolve this issue in our condo docs? We will be > writing our condo docs in the near future. > > > Thanks, Chris > _________________________________________________________________ > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > http://l.cohousing.org/info > > >
- Re: Question about Household Decision, (continued)
- Re: Question about Household Decision Bob Leigh, April 5 2018
- Re: Question about Household Decision Muriel Kranowski, April 5 2018
- Re: Question about Household Decision Sharon Villines, April 5 2018
-
Question about household decision Chris Terbrueggen, April 5 2018
- Re: Question about household decision Philip Dowds, April 6 2018
- Re: Question about household decision Sharon Villines, April 6 2018
-
Question about household decision Chris Terbrueggen, April 6 2018
- Re: Question about household decision Dick Margulis, April 6 2018
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.