Values
- Effective use of individual members’ time
- Effective use of group time
- Satisfaction with group decision making process
Need
Free up community to get large amounts of trivia in process without holding up due to inability or lack of clarity around making decisions.
Goals
- Enable “small” decisions to be made more easily without burdening the larger group with the overhead involved.
- Free up umbrella and subcommittees to make decisions within their arena, and easily socialize ideas.
- Educate the group regarding negative issues of micro management, and positive aspects of appropriate delegation, complete with modeling of new socially responsible behaviors.
- Reduce complaints from members of the community regarding holes in the present decision making system.
Decision
Cascadia Commons HOA will establish a “Decision Board” on which the “small decision” will be posted in special format (see page 2), not less than two weeks before the closing date of the decision. The primary mechanism will be physical, and may also be electronic (e.g. copy to email).
A small decision is a minor implementation issue, which isn’t very complicated, implements no new policy, costs little to nothing, nor does it conflict with any stated values. As a general rule, the implementation is not permanent, nor does it significantly impact usage of common areas. The work is squarely within the charter of activities already sanctioned. “Grounds work” happens, Etc.
Before posting, the originator must check with someone on the committee that governs the activity (e.g. landscape) to check whether the proposed decision will conflict with any activities underway in committee. (This is a courtesy.)
As a guiding principle, a majority of random people questioned should consider the issue small, though any substantive objections should automatically remove the proposal from this “small decision process” These reasons include:
- Safety
- legal liability
- Cost
- Substantive change to the use of a common area
- Permanence
- Conflict with committee work in progress (committee must object on their own behalf)
- Conflict with charter or core values
During the course of the two weeks the decision poster will receive written (and signed) feedback on the posted form so that anyone can see progress to date. Elaboration may happen in person of course. Anonymous diatribes will not be tolerated.
A successful small decision will have thirteen signed “yes” responses, up to two “no” signed no responses, and zero signed substantive objections as defined in #4 above. (We should remember that consensus does not mean veto, and that we need to be clear why passing the small decision would be bad for the community.)
Any small decision, which doesn’t succeed in this process, will need to go through the respective committee to end up as a standard proposal to the full Group.
A successful small decision will be due for full group review after a period of six months.
This small group decision process is due for review by the full group in July of 2004.