My Twin Oaks Clearness
Twin Oaks does not use the same clearness process that Acorn does. At Acorn clearnesses are mandatory and common – you do one with every other member face to face at least twice per year. At Twin Oaks years can go by without using this personal process tool which shares the same name but has a somewhat different function.
The Acorn clearness has two parts individual clearnesses followed by a group clearness. Twin Oaks only does the collective clearness, and by missing the one-on-one versions the most important aspect (in my evaluation) is missing.
Only one person with concerns came to my clearness today, lets call them Fuliano. Fulianos concerns were:
- Dual members are not really at either community
- i already live outside the Twin Oaks property code, dual membership will worsen this
- As planner i will want us to take on more, without dropping things
- Fuliano struggles with my class and privilege
- They dont want me to be recruiting more people like me
Parts of this are a quite a reasonable critique actually. I have watched other dual members struggle with responsibilities at both communities splitting their time and attention and in some cases frustrating them and causing them to drop dual membership.
Members at Twin Oaks get $75 to $85 per month. This does not typically afford the amount of traveling i do. Fuliano looked at this and felt like it was not fair because it was not accessible to other members. It is an egalitarian community after all, we are striving towards fairness and these privileges make me different from other members. And while this is true, a perhaps a violation of the spirit of the property code. The letter of the property code is that members can get gifts. The travel i do that is not for the community functions (college speaking tours, sales trips, Monsanto protests, etc) is often paid for by gift money. The commune has a very liberal policy around accepting gifts and ultimately Fuliano was forced to admit that i was inside the letter of the policy. Though they thought i was not inside the spirit of it.
One of the things i want to do as a planner is dust off the most recent long term planning survey and see what pieces of that brainstorm we should realize. Fuliano is worried about this, because we are already over extended in commitments from the community and adding more plans on top of our existing demands will worsen things. While i completely understand this argument. It is in essence the argument for embracing the status quo, which i am not willing to do.
The class and privilege stuff i need to examine more.
Fortunately for Fuliano, i find very few people like me. But there actual concern was that i would seek out others who looked for loopholes and wanted to live in community as i do. Here again, this is not what i am seeking in new members.