Community Meeting; Twin Oakers vs Land Reparations

Meeting hosted by RET 4/1/2026

For accessibility reasons for people who process information better via audio vs reading, we are including the audio recording of the meeting here: "unlisted" youtube video link with audio only

Present: Aram, Ada, Cecil, Chris, Christian, Edmund, Ezra, Fae, Harlock, Hawina, Holly, Jason, Jessica, Jessie, Kate, Keenan, Klein, Leighland, Mac, Mala, Ollie, Pam, Sebastian, Shal, Shilpa, Tigger, Valerie, Varun, Xando, Zi

Jeli: Thanks everyone for coming. This meeting is about Earthly Wilds. The purpose is information-gathering and getting everyone on the same page, so we can move forward with clearer decision-making processes. We have a lot to cover. We'll start with openers from Trout and Miles. The rest will be a Q&A. We had an input box out for questions, which we reviewed yesterday. We divided the questions into six topics, and we'll spend 15 minutes on each. The topics are: Infrastructure & Resources; Legal; Membership; Intercommunity Communications & Process; Current Political Climate; and Other Land Parcel Considerations. I'll give things over to Trout and Miles.

Trout: I wanted to start this meeting with an acknowledgement of the land and its history. When I see all the war zones, devastation, acts of war against poor people around the world, it brings me to the early 1800s. During the Indian Removal Period, a lot of people were removed from this part of the country, and others were removed from their countries and brought here on boats to lifetimes of enslavement. We live 45 minutes from the capital of the Confederacy. I come from a place where this is isn't as relevant. It's good to acknowledge the history here. It may be different that the history where you're from. We should all reflect on this.

Miles: I want to continue with historical context, and why land reparations matter. [the write-up Miles read at the meeting follows]:

Opening Frame: Historical Context for Why Land Reparations Matter This project is grounded in the long historical context of land in Virginia. Indigenous peoples lived on this land for thousands of years before colonization, which brought displacement, genocide, deforestation, and the forced labor of kidnapped Africans. The histories of Indigenous and African resistance to domination are intertwined. Indigenous communities also faced forms of enslavement and forced labor during early colonization. But even within that system of oppression, there was always a fight for freedom. Enslaved people did not passively accept their conditions. There were constant acts of rebellion, escape, and refusal. Some of the most powerful examples of Black self-determination emerged right here in Virginia, in the Great Dismal Swamp. “Maroon communities” formed there, made up of formerly enslaved people who escaped and built self-sufficient societies in the swamp, beyond the reach of white control. These communities survived for generations, creating their own systems of land stewardship, mutual aid, and autonomy under extremely harsh conditions. They were intentional communities, built by Black and Indigenous people, who had been pushed onto marginal land, and turned that marginalization into a foundation for freedom. “Maroon Communities” are the ancestral legacy that inspire our new community. After the Civil War, Black people continued to pursue land ownership and self-sufficiency, but faced sharecropping, Jim Crow laws, and systemic barriers designed to undermine those efforts. Over the last hundred years, 90 percent of Black owned land in the American South was lost due to violence, forced migration, and local, state, and federal programs designed to prevent generational wealth accumulation. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, mostly white, middle class college students embraced the back to the land movement, re-appropriating the imagery of homesteading and pioneering. Meanwhile, rural Black communities were still under threat. Lynching by the KKK, being denied USDA loans, and other systemic barriers made it dangerous for Black people to participate in many spaces in the rural south. These are the conditions that resulted in the resurgence of homesteading and communes in that era to remain overwhelmingly white. During that time period, some Black communities were forced to build their own models of self-determination. Organizations like the Black Panther Party developed survival programs that directly met the needs of their communities. Their free breakfast programs fed thousands of children. Their health clinics, education programs, and mutual aid efforts demonstrated a working alternative to the systems of Capitalism and The State which had excluded them. This kind of self-determination was seen by the dominant power structure as a threat, even more threatening than the Black Panthers self defense tactics were. All of this history is important and still affects our present day reality. Twin Oaks was founded in this historical context, and so it has benefited from these stacked historical conditions. Yet it also holds the possibility of creating something new that addresses these injustices. That is the purpose of Land Reparations and the vision of Earthly Wilds Community. To restore connection, sovereignty, and justice to the land, while re-imagining what intentional community can mean.

Why This Is Necessary: Our decision to build Earthly Wilds comes from patterns we have experienced within the existing communities movement that reflect the broader negative societal dynamics of mainstream America. Even where individual intentions are good, there are hard limits to what existing structures are able to provide, especially when issues like Racial Equity were retrofitted on, rather than being a foundational core cultural value. Our response has been one of pre-figuration, to build a new structure alongside the existing structure. As always, everyone should feel empowered to speak freely about this, and we are open to dialogue. At the same time, we will continue moving forward with our new Community as a response to needs we have identified through lived experience. Our intention is not to debate whether those needs are valid, but to remain in conversation about how we move forward in a way that is respectful and constructive for both communities.

What We Are Actually Asking For:I want to be clear: we’re only asking for land, something Twin Oaks has in abundance. We’re not asking for money or labor, which are scarce resources here. If Twin Oaks decides it wishes to donate additional resources, we would gladly accept them, as we have gratefully accepted the new labor-budget-area which Twin Oaks has generously created for us. However, it has always been our intention to be responsible for ourselves, including finding our own grants and donations to support the creation and ongoing work of the new community. The exact parcel of land has not yet been determined, as we want this choice to reflect both our own preferences and the input of Twin Oaks. That is the primary area for Twin Oaks’ decision-making in this process, the question of land, and the terms under which land reparations may or may not move forward. This is an appropriate space for discussion, disagreement, and formal process. Even so, Earthly Wilds itself will still exist in one form or another as a broader community initiative that extends beyond any single decision making outcome.

Land Trust Proposal: Our proposal is to transfer the land title into a legally binding Land Trust. This Land Trust will remove the land from sale or privatization while allowing it to be stewarded according to clearly defined purposes written into the Trust. The Land Trust is intended to be a durable, long-term structure designed to outlast any single group of people. Clauses to incorporate include:

1. The land will be intended for BIPOC-led communal living, reparative justice, and ecological stewardship.
2. Ecological stewardship is understood to include sustainable human habitation, food production, ecological building, and regenerative land practices.
3. Economic activity on the land must be community-owned and mission-aligned, intended to support collective livelihood, land care, and long-term sustainability. Private profit derived directly from land-based activities is prohibited.
4. If Earthly Wilds Community dissolves or is no longer able to serve as the active steward, it will be responsible for selecting a successor group with substantially similar mission, values, and practices. If no such successor group is identified within two years, Twin Oaks will become the default beneficiary, with the land remaining in Trust.

Earthly Wilds Community Exists Now: Earthly Wilds Community is still early, but it is already something real. Even without yet having land stewardship, this new community does already exist socially, conceptually, and legally as a growing distinct entity. We were born from RET, but we now extend beyond it. Our support network is not limited to within Twin Oaks. It reaches into the broader intentional communities movement. We’ve received backing from the executive director of the Foundation for Intentional Communities through fiscal sponsorship, allowing us to begin raising tax deductible funds under their 501c3 status, until we finish the process of becoming a full nonprofit organization ourselves. We have also received steady support from our fellow members on the BIPOC Intentional Communities Council, including enthusiasm from fellow council members Quanta and Ira, who have engaged with and supported Earthly Wilds throughout the months of our ongoing discussions. Earthly Wilds is no longer a hypothetical or future-dependent project. It is already in motion and will continue to develop over time. Twin Oaks’ internal processes will help shape certain aspects of that development, but they are not the sole factor determining its trajectory.

Clarifying Core Terminology: In these discussions, it is helpful to be specific about how we are using terminology like intersectionality. This is a term which came out of Feminist Theory, and it is not just about having multiple identities, but about understanding how systems of power interlock and shape lived experience. For example, the experience of race cannot always be separated from class, gender, or other forms of marginalization. These systems do not operate independently, they overlap and reinforce one another, often creating compounded barriers that are not visible when looking at any one factor in isolation. An intersectional approach helps us understand why people in different positions may experience the same environment in very different ways, and why solutions that address only one dimension of inequality often fall short. Earthly Wilds Community uses intersectional theory as a lens, while focusing on anti-racism as a context-specific priority. This reflects the reality that racial harm has been particularly entrenched in the context we are emerging from at Twin Oaks.

Clarifying our Anti-Authoritarian Structure: Another core value guiding our new community's internal governance is anti-authoritarianism and a rejection of hierarchical power structures. In our community, power is exercised horizontally and with consent. Since I have personally been a very visibly proactive member of Earthly Wilds Community, some people might make the understandable misconception that I am the “leader”. This misunderstanding may cause the main discussion to be derailed to be about my personality. I’m open to refining how I express and communicate my ideas, but as an anti-authoritarian, I reject the title and concept of “leadership” over other people. Our community is being designed so that it can function without any single individual, including me. All members are empowered to make decisions without filtering them through one person. Our Community operates via a consent based decision making structure, the same model that RET has been trialing internally for some time. So, a BIPOC ”led” community in this context means centering the needs of marginalized members, especially where those needs are shaped by lived experience of oppression. Being anti-hierarchical and prioritizing marginalized voices are not in conflict. Anti-hierarchy creates space, and centering marginalized voices ensures that space is safe.

Aspirational long term Future: What Earthly Wilds Will Actually Do Once Established Once landed and established, Earthly Wilds will be outward-facing. It will support people beyond its membership through mutual aid infrastructure including food systems, housing support, healthcare access, natural disaster response, education, and land-based skill sharing. This work is solidarity, not charity. It is a model for building collective autonomy in response to systemic failures in housing, healthcare, food access, and economic stability. This approach is designed to be scalable and adaptable across contexts, supporting other communities in developing their own systems of care and resilience.

Conclusion: What This Means for Twin Oaks moving forward Supporting this project does not have to come at the expense of Twin Oaks or its cohesion. Ideally, it reflects a commitment to continuing to grow and evolve in alignment with shared values. Earthly Wilds represents an opportunity to contribute to the future of the broader communities movement, bringing in new energy, skills, and perspectives that can strengthen us all. We invite Twin Oaks to be part of that process, and to help shape what this can become, not just for this moment, but for the future of the broader communities movement.

[Note-taker remark: Earthly Wilds Community will be abbreviated as "EWC" throughout the remainder of these notes.]

Jeli: The first topics is Infrastructure & Resources. Several people asked about road access. [map displayed on screen]

Trout: The proposal that I put out for this isn't a concrete proposal. We'd be discussing this as a community. I do feel that this is a workable situation. It would involve transferring the title of Blackberry Ridge, formerly known as the Clear-cut, and providing access to W Old Mountain Rd. The section on the map "B" [the area between Blackberry Ridge and W Old Mountain Rd, which includes the Moss Trail and Grain Bin] would not be transferred to Earthly Wilds, but EWC and TO would both have sovereign access to the land. [Note-taker remark: I'll be referring to "section B on the map" as "Grain Bin Area" going forward, for the sake of clarity and brevity. See also copy of the map attached at the end of the notes.] Presumably the access road would be upgraded at some point, since a well-drilling truck would need a road to get there if we wanted to make a well. Jeli: Updating the access road to a primary driveway would be a labor monetary cost incurred by EWC, as well as any legal requirements for road access.

Jeli: Updating the access road to a primary driveway would be a labor monetary cost incurred by EWC, as well as any legal requirements for road access.

Shal: Would the entrance be at the Grain Bin?

Hawina: I see it at EC on the map, the dotted orange, right?

Trout: Yes, at EC.

Jeli: The next question is about water, utilities, and electric. What will be the short-, medium- and long-term sources?

Trout: Short-term, we have a tank on wheels from dairy that holds 250 gallons, which we could bring up on a truck. Longer-term, I would build a well, septic tank, and electrical hookup at the Grain Bin. That would allow people to live in tiny houses in the area. We would probably want a well out there [on Blackberry Ridge] that's solar powered. That will be a major expense.

Pam: Drilling a well takes lots of money. Why would you drill one in the Grain Bin Area when the long-term plan is to have one at Blackberry Ridge? Why two wells?

Trout: One is a medium-term solution. I think people wanting to be involved with building EWC might arrive in tiny houses or buses. Having a place for people to stay [in the Grain Bin Area] where we're not running into sanitation issues. We've talked about water, electrical, etc., but not about sewage. For sewage there's also a short-, medium, and long-term solution. We should get a septic tank in both places so that a main house can be built to support community functions. It's difficult to build a house without a septic tank and well. Short-term, I have a composting toilet that I think will do the job. It does the job in many places in the community and takes a couple hours to make. There's camping, tiny house, and main building levels to think about.

Mala: With the money it would take to drill the wells and to do all this infrastructure, if you can come up with that kind of money, why would you not want to buy land that already has a well?

Miles: I've looked into this, and cost is very site-specific, especially septic, with soil conditions and percolation. It can be very cheap or very expensive. I'd budget at least 30k for well and septic, but the cost of land that has a functioning well and septic system would be more like 130k depending on location and acreage. In order to begin fundraising, it helps to have a physical landing site for the community. But yes, the future of EWC may be raising funds to buy land elsewhere. Right now we're in the very early stages of development.

Jeli: How about solar technology? This ties into the next question about what resources EWC is bringing to the project.

Miles: For electric and water, I have personal experience living off the grid, treating my own water, and generating my own electric. I have 400 watts of solar and 200 amp of batteries, which is enough to live a comfortable existence with fridge, fans, devices, etc. I also bring to the table my tiny house, which Cecil and I lived in for years in MI, with off-grid capability. We'd also be drawing from experiences of others, such as people at LEF.

Jeli: This development is something EWC would be responsible for, not TO.

Varun: I've heard the term "founding members." It would be helpful to clarity who founding members are. For short-, medium-, and long-term plans, would it be helpful to have a running tally of resource needs, so we can have a more structured discussion as a community? It would be helpful to track and review this information, including identifying resources TO might be providing, such as the truck that Dairy uses.

Jeli: To clarify, Dairy has a water trailer that attaches to a 4x4 truck. We used to use it, but we don't anymore.

Trout: It hasn't been used in 5 years.

Jeli: The next topic was going to be Legal, but since Varun asked about Membership we can do that now.

Edmund: I have another infrastructure question. County is particular about zoning requirements. If you want to build a house, it needs to have frontage on a county road. Have you looked into that?

Miles: That's why the Grain Bin Area has been highlighted, because that's how we'd get road access and frontage that's required by the County.

Jeli: Could you talk about your solar powered well?

Miles: Something I built in MI was a hand-pump well, then I added a motorized arm to it. It was charged by solar panels. I'm used to improvising things like this, for short-term. (Youtube Video Here)

Jeli: On to membership: Who is EWC and what defines "BIPOC-led"?

Miles: By default, founding board members are all the members of RET, since the project was born out of RET. In this context, as I talked about in my intro, EWC doesn't have a hierarchical leadership structure, so BIPOC-led means we're listening to the needs of members who are facing particular oppressions. So if we were going on a gender issue, we would listen our to members who are more affected by that. Since we're emerging out of the context of racial harm in the IC movement, that's why EWC is focused on anti-racism and is BIPOC-led. If there wasn't such a need for anti-racism in the IC movement, we probably wouldn't need to exist.

Jeli: I'm going to get into more specifics about membership, to distinguish between members and non-resident members who don't intend to move onto the land. Trout's been using the word "associate" to describe himself. There will be members of RET who won't leave TO but are helping to found EWC. This would distinguish non-residents from those living on the land, which would include some BIPOC from TO and also focus on recruiting non-TO BIPOC who might not fit into what works for TOers.

Mala: Can you name the current Twin Oaks members who want to live at Earthly Wilds?

Miles: I don't know if they've consented to be named. Myself and Cecil will be resident members. We're not trying to poach TO of its members. We're more focused on recruiting members who wouldn't otherwise be involved in the IC movement. All of the founding members of EWC are the current members of RET. The matter of who will be residents will depend on where the land is and how we can build on it, so it's difficult to answer the question now, as I don't totally know myself.

Mala: Can you list the current members of RET? I know there's been some turnover.

Miles: Myself, Jeli, Seya, and Shilpa.

Mala: Trout is not a member of RET?

Miles: Trout was a member of RET, but not right now.

Mala: Is Trout on the board?

Miles: Trout is contributing as a founding member, but he's most likely not interested in becoming a resident member. Our residency will be limited by our housing, which will depend on what land we're on. I'll be bringing my own housing, but beyond that it's difficult to say what our residency will be like in the early stages. Medium- and long-term, our goal is to have residents who wouldn't otherwise not have a change to or be comfortable in the IC movement.

Pam: I understand you don't want to name people who haven't consented, but could you say how many TOers or others are committed to being residents?

Miles: At least 5 people.

Pam: Besides yourself and Cecil?

Miles: Yes. It would be limited at first due to limited resources, but the goal is to expand.

Jeli: The next question is related, which was minimum and maximum community size. Maximum depends on resources available. Minimum would be 2-4 residents on the property. A small community in the founding stage is valid. The next question is about a "failure clause" in a land trust: For how long can there be only one resident member before initiating the reversion of land back to TO? Both communities would evaluate based on the annual average. So only one person living on the land for a couple months wouldn't change things, but if someone was on the land by themselves for a year or more then that would initiate a conversation. Failure clause basically means the project is abandoned. Maybe it makes sense now to talk about the land trust agreement and how it defines success or failure. EWC would cover the cost of drafting the agreement.

Miles: Our proposal is to transfer the title of the land into a land trust. Land trusts are distinct legal entities, so it wouldn't belong to EWC or to TO. This would apply to whichever piece of land TO consents to. It removes risk of sale or privatization of the land if EWC fails. The point of the land trust is to remove risk and assuage concerns about what happens in the worst case scenario. Worst case scenario, EWC fails as a community and the land reverts back to TO. We want to include the possibility of a successor group similar to EWC being stewards of the land. This isn't the first time a BIPOC community has been suggested and may not be the last. So if EWC fails, there could be a provision about TO helping to select a successor group. But by default, TO would receive the land back. The land trust doesn't permit sale or privatization.

Tigger: Has EWC explored the possibility of having a completely separate board from the people moving onto the land? They could be experienced in BIPOC ventures and have access to donors outside our knowledge. Have you considered reaching out to Soulfire Farm and others about joining an independent board? This could help with moving forward, building trust at TO, and being part of something bigger than ourselves.

Miles: We hadn't considered that, but it's a very good idea. It sounds like you're talking about a new board being overseers of the land trust as a neutral third party.

Tigger: Yes, the would help negotiate agreements and have access to resources we don't know about. Because they're independent, it could resolve some control issues.

Miles: We were thinking of hiring a lawyer to be a neutral third party between EWC and TO, to create the land trust agreement. It's good to be concerned about conflicts of interest and to have a neutral third party. EWC would be the beneficiary of a land trust, but would not own the land. I like your idea of including the broarder BIPOC IC movement in a neutral third party.

Hawina: At an earlier meeting, there was a suggestion that if the land reverts back to TO it would be "earmarked" for a similar project.

Miles: Yes, this is the legalese way of saying that. The land would be "earmarked," in the form of the land trust, for a similar organization if EWC fails. We hope that EWC doesn't die, but if it does, we'd like to help set someone else up for success.

Kate: A couple questions. First, I was curious how far you are along with the land trust. Also, I want to make sure we're thinking about TO's 501(d) status. If we have non-501(d) activity on 501(d) land, that could pose a risk of TO losing its tax status or owing back taxes. Have you talked about that with a third party, and who have you talked to so far? We need to ensure this doesn't become a problem down the road.

Miles: We've reached out to pro bono lawyers since we're just in the early stages of fundraising. There aren't many pro bono lawyers. We've had limited legal consultation so far, but we'll continuing to look into this. We don't want to do anything to risk TO's tax status.

Tigger: TO's 501(d), Twin Oaks Community Incorporated, doesn't have anything to do with the land. If it's outside of TO's assets, it shouldn't infringe on our tax status.

Miles: The land title wouldn't be owned by TO, it would be owned by the land trust.

Varun: I'd feel a lot more comfortable if these assertions that we wouldn't be impacted came from a tax expert.

Jeli: To clarify, legal costs will be covered by EWC. The current vision for EWC is a legal entity will be 501(c)(3) status. The land trust agreement, and the road access and zoning, would be drafted by TO, EWC, and a lawyer. We do have bylaws. Someone asked about about TO's Louisa County forest/agricultural district status and how that would impact subdividing the land. Someone else asked about an easement on the property.

Trout: I think we could cut through a lot of complicated agreements by having an easement. That would allow TO to remain in control of certain things.

Mala: What is an easement?

Tigger: I want to be clear that we're talking about EWC being a completely separate legal entity, with an agreement with TO to be two separate legal entities. An easement is like a right-of-way, a legal agreement that we grant that you can drive on our roads and use our spaces under certain conditions such as travel and placing power lines.

Jeli: Next topic is Intercommunity Communication and Process. The first question is, what sort of land process is needed for short-term development? We can talk about bush hogging, storage space, paths and trails. Process isn't needed to camp.

Fae: I want to say that I don't want to see work on the ground being done on any of these parcels until one is picked. Blackberry Ridge is my favorite place. I hope you aren't doing anything beyond routine seasonal maintenance.

Trout: About the bush hogging, whether there is or is no EWC, both futures want to see the land bush hogged. If we bush hog, the blackberry bushes will continue to be accessible, if we don't they'll grow impassable.

Hawina: I thought your paper mentioned bush hogging paths. Can you clarify if you meant the paths or the whole land?

Trout: Mowing is how I've done miles of paths. Bush hogging can't be done with a lawn mower and requires community agreement, it would be mowing the whole 15 acres.

Hawina: When I hear that, I think there aren't going to be any blackberries left. Can you clear that up?

Tigger: If we don't maintain that land, there will be pine trees in 6-7 years. I think what I hear is that people are trying to keep pines from growing up. They always come back.

Chris: If we want to optimize for blackberry production, it might involve mowing one third of the parcel each year.

Jeli: Stephan as Land Planner has offered to help us with process for short-term use of the space. The next question is, why did RET put out our latest EWC informant as a mailbox letter with input box instead of an O&I? Someone perceived an element of secrecy. We did a mailbox letter because we wanted an in-person discussion, to consolidate the questions, and to answer as a team. This helped us be better prepared for this meeting. The next question/comment is that EWC doesn't engage with process. We postponed a meeting due to emotional burnout from the fire. We're interested in open dialogue and it's been a struggle that there's no set process for this. We hope to get everyone on the same page with this meeting, and it's up to the Planners ultimately to inform the process.

Ada: Question for anyone: What has EWC done that people feel has been outside of TO process?

Hawina: My question for the input box didn't mean EWC never engages with process, but at times it has come across that way. The paper on Monacan Land, I interpreted to say as "Twin Oaks is racist. Reparations are in order." There was never a sit-down to have a conversation with Forestry. I wrote a comment on the paper asking about next steps. I felt like the paper was put out as "we want this," which is good to know, but it felt like not engaging in process. My comment was meant as, of course it's frustrating with the racist microaggressions that BIPOC members deal with, but we could feel more like we're cooperating and let's work together.

Jeli: Thank you. You weren't the only person to give that input.

Shilpa: We were also thinking of the Discord discussion.

Mala: Part of what made me feel like this was bad process was the focus on Monacan Land for so long, then a sudden shift to Blackberry Ridge. This is more than just camping up there. Without any process, truckloads of stuff have gone up there, such as cinderblocks and lumber. It's going to take a lot of labor to move that stuff back down if the location isn't approved. That feels like bad process to me.

Jessie: To answer Ada's question: On top of what Mala said, there was the paper Trout posted with "I don't need permission to camp on the land." I read it as "I don't need to go through community input or process." It didn't feel community-involved.

Tigger: I'm very supportive of putting land in a BIPOC trust, but I want to acknowledge the frustration of not getting agreements in place. Even people who support this wanted more meta agreements. I wanted to validate that.

Trout: I hear what people are saying. A lot of my reasoning came from seeing people around me downtrodden, and I wanted to infuse confidence in the people that I'm working on this project with. When I saw Harmony burning, I felt it's time to go out on the land. I was inspired by a particular person camping. It was a culmination of things. I do feel I rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. I felt I had something to say.

Jeli: I think the next two questions were already answered, I'll read them out to see if anyone wants more clarification. The first was "What is the intended relationship between EWC and TO?" and the second is "What is the process to request labor/monetary resources from TO?"

Trout: To the first question, I feel TO and EWC have an opportunity to collaborate, to work on something together.

Miles: It's our intention for EWC to have a friendly, neighborly relationship with TO. EWC would be a separate legal entity, not just an offshoot. We hope to be able to mutually benefit from shared agreements.

Tigger: I think what people are asking is--Will EWC be sapping labor from TO's domestic budgets?

Miles: No.

Jeli: That's related to the other question about the process to request labor or funds from TO? The Planners did make a labor budget available to EWC last fall, which was kind and generous. It's not something EWC will be requesting, since the request is focused on land. To who will decide if/where resources are made available, that would be the Planners and our normal budgeting process. The last question in this section is: "Would EWC eat at ZK and contribute to meal-related prep or cleanup until a functional kitchen is set up on the land?" People who are residents on the land who don't have a defined status at TO wouldn't be eating at TO meals. EWC would have two types of memberships, people who have a status at TO such as members or long-term guests who would be entitled to meals, and people who are residents of EWC and not TO and wouldn't be eating at meals.

[Discussion got ahead of me here; someone--Kate?--asked for more clarification on EWC membership]

Jeli: People living on the land are referred to for now as "resident members". They might be dual members, or just members of EWC. A "founding member" might never be a resident of EWC but still retain a member or long-term guest status a TO.

Ezra: I was the one who wrote the question about meals. TO population is getting lower, but we're capable of feeding a lot of people. If we're feeding more people, I hope that more people will be involved in that, from gardening to cooking to cleaning. We've cooked for over 100 people a day at ZK. Now we're cooking for about 70.

Miles: To simplify membership questions: Some members of EWC will also be TO members, some will not. The EWC members who are TO members will have normal access to TO food. Those who are not TO members wouldn't have entitlement to any TO resources. Like Ezra was saying, we don't want TO to be cooking for random people or burden TO with additional labor.

Shal: It's easy for a TOer to say "oh, these are my guests."

Miles: It seem like TO guesting culture is changing and that the number of guests in the near future will be fewer.

Tigger: I hope we wouldn't treated EWC members different than Cambia or LEF just because it would be adjacent to TO.

Mala: There was a joke that Acorn needs to be 7 miles away "so they'll buy their own toilet paper." I do think the closer a new community is, the harder it is for them to be distinct and independent.

Tigger: I believe some of our problems with Acorn stem from that. I would like to see us foster both independence and interdependence. I'd love to see more communities grow locally with healthy boundaries. If we'd been more friendly with Acorn at the start, we might not be where we are today.

Mala: We've often been on great terms with Acorn.

Tigger: I felt there was resentment and that we could come across heavy-handed. I've felt residual resentment.

Hawina: I admit I've felt resentful when a bunch of Acorners or LEFers showed up for dinner without explanation. I'd like to be more intentional about it. I don't want to say "EWC shouldn't come over for dinner," but let's make sure that there's a balance, picking up a dinner or garden shift.

Jeli: Let's jump to the topic of Other Land Parcel Considerations. In the input, 3 people mentioned Lawson Land as an alternative location, and one mentioned revisiting Monacan Land. The parcels have road access and Lawson Land has utilities.

Miles: We're still early in the process, and no final decisions have been made about land. We started with Monacan Land as our preference due to road access and less slope, but we're adaptable to the preferences of TOers, which is why we shifted focus to other land. Blackberry Ridge is steep and doesn't have road access. Lawson Land is less slopey and has road access, but is smaller. Each parcel has pros and cons. We want to be flexible in negotiating with TO.

Shilpa: After some intense O&I discussion about Monacan Land, we felt that we should look at a Plan B. The sudden shift in our focus was because we felt people are attached to Monacan Land.

Edmund: My perspective is that the discontent wasn't just about the land, but about the communication and the process. I see improving communication and the process as central

Jason: I was going to say similar about communication and process. A lot of what I see from EWC is theoretical and visioning. People are looking to see how you handle the details, and bumping up against others. There's a mistrust that needs to be amended. I don't see a lot of time and attention being put on that.

Ada: It looked to me like process was being followed. People were just proposing stuff.

Edmund: By "process" I didn't mean technical process, so much as consulting people who have a stake in things.

Miles: I feel like we all have a different definition of process. The process for starting a new anti-racist community doesn't exist. We're all defining it together as we go, which involves making mistakes. We are co-creating this process and have no instruction manual. On questions of whether we've followed process, we're trying to define process. When it comes to working with groups like Forestry Crew, members of RET did meet with members of Forestry Crew months ago. The narrative that we haven't had contact with Forestry is not a true statement. The communication could have been more, maybe even a community meeting. It's a lesson we can take moving forward and defining this process together.

Jessie: I hear you all saying you're considering multiple lands. I also see truckloads of stuff for building infrastructure already. If the community is like "We don't want you to have EWC there," what do you do?

Miles: We would relocate infrastructure to another spot. TO isn't the only place we're considering for land. If TO wants no involvement with EWC, we'll exist as a separate community without land until we get land. We have places for temporary storage, like my off-grid cargo trailer. We wouldn't leave unused stuff on TO land, that would be disrespectful and also a waste of resources.

Jessie: My concern is more that it seems like you're establishing roots on that land. I'm worried about forming emotional connections to the land as well, without community process.

Miles: I think we're doing process right here. We haven't done anything to violate process or policy. Everyone has a different idea of process, which is why we come together at community meetings.

Ezra: My understanding is that EWC would like to be independent of TO norms and policies. I think some distance, not a strict seven-mile rule, helps with policy and procedural independence. Looking at Blackberry Ridge, I think its centrality to TO is causing some nervousness. Lawson Land is exactly halfway between TO and Acorn. I think Blackberry Ridge is a bad place to start a community, Lawson Land is a good place. I don't know if it's possible for EWC to not feel like TO is crawling up their ass all the time on land that's central to TO.

Miles: That was one of the reasons why Blackberry Ridge wasn't our first choice. Lawson Land is flat and has road access.

Ezra: It has a well, and it's not too far and not too close.

Trout: There's a few people who control a lot of the land at TO. It can make people trying to do things on the land feel like they don't co-own the land. We need to consider with Lawson Land that we're still dealing with the same power structure as at Monacan Land. I hear people say that the outcome will be better if we approach the conversation differently, but I don't know if that's true.

Varun: I want to go back to something Miles mentioned earlier, that RET is not open to debating the idea that we need a BIPOC community. I'm wondering if that reflects on RET that you would not have reached out to other BIPOC members of TO, but to BIPOC outside of TO.

Miles: Everything is always up for debate, but the purpose of this meeting is not to debate the need for a BIPOC-centered community. We've concluded that a BIPOC community is necessary and are moving forward with "how do we do that?" We can always debate whether it should exist, but what is limited is time at this meeting. To the other part of your question, EWC doesn't intend to poach members from TO. Our main focus is toward people who wouldn't otherwise feel included in the IC movement. We're focused on unmet needs in the broader movement, but we're open to involvement from TOers of any race.

Varun: I think there's an inherent assumption about the needs of BIPOC members here, and I haven't had any conversations with members of RET about my needs. That doesn't instill confidence in me.

Miles: RET has been having ongoing community discussions since before you were a member. We're always open to members of any race coming to us with questions or concerns. Our email address is ret@twinoaks.org.

Chris: I'd like to speak to process concerns too. I can point to three things that have contributed to this, from my perspective and that of other members I've talked to. Firstly, I understand the arguments that were made against confidentiality. But launching the project with limiting the nature of the input sent a message that landed in ways you probably didn't intend, that the dialogue was intended to produce a desired outcome. Secondly, concerns around having a Planner involved and conflicts of interest haven't been adequately addressed. Thirdly, I'll explain through a personal anecdote: Last May, Miles and I had a disagreement on the O&I. You can go into the archives to read it. I stand by what I wrote. Miles continued harassing and threatening me for two months after this, including behavior that meets the standards of mental abuse in the bylaws. This has led to expulsions, but I'm not indicating an intention to go forward with process because I am also an anti-authoritarian. I don't know how you can sit here and talk about open dialogue. Do you intend to engage in behavior like that toward me or anyone again?

Miles: I also stand by everything I wrote and said. That's a very serious accusation to make in a public setting.

Tigger: A lot of discussions we're having parallel the discussions that happened around Acorn's formation. It might be good to have some of those papers available in the Archives mailbox for review.

Hawina: Back when Zi and I were Planners, we made a maybe unfortunately-worded decision to "greenlight" the general concept of the EWC project. It seems we aren't sure if the community is on board with the concept. This is why I wanted to talk about next steps.

Edmund: What if we start with the question of "do we want to do land-based reparations," and secondly, "what would that process look like?" Saman is interested in creating Afro-diasporic community. I think we went too far too quickly, without looking at more foundational questions and steps.

Zi: Any piece of land will have some people strongly against it. Maybe that decision does need to be made more from the TO side than the EWC side. I'm interested in land reparations and the formation of a BIPOC community, but I think we need to see more people brought into the project. Also, that's hard because there isn't land yet, so maybe that does need to be the first step.

Miles: It's a chicken and egg problem. We need to build something to attract people, but to get something built we need to have people interested. We've made our land preferences known, but we want to know what TO's preferences are too.

Jeli: We're out of time. The purpose of this meeting was more informational than about generating action items. We're always willing to have smaller conversations with people.

Shal: I wanted to check whether concerns about "opposition to the state" will be brought up at another time.

Jeli: Yes, we didn't have time to get to that. It seems prudent to have another community meeting. We'll work with PTM to schedule that and get information from you all about other topics you'd like to address.