I’m trying to suss something out: in an intentional community, who would have the say on how territory in the community gets used. For instance, if one group wanted to use a piece of land for a workshop, who would you look to for final say: general circle or mission circle (if the mission circle is also acting as the Board of Directors). Anyone have experience with something of that nature?
The General Circle acts within the scope of the community’s mission & aims. The General Circle distributes aims and domains to its subcircles. From your question, I guess that that there is land that is not already clearly in any circle’s domain. Therefore, it is up to the General Circle to determine which circle or circles will have domain over that land that has not already been delegated to a Circle’s domain. To get to this point, the General Circle may need to initiate a land-use planning process that will generate the feedback it needs to make decisions about domain allocations.
However, you need to look to the existing Master Deed, Bylaws, and any other existing policies to see if there statements there that define which entity has decision-making rights. For example, in a condominium, it may be that the Unit Owners Association has authority. If there are existing policies, they prevail. Though you could amend those policies.
Hope this was not too confusing.
Jerry