What the community's expressed capacity looked like in aggregate five weeks after the town meeting — and the deduplication and consent lessons that came with it. A clean public copy; the respondent-level source stays private.

Document begins

EOI & Skills Inventory — 24 June 2026

Internal working document. Aggregate only — no names, emails, or contact details. Source: live D1 (bottompub-eoi) queried 24 Jun 2026. Serves issue #8 (WP 5.1–5.2). Not for public release. Published to the Access-protected /admin/ vault (added to ADMIN_DOCS 24 Jun 2026, #95) — behind Cloudflare Access, never on the public site.

Stage 1 guardrail. This is community-coordination data. It is not a pledge ledger, a fundraising commitment, or evidence of available capital. “Financial intent” below records interest expressed in a survey, not money raised or promised. Do not quote these figures externally or treat them as committed funds.

1. Dataset overview (deduplicated)

Source table	Rows	Distinct emails	Notes
`submissions` (EOI form)	51	43	The Expression-of-Interest form. 8 duplicate/repeat submissions.
`financial_survey` (WP 5.8 form)	125	120	The richest engagement dataset — far larger than the EOI form.
`community_survey`	26	15	Several repeat submissions (11 dupes).
`mailing_list`	217	217	175 `general`, 42 `general,local`. All currently subscribed.

Reconciliation with the meeting FACT (issue #8): the 17 May meeting reported “68 EOIs and ~12 working-group volunteers.” The web EOI form holds 43 unique submitters today — the gap to 68 is most likely non-web EOIs (paper/in-person/verbal) counted at the meeting. TODO: confirm with Billie whether a separate list of non-web EOIs exists so the two can be merged. The financial survey (120 unique) has since become the larger pool.

2. Engagement signal (structured fields — clean)

EOI form — capacity to contribute (`submissions`, n=51; 27 blank = pre-dating the field)

Capacity	Count
volunteer (unsure how much)	6
member only	5
few hours / month	4
just want to learn	4
5+ hours / week	3
few hours / week	1
working group	1

Active volunteer signal (working-group + 5+/wk + few-hrs/wk + few-hrs/mo) ≈ 9, plus 6 “volunteer-unsure” ≈ 15 — broadly consistent with the meeting’s “~12 volunteers.”

Financial survey — interest & locality (n=125)

Financial intent: 67 yes-definitely + 39 yes-probably + 18 maybe + 1 probably-not → 106 positive of 125. (Survey-expressed interest only — not pledges, committed capital, or confirmed funding. Never cite the “106 positive” figure externally as pledged capital; any external reference must carry the full qualification “survey-expressed interest, not pledged or committed funds.” See top guardrail.)
Locality (strong local base): 67 live in Cygnet, 31 in Huon Valley, ~13 elsewhere-in-Tas/visitors, ~4 interstate/overseas. ~98 of 125 are local (Cygnet + Huon Valley).
Meeting attendance appetite: 43 yes-definitely + 59 yes-if-timing + 16 written-only + 6 maybe.
Survey-expressed contribution bands: [removed from the public copy — the source held these at aggregate only and marked them “do not externalise”]. Grant interest negligible (1).

3. Skills inventory by stream (keyword-derived — directional)

Method caveat. Skills are free-text. The counts below come from keyword matching and over-count: the “events/arts/community” bucket inflates because generic “happy to support the community” phrasing matches, and “legal/governance” catches “co-op” mentions. Treat as a triage map, not a precise count. A human pass over the raw (private) skills text is needed to confirm stream-matching — especially for legal and heritage, where a false positive matters most.

Stream	EOI form (of 39 with text)	Financial survey (of 112 with text)	Read
Hospitality / food & bev	9	26	Well covered
Finance / accounting	4	23	Well covered — directly useful to the finance stream
Building / trades	9	8	Decent coverage
Project / admin / management	7	7	Decent
Legal / governance	2	24*	Noisy (co-op keyword). Real qualified-legal count likely far lower — verify*
Comms / marketing / design	3	5	Thin — likely a gap
Heritage / architecture / planning	2	1	Thin — a gap, notable given the heritage-listed building
Events / arts / community	11	79*	*Heavily inflated by generic support language — discount

Stream-matching read: strongest volunteer skill depth is in hospitality and finance — good alignment with two active streams. The clearest gaps are heritage/architecture/planning and comms/marketing, both relevant to current workstreams (heritage due-diligence #7; content & comms #31). Recommend a targeted skills call-out for those two before relying on internal capacity.

Source	Consent recorded	Count
EOI form	”updates + skills-contact”	14
EOI form	”skills-contact”	2
EOI form	”updates” only	7
EOI form	blank (pre-field)	28
Financial survey	”updates + financial-followup”	99
Financial survey	”financial-followup”	2
Financial survey	”updates” only	22

Actionable: ~16 EOI respondents consented to skills-contact, and 101 financial-survey respondents consented to financial follow-up. The 28 blank-consent EOI rows pre-date the consent field — do not contact them for skills/financial follow-up without re-establishing a basis. The 101 financial-followup consents were a directly usable, consented audience for time-sensitive follow-up — within the financial-followup purpose they agreed to, and only that.

5. Data hygiene flags found

Duplicates: EOI form 51→43, financial survey 125→120, community survey 26→15. Dedup by lower(trim(email)) before any count is quoted.
Known bad email: one respondent’s address in financial_survey carries a typo (issue #81) — [address removed from the public copy] — still pending in-person identification at the 26 Jun town hall.
Consent gaps: 28 EOI rows with no consent value (field added later) — treat as no-follow-up-consent.

Generated from aggregate D1 queries, 24 Jun 2026. Raw per-respondent skills text remains in D1 only — not copied here. Refresh before quoting any figure.

EOI & skills inventory (24 June 2026)