Archive · Tranche 1

Risk register

Fourteen risks, one of which came true. The register that never got its 'materialised' row filled in.

Original title
Risk Register — Bottom Pub Co-op — Steering Committee
Original date
Last updated 4 June 2026
Project phase
Stage 1 — Gauging interest
Purpose at the time
Fourteen risks seeded from the assumptions register's RISK entries and EPIC-level analysis, with likelihood, severity, mitigation, an owning seat and a cross-reference back to the claim each risk rests on.
Status at the time
Open register. Note the 'Materialised risks' section still reads *None recorded yet* — R-01 (the property sells to another buyer before the co-op can act) is what in fact happened, and the register was never updated to say so.
Source provenance
internal/risk-register.md (private working corpus; unpublished, unchanged)
Publication treatment
Substantially intact
Derived / prepared by
Claude (Fable 5) with Adrian Wedd, 18 August 2026
Prepared
2026-08-18
Human review
Adrian Wedd — publication review completed 19 August 2026
Published
2026-08-19
What was changed for publication
  • R-01: the name of the insolvency firm is withheld, consistently with the assumptions register (AR-05). Nothing else is changed — including the empty 'Materialised risks' section, which is left exactly as the campaign left it.

Document begins

Risk Register

Bottom Pub Co-op — Steering Committee

Internal document | Not for public release | Last updated: 2026-06-04 Likelihood and Severity: H = High, M = Medium, L = Low This register is seeded from the Assumptions Register (RISK entries) and from EPIC-level risk analysis. Cross-references to Assumptions Register entries are noted.


How to use this register

Review at every fortnightly check-in. Update status when a risk changes. When a mitigation is put in place, note what was done and who did it. When a risk materialises, record it as such — it becomes a decision log item, not just a register entry.

Add new risks as they emerge. Label any risk that came from an unverified source as [ASSUMPTION] in the description.


Register

#RiskLikelihoodSeverityMitigationOwnerStatusAR ref
R-01Property does not come to market, or sells to another buyer before the co-op can act. The insolvency process may conclude quickly. No formal sale has been confirmed.HHAppoint authorised contact (steering pack doc 06). Monitor [insolvency firm — name withheld] publicly. Do not commit resources until property status is confirmed.Authorised contactOpenAR-05
R-02Legal structure choice (distributing vs non-distributing) is made implicitly rather than explicitly on legal advice. An earlier draft blended incompatible features.MHCommission legal advice on structure options before any capital design, rules draft, or public capital language is finalised. EPIC-002 acceptance criteria require explicit separation of options.Legal/governance seatOpenAR-14
R-03Residual community expectations from the earlier draft’s financial promises (5% dividend, Year-15 capital return, first-mortgage security). Removed from public material but may persist in community memory.MMMaintain audit page. Ensure any community meeting explicitly acknowledges what changed and why. Confirm messaging through EPIC-001 language review.ConvenorOpenAR-22
R-04Sociocratic governance model incompatible with CNL statutory requirements. Consent-based decisions do not substitute for the 75% special-resolution threshold required by law.MHAdopt a standard elected-board governance model. Sociocratic tools (circles, consent) may apply to internal working culture but cannot override statutory voting rules. Resolve in EPIC-005.Legal/governance seatOpenAR-23
R-05Hotel Theodore (Qld) failure demonstrates that community ownership does not remove hospitality cost-structure risk. Entered voluntary administration August 2023 after ~75 years.HHBuild stress-tested financial model (EPIC-004) with wages, energy, insurance, repairs, and management-depth scenarios. This failure case is essential honest evidence that must not be omitted from community briefings.Finance/modelling seatOpenAR-24
R-06Renovation costs for a heritage-listed building are likely to exceed meeting-reported estimates ($900K–$1.2M). No independent building-condition assessment exists. Heritage BCA upgrades routinely exceed non-heritage commercial estimates.HHDo not use renovation range as a budget line. Commission independent building-condition assessment as a Stage 1 / Stage 2 boundary task. Dependent on property access (requires receiver cooperation or public inspection).Heritage/building seatOpenAR-08, AR-10, AR-26
R-07Zoning of the Commercial Hotel site is unconfirmed. Conflicting briefings on whether the site is General Business, Local Business, or another zone under the Huon Valley LPS. Use-class, permits, and applicable codes all depend on the operative zone.MHVerify zone directly against PlanBuild Tasmania’s operative LPS map before any feasibility model is finalised. EPIC-003 and EPIC-004 both depend on this.Heritage/building seat or PlanningOpenAR-06
R-08Single-title assumption (pub + ~0.5 ha residential land) is unconfirmed. If the title cannot be split, the purchase price includes the residential land; if it can, the co-op might acquire the pub alone at lower cost.MMConduct title search (workplans task 1.4). Do not model capital stack until title structure is confirmed.Legal/governance seatOpenAR-07
R-09The ‘81 cents in the dollar stays locally’ statistic has no confirmed primary source. Cited in community discussions but not in any current public-facing material. If it resurfaces without a source, it damages credibility.LMDo not use this figure in any public document unless a primary source is identified and cited. Audit page records the gap.EPIC-001 custodianOpenAR-04
R-10Castlemaine case-study misattributions persist in community memory. Meeting transcript cited $1.5M (verified: $1.95–2.0M) and “up to 5% interest” (verified: maximum 4%). Asset type also non-analogous (office/community space, not a pub).LMUse only verified figures ($1.95–2.0M; 0–4% interest; asset = The Hub, not a hotel) in all documents. Don’t introduce the meeting figures in any future briefing.EPIC-006 custodianOpenAR-12, AR-13
R-11Charitable status assumption built into tax modelling before ACNC confirmation. A commercial trading pub may not straightforwardly satisfy the ACNC’s all-purposes-charitable test.LHDo not assume charitable status in any financial model or structure design until specialist charity-law advice is obtained. Tax model must use standard corporate rate (25%) as the base case.Finance/modelling seatOpenAR-28
R-12Heritage listing level (state vs national) unconfirmed. THR Place ID 3472 is confirmed. Whether the building is also on a national list (and therefore subject to EPBC Act federal provisions) has not been verified.LHCross-check the Australian Heritage Database at environment.gov.au. Do not assume national provisions do not apply until negative result confirmed from primary source.Heritage/building seatOpenAR-01
R-13Liquor licensing reform (Tasmanian Parliament, March 2025) status is uncertain. Reform proposes a new entertainment endorsement. If passed or substantially amended, the licensing pathway in current briefings may be outdated.MMConfirm current legislative status before EPIC-003 memo is finalised. Do not advise on licensing structure against an outdated regulatory baseline.Hospitality/licensing seatOpenAR-27
R-14Website maintenance at scale. ~15 static HTML files with duplicated nav/footer. Each structural change requires hand-editing every file. Copy-paste regressions have already occurred (fixed in May–June 2026 QA). Will compound as the site grows.HMScope Astro migration (EPIC-008). Does not block Stage 1 operations but becomes a maintenance liability if deferred past ~20 pages.Website custodianOpen

Materialised risks (moved here when a risk event occurs)

None recorded yet.


Update protocol

  1. Review at every fortnightly steering committee check-in.
  2. When a mitigation is put in place, update the Mitigation column and note date and action.
  3. When a risk materialises, move it to the Materialised section and open a decision log entry.
  4. When a risk is resolved or no longer applies, mark Status as Closed with a note.
  5. New risks from any source go in here with a date and [ASSUMPTION] flag if from unverified input.
  6. Cross-reference with the Assumptions Register whenever a risk has an AR- counterpart.
End of document ← Back to the archive