|Re: per household vs per person||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Lynn Nadeau (welcomeolympus.net)|
|Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 09:42:40 -0700 (PDT)|
>Has anyone dealt with the question of whether a single-person household >should be considered the same as a couple household (with or without kids) >re: >- Work requirements >- Participation in a committee >- Common costs (common house, infrastructure, land) >- Maintenance fee >- contributing to cost of optional workshops or professionals like >facilitators At RoseWind Cohousing (Port Townsend WA) assessments are per household; our original buy-in price was per lot, thus also per household. We have no work requirements, but our work expectations are generally about individuals. Often couples end up doing different forms of participation: one person may do meetings, the other, hands-on work party stuff, for example. And we know that many factors figure into how much participation a person can do, including family obligations of all sorts, including watching kids. The one place where it was an issue, many years ago, was when we were determining the relative prices of our lots and decided to factor in a token "pioneer discount" of a thousand dollars lot-price reduction per year of participation (we are self developed and had put in thousands of hours in the first years). Most families were fine at the per-household basis, but one family wanted double, arguing that she had watched the kids so he could do the meetings. As a single mom who had met all day Saturdays, then watched someone else's kid all day Sundays in childcare exchange, this didn't seem valid. I believe we made at most a small compromise for that couple. Our pioneer discount remained based on household.
- (no other messages in thread)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.