Re: Rules & Regs Violation
From: Ann Zabaldo (
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 20:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
Hello all --

This is a truly interesting thread.  I've enjoyed reading everyone's
thoughtful posts -- there's quite a bit to grapple with and I've certainly
learned a lot about how people view "rules."  Thanks to everyone for sharing
your wisdom.

However...I'm slow.  I'm still back on what led up to this behavior by this
resident.  I don't feel the whole story (all zillion sides of it) has been
presented. (Or did I miss this?)

As I said in an earlier post, I don't think this kind of behavior happens in
a vacuum and person's "violator" is another's "liberator."

I'd like to know why the resident wanted satellite.  Is there an
architectural review committee and did he petition the committee for a
variance?  How many meetings did he sit through to have his request heard?
Or was it dismissed before being considered because of the restriction in
the condo docs?  Was this the first time he "violated" the rules or is this
a repeated behavior?

I'm reminded of the old saying that "rules are meant to be broken."  That's
how we get change. 

A big part of what's so glorious about cohousing is that we are "living"
communities.  We are not bound to enforcing 400+ pages of condo docs that
regulate everything from mailbox sizes to the number of goldfish you can
have in a 5 gallon tank.  We have the possibility of modifying agreements to
meet changing circumstances or ...  even just a personal request by a

Of course, the possibility exists that the resident was being self serving.
I'd just like to know more about the circumstances that led up to him
sticking the dish on the side of the house.  We might learn a lot knowing

BTW -- I LOVE this quote from Hitchhiker's Guide:  "We demand rigidly
defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"

Ann Zabaldo
Takoma Village
Washington, DC

³The Road to Enlightenment is Long and Difficult...
So Bring Cookies and a Magazine.²

Wk  202 546 4654
FAX 202 291 8594

On 4/11/06 7:53 PM, "ken" <gebser [at]> wrote:

> Fillard Rhyne wrote:
>> Ken and Thomas have brought up some good points -- e.g., rules work
>> best when there are very good reasons for them, and there are clear
>> benefits to a non-restrictive approach.

>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.