Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Should individual "sponsorship" be allowed of community property?

[Elizabeth Stevenson (tamgoddess]

Susan-

People who donate libraries to the local town are rarely using a consensus
decision-making process. They have their own reasons, which they may or may
not share with the recipients of the gift. They don't have that
responsibility. 

But a cohousing community, by definition, is based on consensus. Every
member has a responsibility to do their share of the work, and gets a share
of the benefits in return. When you decide, on your own, that you really
want a swimming pool in the common area, and you pay for it, you are
circumventing the process by which all decisions are supposedly made. Those
without the money to make that kind of donation are therefore removed from
the decision-making process, by default.

I have been living in cohousing for ten years without the feeling that I am
being somehow deprived of material possessions by our decision making
process. I hardly think we've been shooting ourselves in the foot for all
this time. I'm not that noble.

I resent the implication that by adhering to principles, we are being
prideful and narrow-minded. It takes discipline to use the consensus process
and I stand by my opinions. Encouraging diversity does not mean that we need
to cater to the affluent. Indeed, it will ensure that diversity of income is
not achieved if the less affluent are treated as if their opinions on what
is desired for the community are less important than others'. Accusing
someone of being hyper-sensitive is a tried-and-true method of devaluing
their opinions. African-Americans, feminists, gays and many other
disenfranchised groups have always been accused of being oversensitive. I
guess I'm in pretty good company.

Liz

> From: Sue Pniewski <SPniewski [at] Habijax.com>

> 
> Elizabeth-
> Why would any community with any common sense throw a gift into a willing
> giver's face?  This isn't laziness, this is common sense.  No community is
> going to be able to fund 100% of the projects they have a desire for.  But
> if it's something that the community decided was on the want list, and some
> person or family is willing to foot the bill, what's the problem???  This
> seems like a hypersensitivity to income to the extreme.  If you want to
> encourage income diversity in a community, then you should be prepared to
> encourage the diversity.  If it manifests in the form of a gift to the
> community, how could a GIFT be a bad thing, especially if it's something the
> community had wanted anyway?  Or is it better just to sit around an bemoan
> the lack of amenities so we can suffer in our dignified poverty.  There is
> nothing dignified about selfish pride being given a higher priority than
> community good.  With that mindset, nobody should be able to donate a new
> library wing to the local college and get their name on it, just because it
> makes them happy, when the college needs new chairs in the lunchroom more.
> Shooting yourself in the foot just doesn't make sense.

_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L