Re: Should individual "sponsorship" be allowed of community | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Raines Cohen (rc2-coho-L![]() |
|
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 11:38:07 -0600 (MDT) |
On 10/1/03 10:14 AM, Howard Landman <howard [at] polyamory.org> wrote: >> Howard, I'm struck that you assume "fair" means everyone pays the same >> amount > >Not for everything. But for paying for a capital improvement where we >each own, by legal deeds, an exactly equal share of the resulting asset, >and can sell that share (along with our unit) when we leave, then yes, >I believe we should all pay equally. Anything else is asking some members >to directly donate wealth to other members. I'm not particularly fond >of kleptocracy no matter how it's disguised. Which leads to yet another potential method of financing, which acknowledges this aspect: member A makes loan to the HOA to help pay for consensed-project X, including Member B's share. Member B can't afford to pay Unit B's share, but, having agreed to the item and to this method of financing, voluntarily has a lien put on Unit B that will recapture the unit's share of the common capital improvement at the time of resale (or perhaps even when the mortgage is refinanced). This same method can be (and, in some cases, must be) used to (involuntarily) capture funds owed for unpaid regular or special dues/assessments. This especially makes sense for an improvement that has a high probability of increasing the market value of all units. Remember, if we own units in cohousing, we're all "rich", or, as I've also heard it called "house-poor", in that we do have (especially after a period of time) substantial equity tied up in our properties -- from our mortgage pay-downs, even if the units themselves aren't benefiting from market appreciation (as is the case for a couple decades more here at Berkeley coho, with its limited-equity condo structure). If the group knows that it can eventually be converted to liquid form, it can plan for the long term around helping people improve the quality of life while they're actually living there. We can also tap it for other purposes, including private benefit and helping others, so that comes down to a discussion of values and priorities. Raines Raines Cohen <my initials,2,dash,coho,dash,L at my first name .com> Member, Swan's Market Coho [Oakland, CA] <http://www.swansway.com/> Where a new Mexican restaurant opened across the street last week. Secretary, Berkeley [CA] Cohousing The 4th Quarter meal sign-ups got posted yesterday, triggering a rush to sign up for preferred time slots and cooking partners. Pass-the-baton-guy, East Bay Cohousing <http://www.ebcoho.org/> Recommending that members go to the seminar in Davis on Sat., Oct 4 (NOT Yom Kippur). Boardmember, Coho/US <http://www.cohousing.org/> Asking anyone who, in the last week, requested info or registered for this Saturday's seminar or next Saturday's tour to contact the Coho/US office to make sure your info was received... !@#@#$% technical glitches! _______________________________________________ Cohousing-L mailing list Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org Unsubscribe and other info: http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L
- Re: Should individual "sponsorship" be allowed of community, (continued)
- Re: Should individual "sponsorship" be allowed of community M.Studer, September 25 2003
- Re: Should individual "sponsorship" be allowed of community Elizabeth Stevenson, September 25 2003
- Should individual "sponsorship" be allowed of community Racheli Gai, September 25 2003
- Tone of emails Gary Kent, October 3 2003
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.