Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: COHOUSING-L digest 85

[Michael C. Murray (misha]

On Thu, 3 Mar 94 11:29 CST, Rob Sandelin <robsan [at] microsoft.com> wrote:

{... much stuff on changing values and goals deleted ...}
>This raises some issues about who controls membership, and the impacts 
>of not having the right of first refusal or some sort of membership 
>control.  Most banks demand no restrictions on who can buy a home.
>
>It also raises some questions about the sustainability of a community 
>which doesn't have control of who can be a member.  

We hashed over this issue at great length in our (now dormant) core 
group.  The conclusion we reached was it was not an enforceable idea 
(nor good practice) to "screen" prospectives for membership. 

It seemed a much better idea for us to spend more time clearly 
stipulating our values and goals in the bylaws/ land covenant, and 
provide a built-in vehicle for modifying the bylaws if they are deemed 
unworkable or become inappropriate. 'Cor if your group is "rushed" by a 
gang of individualists you're in trouble with this approach.

Additionally, how could one define screening, aside from subscribing to 
the bylaws and/or a formal land covenant?  A segment of our group wanted 
"at least 30% of the families to be families with children". What 
happens when the 21st childless couple of 50 couples wants to 
join the group? Are they denied access? 

Indeed Peck points out in "The Different Drum" that selectivity is only 
appropriate for a group when an individual becomes disruptive to the 
group somehow, and even then the individual may have the option to 
return to the group.  He also points out that the disruptive (and 
presumed disciplined) individual does not usually return to the group.

One might also argue that a _representative_ group should not 
reflect the "vision" of an initial few but an evolving philosophy for
an entire group.

Regarding profiteering (and what may be considered such by the group), I 
have seen some evidence in non-cohousing groups of land trusts or 
evironmental covenants where speculative development is legally 
prevented, so I would think there is some legal precedent/mechanism for 
enforcing this, again, through bylaws, not screening.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Michael C. Murray             misha [at] maroon.tc.umn.edu
voice:                        (612) 943-8193/227-6143
snail:          469 Laurel Ave. St. Paul MN 55102 USA
glib:    "Irony is the governing law of the universe"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-