RE: "have kids" "have nots" fighting over site | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Rowenahc (rowenahc![]() |
|
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 15:00:01 -0600 (MDT) |
Before
I joined CambridgeCohousing I had belonged to another group which merely had a
Metropolitan focus. They also ran from town to town, moving further and
further out, and changing memebership with every proposed site. One
reason I moved over the CCH was that I wanted to be close to the City and so did
all the others who joined - we built commitment to the City into our vision
statement. It meant that we had to compromise on space and
particular location but at least geography was not a major issue.
Even so, when we finally settled on our small site in a "transitional"
neighborhood we lost some people. I think that is bound to happen when you
start the group without a site.
Rowenahc
Cambridge Cohousing
|
-
"have kids" "have nots" fighting over site Shelly Demeo, June 8 2001
-
RE: "have kids" "have nots" fighting over site Ksenia Barton, June 8 2001
- RE: "have kids" "have nots" fighting over site Fred H Olson, June 10 2001
- RE: "have kids" "have nots" fighting over site Rowenahc, June 9 2001
-
RE: "have kids" "have nots" fighting over site Ksenia Barton, June 8 2001
-
Re: "have kids" "have nots" fighting over site Elizabeth Stevenson, June 8 2001
- Re: "have kids" "have nots" fighting over site Brian Baresch, June 8 2001
- Re: "have kids" "have nots" fighting over site Diane Simpson, June 9 2001
- RE: "have kids" "have nots" fighting over site Racheli&John, June 13 2001
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.