Cohousing-L Mailing List: Conflicting Values?

[Regan Conley (reganconley]

Our little forming group (Urban D.C. Cohousing) is embroiled in a  
process conflict about values.  But it's led me to wonder if we have  
an underlying difference and whether we might be better served as two  
groups.  As neutrally as possible:

Our group all agrees that values A (accessibility), B (affordability)  
and C (diversity) are all important.

As part of our process conflict, it's come to our attention that we  
have different priorities for these values.  Some believe that A and  
B are really fundamental and it's pointless for people to continue  
working hard on this project without an assurance that it's somewhere  
they will be able to live.  Others believe with absolute moral  
certitude that C must be most important to us and that we must be  
prepared to sacrifice other things (including A and B) in order to  
achieve C.

[I must note that the diversity we are primarily, though not  
exclusively, talking about is racial.  I just don't want people  
pointing out the obvious -- that we probably can't have C without A  
and B -- when in fact we could have lots of racial diversity without  
those two things.  Or we could have lots of A and B, but  
hypothetically all white.]

Can this group live happily ever after?  How?

In principle it seems that we certainly can, if we get past the  
process problems.  But in reality, everyone that lives in built co- 
housing is well aware that they sacrificed something important along  
the way to get there.  The group was really committed to their  
values, but had to give something up in order to get nearly  
everything else.

How did your group deal with this "what's most important?" problem?   
Does it make sense to deal with it sooner (as a hypothetical conflict  
when we might really get all three of those things) or later (when  
people will have put in time and emotion and then leave the group)?

Regan Conley
Urban D.C. Cohousing