Extra meeting to vote on JET-14

The Rendez-Vous is scheduled with the owner Mr Fontaine and his wife, who will be present, on Monday 13 May at 6pm for the Jet-14 visit, see you there.

Could someone take the architects’ drawings with them?
Will the architects be there?


Here I agree. What could we learn, in another hour, that we have not been able to dig out in four months of fiches, feasibility studies, 3D models, meeting with the notary etc.?

One exception: the new process “one person buys the undivided site, then sells the different lots to members”. This is new. For what I can see, this is necessary, possible, and it saves 70K on the budget. I imagine this will be presented at the next plenary.

This looks problematic. I see a fairness problem (some of us get a different treatment than others); an incentive problem (it makes sense to vote “maybe” in all cases, it does not cost anything and it buys wiggle room); and, more importantly, it speaks of a divided group. It is a very bad idea to build a cohousing as a divided group.

Fortunately, our current process takes care of that with the “no” vote. That allows people who are not convinced to not buy a site they cannot live with, and people who are to move forward in a coherent manner.

1 Like

Can you be clearer about what your actual concerns are?

Can you actually say what it is that you think they are advising us, because it’s not clear to me…

Also, did the architects give their consent for a recording of them to be posted on a public forum?

1 Like

Hello everyone,

I’d like to gently bring my part of this discussion to a close. That’s very kind of you, but there’s no need to prevaricate or find workarounds. As already mentioned :

I want to vote like everyone else. I can live with my decision. Far be it from me to jeopardize the project, I want The Reef to be able to grow (so bad).

I’m just a bit confused by the way things are going. If we take a step back, the way I see it is that I’m not being given the space to discuss things.

I’m asking for a moment to chat (possibly over a drink), have a good time and simply be reassured.

Here’s a little situation:

We’ve bought the site, we’re going to build our super buildings. Then it’s time to agree on the common spaces. In view of the X m² we have, we discuss again and again until I finally learn that we won’t have an atelier or a nice communal kitchen (or anything else that’s important to me or anyone else).

I know it’s not possible to agree on everything now, but wouldn’t you have liked to know that earlier? At least discuss it before making your decision and investing in the project?

The fact that people are trying meet our need to talk openly about these things is much appreciated.

Enjoy this beautiful SUNday,

@els I can’t vote to your poll, I’m down on Wednesday from 19:00 :hugs:


i asked them, but no answer yet, probably due to the long weekend…

I take back my proposition. It probably isn’t a solution for seb, it doesn’t seem to be one for quentin and i definitely don’t feel good to make it just for me.
I agree it isn’t fair, but there are already some elements of ‘different treatment’ introduced (with which i can totally live ) and i am sure there will be more in the future and supporting them if there is a good reason behind them (maybe here it’s discussable if there is a good reason behind it)

For me (and guess for most of us) what makes a cohousing different from just buying an apartment in an apartment block, is the common spaces and the people/community behind it. So for me they are equally (and maybe more) important as the site itself, so not knowing about them is quite a big thing, especially if they turn out to be a lot less than what was being put forward in the blueprint. Why not having placed the Y/N vote at the time of becoming a full member then? (for as long as the site corresponds to the blueprint)?

But i am gratefull to everyone that there were some extra weeks to think about it, and the vote didn’t happen at the last plenary. I’ve realised that i jumped into the Reef, being fully occupied taking up tasks and stuff, and not really reflecting more on the project, what is important for me, where is see my future home … I am quite confident i will be able to vote the 22nd and having peace with whatever it will be…


i closed it, as there will be a discussion on monday , after the jet-14 visit + next wednesday, before the vote.
i personnaly don’t feel the need to discuss more, so i am fine with the above moments. If you would need extra discussion time, i can reopen the poll…

just to be absolutely sure: this is a plenary and thus open for exploring members?

I need a bit more time to see what most people would prefer, but for now I think it’s going to be the last full members only meeting to make specific decisions.

1 Like

Yes, agree. Just that this should be done sparingly.


Hi @reef-full,

Tomorrow, around 7:00 PM I’ll be at The Pacific bar (:balloon:Rue de l’Arbre Bénit 6, Ixelles, Bruxelles, Belgique). Out there, I know that some of you wants to talk about the common spaces so let’s meet at the :balloon:.
But, let’s also dream about those spaces and take a moment to chill :beers:


@Quentin, could you please add the event to the Nextcloud calendar, and possibly also write up a couple of sentences / paragraphs about what has been discussed? This is part of our working methods, under the heading “transparency and openness”. The reason we insist on this is that we find it builds a lot of trust, and it also helps people who join later to understand why things are the way they are.

Changing the topic, @reef-full: for the meeting on 22/05 I propose that we turn it into a full members meeting, from 19:30 until 22:00. Usually I offer my place in case there is no other one available, but this time I would like to ask to have the meeting at my place, as I have a bit too much on my plate these days, so it really helps to be close to home.

I hope to finalise the agenda during the weekend. Key items will be a summary of the JET-14 story (honouring our “documentation or it didn’t happen” motto) and hopefully a clear explanation of all the legal-financial constructions that the notary is proposing.


Hello @reef-full,

I have finalised the draft agenda for Wednesday’s meeting. My proposal:

  • JET-14: last round of exchange

  • JET-14: vote

  • If the vote is positive:

    • Legal set-up: basic information (to be continued on 26/05)
    • Next steps and who does what
  • If the vote is negative: AND-28 meeting with the commune yes or no

As always thoughts and suggestions are always welcome. Internal link to the usual agenda document: https://c301.nl.tabdigital.eu/f/106053

Important note on JET-14:

Honouring our commitment to radical transparency and our motto “documentation or it didn’t happen” with Els’s help I have created a 4-page document in which I tried to sum up all the essential information about JET-14.

It saved in the “Proposals” folder, and this is the link: https://c301.nl.tabdigital.eu/f/141822

The purpose of the document is twofold:
1 - make sure that we all get an overview before we vote
2 - help future Reeflings to grasp the essence about the site without having to read our 200 exchanges and documents

The document includes three brief sections on the concerns regarding the permit, the sunlight and the common spaces. Feedback is welcome, and we can still adapt the document until after the meeting.


Thank you Lee for preparing the agenda.
I have a concern about a paragraph in the 4-page document.
The document mentions several options to increase the size of the common spaces and one of the options is to “Accept that the price per square meter increases by ± 50 euro per m²”. Is this an option that has been discussed already and did I miss something or was this not on the table yet? 50 euro extra per m² is not nothing, especially when we should already take into a account a 10% margin as well. It makes me feel worried to see that such numbers are being presented without having had a discussion about it.

Hi @mieke,

There are a couple of people in the group who are concerned about the common spaces, so in my opinion the document had to mention that several options exist to solve that problem. The options that are listed have all been floated around in discussions on the forum, but more options exist of course. If it can reassure you: increasing the price per square meter to get more common spaces would be a level 5 decision (long term financial impact), which means that we decide about it by consensus.

1 Like

Thanks a lot for this @els and @Lee !

A small comment: I really don’t think the architects talked to the neighbour, at least not before the first feasibility study, as I remember Francois sating we should meet him and feel him out, which implied he did not talk to him. But maybe I missed something and they met him later? Also not sure how important that is, but better to have full clarity.

I also have a question but I will do it through the Jet-14 thread as I don’t feel comfortable asking it in a non-sensitive thread.

1 Like

This is not a decision being presented, but the discussion you rightly suggest. You cannot have one without anyone proposing solutions to discuss.


1 Like

Hi @ugne,

I wasn’t clear on whether you had taken notes yesterday. If you did, can you please add them to the plenary meetings minutes document? If not let me know and then we’ll find 2-3 sentences to sum it up?

Hey @Lee
I think you did a great summary in the post today. I had a crazy week & today again back to back and leaving for a trip now. I didn’t manage to check the minutes. Can this be done next week, if needed.

Hi @ugne,

No problem. I took care of it by linking to the Edgeryders posts.

1 Like