What duties must board members of nonprofit corporations uphold?
Duty of Care. Community association boards must give the business of their associations the same degree of care and diligence that prudent persons would exercise in their own affairs in similar circumstances. The duty of care requires directors to invest time and attention in association business, make reasonable inquiry into association matters to enable informed decision-making, and take reasonable, not arbitrary or capricious, actions.
Duty of Loyalty. Directors of community associations, like their counterparts in for-profit corporations, have a duty to the association and to its members to act for the association’s benefit only and with an eye to its best interests, without regard for any personal interest the directors may have. Courts take this duty very seriously, using expressions such as “utmost good faith.” If a transaction is challenged, courts place the burden on the director to demonstrate the fairness of any transaction in which the director is personally involved.
Duty to Act within the Scope of Authority. Directors owe a duty to their associations and to their members to perform their duties in accordance with the authority granted to them by statute and in their governing documents. If directors exceed this authority and damage results, the directors may be personally liable for their unauthorized actions.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Free Speech in the 21st Century
This is rich. I greatly enjoyed this story.
Click on the title to access the link to the story.
Jay
Click on the title to access the link to the story.
Jay
Food for Thought
a quote from Thomas Jefferson over 200 years ago:
"But I have always found that rogues would be uppermost, and I do not know that the proportion is too strong for the higher orders and for those who, rising above the swinish multitude, always contrive to nestle themselves into the places of power and profit. These rogues set out with stealing the people's good opinion, and then steal from them the right of withdrawing it, by contriving laws and associations against the power of the people themselves."
--Thomas Jefferson to Mann Page, 1795. ME 9:306
"But I have always found that rogues would be uppermost, and I do not know that the proportion is too strong for the higher orders and for those who, rising above the swinish multitude, always contrive to nestle themselves into the places of power and profit. These rogues set out with stealing the people's good opinion, and then steal from them the right of withdrawing it, by contriving laws and associations against the power of the people themselves."
--Thomas Jefferson to Mann Page, 1795. ME 9:306
Not guilty plea in embezzle case
By Robyn Moormeister
A Story from Nevada
12:01 a.m. PT Nov 22, 2007
A Nevada City woman accused of embezzling more than $100,000 from her homeowners association as its treasurer pleaded not guilty Wednesday to felony embezzlement and theft charges.
Linda Balch, 61, appeared in Nevada County Superior Court to face three charges of felony embezzlement and one count of theft from an elder. She was joined by her attorney, Thomas Leupp of Auburn, and her husband Tom Balch, a former Nevada City mayor.
Eight of Balch's alleged victims sat in the back row of the crowded gallery, accompanied by two county victim advocates.
When Judge Candace Heidelberger called Balch's case, Balch stood before the judge while Leupp entered the not guilty plea. With Leupp's arm sheltering her, she quickly left the courtroom without responding to questions.
"Is there any chance we'll recover the money?" Woodbridge Townhomes Homeowners Association board secretary Uli Kaestner asked District Attorney Cliff Newell outside the courtroom.
Newell told Kaestner and the other alleged victims that restitution is possible.
"The Balches have assets," Newell said. "They're not destitute, as opposed to some of these cases, where the defendants have nothing."
Balch allegedly used her position as association treasurer to embezzle more than $100,000 from the Woodbridge homeowners association between September 2005 and Sept. 30 of this year and used the funds for personal gain, Grass Valley police Sgt. Doug Hren said.
Grass Valley police arrested Balch Oct. 25. Her bail was set at $100,000, and she posted a $10,000 bond the same day of her arrest.
Balch told residents at a recent homeowners association board meeting that she would do "everything in her power" to pay the money back, Kaestner said.
"She said she did it to keep up her lifestyle," Kaestner said.
Leupp did not return a phone call from The Union.
Mishandling of homeowners association funds is nothing new, said Marjorie Murray, president of the Center for California Homeowners Association Law.
"This is an issue we've been tracking for a long time," Murray said. "There are few controls over money collected by a homeowners association."
According to the center, California law does not demand financial accountability by homeowners associations. Residents hand over more than $200 million in assessments annually to association boards, but they often have a difficult time finding out how boards are spending the money they have entrusted to them, according to Murray's Web site.
Newell said every homeowners association is different, and it is up to the board to assure adequate oversight of its funds.
"This might be a wake-up call to homeowners associations," he said. "They need to be sure there is a system of checks and balances and their procedures are followed."
Since Balch's arrest, the association board removed Balch from her position and assigned four people to run the treasury position instead of one, Kaestner said.
After Wednesday's court hearing, the DA reassured the group of elderly homeowners it is possible that Balch could change her plea in coming months and be ordered to pay restitution.
Newell said he would like to resolve the case as quickly as possible, and he is confident that Leupp - with whom he has worked before - will also help to ensure an expedient resolution to the case.
The maximum possible sentence for Balch's alleged crimes is 13 years in prison if she is sentenced consecutively for each count, but that's not likely, Newell said.
"It could end up being anything down to probation and community service," he said.
According to California law, many crimes occurring out of the same set of circumstances can't be sentenced consecutively, Newell said.
In addition, a clause exists in the sentencing guidelines for the alleged crimes Balch is facing that allows the judge to take into account unusual circumstances.
"It's really up to the judge," Newell said. "It's very unlikely for a first-time offender to go to prison, but there are aggravated circumstances. The victims are elderly and the amount of money is large. These are things a judge would consider."
Balch is set for a pre-trial hearing at 1 p.m. Dec. 13 in Nevada County Superior Court.
ooo
To contact Staff Writer Robyn Moormeister, e-mail robynm@theunion.com or call 477-4236.
A Story from Nevada
12:01 a.m. PT Nov 22, 2007
A Nevada City woman accused of embezzling more than $100,000 from her homeowners association as its treasurer pleaded not guilty Wednesday to felony embezzlement and theft charges.
Linda Balch, 61, appeared in Nevada County Superior Court to face three charges of felony embezzlement and one count of theft from an elder. She was joined by her attorney, Thomas Leupp of Auburn, and her husband Tom Balch, a former Nevada City mayor.
Eight of Balch's alleged victims sat in the back row of the crowded gallery, accompanied by two county victim advocates.
When Judge Candace Heidelberger called Balch's case, Balch stood before the judge while Leupp entered the not guilty plea. With Leupp's arm sheltering her, she quickly left the courtroom without responding to questions.
"Is there any chance we'll recover the money?" Woodbridge Townhomes Homeowners Association board secretary Uli Kaestner asked District Attorney Cliff Newell outside the courtroom.
Newell told Kaestner and the other alleged victims that restitution is possible.
"The Balches have assets," Newell said. "They're not destitute, as opposed to some of these cases, where the defendants have nothing."
Balch allegedly used her position as association treasurer to embezzle more than $100,000 from the Woodbridge homeowners association between September 2005 and Sept. 30 of this year and used the funds for personal gain, Grass Valley police Sgt. Doug Hren said.
Grass Valley police arrested Balch Oct. 25. Her bail was set at $100,000, and she posted a $10,000 bond the same day of her arrest.
Balch told residents at a recent homeowners association board meeting that she would do "everything in her power" to pay the money back, Kaestner said.
"She said she did it to keep up her lifestyle," Kaestner said.
Leupp did not return a phone call from The Union.
Mishandling of homeowners association funds is nothing new, said Marjorie Murray, president of the Center for California Homeowners Association Law.
"This is an issue we've been tracking for a long time," Murray said. "There are few controls over money collected by a homeowners association."
According to the center, California law does not demand financial accountability by homeowners associations. Residents hand over more than $200 million in assessments annually to association boards, but they often have a difficult time finding out how boards are spending the money they have entrusted to them, according to Murray's Web site.
Newell said every homeowners association is different, and it is up to the board to assure adequate oversight of its funds.
"This might be a wake-up call to homeowners associations," he said. "They need to be sure there is a system of checks and balances and their procedures are followed."
Since Balch's arrest, the association board removed Balch from her position and assigned four people to run the treasury position instead of one, Kaestner said.
After Wednesday's court hearing, the DA reassured the group of elderly homeowners it is possible that Balch could change her plea in coming months and be ordered to pay restitution.
Newell said he would like to resolve the case as quickly as possible, and he is confident that Leupp - with whom he has worked before - will also help to ensure an expedient resolution to the case.
The maximum possible sentence for Balch's alleged crimes is 13 years in prison if she is sentenced consecutively for each count, but that's not likely, Newell said.
"It could end up being anything down to probation and community service," he said.
According to California law, many crimes occurring out of the same set of circumstances can't be sentenced consecutively, Newell said.
In addition, a clause exists in the sentencing guidelines for the alleged crimes Balch is facing that allows the judge to take into account unusual circumstances.
"It's really up to the judge," Newell said. "It's very unlikely for a first-time offender to go to prison, but there are aggravated circumstances. The victims are elderly and the amount of money is large. These are things a judge would consider."
Balch is set for a pre-trial hearing at 1 p.m. Dec. 13 in Nevada County Superior Court.
ooo
To contact Staff Writer Robyn Moormeister, e-mail robynm@theunion.com or call 477-4236.
Hand in the HOA's Cookie Jar
by Richard Thompson
An excerpt from a recent news story read: "Bridgett Freeman of Sheboygan stole more than $11,000 from the Westridge Homeowner's Association in West Bend. Thursday, she was sentenced to six months in jail and three years probation, and was ordered to pay back $11,617.41. She said she was sorry."
From time to time, these stories hit the local rag with the really big ones making national news. While embezzlers can be found in virtually every type of business, homeowner associations are not immune. In fact, because of the volunteer nature of HOAs, business practices tend to be somewhat lax and HOAs are even more vulnerable than traditional businesses.
In the past, big time embezzlement was less likely because most HOAs had little money to steal. It was like mugging a panhandler. What was more likely to happen, is something, like board members buying themselves dinner or other perks on the HOA's dime. Those so engaged, view it as a legitimate expense for a volunteer position. Trouble is, since directors usually serve for no compensation (see your governing documents) and there is rarely a budget line item called "Board Perks," this is just another form of petty embezzlement. Like Enron, this kind takes collusion of the board members to keep the practice alive.
With reserve planning for homeowners on the rise (thankfully) comes increased amounts of cash which can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars. With larger amounts of cash comes the unfortunate temptation to dip into the HOA's cookie jar. Embezzlement can happen by either a board member or management company that has access to the funds. Usually, managers are restricted (or should be) from reserve accounts where most of the HOA's money is. This leaves the HOA cookie jar under the control of the Board President and Treasurer.
When it comes to protecting against embezzlement and other forms of fraud, it's best to have a number of controls in place that are designed to preempt the act. In other words, if there is a good chance an embezzler is going to get caught, the temptation is much less than if stealing is a piece of cake.
Getting caught with a hand in a cookie jar is no big thing if you're five years old and the goal is a macaroon. But when the prize is the HOA's cash, the Board needs to place aggressive measures in place to help keep those "certain someones" from helping themselves.
An excerpt from a recent news story read: "Bridgett Freeman of Sheboygan stole more than $11,000 from the Westridge Homeowner's Association in West Bend. Thursday, she was sentenced to six months in jail and three years probation, and was ordered to pay back $11,617.41. She said she was sorry."
From time to time, these stories hit the local rag with the really big ones making national news. While embezzlers can be found in virtually every type of business, homeowner associations are not immune. In fact, because of the volunteer nature of HOAs, business practices tend to be somewhat lax and HOAs are even more vulnerable than traditional businesses.
In the past, big time embezzlement was less likely because most HOAs had little money to steal. It was like mugging a panhandler. What was more likely to happen, is something, like board members buying themselves dinner or other perks on the HOA's dime. Those so engaged, view it as a legitimate expense for a volunteer position. Trouble is, since directors usually serve for no compensation (see your governing documents) and there is rarely a budget line item called "Board Perks," this is just another form of petty embezzlement. Like Enron, this kind takes collusion of the board members to keep the practice alive.
With reserve planning for homeowners on the rise (thankfully) comes increased amounts of cash which can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars. With larger amounts of cash comes the unfortunate temptation to dip into the HOA's cookie jar. Embezzlement can happen by either a board member or management company that has access to the funds. Usually, managers are restricted (or should be) from reserve accounts where most of the HOA's money is. This leaves the HOA cookie jar under the control of the Board President and Treasurer.
When it comes to protecting against embezzlement and other forms of fraud, it's best to have a number of controls in place that are designed to preempt the act. In other words, if there is a good chance an embezzler is going to get caught, the temptation is much less than if stealing is a piece of cake.
Getting caught with a hand in a cookie jar is no big thing if you're five years old and the goal is a macaroon. But when the prize is the HOA's cash, the Board needs to place aggressive measures in place to help keep those "certain someones" from helping themselves.
Where does the money go?
WHAT ARE THEY DOING
WITH YOUR DUES?
by Karen Conlon,
President, CACM
You keep your patio neat, your radio down and your homeowners association dues paid on time. But how can you be sure those dues are being used for property repairs, maintenance, taxes and other association costs?
Approximately 98 percent of the time, your dues are being properly applied. However, there are those rare instances of embezzlement or mismanagement, from either a member of the homeowners association board of directors or an employee of the association management company that you, as a homeowner, need to guard against.
For example, in one instance an association board member who was a contractor by trade worked on the landscape committee and offered to purchase all the association's materials. He set-up an account at a local nursery, under the association's name, and began buying a wide variety of items.
After several months during which several thousands of dollars worth of goods had been purchased in this manner, an investigation of the nursery account revealed that: 1) all the items purchased on the association's account had been delivered directly to the board member for use in his own contracting firm, and 2) the board member had received financial kick-backs from the nursery for all the purchases.
Embarrassed by their oversight, the other board members reimbursed the association out of their own pockets and asked the contractor to resign from the board.
But other associations can't resolve the problem of fraud that easily. Since they have a monthly income flow, associations do not want to file for bankruptcy which leaves homeowners themselves to fill in the financial hole. As the number of homeowners associations grow, so does the possibility of these unexpected special assessments.
In Northern California there are approximately 10,400 common interest developments (CIDs) such as condominiums, condominium conversions, planned unit developments and cooperatives which require a homeowners association and an association management firm. This figure represents 1,100,000 individual units housing approximately 2.5 million people.
According to recent projections by the California Department of Real Estate, some 80 percent of all future residential communities in Northern California will be common interest developments. With that in mind, homebuyers are best advised to protect themselves and their investments by knowing the questions to ask before they buy, how to spot fraud or mismanagement, and what to do if they suspect problems.
Some of the most important questions homebuyers should ask prior to purchasing a common interest development home is whether or not the community requires any major repair work, and if there are pending lawsuits or a history of litigation. Buyers might speak with the board president regarding any other current community concerns, and to ascertain when the association holds open board meetings that homeowners are allowed to attend.
Secondly, homebuyers need to make sure that the association management firm and the homeowners association have the appropriate types and levels of insurance. In fact, it's a state statute that the seller of the home provide this information about the association.
Typically, the homeowners association board of directors hires the association management company. That company has a fiduciary responsibility to collect dues and pay bills. However, the board has the ultimate responsibility for the association with the association management firm following the board's policy.
Depending upon the number of units involved and the level of possible exposure, the management firm should have at least $1 million in professional liability insurance which covers breach of duty, errors and omissions. The management group also needs to carry fidelity insurance which covers employee theft of management company funds, as well as a general office package that includes such basics as workers compensation, general liability and fire.
The homeowners association should also carry fidelity insurance. And it's very important to have the management firm listed as an additional co-insured on this policy.
Several years ago, a large management firm was caught embezzling millions of dollars of homeowner associations' funds. Eventually, the company's owner went to jail and the company itself filed for bankruptcy. Unfortunately, the management company was not listed as a co-insured on the association's fidelity insurance policy and thousands of homeowners were faced with unexpected assessments to make up the lost funds.
Homeowners associations should also carry directors and officers liability insurance as well with the minimum standard amount of $1 million. In fact, many times the community's covenants, codes and restrictions (CCR's) and California statutes require minimum levels of insurance coverage.
Finally, buyers should ascertain whether or not the community association manager and/or the association management firm is certified by a recognized trade association such as the California Association of Community Managers which is the only state-specific organization for association managers in the country.
Once the buyer has moved in, how can he or she spot mismanagement or fraud before it's too late? Actually, it's a lot easier than one might think.
By law, the homeowners association must send out certain financial documents on an annual basis. Each owner should be sure to read them, checking for such things as: Is the management entity collecting at least 85 to 90 percent of the monthly association dues owed by homeonwers; are the funds being held in an interest-bearing account in the name of the association; and has a reserve account been set aside for long-term maintenance and repairs?
If the answer to any of these questions is no, the homeowners association may be on shaky financial ground. Owners can also be on the lookout for fraud by verifying that the endorsement stamp on the back of their monthly dues check is that of their association and by walking around their community from time to time to make sure it is being maintained in acceptable fashion.
If a homeowner has a complaint, what can he or she do about it?
First, owners should call the association management company and ask for answers to their questions. If necessary, a complaint documenting concerns should be filed. If it takes more than 30 or 45 days to get a response, the problem may well be with the management firm itself.
If owners don't get a response, or receive one that's unsatisfactory, their concerns should be presented at the next board meeting. It's up to the board to resolve the issue and if the board doesn't do so, owners can actively pursue the election of a new board.
It all boils down to owners, the board association and the management company doing their homework and communicating their concerns. When each member of the team works in concert and respects the rights and duties of everyone else, it's a win-win situation for all concerned.
WITH YOUR DUES?
by Karen Conlon,
President, CACM
You keep your patio neat, your radio down and your homeowners association dues paid on time. But how can you be sure those dues are being used for property repairs, maintenance, taxes and other association costs?
Approximately 98 percent of the time, your dues are being properly applied. However, there are those rare instances of embezzlement or mismanagement, from either a member of the homeowners association board of directors or an employee of the association management company that you, as a homeowner, need to guard against.
For example, in one instance an association board member who was a contractor by trade worked on the landscape committee and offered to purchase all the association's materials. He set-up an account at a local nursery, under the association's name, and began buying a wide variety of items.
After several months during which several thousands of dollars worth of goods had been purchased in this manner, an investigation of the nursery account revealed that: 1) all the items purchased on the association's account had been delivered directly to the board member for use in his own contracting firm, and 2) the board member had received financial kick-backs from the nursery for all the purchases.
Embarrassed by their oversight, the other board members reimbursed the association out of their own pockets and asked the contractor to resign from the board.
But other associations can't resolve the problem of fraud that easily. Since they have a monthly income flow, associations do not want to file for bankruptcy which leaves homeowners themselves to fill in the financial hole. As the number of homeowners associations grow, so does the possibility of these unexpected special assessments.
In Northern California there are approximately 10,400 common interest developments (CIDs) such as condominiums, condominium conversions, planned unit developments and cooperatives which require a homeowners association and an association management firm. This figure represents 1,100,000 individual units housing approximately 2.5 million people.
According to recent projections by the California Department of Real Estate, some 80 percent of all future residential communities in Northern California will be common interest developments. With that in mind, homebuyers are best advised to protect themselves and their investments by knowing the questions to ask before they buy, how to spot fraud or mismanagement, and what to do if they suspect problems.
Some of the most important questions homebuyers should ask prior to purchasing a common interest development home is whether or not the community requires any major repair work, and if there are pending lawsuits or a history of litigation. Buyers might speak with the board president regarding any other current community concerns, and to ascertain when the association holds open board meetings that homeowners are allowed to attend.
Secondly, homebuyers need to make sure that the association management firm and the homeowners association have the appropriate types and levels of insurance. In fact, it's a state statute that the seller of the home provide this information about the association.
Typically, the homeowners association board of directors hires the association management company. That company has a fiduciary responsibility to collect dues and pay bills. However, the board has the ultimate responsibility for the association with the association management firm following the board's policy.
Depending upon the number of units involved and the level of possible exposure, the management firm should have at least $1 million in professional liability insurance which covers breach of duty, errors and omissions. The management group also needs to carry fidelity insurance which covers employee theft of management company funds, as well as a general office package that includes such basics as workers compensation, general liability and fire.
The homeowners association should also carry fidelity insurance. And it's very important to have the management firm listed as an additional co-insured on this policy.
Several years ago, a large management firm was caught embezzling millions of dollars of homeowner associations' funds. Eventually, the company's owner went to jail and the company itself filed for bankruptcy. Unfortunately, the management company was not listed as a co-insured on the association's fidelity insurance policy and thousands of homeowners were faced with unexpected assessments to make up the lost funds.
Homeowners associations should also carry directors and officers liability insurance as well with the minimum standard amount of $1 million. In fact, many times the community's covenants, codes and restrictions (CCR's) and California statutes require minimum levels of insurance coverage.
Finally, buyers should ascertain whether or not the community association manager and/or the association management firm is certified by a recognized trade association such as the California Association of Community Managers which is the only state-specific organization for association managers in the country.
Once the buyer has moved in, how can he or she spot mismanagement or fraud before it's too late? Actually, it's a lot easier than one might think.
By law, the homeowners association must send out certain financial documents on an annual basis. Each owner should be sure to read them, checking for such things as: Is the management entity collecting at least 85 to 90 percent of the monthly association dues owed by homeonwers; are the funds being held in an interest-bearing account in the name of the association; and has a reserve account been set aside for long-term maintenance and repairs?
If the answer to any of these questions is no, the homeowners association may be on shaky financial ground. Owners can also be on the lookout for fraud by verifying that the endorsement stamp on the back of their monthly dues check is that of their association and by walking around their community from time to time to make sure it is being maintained in acceptable fashion.
If a homeowner has a complaint, what can he or she do about it?
First, owners should call the association management company and ask for answers to their questions. If necessary, a complaint documenting concerns should be filed. If it takes more than 30 or 45 days to get a response, the problem may well be with the management firm itself.
If owners don't get a response, or receive one that's unsatisfactory, their concerns should be presented at the next board meeting. It's up to the board to resolve the issue and if the board doesn't do so, owners can actively pursue the election of a new board.
It all boils down to owners, the board association and the management company doing their homework and communicating their concerns. When each member of the team works in concert and respects the rights and duties of everyone else, it's a win-win situation for all concerned.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
The importance of water
I found this article on CNN today. You can click on the title of this entry to link to the story or you can paste the link into your browser below. Interesting story. It establishes why water conservation is so important. We tend to take it for granted, however, our supply is not endless. We only have so much that we are allowed to take out of the ground on a daily basis. Not protecting our watersource could lead to situations like the one the City of Atlanta is going through and this city in Orme, Tenessee.
The City of Orme only gets water for three hours a day because they don't have enough to go around. They have a spring that feeds their supply. That supply has dried up. You can bet it is from overuse in the surrounding area.
Enjoy the reading.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/08/dry.town/index.html
Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays Homeowner and Board Member
The City of Orme only gets water for three hours a day because they don't have enough to go around. They have a spring that feeds their supply. That supply has dried up. You can bet it is from overuse in the surrounding area.
Enjoy the reading.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/08/dry.town/index.html
Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays Homeowner and Board Member
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Monday, October 1, 2007
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Last Fridays meeting
If the views of those present at the meeting on Friday (about 40 in all) are any indication, a large percentage of the community is in favor of stepping back and re-evaluate the water and roads projects, and what should come first.
First of I commend the board and the community for not beating up one another and having a true constructive dialogue. After all of the discussion the board decided to table the motion to go forward on the water project. Though the board is in favor of the water project 3-2 I appreciate that you are listing to the community.
For those who were not there it is important to know that the board has committed to take a poll of the whole community to find out what the priority of the community is as a whole is. Please ask questions and vote.
ROADS
The arguments for the roads basically revolve around dust and finishing what was started.
WATER:
The motion prior to being tabled was to finish phase II and III of the water project and before finishing the roads and use the $50,000 reserve if necessary. The use of the reserve was to avoid 8K in taxes. I do not know taxes well enough but my concern is that if something comes up the only way to address it would be a special assessments.
It seems that the first argument was the lack of water. Many in the community seemed to be knowledgeable about the 7 Bays water system and said that with the building of the new tank last year we have plenty of supply. It seems that the engineers report supposedly says that the other projects are not urgent and do not need to be done now.
The second argument is that we would have better fire protection. Folks we have a volunteer Fire Department and they are required two have people for the truck to roll. One member also stated that they have never saved a house in 7 Bays (no one argued this point). Please do not take this as me as slamming the FD or it personnel. When I bought down here I knew going in fire protection was not what one would expect in town.
The last argument came that the RCW’s mandated a 6” pipe through out the community. I have found no RCW (though it may exist) that says this. Even if it does exist does it sound reasonable that a law would require us to tear up a whole community to replace pipe that was to code at the time installation? If that was the case community’s within the state would be tearing up roads at the cost of millions. One would have to think if such a law exists we would be grandfathered.
It seems that arguments were being thrown against the wall to see what sticks, but the majority of the homeowners were not buying them and successfully countering them.
I heard those present and it seems that the wells are not going dry anytime soon, and with the new tank we have plenty of water. Yet the roads are an eyesore, dust is creating health issues for some, and new roads would do more to enhance our property value then upgrading a water system that is meeting our needs.
Above is from my notes and are in no way an official record of what happened and by no means do I represent 7 Bays or the Board.
SOME LINKS LOOK AT:
Reserves funds for Home Owners Assoc.
Please get involved, stay informed and hold our board accountable.
Look forward to the debate.
Sean
Yhea we got the picture
Again, I am sure the community is smart enough to make there own decision after studying the facts.
Sean
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Friday
Thanks for the info I hope people will do their own research and find the
facts out prior to casting their vote.
facts out prior to casting their vote.
Sean
FW: Friday Meeting
Removed (again) for failure to post your name in association with your work.
Jay S. Jump
Blog Moderator
Take Credit for your work
Once again, I have removed several posts from the blog. They are all posted by the same person obviously. I don't know why you someone who is so opinionated and clearly has a passion for arguing a position is not willing to stand up and be counted.
Could it be that you don't live at Seven Bays? Could it be that you are covering from someone else? Perhaps you are just a puppet for a small minority of people.
Your words carry no weight when the person behind them is unwilling to come out from behind the curtain.
This blog is for Seven Bays Homeowners only.
Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays
Could it be that you don't live at Seven Bays? Could it be that you are covering from someone else? Perhaps you are just a puppet for a small minority of people.
Your words carry no weight when the person behind them is unwilling to come out from behind the curtain.
This blog is for Seven Bays Homeowners only.
Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays
Friday Meeting
Removed for failure to take credit for your work.
More photos; more messages; more whatever – Get MORE with Windows Live™ Hotmail®. NOW with 5GB storage. Get more!
More photos; more messages; more whatever – Get MORE with Windows Live™ Hotmail®. NOW with 5GB storage. Get more!
Monday, September 24, 2007
Fridays meeting
If the views of those present at the meeting on Friday (about 40 in all) are any indication, a large percentage of the community is in favor of stepping back and re-evaluate the water and roads projects, and what should come first.
First of I commend the board and the community for not beating up one another and having a true constructive dialogue. After all of the discussion the board decided to table the motion to go forward on the water project. Though the board is in favor of the water project 3-2 I appreciate that you are listing to the community.
For those who were not there it is important to know that the board has committed to take a poll of the whole community to find out what the priority of the community is as a whole is. Please ask questions and vote.
ROADS
The arguments for the roads basically revolve around dust and finishing what was started.
WATER:
The motion prior to being tabled was to finish phase II and III of the water project and before finishing the roads and use the $50,000 reserve if necessary. The use of the reserve was to avoid 8K in taxes. I do not know taxes well enough but my concern is that if something comes up the only way to address it would be a special assessments.
It seems that the first argument was the lack of water. Many in the community seemed to be knowledgeable about the 7 Bays water system and said that with the building of the new tank last year we have plenty of supply. It seems that the engineers report supposedly says that the other projects are not urgent and do not need to be done now.
The second argument is that we would have better fire protection. Folks we have a volunteer Fire Department and they are required two have people for the truck to roll. One member also stated that they have never saved a house in 7 Bays (no one argued this point). Please do not take this as me as slamming the FD or it personnel. When I bought down here I knew going in fire protection was not what one would expect in town.
The last argument came that the RCW’s mandated a 6” pipe through out the community. I have found no RCW (though it may exist) that says this. Even if it does exist does it sound reasonable that a law would require us to tear up a whole community to replace pipe that was to code at the time installation? If that was the case community’s within the state would be tearing up roads at the cost of millions. One would have to think if such a law exists we would be grandfathered.
It seems that arguments were being thrown against the wall to see what sticks, but the majority of the homeowners were not buying them and successfully countering them.
I heard those present and it seems that the wells are not going dry anytime soon, and with the new tank we have plenty of water. Yet the roads are an eyesore, dust is creating health issues for some, and new roads would do more to enhance our property value then upgrading a water system that is meeting our needs.
Above is from my notes and are in no way an official record of what happened and by no means do I represent 7 Bays or the Board.
SOME LINKS LOOK AT:
Reserves funds for Home Owners Assoc.
Please get involved, stay informed and hold our board accountable.
Look forward to the debate.
Sean
Friday, September 21, 2007
Who can stay up later?
My accusation about lies and deception comes from you throwing mud at Jay as much as he is to you and the board. I have yet to see anyone take the high road we are all slopping around in the gutter.
Yes the board could have done something such as speed bumps on those roads. Did you propose that to them? Did you push that?
Yes to my previous board member I asked for speed limit signs, I e-mailed a concern to my current board rep. and I know my neighbor has asked as well.
Yes someone could lobby with the county I suppose. Great idea are you volunteering?
I am a registered voter in
Saying "change the by-laws" and actually getting them changed are two different things. It will take a lot of hard work. Are you volunteering for that?
YES lets get solicit ideas and form a committee and have something prepared for July’s meeting. FYI most of my involvement will be via e-mail.
You're saying that the homeowner's should vote monthly to on issues and the board should just exist to decide about broken pipes? My mouth is hanging open. That's a big change you should get right on making that happen.
YES at this point I trust my neighbors as a whole then in groups of five.
You should go ahead and see if you can make those changes.
LETS’ GO! Lets run as a ticket MORROW and ANONYMOUS in ’08 Putting 7 BAYS 1ST.
I believe this mess is due to lack of community involvement and apathy, though not on the part of the board I still believe all 5 have their own idea as to what is best for 7 bays or else they would not have ran. I did not think twice about the water prior to the road fiasco, and yes I had total trust in
Speaking of property if there is extra land we can sell lets do it. Get the dues in and get it off the books. (for those keeping score that is not what Jay wants). Just remember the government will tax the gains.
To be honest, you know as well as I do that most of the community thinks you and I are nuts, but no one can dispute we both care deeply for our community.
If you would like to take this off line feel free to e-mail at sean_morrow@msn.com I promise to keep your identity private and let’s find common issues and work from there. That goes to anyone that wants to e-mail me and does not want to talk on the blog.
Sean
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Late night should be sleeping
My nonanonymous friend Sean,
I didn't take up the discussion on the pool because I know very little about the pool. I don't use it.
Removed due to failure to post a name and take credit for your work.
Can you find the hidden words? Take a break and play Seekadoo! Play now!
I didn't take up the discussion on the pool because I know very little about the pool. I don't use it.
Removed due to failure to post a name and take credit for your work.
Can you find the hidden words? Take a break and play Seekadoo! Play now!
My Anyonomus Blogger Friend
Fist I apologize for my last post I made some serious typos. Second on your points:
“You bring up the reserve fund Sean. I answered that question. I'm sure it hasn't changed your mind on the issue at all. I'm sure yourself and others will try to gain traction on something else next. I wish you luck with it.”
You are lumping me into Jay’s camp again. You are assuming that I am looking to make waves and I am pushing an agenda. MY ISSUE IS THE ROADS that the governing body of seven bays destroyed. That’s all; fix our roads I go AWAY. Raise the dues to $1500 I can afford it just fix the roads. Pay the maintenance personnel well, for those who know me know I am a unionist. I believe that a man should reap the fruits of his labor. Looking back I do not think you could put a price on
Also on the roads, you said “I don't believe the majority of people in Seven Bays support the roads over the water project”. You are right; I believe that the majority of 7 Bays does not live on the corner of Rainbow and Park or Park and Ponderosa Cir, Ponderosa Cir and North point, or Rainbow and Ponderosa Cir.
As far as the water goes upgrade it just put it out to bid. At this point in time maybe it would be in the board’s best interest to resend out the engineering report. I vaguely remember it myself. Let the community reexamine it and decide.
Something else I find interesting is that you took no time to respond to my pool post. Nor did Jay, and frankly I do not care. It does prove that you’re right in your post dated September 6th in which you said “there will always be contention in this blog because that is the nature of this medium.” However I offered a way to start a dialogue on an issue that was not contentious yet important to the community and you did not enter the debate, which means that there may be something to the personal gain theory. Personally I believe that our community is too small for anyone to get away with that. More than likely it appears that you are as hell bent in spreading lies and deception as you accuse Jay.
To let you know that it may seem that I side or better yet respond to Jays arguments, that is because he gives out numbers, and if one is smart enough to read past the rhetoric they will see that he gives examples, which the other side refuse to refute. I am not asking them to jump into the attack (that’s what they got you for) just put up actual numbers. Prove him wrong, I do not have the numbers at my disposal, and by your own admission neither do you. You go on accusing him on this and that back it up. I am easy to convince just show me facts not opinions
You say Jay is trying to make one of the board members resign. That argument makes no sense to me. Was his father-in-law not on the board and resigned? Would Jay not have made every effort to keep him on? By my calculations that would have left George and Linda in the minority. Second if one resigns that would make the 2nd alternate the next in line. I have asked a couple of people each from different sides of the debate what they knew of him and it sounds like he is a wild card so Jay would be taking a gamble.
You seem to be holding the fact that Jay and Margot are not full time against them. As a part-timer I I feel strongly that my annual assessment buys me the same right to run for the board as yours. If George, Rick, and Linda choose to work in the office and do odds and ends, a sincere thanks to them and I certainly see the value in it, however that is not part of their job nor should they be held in a higher regard just because geography allows them to give more to the community. I’ll admit I do not have the history that you do in 7 Bays, so please tell me at what levels were past boards involved in the day to day operations? Many of us are down there to relax and that is why we are willing to pay a fair assessment.
Why does it matter that someone may have been giving 20 proxies? That gave one person a lot of control. Did people do their homework on the issues or just hand it over because it freed them of an obligation to be present? I will tell you that I gave my proxy away with one condition vote to fix the roads.
Random thoughts:
Resend the engineering report to all homeowners and just the report no commentary from either side, just the facts.
Water is important to any community but give us a clear reason why. Is it because my water will cease to flow in my place or is it because of fire suppression. If it is the later I ask you this, if a fire breaks out would our fire department respond in time to put it out? They are volunteers and I do not know this but is there always someone on call or in the community to man the truck? Now the Fry Tank is going, when and where did this come from. The story seems to be always changing.
The roads need to be fixed; the board has refused to do anything this past summer about this. Portable speed bumps could have been installed; permanent and visible speed restrictions could have been put in place. They did nothing.
We have spoke about the county. Does Seven Bays send anyone to lobby the county on our behalf, talk about the proverbial shaft; we are a cash cow to them. They raise our taxes and 80% of us are not residents to vote. We do not send our kids to Creston schools. They need to be held accountable.
Change the By-laws.
Make each plat elect their rep. and you must live in the plat you represent. No offense to Rick.
Give the homeowners more control. In other words the Board makes decisions that need to be made on the spot (i.e. broken water pipes, pool breaks, ect), other than that the e-board may recommend to the homeowners what should be done and the homeowners vote at monthly meetings. Of course the homeowners could also approve a budget for day to day operations. I am not looking to totally tie their hands, only on capital decisions.
Make a quorum for the homeowners meeting to be of those present at the meeting. A lot may choose not to come and that is their loss.
Talk to you soon,
Sean Morrow
Proud resident of “
What I know
To the person calling me a coward,
I really can't speak with authority about the numbers.
(Removed for failure to take credit for your work)
I really can't speak with authority about the numbers.
(Removed for failure to take credit for your work)
When you dont' have an argument
Many years ago, I learned this funny phrase in ethics class.
"When you don't have the law argue the facts. When you don't have the facts argue the law. When you have neither the facts or the law, attack the other party."
I see in the anonymous blogs response (which I will be taking down since you clearly lack the courage of your conviction) that there are no rebuttal facts, no rebuttal argument. It is only an attack on me. Now you attempt to divide the old board and say that even they must have hated me. If they did, they are masters of deception and I will certainly have had one put over on me.
Now all you have done is state that my assertions aren't true, but you fail to assert any facts to the contrary. Me thinks you doth protest too much sir!
As to the board having the votes, that might very well be true. If the board holds a vote and three members vote for the water project, then the homeowners lose. That is democracy. Indeed, I will not like it, but, I will recognize democracy when it is properly used. My prior posts have been that the board has failed to use the democratic process and instead has acted unilaterally without the approval of the entire board. I think the facts bare out that assertion.
Again sir, I point you to the facts. Fortunately, I have both the facts and the law on my side. You apparently, have neither.
I look forward to seeing you on Friday.
Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays
"When you don't have the law argue the facts. When you don't have the facts argue the law. When you have neither the facts or the law, attack the other party."
I see in the anonymous blogs response (which I will be taking down since you clearly lack the courage of your conviction) that there are no rebuttal facts, no rebuttal argument. It is only an attack on me. Now you attempt to divide the old board and say that even they must have hated me. If they did, they are masters of deception and I will certainly have had one put over on me.
Now all you have done is state that my assertions aren't true, but you fail to assert any facts to the contrary. Me thinks you doth protest too much sir!
As to the board having the votes, that might very well be true. If the board holds a vote and three members vote for the water project, then the homeowners lose. That is democracy. Indeed, I will not like it, but, I will recognize democracy when it is properly used. My prior posts have been that the board has failed to use the democratic process and instead has acted unilaterally without the approval of the entire board. I think the facts bare out that assertion.
Again sir, I point you to the facts. Fortunately, I have both the facts and the law on my side. You apparently, have neither.
I look forward to seeing you on Friday.
Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays
AHH MY FRIEND THE ANOYNOMUS BLOGGER
Some points on your last blog:
“The possible loss of the Fry Tank by falling over the cliff” can’t we just build a wall? (Oops sarcasm)
“Because he’s seemed to interpret the law in whatever way benefits him the most”. When Jay wrote those blogs (in which he put his name on) asking us to follow the money trail it seems you blasted him. Now you are accusing him of gaining something by not having the water project done. What benefit does Jay get?
When you say that they have the votes to do it I assume you mean the board. Of course they do anyone who has been paying attention know the board is split 3 to 2. Is
Speaking of the split is it true that one member of the community collected over 20 proxies by attacking the actions of Jay Jump in a letter he sent to parts of the community. To me it sounds as if that the person is the one who has something to gain.
Political will and political capital are two different things. They may have the will but not the capital. If dues go up and dust is still an issue this board will have trouble.
If they cant handle the “unwarranted crap” resign, if not deal with it.
Now if you want questions Jay’s blog answer these questions I was not at the meeting last week so I do not know:
“George had to concede that the cost did not include labor”
Did George want to liquidate all the reserves?
My understanding is the county has no plans to give us 500GPM fire truck. Please tell me who you talked to because I heard from one person that the FD Commissioner Reinbold himself said that was not going to be the case. If there is a commitment from the County lets get it in writing.
My insurance agent says that regardless of the size of the truck my rates will not change due to the staffing of the FD.
If we are doing this project in the name of public safety wouldn’t you think an
Please answer these questions.
Sean
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Ahh yes the water project
Well there's a lot to say here but with the limited time I have I'll say this.
Removed for failure to take credit for your work.
More photos; more messages; more whatever – Get MORE with Windows Live™ Hotmail®. NOW with 5GB storage. Get more!
Removed for failure to take credit for your work.
More photos; more messages; more whatever – Get MORE with Windows Live™ Hotmail®. NOW with 5GB storage. Get more!
Fiscal Responsibility
Sorry I haven't posted anything in a while, I've been busy actually working to pay the bills.
Last weeks meeting was a step in the right direction. But I also think it is clear that we still have a vast rift that probably cannot be mended.
Let me address this Phase II water project again. Aside from the previous issues I've raised about why Mr. Cordier and his court (Mr. Graffis) are so fired up to push this water project through, the more I learn about this project, the less I am in favor of it.
Do I think it is important to have an upgraded water system? Absolutely.
Do I think we need to push it forward at the expense of all else? Definitely not.
In the last meeting, George had asked Rick to come up with a number for the roads. In order to chip seal everything in the community, twice, it would cost $155,000.00. However, to do Plats I and II would cost $33,000.00 and it could be done this year.
George felt that the public should have a voice in whether or not the roads went forward, but I felt that this was made clear at the previous public meeting. The community wants to have the roads addressed!
I posited that we should do a portion of the roads each year until it was all completed.
George next turned to the water system stating that it would cost $76,000.00. However, this isn't accurate as the original bid of almost a year ago did not include labor. George indicated that there was a $8,000.00 contingency fund, thus the real cost was less than $76,000.00. Again, this is flawed logic. I don't know about you, but whenever I budget for a job, there is always an unforseen expense. The $8,000.00 contingency is there for a reason and we shouldn't discount it.
Now, George had to concede that the cost did not include labor. So the cost would definitely be more than $76,000.00 in order to complete Phase II. There is only $23,000.00 in the budget alloted for Phase II. George's plan was to do the following:
(1) Liquidate our $50,000.00 reserve.
(2) Use the $23,000.00 in the budget allocated to Phase II.
(3) Sell our remaining parcel of land at the airport,
(3) Raid the labor budget, and
(4) Raid the healthcare budget.
I can't support this reasoning for a couple of different reasons. The first one is fiscal responsibility. We simply cannot afford to put all of our eggs in one basket. Phase II has an unknown top end to its cost. We don't know what labor will be. We don't know what equipmenet rental is going to cost. These costs are not known. Raiding every dollar we have in our budget is a terrible idea. Selling assets to fund projects is an even worse idea. Would it be prudent in your own household to liquidate your savings and checking accounts as well as sell your home to fund the purchase of a pool or hot tub? Would it not be smarter to make sure that you kept money in reserve? I don't see the current board doing that in this case.
Now, let me address the other reason I think this is a bad idea. At the end of the day, this is about improving our water system to increase our level of fire protection. We are going to go from a 250 gpm capacity to a 500 gpm capacity. However, in order to do that we need to have a 500 gpm pumper truck. We don't have one and the County apparently does not have any present plans to purchase one despite Mr. Cordier's assertions to the contrary at the September 14th meeting.
So, in the end, we push this project through and what benefit have we received? I don't see one. I certainly don't see one for the expense.
250 gpm or 500 gpm isn't going to save our homes when all we have is a garden hose from our neighbors house.
What I proposed at the last Friday meeting was breaking Phase II into multiple projects. I also proposed the same thing for the roads. I felt this was a fair and reasonable compromise. Creating a solid multi year plan that addressed the concerns of everyone and accomplished all of our goals. I don't think this offer of compromise was well received by our chairman and I'm going to tell you why.
During the course of the meeting, George made me the following offer. He was so sure that he was right and I was wrong that he stated "If I'm wrong, I'll resign. If you're wrong, you resign." It was at this moment I realized there was no compromise to be had. It was also clear to me that personal feelings have clearly obscured that which is in the greater interest of Seven Bays.
As I stated at the meeting, I receive no benefit from either project. I live too far away for the roads to affect me and I live too far away from the nearest fire hydrant. My goals are to serve the greater good of Seven Bays. To ensure that we are fiscally solvent. Putting all our money into the one project and stripping other sections of the budget to do it is too close to the edge. If we have one thing go wrong, we're out of money.
The board has already addressed one issue that is going to cost us some money and we don't know how much it is going to cost in the end. But we're going to have to deal with it and it will probably put both the water project and road completion off for the forseeable future.
Now, let me turn to the previous posts which have served only to malign my good name. Linda, you simply have to get your facts straight. You've stated that you took time to review the attendance sheets from last year. You stated that I attended less than half of the meetings. One of our wonderful community members actually went back and reviewed the minutes for the previous year and determined that you were wrong. A statistical analysis was provided showing attendance at board meetings, community meetings, and a combined total of board meetings and community meetings. Overall, I believe I had a 75% attendance rate.
Now, your argument is going to be that it should have been 100%, but consider this. I deliberately set up a communication network so all of the board members could talk on a regular basis throughout the year. I made that same system available to the current board members.
I didn't need to attend every meeting because our previous board spoke on a regular basis via email and telephone. We also shared a common vision and had respect and trust for one another. Our local email network allowed us to meet day in and day out if necessary and there were days when we would send multiple emails across the network. The same network, that you now refuse to use.
The next time you choose to go on the attack, check your facts.
As to your statements that I am trying to play the community. Shame on you. Certainly aren't you trying to do the same thing? And even if you are correct, is it not correct to make the public aware of the actions of the board. Should I have allowed all of these transgressions to take place without public scrutiny? Was it not the new members of the board's platform that the old board hadn't communicated with the community until after the fact? Is this not what you and George wanted to change? Further, is it not the exact same behavior that Roy Graffis and George Codier exhibited in their 'letter's' to the community? I'll thank you for not calling the kettle black.
Many members of the community have approached me asking me to work with the board. I am most certainly willing to do that and have indeed endeavoured to do so. I have argued with reason and logic over the past few weeks, letting the emotions go. I don't think the balance of the board has accomplished the same, but your actions will speak louder than your words.
As was stated at the previous meeting, the time is now. Spending every waking moment talking about what the previous board did or did not do does not alleviate your responsibility for dealing with the issues of today. You cannot use the past as a scapegoat as it only reveals an inability to address the real problems facing you.
I look forward to seeing everyone at the PUBLIC community meeting this coming Friday.
Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays
Last weeks meeting was a step in the right direction. But I also think it is clear that we still have a vast rift that probably cannot be mended.
Let me address this Phase II water project again. Aside from the previous issues I've raised about why Mr. Cordier and his court (Mr. Graffis) are so fired up to push this water project through, the more I learn about this project, the less I am in favor of it.
Do I think it is important to have an upgraded water system? Absolutely.
Do I think we need to push it forward at the expense of all else? Definitely not.
In the last meeting, George had asked Rick to come up with a number for the roads. In order to chip seal everything in the community, twice, it would cost $155,000.00. However, to do Plats I and II would cost $33,000.00 and it could be done this year.
George felt that the public should have a voice in whether or not the roads went forward, but I felt that this was made clear at the previous public meeting. The community wants to have the roads addressed!
I posited that we should do a portion of the roads each year until it was all completed.
George next turned to the water system stating that it would cost $76,000.00. However, this isn't accurate as the original bid of almost a year ago did not include labor. George indicated that there was a $8,000.00 contingency fund, thus the real cost was less than $76,000.00. Again, this is flawed logic. I don't know about you, but whenever I budget for a job, there is always an unforseen expense. The $8,000.00 contingency is there for a reason and we shouldn't discount it.
Now, George had to concede that the cost did not include labor. So the cost would definitely be more than $76,000.00 in order to complete Phase II. There is only $23,000.00 in the budget alloted for Phase II. George's plan was to do the following:
(1) Liquidate our $50,000.00 reserve.
(2) Use the $23,000.00 in the budget allocated to Phase II.
(3) Sell our remaining parcel of land at the airport,
(3) Raid the labor budget, and
(4) Raid the healthcare budget.
I can't support this reasoning for a couple of different reasons. The first one is fiscal responsibility. We simply cannot afford to put all of our eggs in one basket. Phase II has an unknown top end to its cost. We don't know what labor will be. We don't know what equipmenet rental is going to cost. These costs are not known. Raiding every dollar we have in our budget is a terrible idea. Selling assets to fund projects is an even worse idea. Would it be prudent in your own household to liquidate your savings and checking accounts as well as sell your home to fund the purchase of a pool or hot tub? Would it not be smarter to make sure that you kept money in reserve? I don't see the current board doing that in this case.
Now, let me address the other reason I think this is a bad idea. At the end of the day, this is about improving our water system to increase our level of fire protection. We are going to go from a 250 gpm capacity to a 500 gpm capacity. However, in order to do that we need to have a 500 gpm pumper truck. We don't have one and the County apparently does not have any present plans to purchase one despite Mr. Cordier's assertions to the contrary at the September 14th meeting.
So, in the end, we push this project through and what benefit have we received? I don't see one. I certainly don't see one for the expense.
250 gpm or 500 gpm isn't going to save our homes when all we have is a garden hose from our neighbors house.
What I proposed at the last Friday meeting was breaking Phase II into multiple projects. I also proposed the same thing for the roads. I felt this was a fair and reasonable compromise. Creating a solid multi year plan that addressed the concerns of everyone and accomplished all of our goals. I don't think this offer of compromise was well received by our chairman and I'm going to tell you why.
During the course of the meeting, George made me the following offer. He was so sure that he was right and I was wrong that he stated "If I'm wrong, I'll resign. If you're wrong, you resign." It was at this moment I realized there was no compromise to be had. It was also clear to me that personal feelings have clearly obscured that which is in the greater interest of Seven Bays.
As I stated at the meeting, I receive no benefit from either project. I live too far away for the roads to affect me and I live too far away from the nearest fire hydrant. My goals are to serve the greater good of Seven Bays. To ensure that we are fiscally solvent. Putting all our money into the one project and stripping other sections of the budget to do it is too close to the edge. If we have one thing go wrong, we're out of money.
The board has already addressed one issue that is going to cost us some money and we don't know how much it is going to cost in the end. But we're going to have to deal with it and it will probably put both the water project and road completion off for the forseeable future.
Now, let me turn to the previous posts which have served only to malign my good name. Linda, you simply have to get your facts straight. You've stated that you took time to review the attendance sheets from last year. You stated that I attended less than half of the meetings. One of our wonderful community members actually went back and reviewed the minutes for the previous year and determined that you were wrong. A statistical analysis was provided showing attendance at board meetings, community meetings, and a combined total of board meetings and community meetings. Overall, I believe I had a 75% attendance rate.
Now, your argument is going to be that it should have been 100%, but consider this. I deliberately set up a communication network so all of the board members could talk on a regular basis throughout the year. I made that same system available to the current board members.
I didn't need to attend every meeting because our previous board spoke on a regular basis via email and telephone. We also shared a common vision and had respect and trust for one another. Our local email network allowed us to meet day in and day out if necessary and there were days when we would send multiple emails across the network. The same network, that you now refuse to use.
The next time you choose to go on the attack, check your facts.
As to your statements that I am trying to play the community. Shame on you. Certainly aren't you trying to do the same thing? And even if you are correct, is it not correct to make the public aware of the actions of the board. Should I have allowed all of these transgressions to take place without public scrutiny? Was it not the new members of the board's platform that the old board hadn't communicated with the community until after the fact? Is this not what you and George wanted to change? Further, is it not the exact same behavior that Roy Graffis and George Codier exhibited in their 'letter's' to the community? I'll thank you for not calling the kettle black.
Many members of the community have approached me asking me to work with the board. I am most certainly willing to do that and have indeed endeavoured to do so. I have argued with reason and logic over the past few weeks, letting the emotions go. I don't think the balance of the board has accomplished the same, but your actions will speak louder than your words.
As was stated at the previous meeting, the time is now. Spending every waking moment talking about what the previous board did or did not do does not alleviate your responsibility for dealing with the issues of today. You cannot use the past as a scapegoat as it only reveals an inability to address the real problems facing you.
I look forward to seeing everyone at the PUBLIC community meeting this coming Friday.
Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Next meeting
Well I guess unless we are tearing one another apart the blog does not seem to generate much discussion.
I noticed a lot of folks attended the last board meeting. I feel that the board meeting is just that and should not be open to the public.
Anyway I look forward to this Fridays meeting, is their any word on the roads? Just curious.
Friday, September 7, 2007
Changing Gears
Well it seems that we have gotten passed the attacks, and I have stated that I felt that this is a good medium to communicate. So here I go.
The Pool:
I was in favor of the proposed card system especially if it will save the association over $4K. As you have seen if you read my blog post I have changed my mind on it. It sounded like it has been tried and failed in the past and some are reluctant to go back. How about a part time pool monitor? One who works after 4pm on Friday, normal hours Saturday and Sunday, while trouble can happen anytime I think you would agree that the most likely trouble would come on the weekends when most people are present. Also during the week we have maintenance already on the property. They can monitor what is going on while they are attending to their other responsibilities. This should prevent them from being called out on the weekend to unclog a toilet or clean up messes. I have spent many weeks up there in the summer and the pool seems extremely low key on M, W, and TH. Has this idea been explored? The return on investment of the card system won’t be realized as quickly but by the second year I think we would see some real savings. I would like to hear comments, pro or con.
Not the most important issue in 7 Bays but probably the least polarizing.
Have a great Weekend.
Sean
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Okay
You won't find George on here. He's not computer savvy and he feels like I do that there will always be contention in this blog because that is the nature of this medium. I've been looking at other homeowners association websites and haven't found one with a blog yet. It would be nice if your ideal of this being a place for community announcements and fishing stories was achieved but in my experience all blogs and message boards no matter what the subject of discussion always become contentious. No matter if its on Winnie the Pooh fansite or Salon.com.
I agree it would be good to have a unanimously selected moderator for the blog if it has to stay up.
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger Get it now!
I agree it would be good to have a unanimously selected moderator for the blog if it has to stay up.
Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger Get it now!
My last post
I shot that off during my last break and did not see Linda’s post until it was to late. Some things may be out of order.
Sean
RE: WELL
You said:
“The volunteer help has nothing to do with Jay. Calling for volunteer help is as simple as posting a message or making a statement. “
I said:
He has reached out and asked that others volunteer to help the community. From the blog the other night it sounds that many are, I know many of them and I know they are not doing it because Jay asked. However it is the first time that any board member has reached out and asked me.
My point is he actually reached out to the whole community an initiative that I have yet to see since coming down.
You said:
“One board member controlling the blog”
None of our exchanges have been filtered, and I find the only editing comes when you do not put your name with the post. So someone seeing this a few days from now may think I am talking to myself.
In the case of his blog last week he took issue with a member of the community (who by the way I enjoyed debating at the pool this weekend). I do not think it was called for naming that person, but Jay did sign it, keeping with his policy. Maybe we need the board to unanimously appoint a moderator. But I think debate is and openness is important.
You said:
The others are doing work and business for the community
I do not doubt it. I am sure that they are showing up and working and keeping the bills paid and the water on, which has to be done. From Linda’s post it seems she has given up real employment to work the office. Like I said to Linda on Tuesday it is not a board of 3 or a board of 2 it is a five member board. I just wanted an opportunity for all side to be heard at the board meeting. Part timers are on the board and in my opinion allowance need to be made. They may not be able to provide the sweat equity that full timers can, but their opinion should be solicited and their vote should be counted. Or are you implying that only full timers should serve on the board?
If I remember right the politics of 7 Bays last year tilted in Jay’s favor and probably he was not as concerned since him and the rest of the board had a shared vision, I do not know. Was he absent because they made allowance to maximize attendance which conflicted with his schedule? I do not know, do you?
I have yet to call anyone a bum like the other bloger did. I have questioned their ability but not their integrity, and I spent most of the past weekend listening to the other sides views’ (not from them directly, nor have Jay and I ever had a direct conversation about his views either). It is just that they do not seem to be communicating their views or vision very well. My Plat Rep. did not want a meeting with the Plat he represents but has offered to do it on an individual basis, not exactly what I was looking for but at least he is holding himself out there. I have read Linda’s post and responded. I even recognized that people who serve should be thanked. So please do not hint that I am some close minded fool.
I am not asking them to respond to Jay’s “attacks”, however I would like to see something coming out of association that tells me that sound decisions are being made and the members of the board are making their own decisions without being influenced by someone’s outside agenda. By staying silent they are giving validity to the “attacks”. Linda the other night reported progress, but it was not until a threat of a recall was made. I was furious when I heard the meeting moved to Monday, but you say that it has been changed to accommodate Jay and Margot. Great! But is because the Chair thought it was the right thing, or because of the post of me and the other resident? I do not know.
I challenge the entire board to individually post their goals for 7 Bays and how we need to get there on this blog.
I do enjoy the discussion and look forward to continued debate. I feel that you, I and the every member of the board agree on a lot more when it comes to what is best for 7 Bays. The problem lies on who will get us there and how.
SOMETHING TO CONSIDER-MEETING SCHEDULE AND MORE
Sean,
Jay Jump is attempting to play the community. He is a very cleaver person, who has had schooling and working experience manipulating words and getting others to rally in his causes favor. The trick is to first get everyone's attention by implying that they are going to be personally affected by something ("hold on to your pocketbooks", "follow the money", etc.). One that I particularly like is talking about Jed demanding more money and I guess they saw fit to give it to him. The truth was Jed asked, if we could not provide the insurance, to pay him what we would have had to pay for the insurance and we agreed. As it turns out, we could insure him so it was a moot point anyway. The thing that I find so funny is that Jay Jump wants to hire someone with all of the bells and whistles to the tune of $80,000 a year, or not less than $60,000 as the maintenance manager and wants a full-time Office Manager to the tune of at least $40,000 a year. Then, of course, we still need our second maintenance staff. Now we would have to pay all of the payroll taxes and insurance on top of all of that. Look at the minutes from the last board and you will see that in a meeting before the election they offered the then Office Manager $40,000 a year. I could go on, but I think you get the picture.
As far as the Board meetings go, we set a meeting for a Friday and Jay said he could not attend and wanted the 15th (a Saturday) as he had weekend plans. He knows that Saturdays are out of the question for us and asking the Joe Brinkman to work more on the weekends than he already does is not right. George changed it to Monday thinking he and hopefully Margot could participate via telephone (as we purchased equipment to do this to accommodate our out-of-town Board members). This was not an option for Margot or Jay. On the 4th I sent the following message to Morgot in particular, but it was distributed to all of the Board members:
Margot,
I can talk to George. He is the one scheduling the meeting. The only response that we got from the original meeting notice was that the 15th would be better for both you and Jay. That is a Saturday and we had already let everyone know that Saturdays are not an option for us and it isn't fair to ask the maintenance staff to work any more weekend time than necessary.
After talking to George with Rick, he changed the meeting to Monday hoping you could both attend at least by telephone. I ask Rick to talk to George with me and see if we can change the meeting again.
I sense your frustration and I feel bad that you feel that way. I don't believe that George is trying to be difficult. He is trying to get things done and time is passing. We need to figure out an easier way to schedule meetings in a timely manner without so much effort. The solution might be to have a particular night that we meet and people attend or not.
Now, why did Jay indicate to everyone that the meeting was set in stone, because it keeps everyone thinking that we are waging some kind of conspiracy.
In truth, we are trying to get as much accomplished as we can with the least amount of expenditures. We are new at this and have entered the game with everything against us.
I hope that at least we can agree that despite the controversy this board has been effective at getting a lot of problems solved for the community in the short time we have been in office, despite the obstacles put in our way (the blog). We've hired the staff we need, we've organized the office and run it without paid staff to save the association a lot of money, we've fought hard to allow a solution to the problem of the road above the Bennett property, we've solved the issue of the Simpson property (twice as it turns out since we both replicated the agreement and found the original) that the previous board was not able to take action on for almost a year, we've advanced toward being almost ready to begin the phase 2 water project, we've gotten closer to being able to present figures and options to our road problem, we've gotten the books back in order and reconciled the accounts which were all wrong, we've come up with a filing system that has until now consisted of stacks and unassorted boxes, right or wrong we've taken action on what to do about the pool, we've granted 2 necessary variances, we're dealing with many building requests and property issues.
In my opinion, the blog is a negative thing that has served to create disruption in the community and slow down the progress we are striving for. There have been many days that I could not function because I could not sleep, as a result, the office is not nearly to the point I would like it to be. I want to make procedures and desk manuals so that no one will ever have to go into an office and face the challenge that we had to face.
I'm not sure how much I will be able to respond on here. It takes too much precious time and I need to focus on constructive progress.
Thank you for reading and considering my thoughts on this subject.
Jay, where have you been screaming for a common meeting time? Your only communication on the issue was that you wanted saturday the 15th, then you accused us of having no integrity (again) because George had asked for the 7th. This issue was worked out between the board and we followed Margot's suggestion of an alternative meeting date. By way of saying "power to the people" you are simply trying to take credit for this by saying your emailings to the community had some affect on the decision. It was Margot's willingness to compromise on a meeting date that led to the date being changed, not your PR campaign.
Linda Schindler
Board Member
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)