Seven Bays Homeowners Blog

A Missive about leaving your name

2008-01-21T22:19:00.001-08:00

Ok - recognizing that the ranters don't want to leave their names for obvious reasons, I'm removing both of you.

The guy who is upset about the ruts in the runway. Yes, it is being dealt with. I'm upset about it too and I have spoken to Joe about it. It is on the list of things to be fixed in the spring. But before you rant about it, have the courage to list your name.

To the guy who is presumably the guilty party and took such offense to the rant, you're being removed as well. (I am making a presumption that you are the guilty party as everyone else found it to be quite a chuckle, however, you clearly, have some pressing issues on your mind which leads me to think you are probably the one who drove across the runway).

I assume you think it was me and if you do, by all means you are welcome to come discuss it with me directly. I am making that assumption that you were referring to me as the guy who is here every other weekend, which would of course, be me, as well as a host of other people, so, if it wasn't directed at me, well, even better. But since I also seem to tbe at the epicenter of drama at Seven Bays, I narrow it back to me again. Either way, you're off the blog for not putting your name up there.

So thankfully, since the rant was read at the board meeting aloud, it is now clearly in the eyes of the community. I asked Linda to send a letter to all the airport residents that no one should drive on the runway. I also asked Joe to put the signs back in place so that people will know not to drive on the runway.

To be fair, everyone has to put their names on their posts. Even me.

Jay Jump
Seven Bays Homeowner and Board Member

Signing off for now

2008-01-20T10:56:00.001-08:00

Last night I had what I would classify as a meaningful e-mail exchange with a board member, I promised them that I would not blog without getting there side of the story.

Since I am not taking a position one way or another here I feel that I will not be breaching that promise.

I will sit back for now and let the community decide, I have learned this blog is not necessarily the best way to communicate and I will let the political will of the community decide how this saga ends. I have learned through this experience that I have no voice in how our community is run except (and this goes back further then this board) during the second weekend in July and maybe I will do my speaking then in how I vote, or maybe I will just say screw it and spend the morning on the lake, we will see.

Have a great Winter Seven Bays!

Good bye for now.

Sean

Missive to the Blogger

2008-01-19T12:29:00.000-08:00

To the last blogger, DO NOT EVER SIGN from the community, because you do not speak for me, and by signing it as you did you show no more courage then the blogger to which you were responding to. I to was not going to ID myself but since I decided to send this to the board I realize what the hell.

Regardless of which side of the board you agree with we as a community must agree that 5 people are destroying us though they all may have ran with the best intentions.

I only get to spend a few weeks a year up there and until now I have enjoyed it and had fond memories. Now I look at 7 bays and want to puke. All winter my mail box has been littered letters, all summer we had to deal with dust, and our dues went up. Yet there is no shortage of bad feelings. Is the board in such a mess because one board member did not get their way or is it that other board members are taking on too much too fast, or is it community apathy? My guess it is a little bit of everything.

Now is the time to ask the board to resign, hand the bill paying authority to our accountant and run a new election quickly. Or as a compromise ask that Linda and Margot stay on board (I believe their terms just started) and the rest resign NOW, and we re-elect three new folks. This way both “interests” are represented and we maintain some continuity I was told all but one has offered to resign come July, can we survive that long?

If this board can not work things out soon what do we do?

Withhold dues?

Become part of the county?

None of these are desirable options in my opinion.

I ask the community what is the solution?

Sean

Vindication! Thy name is Seven Bays!

2008-01-09T17:03:00.000-08:00

Dear homeowners:

Last week I received a mysterious email from Linda requesting my presence at a meeting on Friday, January 4 at 10:00 a.m. The request arrived on Thursday, less than 24 hours before the event. In addition, George Cordier called me that evening and asked me to attend the Friday Meeting.

Aghast at why I would ever receive a call from Linda or George, I figured something must have gone terribly wrong and now the blame would attempt to be spread far and wide. When I arrived at the maintenance office, I found the Lincoln County Fire Commissioner and our Engineer from E&H present.

I asked George what was going and what was wrong and he replied, "Nothing, we're meeting to discuss doing Phase III after Phase II is finished." Of course! I smelled a set up and that this meeting was intended to clear the path for Phase III immediately.

So the meeting commenced with four members present. Margot was stuck in Spokane at work. George started off asking the fire commissioner when we were going to get a 500 gpm pumper truck. Dean politely acknowledge they knew the area would eventually need one and said it wouldn't happen for a few years.

There was some more discussion about fire protection until finally, the fire commissioner asked "Why are you in a rush to do Phase III? Is it to lower your insurance?" Well, you and I both know that the insurance won't go down until we have a fulltime dedicated fire departent, so that clearly wasn't the answer.

As the fire commissioner stated - there isn't any reason to do Phase III. Lincoln County doesn't particularly care. As the fire commissioner said, "If there is a fire, we'll get four or five trucks up here and then you'll have over a thousand gallons per minute."

George continued to push on for reasons why Phase III should be done, but our own engineer was shaking his head!

"I think there has been some misunderstanding," he said, "This water project was never designed for you to do all at once. It was set up so you could do it in pieces when money and time was available."

He went on to further state "The State has no mandate at this time that the water system be upgrade."

Now, here I am, listening to this discussion. I had been expecting a complete push for Phase III and here are our two experts telling us it simply wasn't necessary. While I didn't come out and ask, I got the impression that Phase II wasn't necessary either.

Now, I think that George had been expecting the conversation to go towards his position as well, because he kept on asking questions and trying to get the fire commissioner and engineer to admit and state that Phase III was absolutely necessary. And yet it didn't happen.

Then what to my amazed ear should I hear, but Linda Schindler state "I see no justification for Phase III." Oh my gosh, I just about fell off my chair. Could it be, did I hear correctly? Thank God she was recording the conversation so I could go back and verify it later. But oddly enough, I did not have to verify it as she sent an email thirty minutes later advising Margot that Phase III was not necessary!

Now George did continue to push for Phase III or for some reason to justify Phase III but he just wasn't getting it. Finally, he did concede that he saw the point, but didn't know how he was going to explain it to the community. Since I know that there is really only one homeowner close to George pushing for Phase III, it didn't take me long to realize that George was trying to figure out how he was going to explain this to his handlers. George concluded by saying essentially "He saw the point, but I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion."

Now, I do mean to gloat here, because our board is in a terrible state what with all the assertions that the three members have been making about necessary water systems. I've been saying all along it wasn't necessary, it could be done over time. The community has said the same thing. But then you have George with his agenda and Roy pushing him right along. In fact, it was Roy who told our community that he had the WAC code that mandated it. Of course, it has never been produced. . . and I've never found it.

Now folks, I want to get this out to you. Because I think it says two things. One, we were right. Two, the board now has to face the fact that we were right. This community has been ramrodded into doing unnecessary projects that cost an enormous amount of money while jeopardizing our own financial situation and disregarding other projects that had already been started.

I hope that you will speak up at the next public meeting and all the public meetings that occur between here and July. I also hope that you voice coalesces into an action to deal with the ENTIRE board, myself included, and get some quality leadership into position.

Yes, these are my own opinions. But since the board has unilaterally decided that they don't like this website and have created an official one, I can assert my own opinions on here.

I should note that these are your opnions as well. I want to thank all of you who have emailed, called, or dropped by to voice your support. I appreciate it and look forward to carrying on the battle for you.

As an aside, you should take a moment to thank Nancy Wolfrum. Nancy is a pillar of our community and she has watched from the sidelines for the past year what has been going on in the board. She took the time at her own expense to send you copies of the minutes from the last two meetings. Minutes which the three member board has refused to accept. She did this on her own accord and her own time. She paid all the expenses. While you might disagree with her putting the message out to everyone, take comfort in the fact that she feels strongly enough about something to let you know. Imagine what would happen if we had people who just didn't care and were apathetic to the condition of Seven Bays. Take pride in the fact that there are people in this community who care enough to take the time to let you know what is going on. Those are the people who should be applauded.

So to summarize, Phase III is not necessary at this time according to the following:

(1) ME
(2) Lincoln County Fire Commissioner
(3) E&H Engineering (the guys who designed the water systems upgrades)
(4) Linda Schindler

I think Rick also doesn't support Phase III because saw him nodding his head in agreement with Linda when she made her bold statement, but I won't put words in his mouth.

People who are still in support of Phase III?

(1) The uninformed.

Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays Board Member and Homeowner

Duties of the Board

2007-11-30T09:59:00.001-08:00

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.

Free Speech in the 21st Century

2007-11-29T12:10:00.001-08:00

This is rich. I greatly enjoyed this story.

Click on the title to access the link to the story.

Jay

Homeowners association causes turmoil

2007-11-29T12:06:00.000-08:00

Interesting Reading. . .

Food for Thought

2007-11-29T12:01:00.000-08:00

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

Not guilty plea in embezzle case

2007-11-29T09:51:00.000-08:00

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.

Hand in the HOA's Cookie Jar

2007-11-29T09:48:00.000-08:00

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.

Where does the money go?

2007-11-29T09:47:00.001-08:00

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.

The importance of water

2007-11-08T13:23:00.000-08:00

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

Saturday Morning Test

2007-10-07T12:33:00.001-07:00

I have realigned the blog column. Testing to see if it works.

Jay

October 1 Test

2007-10-01T09:16:00.000-07:00

Good Morning. A monday morning test of the blog.

Jay S. Jump

Last Fridays meeting

2007-09-27T21:07:00.001-07:00

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:

RCW FOR HOMEOWNER ASSOC.

Reserves funds for Home Owners Assoc.

RCW Index

Please get involved, stay informed and hold our board accountable.

Look forward to the debate.

Sean

Yhea we got the picture

2007-09-27T09:07:00.001-07:00

Again, I am sure the community is smart enough to make there own decision after studying the facts.

Sean

Friday

2007-09-25T14:29:00.001-07:00

Thanks for the info I hope people will do their own research and find the
facts out prior to casting their vote.

Sean

FW: Friday Meeting

2007-09-25T13:02:00.001-07:00

Removed (again) for failure to post your name in association with your work.

Jay S. Jump

Blog Moderator

Take Credit for your work

2007-09-25T08:27:00.000-07:00

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

Friday Meeting

2007-09-25T07:39:00.001-07:00

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!

Fridays meeting

2007-09-24T21:19:00.000-07:00

ROADS

The arguments for the roads basically revolve around dust and finishing what was started.

WATER:

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.

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:

RCW FOR HOMEOWNER ASSOC.

Reserves funds for Home Owners Assoc.

RCW Index

Please get involved, stay informed and hold our board accountable.

Look forward to the debate.

Sean

You outlated me

2007-09-21T08:09:00.001-07:00

Removed for failure to post a name

Who can stay up later?

2007-09-21T00:39:00.000-07:00

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 Spokane, so I assume I have no voice in Lincoln County, I certainly can’t vote. But if the board wants to appoint me as a lobbyist and Lincoln County will listen, talk to me. LOOK OUT JACK “FROSTY” FREEZE YOURE SEVEN BAYS CASH COW IS DRYING UP!

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 1^ST.

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 Warren and how he and the board ran thing at the time. Assessments were low, we were selling lots and we had extra money. At the time it sounded like a good idea.

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

Late night should be sleeping

2007-09-20T23:31:00.001-07:00

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!

My Anyonomus Blogger Friend

2007-09-20T22:07:00.001-07:00

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 Warren’s services, just pave our roads. Make the dues whatever they have to be to run the community, just give me something in return for them.

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 6^th 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 2^nd 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 “TIN TOWN”

What I know

2007-09-20T19:02:00.001-07:00

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)

The facts

2007-09-20T16:40:00.001-07:00

Removed for failure to provide a name and take credit for your work

Kick back and relax with hot games and cool activities at the Messenger Café. Play now!

When you dont' have an argument

2007-09-20T16:16:00.000-07:00

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

AHH MY FRIEND THE ANOYNOMUS BLOGGER

2007-09-20T12:15:00.001-07:00

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 EMS vehicle would be more important then a fire truck?

Please answer these questions.

Sean

2007-09-20T08:35:00.001-07:00

Removed for failure to state your name and take credit for your work.

Ahh yes the water project

2007-09-19T21:18:00.001-07:00

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!

Fiscal Responsibility

2007-09-19T15:42:00.001-07:00

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

Next meeting

2007-09-18T20:17:00.000-07:00

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.

Changing Gears

2007-09-07T19:49:00.001-07:00

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

Okay

2007-09-06T15:40:00.001-07:00

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!

My last post

2007-09-06T14:38:00.001-07:00

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

2007-09-06T14:32:00.000-07:00

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

2007-09-06T14:15:00.000-07:00

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 15^th (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 4^th 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 15^th 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

Power to the People!

2007-09-06T13:18:00.000-07:00

Late last night I received an email that stated the Monday Morning meeting was cancelled and a new meeting was being scheduled for Friday, September 14, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. As it turns out, all five us can be there.

Hallelujah!

I have no idea what transpired to bring this sea change about. All I can say is I'm going to take it as a good sign. I'm cautiously optimistic that perhaps members of our board heard the grumblings of the community and yielded.

If so, than that is a powerful endorsement of your ability to effectuate change in the community. It certainly had nothing to do with me. I've been screaming for a common meeting time for weeks to no avail. It had nothing to do with Margot, because she was screaming for a common meeting time as well. It had everything to do with you - the citizens of Seven Bays.

So, take the moment now to realize your voice is powerful. Don't fail to keep on speaking out, don't fail to continue to question, don't fail to demand answers to your questions.

I look forward to seeing everyone on the 14th.

Jay S. Jump

P.S. - Please, please, please take credit for your posts. I've been taking these things down left and right. I would prefer to leave them up, but if you don't take credit, they come down.

Well

2007-09-06T12:25:00.001-07:00

I don't think anyone is 100 percent behind either "side." People all have different issues they are concerned about.

The volunteer help has nothing to do with Jay. Calling for volunteer help is as simple as posting a message or making a statement. The volunteer help has been requested and organized by other members of the board.

Maybe sarcasm isn't the best way to communicate. Now look at your previous post and apply that.

You have one board member controlling the website, one board member controlling the blog, one board member sending out mass emailings with heavily slanted opinions most of which are falsifications or as you say heavily editorialized. The others are doing work and business for the community. Jay's participation has been simply to try to rally the community behind him to oppose the rest of the board. They have been trying to compromise about the meeting date this week and they have. This should be done without one member using all of those communications to try to make the other members look bad. If you're looking for cooperation I think you are seeing from the rest of the board and you are seeing the continued attacks by Jay. He missed half the meetings last year, so I'm sure finding a time he'll agree to isn't an easy thing. Personally I wouldn't change a meeting date for him. He's lucky his fellow board members have chosen to be so obliging.

I don't believe you're a kool aid drinker. I just think you need to respond less to what Jay's sending you without maybe calling or contacting one of the other board members first. There are two sides to every story and because of Jay too many people are just getting one side. Try to approach this as if those people Fookes is calling bums and Jay is telling everyone have no integrity are actual people trying to do their best. Give them the courtesy of asking for the other side of the story and pretend that they have other things to do besides constantly have to respond to Jay's attacks.

Explore the seven wonders of the world Learn more!

RE:LOL

2007-09-06T11:24:00.001-07:00

First maybe sarcasm was not the best literary device to approach such a serious topic. Second at least I stand by what I write. Third I am no means someone that does not study the issues. Read my posts.

Any reasonable person would who has read my posts would see:

I have spent a copious amount of time asking questions of community members, and even arguing with some on the water issue, and have been persuaded that it is an important issue. (I still want dust free roads first).

One board member blogged the other night and while her and I differed on a couple of issues all I asked for was that the board work out there difference. If there was a board meeting changed she could have posted it, but that aside I thank the board to having a meeting where all can be present, specifically Linda. The board does not always need a 100% attendance, but don’t you think that at this time it is important?

Jay and Margot are against the wall. I say let the issue go. Keep it.

Jay and Margot are for pool card access. I am against it.

Jay was on the board that is responsible for the roads. Fix our roads I go back to quietly enjoy 7 bays and the many friends I have made up there.

I have publicly questioned Jay’s approach.

I called for a recall of the whole board not just Jay’s enemies.

So do not insinuate that I am 100% Jay supporter.

Now that Jay has read this I imagine he is fixing up another batch of Kool-Aid, because the first batch I drank is wearing off.

Authors Note: That is the sarcasm I was talking about.

Things that I think Jay has done well:

He was part of the board that started a monthly newsletter that now seems to have disappeared.

He kept us informed of things that are going on (though extremely editorialized).

Jay got turn out at the meeting on the 21^st, and not all were on his side.

In August I e-mailed our chairman and Cc: the entire board on an issue of concern, only Jay and Margot responded.

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.

I will end with this:

Jay, Linda, Margot, Rick, George, put your personal issues and find some common ground and listen to one another.

Sean

LOL

2007-09-06T10:24:00.001-07:00

Omg they scheduled for the first friday after labor day. Conspiracy conspiracy! Listen to yourself. When I saw this blog I called one of the board up and it seems they had already rescheduled again to a date Margot and Jay could attend. Maybe before you flail about on here attacking the board you should check your info instead of just swallowing the bait Jay is feeding you. He will continue to try to make the rest of the board look bad in any way possible just as he has been doing since July. The funny part is how many people like yourself can't or don't choose to see through it.

Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces. It's easy! Try it!

PART TIME RESIDENTS UNITE!

2007-09-06T04:50:00.001-07:00

Let’s see on August 24^th the board meeting was cancelled when the two part time residents were able to make it. So what does the 3 do? Schedule it for the 1^st Friday after Labor Day, kids in school, soccer practice, catching up on other work at home, and just getting back into the routine of things. But wait! It is going to be in the 80’s this weekend. Folks might show up, so let’s have the board meeting on Monday morning.

To me it is starting to feel that as a part timer the only thing I am good for is my $900, or is it $1050 a year in association fees.

Part timers of Seven Bays, maybe we need to push for the following by laws changes.

Pay per use for the pool: we usually only use it 2x’s a week when it is crowded, we are not able to use during the week when it is empty and quite.

Water meter and pay per gallon: Not including sprinklers, I use the water only on weekends four months a year. Why should I pay the same as everyone else?

Pro rated association fees: Next year the dues are going to be $1050, divided by 12 equals $87.50 a month. We can pay our monthly rate for when we are there.

Runway: Implement landing fees.

Part timers are in the majority. We can make this happen.

In exchange part timers will surrender their RIGHT to run for the board.

Now I know this may sound crazy and I agree as a community we are all in this together, and I am not trying to upset my full-time neighbors. They are great and I know 7 Bays would not be what it is with out them, nor would it be able to operate.

The majority of the board needs to make allowances for part time board members. The “3 Musketeers” as the post put it, are the majority, their vote and agenda will prevail, and so be it. However to me it is becoming quite clear the only thing they fear is transparency.

Sean

Two Cents

2007-09-05T22:22:00.001-07:00

SEVEN BAYS - NOW AT THE MERCY OF THE DECEITFUL

CHAOS REIGNS - GUESS WHO IS IN CONTROL - ITS A FULL FLEDGED SCAM

EVIDENTLY LINDA SENT OUT A MESSAGE ONLY TO A SELECT FEW CANCELLING THE FRIDAY NIGHT MEETING AND RESCHEDULING IT FOR MONDAY MORNING AT 8AM.

I GUESS SHE HOPES THAT THE AUDIENCE WILL BE SMALLER THAN A FRIDAY NIGHT MEETING AND THAT PEOPLE WILL SHOW UP TO AN EMPTY HALL ON FRIDAY. - that is one way of staying on top of the pile.

OUR ILLUSTRIOUS PRESIDENT CANCELLED A BOARD MEETING LAST MONTH BECAUSE RICK WAS OUT OF TOWN EVEN THOUGH THE OTHER FOUR WERE AVAILABLE. NOW THAT HE IS BACK, IT IS EVIDENTLY OK TO HAVE A BOARD MEETING WITH ONLY THE THREE MUSKETEERS.

THERE SEEMS TO BE NO REGARD FOR THE LAST ASSOCIATION MEETING.

AND IT IS ALL SO BLATANT - THERE IS NO SHAME - IT'S ALL OK - NORMAL OPERATING PROCEDURES.

The three musketeers are scared to death to face the owners.

Does anyone now doubt the insecurity of these people?

DOES ANYONE OUT THERE SEE THAT THE THREE MEET AND ONLY TWO NEED TO VOTE TO CONTROL THE ASSOCIATION?

I'VE GOT TO HAD IT TO THE THREE MUSKETEERS, THEY ARE DOING A

SPLENDED JOB OF KEEPING US GUESSING WHAT IS NEXT, WHEN THE NEXT MEETING WILL ACTUALLY HAPPEN, NOT ALLOWING PEOPLE TO PLAN, DISRUPTING LIVES WITH NO REGARD FOR ANYONE BUT THEMSELVES - (IT'S CALLED PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR.)

WHERE IS INTEGRITY? OUR PRESIDENT WANTS WHAT HE WANTS - HE IS ON TOP OF THE PILE IN THE SAND BOX.

WE HAVE NO REPRESENTATION!!

THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES THE WEAK LEADERSHIP WILL PILE ON US AND THE HOMEOWNERS ARE GOING TO PAY IN THE END. I CAN AFFORD IT, CAN YOU?

THROW THE BUMS OUT - WHERE TO I SIGN UP?

Larry Fookes

Linda

2007-09-05T00:25:00.001-07:00

At this late time of night I am not prepared to comment point for point. I may in a later post. However I do thank you for posting.

In the spirit of full discloser I am on the community e-mail list and saw that Jay and Margot will not be in attendance at the next board meeting. With all that is going on and if you are truly looking to work with the other side please reschedule the Board meeting and take it behind closed doors. I think the community is looking for all of you to just to come to some point where you can work together. I do not think that anyone of us want a meeting like the one we had in August. We just want you to be respectful of each other and tells us in some form or fashion what is going on and why. We elected all 5 of you to get things done. Not 3 or 2. You will all make decisions time from time that I do not like. And I can live with it.

At the August meeting I think the one gentleman put it best when he said that you all must figure out your differences and work them out or we will recall you, and I for one am watching. The last Board meeting was cancelled by “your side”. Now it seems the other two can not attend. By rights you may conduct a meeting with only 3, but in light of the current circumstances that is not what is best for the community. Again take the meeting behind closed doors and tackle the board’s problems head on.

As far as Jay pulling the anonymous post, personally I think that post were fine until they attacked employees of the association, and accused another homeowner of being violent. The right thing was to pull them. Like it or not it was not until the website did any of us really know what was going on? And I hope one day this blog will serve for community announcements and where the fish are biting.

A comment on one thing you wrote:

It's caused a serious dust problem to be sure. Is it their obligation to fix this problem at the expense of all else? I don't think so, maybe some do.

This is the only issue that has gotten me involved. The dust at my place is awful, my neighbors and I have wasted gallons of water trying to keep the dust down. The board could post larger 5 mph speed signs, install speed bumps, something, but they have not. Whoever’s fault it was it now rests on the current board to fix it. A change to our quality of life has taken place by the governing body of 7 Bays and it is that body’s responsibility to correct it.

Anyway thank you for taking the time to respond. Whether we agree or not I respect anyone that step forward to help their community.

PS. For the record I do not care about the wall.

Sean

Response to Sean

2007-09-04T23:04:00.001-07:00

Sean,

The will of the community is what is important so if they voted for a recall then so be it. We joined this board to get things done for the community and I think we have. Some of us have had our names smeared through the mud for it by Jay and a few others, but I would simply ask the community to consider what has been accomplished. I didn’t want to post on here because I haven’t wanted to continue the nasty arguments that have characterized mine and some other Board members interactions with Jay.

My friend who has been posting has had a lot of valid things to say. I respect Jays right to edit the blog as he sees fit, I guess, but I think the posts have had a lot of valid things to say. He simply doesn’t want his name brought into it because of the vindictiveness of some of the attacks that have been put out. I wish those posts would stay up but I respect his right to anonymity.

The present Board, despite Jay’s PR campaign, has been making great strides forward in just 6 weeks We hired two maintenance staff who have been working very hard around Seven Bays. Mark gave his resignation in January, quit in May, and the previous Board still had not hired anyone capable of getting much accomplished.

I quit my paying job and have been working very hard in the office to get it organized and running smoothly. Maxine Jones, Angie Brinkman, Phyllis McFillen, and Gladys McLaughlin have all volunteered time to help. Della Graffis has taken deposits to the bank and picked up supplies when possible. I may volunteer to continue to work for free paying bills and doing payroll to save Seven Bays money for the water project or roads.

There have been many serious issues since we came on board. The Secretary quit without notice – so no one has been available to help figure out what needs to be done. Yet, staff are on board and getting paid. Bills are getting paid.

Rick has been working hard on the road and water pipe problems. A large part of the problem with the current roads is inherited from a decision by the previous board to tear up a large section of road that they couldn't complete work on. It's caused a serious dust problem to be sure. Is it their obligation to fix this problem at the expense of all else? I don't think so, maybe some do. Rick suggested that, when we get to the point of chip sealing, that Plats 1 and 2 should come before the airport (even though he lives at the airport) since Plats 1 and 2 have the largest population.

Rick has been trying to figure out how to get water shut-off issues figured out for Plats 1 and 2 especially, as those are the Plats with the most problems.

He has also been trying to figure out how we can do Phase II with mostly in-house labor and volunteers. Even though Jay has tried to make you believe that you just need to “follow the money.” My husband is one of the volunteers that Rick has recruited by getting him to offer his time and equipment for no more the replacing the fuel used. Hopefully, he will still do it after being slandered by Mr. Jump.

No, Rick did not take Nancy up on her suggestion. He told Nancy that he would prefer to meet with people more one to one and that he intends to contact them on his own. That does not mean that he is not looking out for your welfare.

George has also been working very hard on budget issues and troubleshooting many problems. Boards are made up of common people like us and usually the senior board member helps the new members along. That has not happened this time. Most years that I have been at Board meetings, the chairman has not been the best at running a meeting, but I don’t know of one that had to face a crowd such as George did.

Margot has been dealing with the issue of past overtime pay for the pool attendant. This meant trying to locate time sheets from the office (not an easy task) to try to accurately determine the correct amount of pay.

Jay has blogged.

This Board did not make the decision to have only one person working in the pool. Margot suggested the pool cards as, in her experience, they have worked fine. George and I were skeptical. I don’t remember how Rick felt about the pool cards but we said that we were willing to try them. So we actually did vote with Jay and Margot on that issue.

I actually spent some time looking at meeting minutes from the last year and found out that Jay missed at least half the meetings last year. At one meeting only two Board members were present and stated that they could not make a decision as they did not have a quarum (3). I found letters that had only three signature blocks and many Building Packets that were signed by only three. So you see, it has only recently become a problem.

We want to work with Jay and Margot. Margot and I had a talk and I am hoping we can begin to work together. Jay is a little harder to cope with as he loves to strike out with mean and hurtful adjectives that I feel are underserved. If I am approached with reason and respect, I am much more apt to react in a reasonable and respectful way, the same as most people would react. Now put yourself in my place and read the email that Jay wrote to me putting yourself in my place and ask yourself how you would react. . In all honesty I have felt hurt about some of the things that have been said. I am working to get past that but, to be honest, sometimes it is hard.

Thank you for reading this.

Linda Schindler

Board Member

The simple fix to 7 Bays Problems!

2007-09-03T22:08:00.001-07:00

From the Covenants:

AND ANY MEMBER MAY BE REMOVED FROM MEMBERSHIP ON THE BOARD BY VOTE OF THE OWNERS

WHAT DO YOU SAY 7 BAYS? I am for removal of the whole board. If they run again and get in so be it. It seems that a couple of the team of three are in over their heads, heck my “representative” won’t even hold a Platt meeting that was requested with residents of our Plat, and the other two are in such a position that they are not effective. Some will argue that they brought it upon themselves, and I do not necessarily disagree.

For what it is worth I had a discussion with a member of the community this weekend at the pool whose name was featured prominently in a recent blog. Several times during the talk he kept saying that my side did this and my side wants that. He feels I am on the side of the minority of the board. That is not true. I am on the side that will do what is best for our community. I started coming down here in 2003 and the dues were under $600. Now they are going over 1K and for what? It seems we went most of the summer without full time maintenance staff, our roads are worse now then ever, we may or may not have enough water to meet our needs, and a large part of 7 bays road may or may not sluff off into the Bennett’s house thus launching them into the lake.

We need leadership, and regardless of what the chairman said prior to the last meeting he lost control of the meeting, PERIOD! (*note I saw in the police blotter in the Davenport Times that the Sheriff in attendance was called by a homeowner, give me break!) And like I said before I expect more from the people that have control over so much of our money.

Just for the record I also do not appreciate being video taped and recorded like at the last two meetings. Are we that paranoid?

Another question that I still would like an answer to was why was the last board meeting canceled? If the chair was ill I totally understand him not being there, yet there still could have been a quorum if only one of the other two show up. I hope going forward the same courtesy is extended to Jay and Margot.

Now as far as pending seven bays issues, after talking to several members of the community it seems that the water issue needs to be addressed. We spent money on a new tank lets get some use out of it but let’s get several bids and bring it to the membership.

Regardless of who’s at fault the roads are an issue that need to be addressed. In Plat II we have not been able to leave our boat uncovered or windows open all summer.

Another concern is the pool I was all for a key card system, but two issues have come up since it was discussed at Augusts’ meeting. One was a belligerent guest of a homeowner that the current pool guard had to kick out, and an accident by a child in the pool that was cleaned immediately, if he was not there how long the pool would have to be closed? If salary is an issue get two pool monitors thus avoiding OT pay.

It seems that many members of the community lack the courtesy to drive 5mph to keep the dust down how can we ever expect them to police behavior in the pool?

Like one of the members said at the last homeowners meeting both sides of the Board need to work together or on the 21^st we vote for a:

RECALL!

My suggestion is that the entire board meets prior to, or take the board meeting into executive session on the 7^th and work out their differences or the homeowners meeting on the 21^st may end in a:

RECALL!

Have a great week!

Sean Morrow

FW: Response to "Realizing the issue" and "Productive meeting on friday"

2007-08-30T20:12:00.001-07:00

Very long post with several twists and turns.
ONCE AGAIN, YOU HAVE FAILED TO TAKE CREDIT FOR YOUR POSTS AND PURSUANT TO THE RULES STATED PREVIOUSLY. IT HAS COME DOWN.
I WISH YOU WOULD DEMONSTRATE THE COURAGE OF YOUR CONVICTION AND NOT HIDE BEHIND A 'FORWARDED' POST, BUT INSTEAD TAKE CREDIT FOR YOUR ACTIONS.
THE MOMENT YOU TAKE CREDIT FOR YOUR WORK, IT COMES RIGHT BACK UP NO QUESTIONS ASKED.
- Jay S. Jump, Blog Moderator

First of all I am not one of the board members. If you think so then perhaps I've done my research very well and I thank you for the compliment. I also haven't sent you any emails let alone lobbed at you and your family.

Forwarded by Darrell Schindler,
Homeowner

Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger Get it now!

Discover the new Windows Vista Learn more!

Productive Meeting on Friday

2007-08-29T23:27:00.000-07:00

I would like to thank everyone for coming out on Friday evening last. I know that George cancelled the meeting, but so many of you contacted me directly asking if we could still have a meeting.

I was really impressed that over 30 people showed up for that meeting.

True, we didn't have a quorum because Linda Schindler and Rick Graf chose not to appear. Nor did George Cordier. Had any one of them appeared we would have had a quorum and we could have actually gotten some work done. But I don't think that is fair. Let's say Rick showed up but not Linda or George. Fairness and integrity would suggest that we not do any board business until all five members can be present. This way everyone is represented equally.

It was an interesting discussion Friday ranging from issues about the wall, to the airport having too much representation and none for Plat II. Sean's conspiracy theories aside (:-), I thought much was accomplished and a true read of the community's attitude was obtained.

I am sorry that George wasn't there, as well as Linda and Rick, but fortunately, Roy Graffis was so I am confident that the three of them received an immediate update as to the status of the meeting.

I have to confess, I am more than a little frustrated when I have to learn of board business through Roy Graffis. At the meeting, Roy announced to the community, that "I just want everyone to know, the property issue with the tank is resolved. We found the document and I signed it as chairman of the board."

Wha, Wha, What?

Perhaps I'm out of line, but does it not seem that Margot and I should have been informed of that right away? I'm quite confident that they had the document for quite a length of time, but yet, no word to the other board members, but as long as Roy has got the situation under control, it's OK.

If I am a little frustrated by that, you should be outraged. If you thought that this board didn't have a shadow force behind it, think again. Allow me to illustrate:

(1) The letter received by the community from George Cordier was postage paid at a discount rate. Who was able to obtain that discount rate?
At the last public meeting almost two weeks ago, when asked about the mail rate, George said, "I don't know, you'll have to ask Roy about that." Clearly, then Roy was involved in the mailing of the letter allegedly written by George.

(2) When the Bennett Wall issues came to pass, it was Roy Graffis who went down to the County Commissioner and the Planning Department for Lincoln County to 'deal' with the situation. If Roy is not on the board and is not an immediate neighbor of the Bennett's, why did he undertake this activity?

(3) At our information meeting last Friday, it was Roy Graffis who stood up expecting to get a 'pat on the back' for his fine work, but instead simply drove home the fact that he is one in the same with our three members of the board.

Incidentally, I called him George during the meeting on several occasions. He answered every time. Freudian slip? I don't know.

These are just a few of the questions you should ask of your board the next time you get to see them.

Here is something else I've been pondering.

At the last public community meeting, George stated that we need the water system improved so we can have a 500 gpm flow out of the water lines. Fair enough.

However, I and a few others have looked into this a little more deeply. Deer Meadows has a fire truck that will pump 250 gallons per minute, but it won't make it over to Seven Bays. We do not currently have a 500 gallon per minute pumper fire engine.

OK - where do we get one? Well, we could ask the County Commissioners. However, pumper trucks aren't of much use in Lincoln County as there are no fire hydrants except in the towns. Pumper trucks cannot be used to fight farm, grass, or forest fires. Do you think the County Commissioners will be willing to buy a pumper truck at 500 gpm for Seven Bays?

Maybe, what will the cost be? Well, the City of Davenport bought one 12 years ago for about $250,000.00. Do you think the County Commissioners will spring for a pumper truck for us now? Probably not.

Very well, let's buy our own pumper truck.

Wha, Wha, What?

At $250,000.00 that is a pretty big price tag! Let's say we find one on eBay for $120,000.00. That's a third of our entire budget! Doesnt' sound like we will be able to get that one paid for out of the annual budget, even if our dues are $1050 per year. That means a special assessment.

So, I ask you, the thoughtful citizens of Seven Bays, why are we spending thousands upon thousands of dollars to make this water system such a priority when at the end of the day, we still won't have the equipment to hook up to the hydrant to provide you with the fire protection you were told you so desperately needed.

You need not rely on my word or supposition to figure this one out. Make the call directly. Dean Reinbold is our fire commissioner. Ask him what the plans are for new fire equipment out at Seven Bays. Ask if we will be getting a 500 gpm pumper truck.

Now, be kind to Dean, he's doing his job and the fact that he doesn't have plans to put a 500 gpm pumper truck doesn't make him a bad person. He has a limited amount of resources to cover all of Lincoln County.

However, you might want to ask your board members when the last time they had a conversation with the County to find out what the plans were for getting us a new fire truck to handle our new and improved water hydrant system. I think that would be a good question to ask before we start spending our entire budget for Phase II and Phase III.

Thanks again for your meeting and time on Friday. I enjoyed it immensely!

Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays Board Member
Airport Representative.

Realizing the issue

2007-08-23T17:01:00.000-07:00

I've been watching with interest the events unfold over the course of the past week.

The public meeting which we attended last Friday was a watershed event. I want to thank EVERYONE who came out and attended the meeting. Such involvement is unprecedented in Seven Bays and I was appreciative that everyone showed up an took part - no matter what side/position you had.

The fact that it ended the way it did suggests to me that the community is wise and can see the writing on the wall. I cannot explain to you satisfactorily why Mr. Cordier ended the meeting abruptly and left immediately thereafter. It was clear that people wanted answers. Although, the public was definitively involved, didn't think anything was out of hand or about to get out of hand.

I stayed after the meeting to talk to people and was encouraged by the thoughts and observations of our community. I ended up turning the lights out in the community center about 45 minutes after George, Linda, and Rick walked away. I should note for the record that Margot walked out one step in front of me after that 45 minutes.

Since then, posts have been flyng on the blog, accusations have been made, and slanderous comments have been thrown at the good members of our community. I have redacted those posts. My intention in creating this blog was to create a forum for one member to slander the good name of another private resident/neighbor in Seven Bays. Board Members are public figures who hold themselves out as being representatives of the community and as such are subject to the scrutiny we hold them too. Private residents of Seven Bays are not.

The slanderous comments made by certain members of our community (who refused to take responsibility for their posts) were inappropriate and I felt it necessary to protect the names and reputations of individuals in our community. "The Other Side" as it were will now probably have some ammunition against me to say "See? He really does control the content and he is clearly editing it." But, I had to weigh that against the interests of the homeowners. I owe them a higher duty, at least I believe so.

Now, let me address the comments weighed against me, the previous board, and a litany of other attached levied throughout the week. It's nice to know the community members don't think I'm an idiot, but I'm a crafty, cunning, maschogenist who is hurting because my ego and pride are bruised. I appreciate the compliment.

However, this isn't about pride for me. It's about consistency. I learned long ago that pride has very little space in this world. Pride is usually the emotion that will take you down as it gets in your way. As an attorney, sometimes I win, sometimes I lose in Court. I take the losses with the wins, it is what I do for a living. Pride has no place in that equation because if I took each loss personally, I would not be a very good lawyer. But it's nice to know that my opposition thinks I am a very good lawyer. Always present a strong front to your opposition - it keeps them guessing.

I know who the anonymous poster is. That person knows certain facts that only someone who has been present in the board meeteings could know. The truth is, I would really like to out you on this blog, but clearly you are too cowardly to step forward and speak to the strength of your conviction. The personal emails lobbied at my family in the past week are a further comment on the anger and frustration you clearly have for me personally. In the end, the impact of your words is lost because of your failure to take credit for them and the viciousness you exhibit. In the end, you have invoked my pity for you rather than my anger.

The subject of the "Bennett Wall" has been much in the news this week. The opposition has been doing their best to steer the issue away from consistency to the 'beauty' of the wall and the good it does for the homeowners in Plat 3. A nice argument, but one that thwarts the true purpose of this blog and that is to shed some light on the inner workings, or lack thereof, of your board, which I now refer to as a "three member board."

Make no mistake, the Bennett Wall was put up without the proper authorizations and everyone has done their best to make the legal wranglings as cloudy and murky as possible. I too spoke the the County and learned that the board acted outside it's scope of authority when three members of the board decided that it was OK to have the wall after the previous five member board unaminously agreed to have it removed as it was never approved in the first place.

Much has been made about previous board members verbally OK'ing the wall and that must surely outweigh the fact that a written letter was written not approving the wall and directing that it be torn down. "The Other Side" has done their best to grasp at any and all straws to try and create an argument about what this is OK including pointing out, inaccurately, that the previous board members all walked out of Friday's meeting early. They tried to throw some mud up on the wall and create some sort of conspiracy between the previous employees of Seven Bays and the Previous Board. Surely this much indicate some type of collusion and fraudulent activity as if they truly were to stand for the courage of their conviction, they would have stuck around to the end. This is a fallacious argument and one that doesn't stand up to scrutiny, but it is evidence of their desperation. Because could I not take that exact same argument and suggest that George exhibited the exact same behavior when he and two members of the board walked out last Friday night. When you present these desperation arguments, remember that they will usually backfire on you as you exhibit the exact same behavior you accuse myself and the previous board of.

But I'm digressing and I need to get back on point. The real issue about the Bennett Wall and the Ripley Addition, and the other properties that have been granted waivers in the past month by our 'three member board', and that the 'three member board' is acting unilaterally without discussion and without the participation of the other two board members. You elected a five member board. Only three of them are running Seven Bays.

Some of you have said "Well, this is something you should be working out amongst yourselves and it shouldn't involve the community." But it does involve the community. We are elected to represent your interests in this community. I, Margot, Linda, Rick, and George are all representatives of your interests for our respective plats. By the unilateral actions of the board and this 'freeze out', the airport and Plat I aren't getting a whole lot of voice and representation. Keep it to myself? No way, you deserve to know. Hence this blog and these posts, and pat myself on the back if I may, it is working wonderfully. Even 'the other side' has wandered into the fray, I just wish they would exhibit the courage of their conviction and take credit for their words.

But I'm digressing again. . .

The real issue is consistency and uniformity. Before the new board took charge, decisions were made. The new board went back and revisited all of those decisions and changed the outcome. One of those decisions clearly involved a conflict of interest, and even if you buy into Mrs. Schindlers' disclosure, it still exhibits the appearance of impropriety. And if you didn't think it was any big deal initially, one has to ask why it became so pointed and heated that Mrs. Schindler took it upon herself to craft a legal document purporting to resolve the situation with only three signature lines for three board members? Why are you so desperate to make this wall stay? Why are you so desperate to be right? Why is Roy Graffis going to the County Commissioners and fighting tooth and nail for this wall? Why should he care? Is he on the board? No. Does he live next to the Bennet's? No.

Usually, when you enter a conflict with someone, there is an expected measure of response. Sometimes that measure of response is exceeded but that is your own underestimation. Then there are times when you sit back and watch the other side and wonder why it is that they are overreacting so very much? The original issue simply wasn't that big a deal to justify the reaction that the opposing party is having. We have that situation here. I havent' asked enough questions and I find myself marveling at the fight and effort being put on by everyone except the Bennet's. Why? Just what is going on here? Why are Linda, George, and Roy so desperate to be right on this issue?

Consistency and uniformity are necessary to make a neighborhood, company, or government run. Of course when a new administration comes in, they are going to take a direction that they ran on. In the last administration, we fought to make sure the community didn't pay a huge tax bill incurred by the sale of those two lots by the Bennett Wall. We worked hard to set up Seven Bays as a business and to organize it as a business. Without Warren working every angle of the maintenance manager position, we need to have an organization structure. In the current administration, George wants to push the water project through at the expense of everything else. George wants to do away with an office manager and return to the days of having a maintenance manager run the entire operation. It's not my shared vision, but he has the power and votes to effect that change. That's democracy. I don't like it, but at least it presents itself according to the rules and I can't argue with that. Maybe one day, the roads will get done and the Seven Bays Association will be run as a business, but it won't be this year. That's OK. We elected board members who had different visions of Seven Bays than the previous board. The community elected these four new people and we as a community will reap the benefit of that decision.

What I can argue with is when the three board members are acting unilaterally by effectively refusing to engage the other board members and their community. Declaring the meeting over last Friday was in error. We have a duty to work with the community. I find it interesting that Roy's comments were to not allow the community to be involved in the goings on of the board, but yet, is that not exactly what the purpose of the meeting is? Is it not we that represent you? I don't think any of us should be trusted to run off and manage your community for the year without reporting back to you and getting your input. But, then you yourself could see what was going on in that meeting and make your own judgments. As an aside, Nancy and I looked at Robert's Rules of Order after the meeting. Since the meeting was adjourned improperly, the next time we meet, we will have to pick up right where we left off. I hope that you will continue the discussion then.

What I despise is the inability to manage this conflict. Rather than debating it in the open and arguing it face to face, the three member board runs from the conflict. Meetings are ended, new meetings are cancelled, but I'm willing to be that at any point in time, if I walk into the maintenance shed, I will find three of the five board members meeting and conferring.

As I walked into the meeting Friday night, I realized that no one had asked me to provide input about the agenda, no one asked if there was anything I wanted to discuss about the airport, no one conferred with me before hand about the pronouncement that "if the community couldn't keep it's act together, we're bringing in security." I thought that maybe they simply didn't want to incur a long distance charge on their telephone to inform me, so I asked Margot if they had spoken with her previous to the meeting. She said she heard nothing until she walked through the door. That angers me and as a homeowner in Plat I and the airport addition, it should anger you too.

In the end, I don't care about winning, it's not my pride, my ego isn't bruised. This is about stability, consistency, and uniformity. We severely lack those components right now. The only people who can rectify that situation are you the homeowners. I spoke at the meeting about integrity. I listened to an individual call for a recall of the board members. I asked him to put his motion off for a month. I thought that the other three members of the board would hear what the community was saying and that would force us to come together and make sacrifices to work with each other. But, the posts of the last week indicate to me that I was again naieve. The failure of any of the board members to call or email me in the past week indicated to me that I was again naieve. The fact that the board meeting was cancelled this week again indicate to me that I was naieve.

Integrity is about putting Seven Bays first. I would like to see the board members reach out to each other and work together, but I don't think that is possible. I bear some of the blame for that as well in addition to the other board members. If Integrity is about doing the right thing then perhaps it is correct to let that individual renew his motion for the recall of the board. Perhaps stepping down as a board is the necessary thing to do to preserve the integrity and stability of Seven Bays. I would like to think I have that level of integrity and if the community does motion for a recall of the board, I will stand by my statement to second the motion. I wonder if my other board members will have that same level of integrity to do the right thing?

The meeting for Friday has been cancelled. However, several homeowners have emailed me asking if I would be there anyway. I will be present at the community center at 7 p.m. Margot Rach has agreed to be there as well. I can't speak for Nancy Wolfrum, but the grapevine has indicated she would come too. If you would like to come, you are more than welcome. There will be no official homeowners meeting as a quorum will not be present unless George, Rick, or Linda show up. However, I will be there as I was the week before to answer any and all of your questions to the best of my ability.

Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays Board Member
Airport Addition

RE: Take Credit for your Posts II

2007-08-22T21:00:00.001-07:00

Good call Jay, if we write something we should stand by it, and not be ashamed to associate our name with it.

Sean Morrow

FW: Response to "The Wall"

2007-08-22T19:08:00.001-07:00

Mrs. Rach,

I'm not sure why a board member is on a public forum calling into question whether or not a resident had a building permit for a structure that is on their private property and has been in place for months. The question that you have been dealing with is the portion of the wall that encroaches on the easement. Does the board go to resident's houses and check existing structures and investigate whether they obtained a building permit now? Why bring this up?

I will break your concerns down as well as I can into their component parts. All of the arguments presented here so far had been about integrity, corruption and conflict of interest. Now the argument changes since those issues have been clearly pointed out to have been invented. The only section of the wall that has been in question up to now also has been the lower end where it is from 2 feet, to 8 inches high. Now you are bringing into question the entire structure and whether or not there was a building permit for it. I can tell you also that it is reinforced beyond all building codes by being tied back into the bank with 6 feet wide of heavy geomesh along it's entire length. In addition it is backfilled with drain rock overlaying 6 inch drain pipe, covered with felt paper and groomed to match the road above. Why backtrack now into an issue that's been dealt with to try to call into question a wall that everyone who is affected by it is happy with?

Bringing these things up now that the previous "concerns" have been invalidated seems odd to me. Why choose to question other issues involving this wall now that your concerns about the part that is encroaching into the easement have been dealt with? There is a retaining wall a few houses down belonging to the former maintenance manager which is over 4 feet, wasn't permitted, does not obey the setback requirements (a serious issue,) is in the easement, completely unreinforced, and hampers anyone who might wish to park on the street. Maybe your time and concerns could be better spent there or in volunteering to help out in the office as others have done.

1) Statements that the county has no authority over Seven Bays

I can't speak to this because it's unclear to me exactly what statement's you're referring to. Seven Bays maintains their roads. The county does not. They are private roads over which the board is required to maintain and regulate. In addition, most of the roads within Seven Bays already violate county regulations. Are you now saying that we should ask the county to take over Seven Bays roads? What about the fire department? Should they enforce the regulation that all roads must have turnarounds for emergency vehicles? I assume you're simply making a mistake in what question you're asking. The issue is not with the wall itself but with the board's duty to decide matters of roads. This is simply YOUR duty, not the county's.

2) Life, Fire, Safety

This issue has been addressed by the fire department definitively.

3) Building permit not obtained

The building department has inspected the wall and has taken pictures. They have also been provided with pictures and maps and drawings. The wall is reinforced beyond what is required and retains the bank to a height of less than 4 feet it's entire length. If you want to get technical with a few inches the problem could perhaps be fixed with a rake in 10 minutes. You extrapolate this into a situation like they were building a house or other structure. It retains a road that Seven Bays had put in that was a runoff problem not only onto the Bennett's property, but onto the main road below. The wall should have been put in place by Seven Bays. Why not just be thankful that the Bennett's paid for it themselves instead? Why not call the property owner and thank them instead of trying to look for every avenue possible to give them grief over it? I encourage everyone to drive down and take a look at the wall and see just what all this fuss has been about.

As an aside, building departments do not always require permits from qualified contractors installing this wall system. It has an over engineered support structure and tieback system. You simply go to them and tell them what you're doing and show them the documentation and it's done.

4) Possible violation of 60 foot easement to the property above and behind

This is the real matter, and far more complicated. I'm not sure where you're deciding that they need a 60 foot easement. Is there a separate agreement with the county requiring a 20 foot wider easement between these lots. Since those lots are at the end of the road I believe their easements are utility easements. Have you measured it and found that it does not meet these requirements? You say you have been worried about this for quite some time. Have you investigated? Why is it coming up now?

If you've been worried about this since July 28 or earlier as you say, perhaps in your research on behalf of the residents of Seven Bays you might have noticed that the requirement is only a 40 foot easement, not 60. The only 60 foot easement requirements are at the airport where Mr. Jump has built, or in the case of a cul-de-sac which Seven Bays has disregarded. If you wanted to apply this as a cul-de-sac you would be taken large pieces of properties from each of the 4 lots there. Technically to my understanding therefore if you want to apply strict interpretations there is no way to make the situation completely legal unless you simply give the road to the homeowners. In addition, the County Planner agreed that he had no problems with any portion of the wall as long as the people whose access was involved signed a statement that they were in support of the wall. Which they have. This should be the end of the story. Let's see if it is.

Forwarded by Darrell Schindler,
Homeowner

Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more….then map the best route! Find it!

Take Credit For Your Posts II

2007-08-22T18:34:00.000-07:00

I wrote yesterday about the need to take credit for your posts. No one has come forth and emailed me directly taking credit for the offensive posts.

After much reflection and a discussion with the people who are adversely affected, I am taking down all anonymous posts. They will be saved on my hard drive and the moment someone wants to come forward and take credit for their work, I will put it back up there in all its glory, but I cannot allow this one individual, who clearly has a great deal of anger, to continue to malign the good citizens of Seven Bays.

For the record, you can malign me as much as you want. If your fight is with me and you see me as the reason you're having these problems, then bring it to me. Don't drag others through the mud because of your desperation to sling some mud on the wall to see what will stick.

Jay S. Jump
Seven Bays

The Wall

2007-08-22T13:39:00.001-07:00

At the community meeting on Aug 17th, the Bennett wall caused a major eruption of questions, comments and emotion. Subsequently, there have been numerous comments about the wall on the blog. As the one dissenting vote in regard to the Bennett wall during our July 28th Board meeting I was attempting to respond to some of the comments being made from the floor and had my response cut off by the abrupt ending of our meeting. Therefore, I have decided to use this forum as a means of completing those comments.

At the meeting, I tried to respond to a statement made by an individual in the audience; a statement that the county has no authority over Seven Bays. I am not sure how such an attitude developed as property owners in Seven Bays are no different than property owners elsewhere in the county. What happens when someone decides to build a new home in Seven Bays...they go to the county and obtain a building permit to construct that home. Even our own construction packets reference the county's requirements regarding set backs in relation to our own more stringent requirements. Surely if the county has no authority, no one would bother with getting the required permits before building; they would just start digging and pouring and nailing with no regard for the requirements of the county. And if the county has no authority in and over Seven Bays, why do we as an entity, file documents with the count y? Our own covenants were filed with the county as were any number of other documents, plat maps and even our building packet. The county does have control over what and how buildings, retaining walls, roadways and easements are handled. Gentlemen, you are misinformed if you believe we are above the laws, rules and regulations put forth by the county. You do a disservice to this community if you make such ill informed, inaccurate statements to the public in general. And then if you have used that belief as you made decisions past or present while serving on the board you compounded that disservice.

As to the Bennett wall, my dissenting vote on July 28th was based on not just a concern about fire department vehicles; it was a concern for life, fire, safety. It was also a concern for what potential impact the impingement on the easement might mean in regard to county requirements for that easement. I urged the board to check with the county before taking any further actions and had my concerns dismissed with words to the effect that the county doesn't control us, we are private property. While I may not have fully expressed my worries, leaving it at the "life, fire, safety" issue my worries were there and justified as it turns out. Granting even a one week extension of the requirement of the previous board's letter telling the homeowner to remove the wall would have allowed for additional information to be gathered and allowed for a more informed decision to be made. Would that information have changed the outcome ? Who knows, but at least the information could have been factored into the decision making process.

On the following Tuesday, July 31st, I called the county and spoke with two different individuals in the county building department. Based on my conversations with those individuals I understood that the county requires a building permit for any "wall" over four feet in height and if it is an unsupported wall it requires engineering as well. From the information given to me, I believe the Bennett wall is an unsupported wall (the county described it as a wall with dirt pushing against the back of the wall with nothing to support the wall from the front) and that it is over four feet tall at its upper end. I was further informed that no building permit had been obtained from the county. This failure rests not only on the property owner but on the licensed contractor who built the wall. The State of Washington Department of Labor and Industries, in licensing individuals as contractors requires a higher standard of knowledge regard ing building requirements. While private property owners might be forgiven a lack of knowledge regarding permitting and engineering requirements a licensed contractor should know better and should never agree to undertake a construction project without the proper permits in place; doing so opens licensed contractors up for possible sanctions or even revocation of their license by the state.

More importantly, the impingement on a Seven Bays easement and the board's decision to allow that impingement has potentially violated a platting agreement with the county that required a 60' easement to the property located above and behind the Bennett's. This 60' easement is what was required by the county in order for the property Seven Bays sold to be short platted into two lots.

I know there will be some who will feel that as a board member, I am maligning my fellow board members, that my purpose in saying these things is suspect or that I am just mad that I lost the vote on the Bennett wall. Guess what folks, I fully expect to "loose" many more votes during my term. And I fully expect to win many more votes. Its not about my winning or loosing, its about what Seven Bays may stand to loose should this wall ever become one of liability for the impingement of the easement and possible invalidation of the short plat.

Margot Rach

Board Member

Fellow Sevenbays Association Members

2007-08-22T13:05:00.001-07:00

Dear fellow members of sevenbays,

I know that much has been posted about the retaining wall the the Bennetts built the encrouches onto the easement road next to them. Like most of you I would like to see a finale resolution to this issue so that we can move on to more pressing matters such as a water tower that the association members have paid for but do not have leagal access to the property it was built on.

So that it does not become fauder for more back room gossip ( which this community could do with a lot less of) I want everyone to know that I am a very close personal friend of Mike and Karen Bennett and have known them for over 20 years. I currently have the privelege of living next to them at sevenbays. I understand that many of you will think that I am bias in regards to this matter.

However, I think we all need to step back and take a new look at this situation in a rational manner.

First: What necessitated the need for the wall?

Two lots were donated to the association by a very generous member of the community. (I wounder if he knew the problems and turmoil it was caused the community if he would do it again). These lots were not part of the original platting of the developement when it was first mapped out. In order for the association to get any value for them and make them accessable for a future buyer a road had to be cut and water, sewer, and electricity had to be run to the lots. In building the road a dirt bank was built above the Bennett property and every time it rained dirt would wash done on to their lot. The association should have built a retaining wall to prevent this when they built the wall.

Does the Bennett wall encrouch on the easement?

Yes, at its widest point it is 7 feet on to the easement.

What is the impact on the association and it members?

None, the association still retains full ownership of the propberty. With any easement, if at any time the association needs to dig under the wall for water sewer or what ever, it is entitled to remove the wall and is not responsible for replacing it. Must every homeowner has easements on their property for such things as gas lines, sewer pipes , water mains, etc. It does not change your owner ship to the property, however the utilities can dig up your lawn and are not responsible to put it back to its original state.

Are the two adjoing land owners who share the road opposed to the wall?

No, both of them have signed letters stating that they are fine with it and have no concerns with it at all. They feel it is a benefit to everyone.

Are there any emergency vechiel safety issues with the wll?

None, the local fire department inspected it and sent a letter to the association that they had no problem with it at all. Lincoln county recommends that access roads should be at least 16 feet wide to insure access by emergency vechiels, at its narrowest width the road is 17 feet 9 inches wide, exceeding county recommendations

How does the association benefiet from the wall?

The association benefits from the fact that there is no more run off and WE the members did not have to pay any more for the improvements to the lots leaving more money for the new water system. It looks better improving the appearance of the community and helps improve all the property values in platt 3.

How do the Bennetts benefit from the wall?

They have easier access to their front door making it easier for their parents (who are all over 80years old) to visit with them.

I appoligize for the lenght of this, however I think that it is important for all of us to look at this as objectively as possible and to make a decision that is practical and not emotional.

I truly hope that calmer heads will prevail and everyone realizes that no one is harmed by the wall and we all benefit from it.

As a last thought, we all will be better off with less name calling and bitterness and more of an attitude of working together and supporting each other within the community.

Sincerely

Ed Korst

Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

Board meeting

2007-08-22T10:14:00.001-07:00

I was planning to respond to the response to my earlier post on A Response (what a mouth full) but I feel that I need to get more information, the time line if you will. I still believe that 7 Bays employees do not work under me and their in employment status is between them and the board. Section 6 Paragraph D of the bylaws makes this clear, and by no means should they be named on the blog. Also I feel that the board has heard our complaints and I expect them to address them this Friday. Hopefully since they will be conducting their meeting in a fish bowl they will finally make some progress in resolving the issues before us. Last weeks meeting’s agenda said it would be at the community center at 7pm lets all show up and show the board we expect progress. Remember we should remain silent and be there as observers only. SEE YOU FRIDAY!

Sean

PS. The word agenda has been used a lot. Just to let everyone know my agenda is to enjoy Lake Roosevelt with my family, and dust free roads would be nice too.

Retraction

2007-08-21T21:02:00.001-07:00

I would like to retract my statement regarding Mr. Don Lawrence as I have no first hand knowledge of the incidents involved just what I had been told by a couple of sources. It also has small relevance to the matter at hand.

See what you're getting into…before you go there See it!

Negative Anonymous Comments

2007-08-21T19:45:00.001-07:00

I have spent a part of today reading and rereading the recent posts to the blog. While I think it is great that people are getting involved and stating their opinions I do feel that we gain nothing by making mean spirited, hurtful comments about private members of our community. As Board members, we are now considered "public figures" and as such may not reasonably expect the same privacy we had before being elected. Our words and actions will (and should) be scrutinized by the community. However, attacks on individuals, particularly when made by an anonymous post are extremely inappropriate and highly offensive. Have the courage of your convictions people, sign your post with your name. Hopefully, no one will take these words as any type of rant, rather an observation and commentary on decency and right minded behavior.

Margot Rach

Board Member

2007-08-21T17:50:00.001-07:00

Good afternoon

Redacted due to failure to post name.

Take credit for your posts

2007-08-21T17:21:00.000-07:00

I received an email from a homeowner today who was very distressed because his name was mentioned on the blog. He is neither a board member nor a public figure and the comments were inappropriate.

What is worse is that the author of the post refuses to give their name.

I am establishing a new rule on the blog. If you don't take credit for your publication, I will redact the post. If you are going to be slanderous towards others, the least you can do is stand up to associate your name with it.

I know you are going to cry 'censorship', but it is not fair for you to take this argument out to the good members of Seven Bays who are not public figures.

Jay S. Jump
Blog Moderator

Again

2007-08-21T16:49:00.001-07:00

Redacted due to failure to post name

To Comment or Post?

2007-08-21T14:53:00.001-07:00

I thought as the moderator of the blog I would weigh in on whether you should comment or blog.

You can post to the blog directly via email and that will come up as a new entry.

You can also comment by clicking on the comment link at the bottom of a post.

Using the email address makes sure that you get prominently featured as a new post.

Posting a comment may get you lost in the shuffle, but feel free to comment as much as you like.

As to the censorship issue and the 'moderation' of the comments, I typically just pass through whatever is said and let it publish. I have refused to publish a couple of comments which were simply too offensive to be put up as written words. It's good to have constructive dicsussion, it's bad to out and out call somone abusive names. Incidentally, just so you are aware, those names were directed at Mrs. Schindler and I didn't think any good would come out of publishing those comments. The next time someone tells me that this is all about a personal attack on other members of the board, please remember that if that were the case, I wouldn't think twice about publishing those offensive comments.

I have also eventually rejected comments from someone who does not own land at Seven Bays and his constructive criticism also eventually came to pass as being angry and offensive. I rejected his comments because he too was serving no constructive purpose and he doesn't own property here at Seven Bays. If you would like to see them, I will publish them to you privately upon your request.

However, if you want to post a comment, chances are it is going to get passed directly through and I think from the number of comments you have seen, it is clear that I'm not doing much censoring.

Now the truth of the matter is this. If you accept this as medium to post on and clearly, someone on the board besides Margot and myself has, then you accept all that comes along with it. If you believe that I am going to censor other members of the board and their posts and other homeowners, then you are sorely mistaken. Otherwise, the posts of the last few days never would have made it on would they?

The truth of the matter is, as moderator, I can control all aspects of what is published and what isn't. If you posted something from the email, I could go back and take it off later. In fact I did do that when one of our homeowners inadvertantly published his email address on the blog. I went back and took it out so he wouldn't suffer interminable spam in his mailbox.

The email posting doesn't save you from my 'censorship' and 'moderation'. I believe in fair play and abiding by the rules. If I get to stand on the podium and shout to the crowd, then everyone else gets the same fair shake. I only ask that you keep your comments to the matters at hand and not take it upon yourself to refer to members of the board as various parts of the human anatomy.

Good luck out there and keep on posting. I'm so encouraged by the caliber and involvement of the community.

A Note of Caution: I do not edit the posts. You are responsible for anything you publish. I have read through the past few posts and the anonymous person who is providing information. It's one thing to talk about me and whether you like or hate this format. It is quite another to make reference to private members of the community who are not in a public position. I would caution you and anyone else before they make an issue and slander a private resident of the community. While I will not edit your post, I would suggest to you that you might want to contact me directly and give me permission to redact certain portions of your post as they clearly are directed at a member of this community who is neither on the board nor a public figure in the Seven Bays Community.

Jay S. Jump
Blog Moderator

Blog

2007-08-21T14:08:00.001-07:00

To the poster of the last Blog, I am new to this form of communications, and see now that comments are posted differently. However as we are learning there are ways around this. If Mr. Jump is censoring comments shame on him, when time permits I will respond to your response to my earlier blog.

Sean

Response to "Just an FYI"

2007-08-21T13:23:00.001-07:00

Redacted due to failure to post name and take credit.

This blog dealt with the blog moderators 'review' of all comments before posting. The issue has been addressed in other submissions by the moderator.

A response to "A Response to a Response"

2007-08-21T13:15:00.001-07:00

Redacted due to failure to post name and take credit

To have this blog reposted, please step forward and claim your work.

- blog moderator

Just an FYI

2007-08-21T12:08:00.001-07:00

The only thing Mr. Jump does in relationship to this blog is give the e-mail address to post. I was given that address no questions asked and my post have posted as soon as I have hit send. Just thought that should be cleared up.

Sean

Another comment on A Response

2007-08-21T12:01:00.001-07:00

Redacted due to failure of author to take credit.

To republish this blog post, please take credit for your work.

A Response to A Response

2007-08-21T11:41:00.001-07:00

I would like to comment on A RESPONSE, my points are in no particular order.

First I have no strong opinions about the “Bennett Wall”. In fact I feel bad for the Bennett’s who I am sure do not appreciate there name being associated with such a divisive issue. It sounds to me they did their part and got approval from representatives of the board. I have no doubt at this point that the homeowners will have to spend money before this issue finally gets resolved.

The whole issue of who Seven Bays employs is irrelevant to me and a decision that the board needs to come to agreement on. Since I have been coming down here I have seen nothing but polite hard working folks, whether it was Warren, Mark, Jed, John, Keri or now Joe. All dealings I have had with 7 Bays employees have been positive.

One concern I have around this is that if the person who posted A Response is a 7 Bays board member I feel that you may have put the association at risk by openly talking about an employee’s employment. The statement “Why is Mr. Jump so eager to hire someone back who made a mess of her job?” What happen while she was employed is between her and her employer (the board) and should not be discussed in a forum such as this.

George seems to be a kind man, I admire anyone who steps up to serve their fellow citizens however when doing so they MUST understand the importance of the position they are seeking. You are dealing with my family’s hard earned money. Like many residents in Seven Bays having a second home means we sacrifice somewhere else. I expect more from the board that we elect then walking out of a meeting. With the exception of Nancy, before Friday I have never met any of the people sitting at the dais. Let me tell you those who walked off and adjourned the meeting without a motion from the floor did not leave me with a great first impression and have lost some of my respect. True leaders take their lumps and listen to their constituency. It has been my experience that any meeting that has gotten out of control has been the fault of the one running the meeting.

I made the motion for the parliamentarian and I did make a comment that George should resign after he stated that “I am going to be 78 years old and I am not going to take the time now to learn Robert’s Rules of Order”. My last comment may have been out of line, but by the chair’s own admission he does not seem to want to learn what it would take to run a productive meeting.

Why do you call Mr. Fookes’ comments a rant? I have read and re-read his post and did not see anything that could be construed as a “rant”. Anyone who was at that meeting saw with their own eyes that we had a “total breakdown of law”.

If the person who wrote A Response is a 7Bays board member you should not take criticism so personally, it comes with the territory. I myself sit on two boards I know criticism can sting. You are entitled to your opinion as I am mine, and we now have a forum to discuss them. But to call the concerns of the people you represent “rants” is a little over the top.

As far as Mr. Jump goes, he has placed an unfavorable light on some members of the board and I do feel a little tact could have been used, but what I find interesting is that those members not only responded (as you should, I most certainly would), they also take the liberty to attack Mr. Jump. They just choose a different medium. The arguments from both sides would resonate louder with me if “attacks” were not answered with attacks. I feel both sides have made some mistakes.

Why does Mr. Jump’s profession always come up? There are good lawyers and bad lawyers, we like to bash the profession yet we all spend money on one when we need advice (Note: I am not a lawyer). According to the post Mrs. Schindler herself sought advice of council, to me that shows due diligence on her part.

Let’s stop the attacks.

If you are going to post please put your name with it. Stand by your words.

The last point I would like to make about this particular post is that the website is a positive and needs to stay. It is obvious that the only censorship on the blog comes at the hands of those who refuse to post. Like it or not we now live in a world where things happen and get disused 24/7. The world does not wait for the next monthly meeting. Welcome to the 21^st century 7Bays. Once this mess gets straighten out (and I believe it will) you will see that airing our concerns as a community was for the best.

We need to rebuild a community, where everyone is civil to one another and I look to our board to set the example and for leadership.

Sean Morrow, Platt II

2007-08-21T11:23:00.001-07:00

For the Blog

Sean Morrow

Comment on A Response

2007-08-20T17:20:00.001-07:00

Redacted due to failure to take credit for your work.

If you would like to have this blog reposted, please step forward and associate your name with your post.

A Response

2007-08-19T17:36:00.001-07:00

Redacted for failure of author to post name.

If you would like to see your post republished, please step forward and claim your work.

- blog moderator

Bennett Wall

2007-08-19T14:16:00.001-07:00

I guess that I'm a little confused about the Bennett wall. According to the approved board minutes of July 28, 2007, Linda Schindler stated that her husband worked on the wall, "but that there was no financial, no money involved." However, in her letter of August 2, 2007 of approval for the Bennett wall she stated her husband "was involved in the construction of the Bennett's wall and that he was paid for his labor and material…" So what is the truth? How can we trust a board member who is always changing the story? Board member Rick Graf also worked on the wall he, just failed to mention this to the board. It seems to me that both of these board members were less than truthful and both should have excused themselves from the discussion and decision concerning the Bennet wall. Do people with these kinds of ethics belong on the Seven Bays Board? I feel once someone is found to be less than truthful about one subject it is very hard for me to believe them about anything. In my opinion these people should resign from the board.

Linda Davis

Two Cents

2007-08-18T22:34:00.001-07:00

I am encouraged by the citizens of 7-Bays and their response to the poor leadership being displayed in recent Board dealings. Essentially, the citizens took charge at the Association meeting and told the Board what they wanted. Check out the minutes when they are posted if you were not at the meeting.

The next Board meeting Friday the 24^th of August. Please attend. I attended the last board meeting which was called a Special Board meeting on August 3^rd and I want to inform the residents of 7-Bays what I observed. The Special Board meeting was called because of a pool issue, which quickly became a ruse. In my opinion, the real reason for the meeting was the inappropriate actions discussed below.

I will begin by saying, "W ithout the "Rule of Law" giving us a foundation and structure no government can operate much less the Board here at 7-Bays . We need the Roberts Rules of Order to operate at Board meetings as well as the Community meetings.

Our system of government is based on personal responsibility and integrity; the absence of which results in chaos.

Listen, if you don't remember anything I write, remember this: CHAOS BREEDS CONTROL as the person causing the chaos is the only one that knows what is going on and what is coming next – everyone else is on the defensive - walking on eggshells.

In my opinion, what we have here at 7-Bays is a complete breakdown of the "Rule of Law" due to a lack of integrity of a few members. The Friday night meeting on August 3 ^rd seemed to me to be out of control like many meetings that happen in the community meeting format. There was bickering and fighting that had nothing to do with the subject at hand and the board president was at a loss as to what to do. CHAOS!

Listen, the interactions were emotional and not logical. If you have done any study in psychology, you know that once emotion becomes involved, logic goes out the window. It is like two married people constantly fighting each other instead of working together with a common goal. I am sure that you have heard the phrase, "A house divided against itself cannot stand." Well ladies and gentleman, that is precisely what we have here at 7-Bays. One could say, "That is normal. You can't get upset when things are normal." Well, yes, that is one way to think of it, but I would like to make the following points:

First, we have a board president that does not know parliamentary procedure nor have the personal integrity to become familiar with the Roberts Rules of Order so meetings can be run smoothly and legally. As a result, there are situations that that are allowed to arise where TWO people vote to control this association.

In this meeting, I repeatedly heard the phrase, "What do I do now." from our board president. I just shook my head. I don't know about you, but that is not the type of leadership I respect.

I heard a story where three members of the Board got together and unilaterally made a decision without the other two members present and I do not have any evidence that the other two Board members were given constructive notice of this meeting or what "parliamentary procedure" would call adequate "notification," which in and of itself, creates a liability issue for the association.

Then, unashamedly, Linda passed out a written statement that concluded with the phrase, "After you have acknowledged and agreed with these findings by signing below, the wall is approved." Unbelievable! These three musketeers take into their own hands making decisions without having a formal board meeting. This is the most manipulative action I personally have ever seen. It is in your face "screw you" mentality. It is all about a grab for power. It is all about winning. It is not about being on a Board.

Yes, three Board members are a majority, but that does not give the three people the right to get together anytime they want to and conduct business. This type of meeting undermines due process and the rule of law. Decisions were made by these Board members that were arbitrary and capricious – in other words, in the minds of the three Board members, the decision was to be made on the spot as after all, "The three of us are all that is needed." In plain English, what happened here is that three people on the Board get together, and, since they assume they would all vote together on a matter, they can do anything they want anytime they desire. Oh yes, and by the way, only two of the three need to agree because that makes a majority. What these three musketeers don't seem to understand is through interaction and discussion with the other Board members, they may change their minds, much less the fact that this behavior violates due process and parliamentary procedure and the integrity of the Board. Listen, it is a blatant, unabashed power and control issue. Integrity would say, "Let us wait for the others." In my mind, this type of action is done out of desperation and has the basis in manipulation, which lends itself to very insecure people as witnessed by the cancelation of the August 10^th regular Board meeting because one of the three musketeers was on vacation. It is abhorrent for this type of personality to say, "Your right, I am wrong – I am sorry."

Secondly, I observed one member of the Board blatantly, with no idea of the consequences, attempting to undermine parliamentary procedure. The self-righteousness and arrogance was beyond what I would call, "normal" by any stretch of the imagination. As I saw the meeting unfold, there was a clear conflict of interest as would be judged and/or perceived by the members of this body as it was by the two observers that spoke to the Board after the meeting. This is what Linda wrote in a paper handed out at the meeting. You judge for yourself:

My husband, Darrel Schindler, was involved in the construction of the Bennett's wall. He has been paid for his labor and material and has no further interest in said property except as a member of Plat 3. As a Board Member, my interest is in fulfilling my duties as outlined in the Association Documents and as a representative of the members of my Plat. My position would be the same whether or not my husband was involved."

In addition, as I understand it, Rick Graf helped build the wall. These board members should have absolutely recused themselves from any discussion or vote pertaining to the matter at hand.

Thirdly, you have two different Boards that voted on one variance five to zero in favor of rejection and yet, through the process mentioned above, the third request, the one we are talking about here, was favorable three to two – having two of the three votes cast by Board members that should have recused themselves. Did this set precedence? I cannot say, but I would be wary of past decisions being legally challenged and creating all kinds of chaos itself.

I have been in many a negotiation and in fact I am trained as a mediator. The primary thing you do NOT want to do is get the other side angry, hurt or have them lose face. If the opposition does lose face, negotiations will stop and it will become a contest of who is right and who is going to win. Basically, it results in a lot of anguish and pain that did not need to be there had the emotions not become involved. Many a strike by a labor union resulted around these kinds of issues between two opposing negotiators rather than the facts. This is what I saw happening on our Board on that Friday night. It was not about the rule of law. It was about power, winning and it was emotional.

To summarize, in my opinion, the lack of integrity, blatant disregard for structure, arrogance and self-righteousness are poisoning our association through the actions of a few of the current Board members. It results in CHAOS. Guess who is in control.

I think it would be appropriate for the good of the association for Linda, as I see it, the organizer, to resign so that we can have an opportunity to have members that are willing to work together on common goals and not be set-off emotionally. I also think it would be appropriate for the Robert's Rules of Order be implemented immediately, otherwise the CHAOS will continue. If George is unable to or chooses not to do that, then I would ask him to step aside. I would also like to see integrity be the standard that is the foundation of the 7-Bays Board and if there is even the slightest question as to integrity; the person will err on the side of recusal.

Although I was not here, talking with the locals, it sounds to me like this Board is functioning like the one Roy was in charge of and when he left, it allowed the members to come together and get business done in a relaxed and professional manner.

In closing, I would like to review the handout prepared by Linda. It is included in Jay's recent publication. If you read closely, you will see that Linda has made her case, PREDETERMINED the outcome and has a place for only three of the Board members to sign. NOW I CALL THAT A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF ARROGANCE, PREDETERMINATION, BACK-ROOM POLITICS, A GRAB FOR POWER & CONTROL USING MANIPULATION AND JUSTIFICATION COMPLETELY OUTSIDE OF THE NORMAL BOARD SETTING. Is this how you want 7-Bays Board to its business? I for one, do not.

Respectfully submitted,

Larry Fookes - Homeowner

Plat I Party

2007-08-13T16:04:00.001-07:00

I had the pleasure of extending invitations to all homeowners in Plat I to drop by my home on Saturday, August 11^th for cake, coffee and conversation. As I have a limited circle of friends and acquaintances in Seven Bays, I felt it would be the perfect opportunity to meet more of the wonderful people that make Seven Bays their home, even if only for week ends. I did have the pleasure of meeting a few more neighbors and enjoyed talking with each of them. I truly looked forward to hearing from them about what worries them, what causes them to be upset, what direction they felt the board should take. Without the input of the community we cannot represent your interests effectively.

Before I tell you about the conversations at my home on Saturday, let me clear the air about a couple of things…first, I have been informed by George that a homeowner questioned who might have paid for the “business card” I enclosed with each invitation. To not only that particular homeowner but to anyone else who might read this and have the same concern; I paid for the cards, I paid for the postage to mail the letter in which the card was enclosed and I paid for the refreshments I served at my own home on Saturday…and the second…it would seem that some folks feel I need an “overseer” when I decide to entertain guests in my home. Rest assured concerned homeowners, I am more than capable of entertaining whomever I chose to entertain whenever I chose to entertain without someone to oversee my actions. To those individuals who expressed a concern about who would “oversee” what I was doing on Saturday, you might more appropriately direct that concern to the actions of the Board as a whole, not one member who offers her hospitality to the people who live in the plat from which she was elected.

Now that I have that off my chest, let me say that the issues of my guests are similar to my own: the status of both our roads project and our water project and how we will pay for them, a desire on the part of some of the residents of Seven Bays to have a greater knowledge and understanding of the day to day operation of our water system and a willingness to “tag along” with our maintenance staff to learn, concerns about the state requirements regarding the installation of individual water meters, the Bennett wall, our increasing annual homeowner dues coupled with the board’s obligation to be fiscally responsible in its spending decisions and finally concerns that one of our covenants is being broken by individuals operating businesses in Seven Bays.

As I promised my guests, I will raise each of the specific issues that surfaced at our next board meeting; however I also wanted to post them to the website as I am sure they echo the concerns of many other homeowners. Remember blog readers, you have power and a voice; you only need to use them. Post your own blogs here or comment on others and most importantly, contact the members of the Board, attend Board meetings and the monthly homeowner’s meeting which is scheduled for August 17^th.

Margot Rach

Board Member

Integrity

2007-08-09T20:53:00.000-07:00

At the last board meeting, cited as an 'emergency' board meeting, the board gathered to discuss the pool employment issue. No formal agenda was presented and it really had very little to do with the pool. At least as it was, the pool didn't have much to do with any emergency issues.

It really had to do with power, control, and integrity.

A couple of community members came to the meeting. As an aside, you are always welcom to attend board meetings. They are public meetings. The board is entitled to go into executive session and we do from time to time, but for the most part, it is a public event, the matter is being recorded and you are welcome to attend any meeting you choose to attend.

The next meeting for the community if April 17th. I implore everyone to go. I think the board needs to hear from everyone in the community.

I must tell you, I am particularly frustrated at certain members of the board taking unilateral action without consulting the remaining members. We don't have a King or a Queen, we're supposed to have a board that meets to discuss matters in depth and find a meaningful way to resolve their issues. This was the case with the 2006/2007 board. Five different points of view would have to be resolved so we could march forward together. Somedays we didn't all see eye to eye, but at least there was a respect for one another. Never was there a disregard for someones position or their vote and voice as a board member.

You are probably aware of what has come to be known as the Bennet Wall. It invades an easement that grants access to the two plats Seven Bays sold a couple of years ago. The same two plats that led to the $48,000 tax liability we were forced to deal with last year.

The previous board of 2006/2007 advised that the wall should be removed. In a letter signed by all of the board members, this was the action decided upon. In subsequent meetings with the new board, the issue was discussed. I had requested that Linda be excused from the discussion because of the conflict that existed.

At the next board meeting, on July 28th, where I was not present, Mrs. Schindler asserted that she was not in conflict.

A few days later, the infamous email from Mrs. Schindler was presented to the board where she stated the matter was 'settled' and thus my responsive email to her which many of you have reviewed and commented on. Some comments in support, and one particular individual very much against. His comments over the past few days have become more and more egregious and I have refused to post his comments as he is not a member of the Seven Bays Community. I'm sure he will post another comment to this missive.

As an aside, I appreciate the comments of the homeowners here. Some were supportive, some weren't. Some people felt I was stirring up trouble and causing distress. To this, I reply, I am and I am sorry, but I feel I have no other choice. The premise that the new board was elected on was that the old board was being secretive and not discussing issues with the community until after the fact. Not that the old board was hiding anything, but the community is right. You should have more involvement in decisions and you should be given a venue for your voice. That venue exists at the board meetings, community meetings, and this website. As I have advised all who are on the email list, you can post directly to this blog. Everyone has an equal voice and that is the way it should be.

Getting back to my point. . .

At this emergency meeting, Mrs. Schindler handed out a document she had prepared to allow the Bennett Wall. I will scan it and post it to the website shortly. Despite the previous board directing the removal of the Bennett Wall, Mrs. Schindler decided it was OK to be present and she decided that she had no conflict. This document had not been presented earlier, it was a sandbag if there ever was one and the kicker of it is that there were only signature lines for George Cordier, Rick Graf, and Linda Schindler. No signature line was present for Margot Rach or myself.

This is where we have a lack of integrity and leadership on the board. This document was an offensive attempt to simply state that there was no longer a five member board. There is only a three member board and the other two members are irrelevant.

This is what I find offensive more than anything else. I'm thankful that the guests who were present at the board meeting felt the same way I did and they voiced their concerns to the board at the end of the meeting. I hope that they will both appear at the community meeting and relay what they observed. I hope more that the board members take to heart what was said to them.

I am both offended and disappointed at the behavior of our board. All of our board, myself included. It is clear that we cannot continue to work in harmony, if we ever could. A board divided is a board that will fail.

Some of the board members are upset with me because I have used this blog to open a shaft of sunlight on the inner workings and exposed the boards agenda. As Mrs. Schindler stated on August 3rd, she no longer trusts anything I say. So it is clear, she has not respect for me. As well,

I have no respect for a board member who blatantly disregards the rules of order and decides as judge and jury their role relating to conflict and the lack thereof.

I have no respect for a board member who doesn't rise above it all to lead the board to a path of mutual understanding and respect.

I have no respect for board members who are silent and refuse to speak.

I have no respect for board members who tell other board members to "Be Quiet - you're hurting my ears" as a way to have a discussion.

I have no respect for a group of people who have their own agenda and follow the views of a limited few instead of the views of the community.

Perhaps I say too much, but these are my opinions. I take the credit for them and I invite all of the board members to post their responses. I have asked all of the board members to respond, but they have thus far refused to do so. I hope that they will reconsider and use this forum as a means to voice their concerns and views.

And yet, I can't condemn all of our board members. I believe our President has the good of the community as his goal. I believe that he does earnestly believe that Seven Bays can be a great place. I don't agree with all of his views, but I can respect his desire and his motivation. But the board is splintered and the sides have been chosen. I hope that our chairman can find a way to cut through the anger and distrust. I hope that he can find a way to stand up to the other board members and take charge of the situation running the community fairly without conflicts of interest. If he can't, perhaps this isn't the right board to lead Seven Bays.

Once again, I urge all of you to come to the meeting on April 17th. I look forward to seeing you there.

Jay S. Jump

Board Member

Two Cents

2007-08-07T21:08:00.001-07:00

Two Cents - I find it quite interesting that George cancelled the Friday August 10th Board meeting because one member is out of town. I'll bet you that member is not Jay Jump. I will also bet you George would not cancel a meeting because Jay was out of town. George must be afraid of losing control if he doesn't have the meeting stacked in his favor - or maybe the three musketeers didn't have time to get together during the week to plan the agenda and how everyone was going to vote. Only two have to vote in those private back-room deals that control the association. What I find interesting is the lack of integrity of this administration after all the name calling about the last group - and it is so blatant.

Larry Fookes

Thanks for your efforts

2007-08-06T20:21:00.001-07:00

Thank you Jay for all the work you've done on the Seven bays web site and blog.

As George promised the membership in his campaign speech, we have the right, and need to be kept informed as to what is happening at Seven Bays. This is a great step forward in that effort.

I believe the blog will be a great way to keep the board informed by members regarding their own personal concerns.

It appears we are going through some turbulent times with money issues, recent decisions and personality conflicts among the new board. Hopefully all of you board members can bury the hatchet and get together and do justice to those you serve. All of the board members are intelligent capable and caring people. Keep in mind your obligation is to work together to properly en force our covenants and come up with positive solutions to the infastructure and other problems that arise for the benefit of the community as a whole not just a few. If you honestly do this, personal issues will fade away and you will be able to work in harmony.

Hopefully all of the board members appreciate and will use the blog for everyone in Seven Bays best interest.

Respectfully submitted

Jack lenertz

Property owner - plat 1

Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.

July 21st Board Meeting

2007-08-06T19:04:00.002-07:00

We decided to meet again quickly after assessing the situation last week. It was determined that given the current employment crisis, the board needs to be as proactive as possible. Today the board elected to bring Jed back to Seven Bays. It was 4/1 decision to offer Jed a new job. Getting to the point of the actual motion took several hours of vigorous debate not so much about Jed, but about the budget, employment issues, and coming to the realization that the labor budget was going to be stretched thin. In facing this debate, the board recognized a hard reality. The days of being able to pay cut rate amounts to employees were gone and the difficult of hiring new staff means that they have to be paid a sufficient amount in order to show up to work.Joe is learning his new job and doing well. If you seem him out there, make sure to tell him that you appreciate his hard work. It's not an easy position to be in and he has the weight of the world on his shoulders as he goes from 0 to full steam ahead in 7 days.The board also began to explore the issue of complying with the State mandate of our meter requirements and how to handle the installation of everyone on a water meter. None of the solutions are pretty, but the board did ask the serious questions.Clearly, we are going to need the help of the resident's of Seven Bays. If you are available to volunteer at the office to answer phones and take messages, we can surely use you. Be sure to add your name to the volunteer list that we have on the home page of the website. You can bet that we are going to count on your assistance over the next few months. Where do we go from here? Well we have some loose ends to tie up on the Phase I water tank issue. We have to stablize our employment status and then we can begin the serious work of moving forward with creating a long term plan and goal for Seven Bays. The Board has some serious issues to deal with to keep Seven Bays running. It isn't going to be pleasant or pretty. Sometimes we have to be careful what we wish for as we become victims of our own success. There is no guidebook or cheat sheet to work from, the board is essentially starting from scratch. The board appreciates the patience you have shown as well as your support.

Remember the next meeting is August 17, 2007. If you want to be able to voice your opinion, make sure you come to the meeting.

The Honeymoon is Over

2007-08-06T19:04:00.001-07:00

Well, I thought it would take longer, but it is clear that the board has splintered, not even three weeks into the year. The new board was elected on July 14, 2007. By July 28, the gloves came off and the ethics became questionable.Let me advise you what has happened.If you weren't aware, Stephen Davis resigned from the board on July 14, 2007. He was replaced by Rick Graf - who was the elected alternate.Joe Brinkman has been hired as one of our maintenance personell. The other position has been offered to Jed. He has demanded more money that was originally offered. It appears the board is willing to give it to him.On July 21, 2007, the board met to deal with the ongoing crisis of not having an office manager or staff. During that time, I advised the board of actions that had been dealt with by the previous board.There were two property issues that invovled the improper trespass on a Seven Bays Easement and a homeowner who wanted to receive approval on an addition that violated a setback requirement.The previous board had advised the homeowner who violated the easement to remove the offending trespass and had denied the building addition for the other homeowner until such time as he could comply with the setback requirements.Of course, the homeowners sensed a new board and prevailed upon the new members to take up the issue again. During the discussion on the setback application, the board voted again to decline approval until the owner could comply with the setback requirements.The easement issue was a little more complicated. Linda Schindler is presently on the board. Her husband, Daryl Schindler was involved in the construction of the wall that is the trespass onto the Seven Bays Easement. I spoke up on the 21st of July and asserted that Linda had to be removed from the discussion because she had a conflict. The board discussed it and Linda agreed to remove herself from the discussion. Because of other business, the board did not get around to addressing the easement matter with finality. The last act of the previous board with regard to this matter was to direct that the offending trespass be removed.One week later, on July 28, 2007, the board met again. Unfortunately, I was not able to be present at the meeting and it was clear that the remainder of the board took full advantage of this fact.I give you now the letter I wrote to the board this morning. I asked for their prompt reply, but no one but Margot Rach has responded. With Margots permission, I will post her reply shortly.It has been my pledge since I took office that sunshine is the best policy. I think that the homeowners have the right to know what is going on in their association.We presently have no water license hanging in the office. Seems that this would be more important than getting Phase II. I cannot sanction expansion of our system when we don't even have the ability to maintain our present one.But for now, let's simply address the behavior your board, or rather, a few on your board have taken. I give you now my letter to the board asking them to explain their behavior and the justification they have for their actions.Linda,I am deeply disturbed not only by the tone of your email's yesterday, but the imperiousness of them.None of these matters are settled or closed.Initially, I must point out the hypocrisy of your actions where you indicate that you have no conflict with regard to the Bennett Property Issues. You have indicated in your email yesterday that "you saw no conflict". The issue of conflict is not for you to judge otherwise, we would have leaders who are absolutely corrupt. You have stated "I am fully aware of my duties as a Board member.". Allow me to point out to you RCW 68.34. This statute lists your duties and responsibilities as a board member. You owe a duty to the homeowners which you breach and the board in it's entirety breaches when it allows conflicts to taint the decision making process.Linda you have a conflict with the Bennett property. You are married to Daryl Schindler. It was Daryl who was involved in the building of the offending wall that has taken over the easement. It was your husband who approached the Seven Bays Homeowners Association with the threat of a lawsuit over the issues with the Bennett Property and it was your husband and you who came to my house to discuss the Bennett Wall for two hours in early July. It was your husband who approached Paul Kochman after that meeting and stated that the board was opening up a can of worms. How do you think that you are not in conflict here.I further find it terribly hypocritical that you stood up in the July 14 community meeting demanding full disclosure of all the relationships of the people who were running for election, standing on the moral high ground of ethical conduct, and yet you fail to remove your self from the debate over the Bennett property. Further, it was improper of you and the board to change positions between July 21, 2007 and July 28, 2007 when I was not present. It was decided on July 21, 2007 that you would not be involved in the Bennett debate. The conflict was addressed and the issue was resolved. You don't have the opportunity to reopen that discussion a week later. You don't get to decide the following week that the conflict doesn't exist.Let us turn now to your statement that the Bennett matter is 'settled'. It is not settled. Very simply, the board does not have the legal authority to waive the easement trespass and I doubt that the community would be in favor of the board voluntarily giving up property which it has received no compensation for. Seven Bays was granted it's status because of the design of the property and the lots. In that approval process, the short plat process, easements were drawn. That short plat was approved by the County. The board does not have the legal authority to waive this easement or to 'accept' the wall. In doing so, the board has acted outside the scope of it's legal authority.Your statement that the 'wall was approved by three board members even had I not voted' is inaccurate. Margot Rach's vote was to deny the wall should it violate any safety, health, or welfare issues. Those easements were drawn for safety, health, and welfare issues as an operative component of the authority granted to the State and County to regulate land use. As the taking of the easement violates these rules, Margot did not vote in favor of the easement being 'accepted'. Indeed, she voted entirely opposite.Thus, there is no quorum because you are conflicted, and George Cordier and Rick Graf were the only two people who actually voted for the acceptance of the easement violation. The vote is illegal and improper. Your actions and the actions of the president, in permitting this conflict, have exposed the board and Seven Bays to severe legal liability. Setting aside the fact that is smacks of unilateral action on the part of the board when the previous board had already taken lawful and permissible steps to deal with the Bennet easement issue. Your rush to judgment, in view of the conflict, only smells of further corruption and hypocrisy. I dare say the citizens of Seven Bays should have serious questions about your conduct as a board member.Now, allow me to turn to your second proposition of yesterday that the Ripley matter is 'settled'. The Ripley matter is not settled. The previous board sent Mr. Ripley a letter stating that he needed to comply with the setback requirements as pertaining to Seven Bays. On July 21, 2007, this action was ratified by the new board. On July 28, 2007, the action was ratified again. Mr. Ripley's design is rejected until such time as it complies with the setback requirement.Yesterday, you advised me via the email listserv, that you, George Cordier, and Rick Graf had a discussion and you are for granting the variance. To quote with precision, you stated, "George, Rick and I are for the variance as we cannot see that allowing it will worsen accessibility at all and feel if there was a lawsuit, we would be hard pressed to justify it. Therefore, the Ripley property is approved."Now, let's take this apart for a moment. I don't recall a meeting being called, I don't recall there being a discussion about it on our local listserv, I don't recall Robert's Rules of Order being followed. What I see when I read that quote is, a unilateral and arbitrary action was taken, no notice was provided, and you decided on your own, without advice or discussion, that you can do as you please. Setting aside the fact that the board has no legal authority to waive any setback requirements, you, George, and Rick, do not have any authority to take actions on your own without notice to the rest of the board. Nor do you get to return to topics once they have been settled and voted upon.If you advised Mr. Ripley that he was permitted to build, I suggest you immediately remove that permission. The board is already on record that the Ripley application was denied until he can comply with the setback requirements. You acted unilaterally and without justification to override that decision. When Mr. Ripley is handed an enforcement action from the County or is sued by one of his neighbors, he is going to rely on the permission that you gave him. The homeowners association will be sued and I should think that the insurance policy will not choose to cover you under its E&O policy as you acted outside the scope of your authority.As this is going out to our local listserv, George, you bear a large amount of responsibility for these unilateral, arbitrary, and capricious actions. The homeowners elected you based upon your representations at the community meeting. The unethical conduct of the board members falls to you as you are the one who sanctions such behavior and not conducting yourself in an appropriate manner.Allow me to point out what you have accomplished by taking this unethical and inappropriate actions with regard to your decision of the past two days. (1) You have exposed yourselves to personal liability, (2) You have exposed the Seven Bays Homeowners Association to liability (I'm sure the members want another lawsuit to pay for and deal with), (3) You have sent a message to the homeowners that rules need not be followed, building packets and excavation permits can be disregarded. There are no rules to follow here at Seven Bays, you can build and do as you please because the board will take no action to enforce the rules and will even act outside the scope of it's own authority to facilitate illegal actions. I look forward to when homeowners come back and sue Seven Bays because they relied on the board's 'waiver' as a grant of authority to avoid the legal building requirements established by the State and County, (4) Should you enagag e in any enforcement action, the homeowner will have a selective enforcement argument because of the lackadaiscal and arbitrary actions of the board.I suggest you without delay reign yourselves in and answer immediately to the homeowners. I suggest you fully disclose your unethical behavior and withdraw yourself from consideration in these matters.I look forward to your prompt and immediate response from all of you.Jay S. JumpAirport Plat RepresentativeSeven Bays Board Member528 2nd Avenue SouthKent, WA 98032(253) 479-2041jumpj@jumplawgroup.com

RCW Information

2007-08-06T19:03:00.001-07:00

After the post about the honeymoon being over, I received a large amount of response. Some favorable, some not favorable. Many of you were curious as to what the actual law on the matter is and wanted to know where you could learn more. I am posting the link to the RCW's on this post for your perusal.http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=64.38

Good luck!

Jay

Comments on the Meeting Minutes from July 28th.

2007-08-06T19:02:00.000-07:00

Larry Fookes said...
TWO CENTS - I am new here at 7-Bays. I have a long history of Board work. I am appalled at the current Board members lack of integrety and business sense.I am appalled at the Board not being able to control meetings or having any sense of Roberts Rules of Order. I am disturbed at the power and control issues permiating how this association is run. There seems to be no trust - only suspicion.With all the conflict here at 7-Bays, I think it prudent to have minutes that reflect the Roberts Rules of Order to protect the association from legal issues. This is NOT a private playground and Board members open themselves up to litigation when operating on their own agenda.I also think it prudent to have the Board members ask themselves about "risk" management. Everything we do has risk involved. Is the risk of having your way worth a lawsuit where you are personally named and have to use personal funds to defend yourself? If it is, by all means continue. If it is not, get educated about the legal ways of representation. Pride, self-righteousness and arrogance have no place in association business and if pursued, will do nothing but cause pain in the end.An example: Has the Board posted adequate notification for each board meeting and have proof therof? If not, it puts the association at risk.Another example: Not knowing what the definition and parameters of "conflict of interest" puts the person and the association at risk.All decisions have consequences. Electing leaders that have no sense of legal issues or a history of legal ways of doing business has its consequences. Are you willing to pay? You will eventually - I sense that it will be evident in your pocket book soon.In my opinion, as an outsider looking in, the association had people willing to work for less than market wages because they loved this place, but they have been driven off and now those that have driven them off are not in power and the budget for wages paid will almost double to get the same job accomplished. WATCH OUT - these new people ran on the agenda of the previous board not,"STAYING WITHIN THE BUDGET". Behavior tells what is inside. Let's see if they can "STAY WITHIN THE BUDGET" - I personally doubt it and see my money flying out the window.When the pain gets worse than the fear, people change and not until.When nothing changes, nothing changes. Until the people here at 7-Bays embrace humility instead of arrogance and sef-righteousness, nothing will change.Happy sailing and flying!
August 3, 2007 4:22 AM

Anonymous said...
Here, here to Larry Fookes, as he is correct.all meetings should be run by Roberts Rules....All personal agendas and arrogance needs to be flushed out of the equation....If there are experiences people willing to do the work and a lesser rate or donate for free, WHY aren't we utilizing these people.......Operate within the budget, EVERYONE feels the financial pain and I for one don't want to go bankrupt for lack of organization, conflict and bad attitudes....If this community doesn't come together and start working as a team, it will die. Prejudice, intimidation, attitudes is what it is about.......looking at the community as a whole, helping out your neighbor or those who need help is a must.......it also takes a complete range of generations to keep a community alive. Talk to each other, listen to all viewpoints and concerns, come together in concensus.Thank you for the opportunity to comment.Debbie Stecher
August 3, 2007 8:08 AM

Seven Bays Minutes for July 28, 2007 Meeting

2007-08-06T19:01:00.000-07:00

At the emergency board meeting this evening, (August 3rd, 2007) the minutes of the July 21st and July 28 meeting were read. Jay S. Jump made a motion to accept the minutes. It was seconded by Margot Rach.Linda Schindler made a counter motion to not accept the minutes as she felt that they left out critical information. It was seconded by George Cordier.As to the first motion to accept the minutes, the motion was defeated. Jump and Rach were for acceptance, Cordier, Graf and Schindler opposed.As to the second motion to not accept the minutes, the motio was passed. Cordier, Graf and Schindler approved, Jump and Rach opposed.Until such time as the minutes are approved, I have taken them down from the website.I will comment more on what happened this evening tomorrow.

Test Posting of a Blog

2007-08-05T23:42:00.001-07:00

I am submitting this blog remotely from my email address. If this is
successful then anyone can blog simply by posting to this email address.

Jay S. Jump

Seven Bays has a community wide blog

2007-08-05T23:34:00.000-07:00

Everyone on this blog has access to post directly.