July 24, 2013 Comments on Board PROPOSED RULE CHANGES Working Meeting

The Board PROPOSED RULE CHANGES Working Meeting met today (July 24th)  at the HOA office.  
Request those homeowners in attendance provide their comments on the meeting and suggestions on going forward. 

Bill Stolbach E-Mail to the Board

From: Bill Stolbach [mailto:billstolbach@hotmail.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 5:45 PM
To: montereyhomeowners@gmail.com

Subject:  Board President

To: Board of Directors, Monterey Open Forum , Monterey Homeowners

From: Bill "Pinky" Stolbach

CC: Dana Brown

Subject: Patio Extension to My Patio Extension Request For Information

My neighbor Board President Pat Bradley recently (May-June) extended his existing walled/fenced in patio the legally allowed 4 feet or so. He then extended it out an additional 4 feet or so  into the common area to construct a boulder garden as can be seen in the photo below. 
(Current rules do not allow boulders outside patios only the proposed changes would allow this). 

I understand the HOA paid the cost to remove a tree  and paid to grade and sod (not seed) the 
surrounding area again as can be seen in the photo below. 
(The CC&R’s require the homeowner to  pay all costs).

My understanding of the CC&R's & the law is that any homeowner who wants to extend his patio or patio garden or for any reason wants to use common area for their own purposes must first fund a ballot measure (about $2,000+) to get a homeowner approval.

Since the Board apparently has suspended the rules in order to accommodate and subsidize Board President Pat Bradly's additional extension into the common area;
I would like to get in on this sweetheart deal. 

Therefore this is a formal preliminary request to duplicate and add this garden extension into the common area to my fully extended patio at 322 S. Sierra Madre.   A standard application will be submitted when the below requested extension information is received. Others also may want to extend out from their extended patios a similar amount of common area for larger rose, cacti or other desert plant 
gardens, think of the possibilities.

But first I and others need to know from the Board how far out into the common area the Board is approving?  ( I was thinking maybe up to the golf path )
How much will the HOA subsidize the cost; that is: how much did the HOA pay Sunrise to remove the tree and re-landscape the whole area for Pat Bradley?  What did Sunrise charge Pat Bradley 
to do this share and what was his share?

I and others eagerly await your reply.  

Sincerely,

Bill "Pinky" Stobach 

  

322 Sierra Madre S

Palm Desert, CA

_____________________________________________________________________

From: Dale Gribow <dale@dalegribowlaw.com>
Date: Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 5:50 PM
Subject: RE: FW: Board President
To: Bill Stolbach, montereyhomeowners@gmail.com

IF this is true it is shameful................and probably illegal in more way than one. 
However i suspect he complied with all the rules.

Let's give him a chance to respond and not be quick to judge

.

Please note our new address, phone, fax number and email below:

Dale S. Gribow,    Attorney at Law
74-923 Highway 111 # 206, Indian Wells, CA 92210
PH: 760-837-7500  Fax: 760 837 7502dale@dalegribowlaw.com

JULY 18, 2013 BOARD MEETING COMMENTS ON RULE CHANGES & OTHER ISSUES

MONTEREY OPEN FORM – July 18^th Board Meeting - QUICK UPDATE

The meeting room was full of homeowners estimated at about 75+ homeowners probably a record for a summer meeting or any regular monthly meeting. President Bradley opened the meeting with a prepared statement addressing the Proposed Rule Changes. His statement it was said will be published to all homeowners. After which he opened the meeting for an Open Forum for homeowners to comment on Rules Changes only.  Homeowner comments will not be published. 

Therefore we ask all homeowners who attended the meeting to email to montereyopenforum@gmail.com their comments, questions and/or their general impression of the meeting and any or all information presented by homeowners and the board.  These homeowner emails will be posted on the Monterey Open Forum Blog for all to see and comment on, particular those who were unable to attend. 

In summary the board has decided to:

• Extend the Proposed Rule Change approval to the Nov 21, 2013 Board meeting.
• Hold a Town Meeting in October.
• Board will attempt to modify some of these rules before resubmitting them to the homeowners 30 days prior to Nov.21^st.
• The HOA website will not be activated for homeowner comments/questions to the board on the Proposed Rule Changes or any other subject.
• The website survey capability may or may not be used.

Other items presented by the board:

• The contract with Albert has been extended to December 2013. It was due to expire on July 1, 2013
• The contract with Sunshine was renewed for a year. This announcement was received with resounding BOOs from the homeowners. The OPEN FORUM at the end of the 2 hour meeting was primarily an abuse fest of the quality ( or rather lack of) of Sunshine work and the poor state of landscaping around homeowner’s condos.

Our compliments to you who contributed your ideas and Rule Changes comments, as well as voted on the Blog surveys.  It was our hope the board would implement the HOA website MEMBERS FORUM (MESSAGE BOARD) and survey function both of which are a more capable and sophisticated than this FORUM. But that is not to be.

_____________________________________________________________________

From: Judy Saccente <judyyank45@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:04 PM
Subject: Comments on Today's Meetings
To: "montereyopenforum@gmail.com" <montereyopenforum@gmail.com>

I was happy to see such a large turnout by homeowners at today's meeting.  If we can continue to get this level of interest and involvement we have a real chance of impacting the Board's ability to impose arbitrary rules that effect us all in some way.

While encouraged by the Board's apparent willingness to revisit the proposed rule changes and hold a town hall to get homeowner input before making final decisions, we should not let our guard down or become complacent.  There is no guarantee that the new proposal will differ much from the original.  And we still have not been given much explanation for most of the proposed changes, particularly with regard to patio furniture colors

_______________________________________________________ 

From: LLOYD <suite-a@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:51 AM
Subject: Many Thanks
To: montereyopenforum@gmail.com

Many thanks to all who worked so hard to get membership responses the majority of which were against the proposed changes. Again I suggest that prior to adopting rule changes or even considering them that OUR BOARD, should first poll the membership on the issue of needed changes.  Then armed with responses publish those responses and see to gaining a consensus.  With consensus then for the first time Proposed Rules should be formulated for a HOA Vote.  In this way the anger, as seen once again, can be avoided.

Lloyd Robinson

329 Sierra Madre South

cell 310 666 4333

 ________________________________________________________

From: Dale Gribow <dale@dalegribowlaw.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:24 AM
Subject: my .02
To: montereyopenforum@gmail.com, montereyhomeowners@gmail.com, dana@albertmgt.com

The Homeowners and Board should both consider consulting with a Real Estate Attorney that specializes in HOA matters…BEFORE the next vote to learn of the Homeowners rights AND the HO board’s fiduciary obligations. I would strongly suggest they bring a copy of the homeowner’s papers for the attorney to review.

The board has a difficult job to do and every time something like this has come up in the past I have asked myself why I have been on 50 boards. This happens with all boards. It is a thankless job and they are underappreciated. They are doing the job because we do not want to step up to the plate. We should all be appreciative of what they are doing and THANK THEM for what is right not just comment on what is wrong in our opinion.

It is possible they have not thought through these issues thoroughly. There is no excuse for scheduling a vote in the summer for any entity in the desert. They, just like congress, have to answers to its constituents. In this case it is the HO. The Monterey BOD has a clear fiduciary duty. Whether what they are proposing was right or wrong is not the main issue. The setting up of a vote during the summer would be my main gripe. That action causes HO to lose confidence in THEIR board.

In addition the HO and Board should want to avoid any possible litigation which would take money away from other matters that are more pressing. I too have felt like this was becoming a Gestapo state with the security stopping one from going over 20 mph. I lived at Bighorn for 10 years and Indian Ridge for 10 years and never had any contact with the security and HOA. I have been here 7 months and already see things that are probably not handled as delicately as they should.

I am not a HOA attorney but would be glad to suggest several names to you to both groups. However the Albert Group knows what they are doing and if the BOD has not run this by them maybe they should.

NEW CHANGE OF ADDRESS

DALE GRIBOW, Attorney at Law 74-923 Hwy 111 # 206, Indian Wells  CA 92210  760 837-7500  Fax: 760 837 7502 

___________________________________________________________________

From: gene lewis <genelewis246@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: I am underrepresented in voting on the blog
To: Monterey Open Forum <montereyopenforum@gmail.com>

My name is Gene Lewis, and I live at 246 SBC.  I have owned my condo since April, 2001. ( This should satisfy Mr. Bradleys, concern for accountability)

I attended yesterdays meeting and was most surprised at the home owner turnout.  This reflects the value of OPEN COMMUNICATION.  If  Albert Management will not function in the Sunshine ( not sunshine landscaping) then we,  the home owners must provide a forum that keeps us informed.  I am not the most computer literate person; however, I will do anything that will help to provide open communications.  Let me know.

My comments regarding the meeting:

     1.  The board had the look of a Deer in the headlights of a car, when they saw the turn-out.  Mr. Bradley, spend most of his opening remarks back tracking, and distancing himself from the proposed actions of the board.  When it came to the golf path, his comment was "we put this in at the request of Golf course mgt."  I found his response to be indicative of his lack of caring for the home owners benefits.
  

     2.  Once Mr. Bradley, saw the turn-out, he arbitrarily picked November, as the timing of the vote.  Why November?  Why didn't he ask for some suggestions from the home owners?   Why not January, or February, when the majority of home owners are here?

     3.  Regardless of your opinion of Jack Mulhil, he had a very valid point with regards to the HOA Website.  It cost the home owners approx. $7.0, and $90.00 p/m, and the management group and HOA, refuse to use it.  Why?  Is it that they don't care, or is it that keeping us in the dark about issues makes their governess easier. 

     4.  Albert Management, has to GO.  Dana, does not step out of her office to see what is going on with the contractors that they have hired, and based on the groups comments yesterday, no one is happy with Sunshine Landscaping, the Pool Cleaning people, or our own service people.   Sunshine, is a train wreck, and Albert Mgt. knows it because they have been deluged with complaints since day one.  Pool cleanliness is a simple issue to correct, if she would pay attention, or care.  I wonder if the pool contractors are required to give mgt. a daily report of what pools have been serviced by them, and then have our people periodically check on each vendor.  Pool lights are a NO Brainer.  Every evening  when walking my dog, I see security stopping at pools, and many times getting out of their truck and going on the pool deck.  Burned out lights should be noted by them, and turned into the mgt. office daily.Seems simple doesn't it?  It just takes someone who cares.  Again, it is not Albert Mgt. 

     5.  I don't know if you noticed, many in attendance did.  Every time someone went to the microphone to speak, Dana, would sneer, or make condescending looks, as much as to say, you don't know what you are talking about.  I found her actions to be most unprofessional, and her attitude to be disrespectful.  This is the Managements representative?  Poor Choice.

In conclusion:

     I feel very strongly that Albert Mgt. is a serious part of our problem, and we need to act now to insure that they are not rehired.

     I don't know what can be done regarding Sunshine Landscape for another year, other than meeting with their senior management, to discuss ways to resolve their poor performance.  I didn't see anyone from Albert Mgt. saying they would try and get these issues resolved.

     We need to stay vigilant to the actions of the HOA board with regards to the proposed changes, and continue to send peoples concerns to them, as well as continue to communicate amongst ourselves.  I believe that common sense can and will play out; however, everyone must have their voices heard.

Thank you for this opportunity,

Gene A. Lewis
________________________________________________________________

From: Kay Van Zandt <kvz@msn.com>
Date: Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 5:07 PM
Subject: Montery Open Forum Blog
To: Monterey Open Forum <montereyopenforum@gmail.com>

I used the blog message board to post a message on Friday.  But when I went in to check other people's comments on the board meeting this afternoon, my message wasn't there.  I am not sure why--perhaps I did something wrong or maybe there are times when the messages don't upload until later.  But I have since read some of the other messages on the blog and would prefer to have that one rescinded and replaces with the one below, if you can do that. 

Thanks.

Kay VZ

================

Unfortunately I was unable to attend the board meeting on Thursday, 7/18, so I appreciated reading the summaries. I will also continue to watch this blog for additional comments. 

I was very pleased to read how many homeowners attended the meeting and that there were some "interesting" interactions between the board, Albert Management, and the homeowners.  I suspect that without this blog raising homeowner awareness and the ability to share ideas, the meeting and rule changes would have gone into effect unopposed, just as the board had no doubt expected and wanted.  And even though a November date has been established for their proposed rules changes vote I did not get any sense from what I have read thus far that the board intends to do it any differently this time.  Will they provide a summary of every proposed change, why it is believed necessary, the financial and/or operational impact(s) of each change?  Will they be offering a line-item vote or another "all or nothing" yes or no vote?

The board seems to be taking a very hard position against reopening the homeowner forum, and true to form offered no substantive reasons for denying homeowners that access to explore and share ideas.  Perhaps they are afraid, as evidenced by homeowner rebellion Thursday, that it will result in more direct homeowner oversight of their actions, and a level of activism in having a say in how the board conducts our business.  As pointed out by other homeowners, being on the board is no easy task. But rather than taking the path of cooperation and seeking better communications with and support of the homeowners, the board appears more interested in furthering their isolation. This most recent round of homeowner rebellion should be sending a clear message to everyone that things must change; all homeowners must have the information needed to make informed decisions on proposed board actions and at a time when the majority of homeowners are here.

 I hope that every homeowner will enroll and participate in this blog and put pressure on the board to reactivate the official message board.  It is the ideal starting point for implementing a better method of communications with and among homeowners that is so sorely needed.  How much better for the board to get word to the homeowners in a timely fashion, receive feedback, and see/understand any major resistances and make appropriate corrections BEFORE we have to show up en mass to protest what otherwise appear arbitrary and capricious rule changes. 

Kay Van Zandt

Homeowner

__________________________________________________

From: Roberta Monahan <damon1776@aol.com>
Date: Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 6:16 PM
Subject: Fwd: Monterey Open Forum
To: "Montereyopenforum@gmail.com" <Montereyopenforum@gmail.com>

Attention all homeowners:

Can you get the word out about as many as possible attending the newly scheduled meeting Wed July 24 10:00 am to work on the proposed HOA Rules -- I would love as many as possible to attend.  This is an open meeting and  ALL are welcome!  It is imperative that we don't drop the ball now and try build consensus so that we can have more acceptable changes which meet all of our approval, yet address the Board's issues with the concerns raised.   Thanks for all of you who attended last Thursday's meeting but we REALLY need your help now!  

Bobbi Monahan  925 858-6752     Sent from my iPhone

_________________________________________________________

    

HOA BOARD's July 18, 2013 RULE CHANGES

       On June 17th the HOA Board sent out Proposed Rule Changes without much explanation as to why any of these changes were necessary or why these changes are being proposed in the  middle of the summer (July 18, 2013 Board meeting to approve changes) when the vast majority, even many of the permanent residents are away.  These Rules were changed just two years ago in June 2011 (again in the summer).
      Most homeowners may not have taken much notice of these Proposed Rule Changes (a 60 page document with changes to about half of the document)  but a few so far have expressed their objections to  rule changes that may have significant negative effects on Monterey CC residents if these changes  are allowed to take place.  
       Below is a letter to the Board that we believe each resident should be aware of.  Others have either written (letter or email) to the Board or intend to do so. There comments will be posted on this when available.
       All residents are encouraged to make their disapproval or approval of any or all these Rule Changes to the Board as soon as possible (time is of the essence) and then share your comments with other residents by posting your email/letter comments made to Board to this BLOG:
      internet address =  monteryopenforum.blogspot.com 
      or by e-mailing your comments for posting to:
                                     montereyopenforum@gmail.com 

HOA HAS NO AUTHORITY TO RESTRICT HOMEOWNER USE OF THE 

GOLF CART/PEDESTRIAN PATH

Click Here to Read about it in FORUM TOPIC - GOLF PATH PROHIBITED

Homeowners have provided photos of area that would be affected by the PLANT HEIGHT RULE. Check them out under  
                                FORUM TOPIC- PLANT RULE PHOTO  Click to see Photos


      Posting to this BLOG can be made directly below or to FORUM TOPICS listed to the right which address specific Rule Changes or by making a comment on any of the postings by others.
       You are also requested to pass this information on to other residents who on your e-mail list or while walking around Monterey.  Our email list is limited to a few hundred residents.

To read all comments received so far click comments  directly below.

Bobbi and Dan Monahan's July 16th Rule Change e-mail to the Board.

From: i <damon1776@aol.com>
Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:48 AM
Subject: HOA Proposed Rule Changes
To: montereyopenforum@gmail.com, montereyhoa@dc.rr.com


We are homeowners here in Monterrey.   We strongly support Kay Van Zant, Jack & Lois Mulhall, Chuck Pepper and others who have commented on the  Board's proposed rule changes. In particular, we commend Jack four page commentary which outlines for each of us what the Board can and cannot do, what our rights are, and how the Board is trying to ram-rod these changes in without proper notification, publishing each of the comments for or against (they publish those for the rules, but none of the comments against the proposed changes.  

We are very much against rules which arbitrarily make us cut our plants below 4 feet in height without any reason such as safety (perhaps it is falling into a neighbor's yard/space or into a pool ---   we specifically bought a unit with a side yard so we could enjoy the beautifu folliage that grows here so well in the desert including ornamental cactus, yucca, pigmy palms, etc......some of which can exceed 48" in height, but which give our side yard it's beauty.  We have a weekly gardening service and everything is maintained impeccably!   If we are gone, the gardener still comes and trims the plants and does cleanup and maintenance.   What is the problem with that?  Oh, so you can see the top of our cactus from the golf course?   WOW!!!  That is amazing that someone would put in a new rule to change that!   We have striped cushions on our patio chairs (have been there for 3 years) -- so now we have to buy all new cushions and paint our chairs (from white to rust?) -- we clearly aren't using florescent pink -- and the colors we have have never been an issue.   Also, we have a bouganvillia shrub growing on our golf course screen between our units to give each unit privacy, shade and camouflage an ugly green wronght iron fencing... so we now have to cut that all down to 48 inches even though our neighbors like it too and it doesn't block anyone's view and certainly is better looking that a green iron fence?   Why -- green plants with flowers are beautiful -- we maintain it and it is not "out of control" as the Board purports!    Oh, so the Board doesn't like red or blue or yellow flowers which bloom on our plants?  Why do they plant blue and yellow pansies in the Spring -- good color for them but not for us?   Ridiculous and arbitrary!  

The Proposed HOA Rule Changes are capricious, arbitrary and unreasonable!    

So we all pay to below as Social Member of the Monterey Golf Club.  And now...WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO WALK ON THE GOLF CART/PEDESTRIAN PATHS EVEN AFTER THE GOLFERS HAVE LEFT FOR THE DAY OR THE COURSE ITSELF IS CLOSED FOR RE-SEEDING?   The Proposed HOA Rule Changes are capricious, arbitrary and unreasonable!    

So what are we all paying for as Social Member of the Monterey Golf Club?  The priviledge of dining in the dining room or using the Patio Grill?  All of the public who don't life here can come in to use the same facility and no one pays $100/month to do so.   Also, why is the Golf  Club closing the main pool?   We all enjoy taking our friends to the pool, grabbing lunch at the patio grill and  enjoying the scenery there -- now it is closed forever because the Catering Department wants to put in a green area for Barbecues so they an rent it out for more revenue???   How did this happen without any input from the Social Members???

Dog's on leashes --  of course, it is already in the rules -- why make it more draconian.  If we have dogs, of course we clean up after them and put their "do-doo" in a tied plastic bag before we dispose of it.  But now, alas, there is a NEW RULE!!!!  We cannot under any circumstances put the tied plastic bag into a public common area/pool trash bin -- we must carry it around with us for 3 hours until we return home and put it only in our own private trash bin.   COME ON FOLKS.....WHERE DID WE GET THIS IDEA FROM?   

Radar?   Really.....so you now want security services/trucks parked on our streets to radar all the incoming and outgoing traffic to ensure they are goig 24.5 miles per hour?   We have speed bumps, 95% of the people drive very slowly going thru the complex -- let's not make this a police state!   If we can stop obvious repeat offenders do it, but don't monitor every car.    Our Securitas staff are not police officers and should have better things to do in monitoring WHO COMES IN AND WHO GOES OUT -- if they would stick to their job, that would be a major improvement.  

Why doesn't the Board spend more time fixing those things that can improve the appearance and ambiance of our complex instead of coming up with unexplained and arbitrary RULES!!!   We are all living  here because we want a quiet, safe and luxurious lifestyle -- many of us are retirees but not all of us.  We have attracted any mid-age famiiies who enjoy the Desert for its lifestyle and beautiful  weather.   Our MCC has been here for over 30 years -- why do we need to keep adding rules and rules and restrictions unless they affect the safety and maintenance of all that we started with or unless they are in compliance with local laws?     We want an environment that is hassel free and relaxing -- not one that we have condo police on every corner telling us we have the wrong color umbrella or have planted an Xavier Bush which is not approved in our own side yard!  And if we pick up after our dog on our daily walk with a doggy bag and throw it ito a public garbage can, isns't that what the trash bins are for???  If someone's dog is off leash and causes a problem, the owners are by civil law fully responsible and liable so why do we need more rules?   Again it is the occasional offender who  punishes all of us by making this so rule ridden that we drive new folks away from  us and current residents out of here!  

We should only need a new rule if there is a new problem!   The Board has failed to explain any of the reasoning behind the new rules, has failed to publish a list of offense committed and frequency,   If the landscaping on someone's property is out of control or not maintained they should get a written warning, a  period of 30 days to fix it, and then a bill for what it costs the HOA to fix it.   End of story.   Whether a rose bush is 48" or 52" or 55" -- who cares???  The thing that matter is whether it is pruned and beautiful or dead and ugly!    A 30" dead/dried or improperly maintained shrub is worse that a beautifully trimmed one 6 feet tall!!!    What does the height restriction solved?    (I have no rose bushes so I could care less).

ALSO, WHY DOES THE BOARD PROPOSE THESE RULE CHANGES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE OFF SEASON -- JUY 18?   WE HAVE LESS THAN 40% OF OUR OWNERS EVEN HERE IN THE SUMMER!!!   Again, this is their best possibly way to ram-rod these changes in when few of  us are here -- but alas, THOSE OF US HERE REALLY REALLY REALLY NEED TO GET ON THE BAND WAGON and veto their actions!!

I beg each of you do either :

(a)  write to the Board before Juy 18, (Hard copy letter to arrive before Thursday July 18) or email to MCC HOA;

(b)  drop off a letter that you do not approve the Board's Proposed HOA Rule Changes or which to have further time and review of the reasonings and alternatives, or

(c)   write to the montereyopenforum@gmail.com

and then, as Jack Muhull recommends, volunteer and sign up to help educate, petition the Board/HOA,  distribute fliers before any special meeting so that everyone becomes fully informed..... 

Thanks and hope you all plan to attend the meeting this Thursday at the HOA office and/or drop off your comments or respond to:   Montereyopenorum@gmail.com

Bobbi and Dan Monahan

219 Seville Circle

925-858-6752

damon1776@aol.com