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  Homeowner comments will not be published.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

_________________________________________________________