Date: Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 10:44 AM
Subject: Response to Letters from Mr W Stolbach
To: "montereyopenforum@gmail.com" <montereyopenforum@gmail.com>
Subject: Response to Letters from Mr W Stolbach
To: "montereyopenforum@gmail.com" <montereyopenforum@gmail.com>
Please post on your blog., as the two letters from Mr. Stolbach were.
Thank You
Pat Bradley
______________________________________________________________________________
Pat Bradley's requested post is
below. There were no anonymous emails sent to Mr. Bradley or anonymous posts
made concerning this issue. Three emails were sent to Mr. Bradley all
identified the sender as me Bill Stolbach. The attachment to Mr. Bradley's letter
is merely the cart garage election results I don't believe it adds anything to
the discussion however if requested I am sure Mr. Bradley will be happy to
email a copy to you. His email address is listed above.
Pat Bradley besides attacking me fails to
answer the questions asked. Also the board has failed to provide any answers.
The CC&R’s and specifically the Rules & Regulations prohibit the board
from allowing common area to be used for personal purposes without the required
vote of approval by homeowners. This is required by statute and a standing
court order as a result from the Cart Garage lawsuit. The board is fully aware
of the mandatory restrictions on the use of common area belonging to all
homeowners. To add injury to injury Pat Bradley’s rock/flower patio garden
under the new rules is maintained by Sunshine at our (HOA) expense.
Pat Bradley and the board did not notify the homeowners that Sunhine’s owner and his son were indicted by the Riverside County DA for $1.5 million in six felony counts of workers' compensation insurance fraud as reported in the Desert Sun in April 2013. In June the board renewed the Sunshine contract. Apparently prior to this Pat Bradley made an arrangement with Sunshine to install his patio garden in June. He now says what he paid Sunshine for their services are none of our business. Interesting!
My question
remains. How the hell do I get a great deal like Pat's?
Bill "Pinky" Stolbach
Dear Homeowners,
I normally do not answer letters that attempt to cast
aspersions on either my character or that of the other members of the volunteer
Board. Normally when people like this are ignored they get bored and move on to
something else. If you humor them with an answer, it makes them feel like they
have accomplished something and it never quits.
A number of homeowners and a number of Board members,
however, have urged me to respond to this onslaught.
So, here we go….
Dear Mr. Stolbach,
I have received two letters from you and one from the
Anonymous Monterey Open Forum Blogger. Obviously, this is where you got your
information from, and as usual in both cases, they are full of half truths,
innuendos and faulty assertions. They show an absolute total lack of
understanding of the rules and processes that we work under.,
Let me start with your first factual error, “Current
rules do not allow boulders outside of patios, only the purposed rule changes
would allow it.”
If you actually lived here, I would invite you to walk
around our complex and count the number of homes that use boulders as accent in
there landscape projects. This nothing new and it hardly began with me.
Next I will address the one factually correct statement that
I found in your letter --” the HOA paid the cost of the tree removal.”
You are correct the HOA paid the cost of
the tree removal in front of my patio. I enjoy trees and would never willingly
cut one down. For your information, the roots of the tree were ripping up my
unextended patio and the cracks had progressed up to the pad of the house. (
pictures available). The tree had to be removed at HOA expense as it would be
for any other homeowner in a similar circumstance.
You are incorrect however in that the grading and sod were
part of the landscape project. There are very few circumstances where grass
seed is used in landscape renovations.
From your letter --“My understanding of the CC&Rs and
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 to get homeowner approval.”
Your understanding of the CC&Rs regarding patio
extensions and landscape renovations is obviously lacking, and your understanding
of the law may well be much greater than mine, because fortunately I have never
had any direct interaction with the legal system. For clarity, I refer you to
the ballot measure approved by the Owners within MCCA in December, 2011 (see
attached Certification from the independent Inspector of Elections) wherein the
membership approved and granted each Unit Owner an exclusive use easement for patio extensions (provided the
Architectural Guidelines and related conditions are satisfied).
Your assertion, “The Board apparently has suspended the
rules in order to accommodate and subsidize Board President Pat Bradley’s
additional extension into the common area,” that any rules were suspended
to accommodate or subsidize my patio extension is patently false. Both the
Patio Extension Request and the Landscape Renovation Request were applied for
and approved by MCCA through the standard process, accompanied by personal
cheques to cover any and all fees.
Your accusation: “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? “ The HOA does not
subsidize homeowner renovation cost. If the HOA is doing a renovation next to a
homeowners property and the homeowner would like some additional items within
the project. The homeowner must pay for the add-ons. The entire cost, 100%, of
the landscaping in front of my condo was paid for by my wife and I. As to the
price, may I say bluntly, is none of your business. Sunshine is a
contractor and I was their client. No special pricing was ever ask for nor
offered.
Another thing you and the Anonymous Blogger have in common
is that you fail to see any difference between a patio extension and a
landscape project. A patio extension is hardscape and as indicated above, it is the membership who
approved the easements for a patio extension for each and every Unit Owner;
thereafter once the patio extension plan is approved by MCCA, an Architectural
Improvement Agreement it is recorded
against your Condo Unit. With a landscape project, you get the privilege of
helping with the design and paying for it, to hopefully help beautify your neighborhood, but you can never own it.
It is and always will be Common Area .
As I stated in the beginning, answering these frivolous and
mean-spirited charges, seems to be a wasted effort, because as we both know for
you, this is personal and no actual
facts offered will deter you.
But, rest assured, although I have tried to answer your
questions as best as I can , there will
be no further correspondence for you from my end.
Pat Bradley
President HOA
