12-08 I was not on the Board electric panel suggestions
5-09 I was on the Board suggestions and abuse of Board quorum, politics
5-09 I was on the Board notes, pool signs, umbrellas, Phase 1 landscape
information
6-09 I was on the Board maintenance, electric panels
8-09 I was on the Board telephone conferencing, communication, gardening crew, email request on Phase 1Iandscape
9-09 I was on the Board Cease and desist letter
Future Letter to be continued
1st attorney letter to Seascape Sur Board from Bill Gifford
Seascape Sur attorney letter to Bill Gifford
2'd attorney letter to Seascape Board from Bill Gifford
Censor of Bill Gifford
Dan Mc Cu!lough — request to resign and rebuttal
History Phase 1
Landscape history
Tree Trimming
Gardener's dismissal
New gardening company
Phase 2 and beyond
12-08 I was not on the Board – Electrical Panel Suggestions
Concerning the "electrical panel panic fiasco." I would recommend a SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING as soon as possible with an electrical
contract consultant to represent Seascape Sur interest. We have a landscape consultant why not an electrical contractor consultant? He could possibly save us thousands of dollars if not hundreds of thousands. We need a professional consultant with expertise who will be held responsible to guide us through this major undertaking. Sooner the better!!
Merry Christmas, Bill Gifford
Dear Board Members,
I have some things I would like to clarify with the Board. Also answers to questions concerning our actions taken by the Board.
The use of three Board Members as a quorum, authorizing Management to conduct business in the name of the Board is currently being abused.
This practice though legal was meant to be used in emergency situations only. We do not currently have any such emergency situations that cannot be addressed at our regular Board meeting. At that time it can be thoroughly discussed and debated in public or executive sessions. Using the three Board authority undermines the purpose of a five Board Membership. All five Board Members should be contacted by phone if necessary. Information or opinions can go out by e-mail, letter, or telephone any time between Board meetings. All decisions affecting Seascape owners should be voted on by all five directors. All correspondence to members, action taken, and purchases over $500.00 should be authorized by not 1,2,or 3 directors, but by the full five member Board.
Safety is in numbers as in the case of the recently proposed letter to Alayne Harris. All the Board members input is necessary. There are many problems that I can for see with the release of this letter.
Current information from Bob by e-mail would be helpful, but everyday exchange of e-mail requiring immediate action is not helpful.
I am asking the Board for assistance in receiving a three year major project plan in writing by June 1st• It has been 18 months since I first proposed a 3 to 5 year plan and to date nothing has developed. At the next Board Meeting
I will ask for four items to be discussed. They will be on the agenda.
A three year plan proposal in writing of major projects to begin work Sept 1st. (This plan would be due June first.)
2. A thirty day maintenance plan in writing put in the Board pak for May HOA Meeting, and a 30 day plan for each subsequence monthly meeting.
3. Executive session with five Board Members only. It is time to separate Board and Management.(We could hold Management over for five or ten minutes if we have questions on the agenda.)
4. More input and oversight of Seascape Sur by all five directors participating, without micromanaging the property.
Input appreciated. I will be happy to discuss any questions, or comments you may have. My cell# is 213-718-8700 (Can always be reached on cell.) Home 858-259-9381 Bill Gifford
bigtomatopcox.net
I have several items I would like to address to the Board Members regarding past and future meetings. These items are not of emergency nature.
1. Perhaps in our June agenda we could ask all residents to hold comments until the end of our regular meeting as we did in our May Meeting. This would enable owners to comment on current reports.
2. Our C.D. of May 27th with Smith Barney was placed with Pacific Bank in a ten month note at 2.3 percent.
3. Regarding pool signs in the North pool. Replace safety sign, life guard, and rule signs as they are faded. Add spa sign on spa door. South pool replace safety, and life guard sign both of them are faded, take down rules sign this is also faded. (This will still leave one rules sign.) Add spa sign on spa door. Vote in June Meeting?
4. Trash receptacles: Tabling the vote to buy containers was a good call by Dan. Color photos will be in June's Board pak with delivery cost, everything has sales tax. I don't know if they are a necessary expense but note trash receptacles instead of garbage cans by the mail boxes. Vote in June Meeting?
5. Pool umbrellas: Items of concern. View? Non issue. Liability? No more than deck chairs or the pool itself. Necessary? If there is a concern of residents vying for shade spots I think you can say umbrellas would be desirable for our community. Vote in June Meeting?
6. Last quotes on pottery cost $900 to $1200 and still looking. Plus tax? Plus delivery? Local supplier has selections of large pots in various sizes and colors. Prices are $200 to $300.00 plus tax and delivery. A picture of one of the pots is attached. Vote in the June Meeting?
7. I was present when Abraham showed the irrigation pipe that was improperly installed, this was a new connection. Was it installed by Seascape Sur or Mr. Chilson? If it was Mr. Chilson he should be back billed for a full day's wages for our entire crew. Hope we are not eating this bill in addition to a very extensive change order. Discuss in June executive session.
8. Landscape notes. I voted with the other Board Members to appropriate money for pottery and ocean front planting with consulting services by John Ploetz, I am having second thoughts. Surely we must have enough knowledgeable residents to select drought resistant and cost effect plants for the ocean front without incurring a consultant's fee. Barring future water restrictions will this be the end of the landscape concept work for the CALENDAR YEAR 2009? Let's direct our attention to normal seasonal planting throughout the complex for the balance of the calendar year of 2009 Discuss in June Meeting.
9. Swimming Pool: I understand Allan is not happy with Gail's response letter, and wants to pursue other remedies. When residents feel strongly on an issue and take time to write a letter they are concerned! Gail wrote an excellent letter in acknowledgement of his concerns. It was totally impartially (unless Allan wanted total capitulation.) However, in response to noise complaints and in respect to adjacent home owners to the pool, we as parents and grandparents are making every effort to comply by tempering the children's enthusiasm.
10. Expanding Landscape committee: I addressed my concerns that two or maybe even one person is making all the Landscape decisions and I suggested having more owners become involved. This was promptly shut down by Bill with no discussion. This community will never heal with this type of attitude and it is positively unhealthy, unnecessary, and uncalled for in both committees and monthly Board Meetings. We on the Finance Committee had full discussions and total input of all its committee members and it was very productive. However, limiting the committee to four members in order to exclude unpopular owners deprives us of additional and knowledge people. For the good of the community indeed our duty as Board Members is to look beyond personal, petty, preferences. One or even two people do not make a committee. This applies to architect, Landscape, and finance committees. Committees would function more efficiently without the interference of the Board. Remember Finance and Landscape committees are advisory only. I'm sure we can find owners that have the knowledge, and are willing to attend meetings, do the hard work and have as much of a financial stake in the property as we have. I am not talking about the last Landscape committee as I doubt that any of them would serve. Once again I plan on bringing a motion to form a Landscape committee and ask for volunteers.
Looking forward to having these issues discussed at the June Board Meeting. Bill
While walking the property recently I have noticed a large majority of the balcony facings are peeling. There are also rust areas such as patio walls and shed flashings. Some buildings are peeling and in need of touchup painting. Most of us do not know what work needs to be done or in what order our units will be repaired or painted. Financially at this time full building painting would not be feasible.
Here's and idea I would like to discuss with the Board and Bob. Form two, two man teams with Bob supervising. (Two to three days work?) Inventory building by building and unit by unit with a check off list for each unit as to the work needed using numbers to classify needs. (I.E. 0-4 rating on balconies, trim, rails, floors, steps, etc. With 4 being the worst rating.) A separate sheet could be used for walkways, driveways and miscellaneous railings. Just guessing, I would image it would take two to three months to complete this work. We then could go back to our remodel of the wood stucco repair on the buildings. The alternative is to contract the remodel work out to an independent contractor. This would depend on what the unit evaluation showed as to the amount of work and time needed to bring the property up to snuff. Posting these evaluations in the clubhouse, putting it in our newsletter, and email would greatly enhance communication to our owners and with the Board. I would be happy to assist Bob in charting the units if needed. Do we have a commercial sander?
Electric Panels:
Happy to hear we are getting a scope of work on the electric panel replacement. Before we put this out to bid, are wesure that this is the scope of work that is best for Seascape Sur? Our first contractor, theri_SDG&E, and now ko'wbri Electric, all have different ideas as to what needs to be done and how best to do the work. The scope of work is radically different as presented by these parties. Each party had their own interestfirst and foremost. Once again I propose that we hire an electrical consultant that solely looks out for Seascape Sur. He should athiiiW6the sthpe—of vioi=kio make sure it is in our best interestbefore we commit any bids. He would also analyze the bids when completed and make sure the terms, cost, and time tables protect Seascape Sur, Considering the amount of money involved it would seem a prudent investment. It seems none on us including management has sufficient knowledge in this field to go it alone and or trust any one company no matter who it is.
Food for thought for the June Meeting,
Bill Gifford
bigtomato@cox.net
Notes on August Board Meeting "-at?
In my opinion telephone conferencing at Board Meetings just do not work, and I would vote to eliminate them. Dan and I were straining to hear Bill while Dan was trying to run the meeting. The home owners definitely could not hear his responses.
Marilyn Jones was furious and frustrated about the lack of communication shown her from both the Board and Management She asks the same questions at every meeting. Are we communicating with her or is it out of our hands while in arbitration? Is there anything we can do to stave off a costly law suit? Let's make every effort to diffuse the situation, even though the case is going through arbitration.
In regard to using an outside garding crew to supplement our gardeners, I cannot agree with that plan. I would agree to using outside services for roofing, major concrete removal, or even major renovation like Phase One LC. Perhaps the outside gardener would be interested in supplying advice and training for our gardeners, management and landscape committee on an hourly basis.
There seems to be some hesitation to release the emails that Bob has solicited on Phase One.
1. Bob agreed to provide the information he gathered in response to his email requests.
2. The Board did not protest the release of this information.
3. The owners are paying the bill for Management to gather this information. How can we deny them access to the results?
4. There was no statement of anonymity in regard to the survey responses.
5. We have nothing to hide and should make every effort to be transparent
6. I am aware that David Sterling says, we may charge for copies requested. It says the same thing in all condo rules and regulation book, but unless and until this becomes a regular monthly cost I think the Board will be viewed as petty and vindictive.
Bill Gifford bigtomato@cox.not
I cannot endorse a letter that is such a thinly veiled attempt to intimidate our own citizens of this community. It will only add to the distrust of our Board, and further impede any progress and harmony with the home owners.
Bill Gifford bigtomato@cox.net
9/4/2009
I am aghast at the effort to recall the Board. Until Martin Schmidt signed his recent letters I and probably other owners of units in Seascape Sur have received various anonymous letters. Such letters deserve the treatment I give them, which is to reject everything set forth in them, for if the writer refuses to sign his or her letter it means, to me, that they have no credibility as the writers may have a hidden agenda.
ReplyDeleteThe attempt to recall the Board will undoubtedly cost myself and all owners of Seascape Sur a significant sum in legal fees and election costs and for what purpose. I believe that the primary purpose of those seeking recall of the Board is their dissatisfaction with the Boards' decision to remove certain trees and change plantings on the ocean front. I too was upset that certain trees were removed. However, as an attorney who has been involved in construction and construction failures for more than 30 years, it is my opinion that the Board little choice other than to remove the trees as experts had advised it of possible structural problems if the trees were not removed.
Other criticisms of the Board relate to the electric work and the change to plants that require less water. In my opinion both of these actions were proactive. The electrical work being done replaces work performed over 35 years ago and it was prudent to perform that work before there was an electrical failure or, even worse, a fire. With respect to the replacement of plants that require less water the Board was prudent to do so because, even aside from the drought, the cost of water keeps rising and will continue to do so.
It was approximately 6 months ago that 2 members of the Board were elected and in another 6 months there will be another election for 3 directors. I fail to see why it is necessary to recall the Board when the composition of the Board can be changed by a regular election. Certainly there has been no allegation of illegal activities by any member of the Board which would make it imperative to change the Board. It appears to me that the persons seeking the recall are just disgruntled losers in the last election of the Board.
In closing let me note that the current Board or any Board is not perfect and undoubtedly they have made mistakes, but that does not justify their recall. Accordingly, I strongly urge a vote against recall.
Jay Handwerger
In the above comment, the statement was made, "Certainly there has been no allegation of illegal activities by any member of the Board...".
ReplyDeleteWhile this may true, the current pending litigation suggests that the Board was unable to diffuse a disagreement involving an owner --and the ability to manage disagreements to resolution is a necessary skill of Board members. The litigation is of interest as it not only affects the parties involved, but also all 188 home owners as the litgaton is apparently against the HOA / Board.
Lynn and I would like to know the details of this pending litigation. We did a little research in the San Diego County Superior Court Web Site and we believe the pending action to be Case Number 37-2010-00090548-CU-OR-NC. Could someone provide a copy of the complaint?
The Court will only provide a copy if you physically go to the court. If someone could provide us with the complaint, it would save me the trouble of taking a day off work and going to the courthouse (we are not residents and live about 90 miles away in North Orange County).
Thanks, Bill and Lynn Starmann
starmannfamily@verizon.net
Hi JaY:
ReplyDeleteThe legal costs for the recall will be exactly zero, unless the board violates the california election law as they did in the last election. The costs of the outside firm to conduct the election ( because the board cannot be trusted to run a fair election is about $800.00.
Martin Schmidt