11/25/20 BOD ANNUAL BUDGET MEETING: SYNOPSIS AND COMMENTARY BY VICKI ROBERTS WITH ASSISTANCE FROM ARTHUR ANDELSON
Posted November 27, 2020. Your Editor provides the following synopsis of the November 25, 2020 Board Annual Budget meeting, with assistance from your Roving Reporter, and with commentary indicated in bold blue.
Editor’s Opening Monologue:
This edition is entitled“A Penny For Your Thoughts”
Here at the Lakes, the Cascade falls, While nary a soul roams the clubhouse halls;The Covid cavorters, they sure want to play,They dare the odds – they must have their way!New Year’s is off, the show series, too,If you want to play cards, find a house or a few;The pool is now closed, the courts are as well,When will they open? No one can tell.And all the while these plot lines are playedThe ruling class their choices made;To spend the peasants’ money stashed,Thousands frittered unabashed;Fences, gates, swing arms galore,Seeking more money like a penniless whore;Dueling at “fencing” without a sharp sword,Felled by the pen, a mightier lord;Raising the dues some say without cause,Spending more money without giving pause;The residents revolt; they shall have their sayTo replace or renew come election day.
Alas, I’ve been advised that it’s curtains for me and time to start the show.
So without further ado, as we insisted, we have the do-over of the annual budget meeting. A very big “you’re welcome” to the residents who thanked us.
Board Annual Budget Meeting: Audio and Video Up and Running; Zoom meeting online starts at 9:31am.
Board Members Present: Marion Weil (President), Richard Greene (Treasurer), Linda Arbeit (Secretary), Harvey Ginsberg, Eileen Olitsky, and Sue Schmer.
Pledge of Allegiance led by Marion. [Editor’s note: Marion had a flag; all Board members stood.]
Marion Weil’s Opening Remarks and Announcements:
[Editor’s note: Marion stated that the Chat function during Board meetings is very distracting, among other things, and asked, purportedly on behalf of the entire Board, that residents refrain from using it.
(Editor’s note inside the Editor’s note: here we go again, trying to silence the masses. No one is forcing you to read it; avert your eyes if you don’t like what you see. The Chat function, in our opinion, is invaluable because, heaven forbid, you might just learn something before you vote on a matter that affects over 1,100 people.)
Marion also stated that effective immediately, the pool and sports center are closed until further notice because more than one resident has tested positive for Covid19 and those individuals used both amenities.
Marion is always welcome to email her opening remarks for inclusion herein. Just as a point of information, when we receive written remarks from anyone, we publish them as written; we do not edit the content.]
First Residents’ Input Session:
1. Jeffrey D. Green: Wycombe Avenue. As Chairman of the Audit Committee and the Budget Committee, we were unanimous that the maintenance should stay at $1,625. To increase the capital improvement reserve. Identify what it is needed for at this time… we will be making recommendations to the Rules & Regulations Committee… lowering the one percent threshold… now it’s about $40,000; if we lower it ½ of a percent, would be $20,000…
2. Judie Delman: I’m all for keeping it at $1,625…are we doing the tracing method for those people… in the community… [who contracted Covid19]… Marion: we have called everyone on the pool list, Lee has sent out notes… we are not tracers…
3. Wayne Keyes: Hi, this is Wayne Keyes, 5167 Clover Creek Drive. I just want to make a comment about the increase in the HOA dues above that which the Budget Committee recommended. On November 4th the proposal was made for $1,625 by the Budget Committee. The Board unanimously increased it to $1,650 which basically is asking for $60,000 more than that which the Budget Committee recommended based upon their analysis of our needs in the next fiscal year or the next calendar year.
There was no explanation or rationale given by any of the Board members as to why they were increasing the amount. What I’m asking the Board to do at this time is, #1, that the votes of each Board member should be rescinded so as to allow the constituents or the ownership to express their feelings about that and that a new vote be taken at the end of the session or whenever you deem necessary.
What I would ask is for each Board member to articulate to the ownership why they voted for an increase in $60,000 over that which was recommended by the Budget Committee, #1, and for each member to explain to the membership what they, what intentions they have with that $60,000. I believe that we as the ownership, the membership, are entitled to that information; it is our money that is being spent; there should be a rational explanation given by each Board member as to the reason for the increase, and how you intend to spend that money.
I hear at each Board meeting people talk about fiscal responsibility. What happened on November 4 was the height of fiscal irresponsibility. And unless each of you can articulate, as I said, the reason for the increase and how you intend to spend that money, I respectfully request that each Board member rescind their vote and that they vote for no more than that which was recommended by the Budget Committee initially. Thank you. Marion: Thank you.
Mike Blackman [resident/Zoom operator]: ok, next is Howard Feuer, you can unmute yourself.
Wayne: I’m asking for and explanation from each Board member. Can we hear that from them? Marion: Not right now. This is Resident Input. Thank you.
[Editor’s note: and you, Marion, answer residents all the time during Resident Input Sessions, often with a deflection, but some type of response, nonetheless. Here’s a simple way to respond to this gentleman that should satisfy all residents because it is fair and transparent:
President of HOA’s response in this hypothetical fantasy:
“After the Residents’ Input Session, we will be discussing the budget and there may be a motion to rescind which a Board member may make. If that motion is made and approved, and then if there is a motion to again try to increase the quarterly dues beyond the recommended amount, there will be a discussion about that as well, and presumably the explanations would be forthcoming at that time. There also may be a motion made to approve the budget as proposed and a discussion may ensue at that time as well.”
There, now was that so hard? Instead, Marion just dismissively brushed off the resident/owner which could only leave a sour taste in his mouth and the mouths of other residents who were interested in his comments and what the response to those comments would be. That’s not leadership.]
4. Howard Feuer: you said people who use the facilities were notified… we never got a phone call… when were they notified when they had the virus… in what hour at the pool? Which session? … Marion: Deb? Deborah: everyone was notified by phone and email. Howard [with Rosalie’s assistance in the background]: so if you didn’t get a call, if we were at a different session, we weren’t notified. Deborah: correct.
Marion: not on the Agenda today, Howard. Howard: I understand that, but this is a very serious problem, Marion… I respect privacy… Marion: if you feel the need, you may want to get tested… Harold: [words to the effect of, people went to a different session] … many of us who use the pool were not notified, so that was not right. As far as the budget, I was never notified of $1,650. Marion: alright, thank you, Howard.
[Editor’s note: while the Covid19 issue was not on the Agenda per se, Marion specifically raised it in her opening remarks; therefore, it is fair game to mention in our opinion. So to again give a resident the brush off on a very serious matter that is about community safety, which is always relevant in our opinion, and which was in fact raised specifically by Marion in her opening remarks, is not leadership, and again leaves the residents with bitter tastes in their mouths.]
Sue: Point of Order. Because of procedural errors because of the last meeting, I believe we can’t delete the Minutes, but we have to make a motion to rescind the $1,650…motion. Harvey: second. Marion: all in favor? Unanimous.
[Editor’s note: we guess Wayne finally got part of an answer.]
Approval of the Proposed 2021 Budget:
Marion: Open the motion, move to accept the recommendation of the budget committee for the 2021, for maintenance $1,625. Harvey: Second.
[Editor’s note: Wayne is about to get more of an answer.]
Eileen: [Editor’s note: Per our request, Eileen was kind enough to email your Editor her full written statement for inclusion herein for the benefit of the community. We thank Eileen for this gesture and without edit, we present her entire statement which she read at this juncture during the meeting.]
"Budget meeting statement
I’d like to thank the finance, budget and audit committees for all their hard work in putting the budget together for 2021. I would also like to thank the other committees for submitting their requests for next year’s budget. They put in a tremendous amount of time and effort.
I’d like to restate the reason for my request to increase the maintenance fee by $25.00 a quarter. That amount comes to approximately $8.25 a month. It was not devious in any way nor was it a setup as some have asserted. It was merely my desire to save some money for future improvements for our community. I ran for the board because I wanted to make this community the “best that it could be”.
The demographics of our community have changed since it was built and we are now reaching 21 years old. Many in our community don’t want to spend anything while others are anxious to add new amenities and enhance the old ones.
With each new amenity comes a Special Assessment vote and must pass by 75% which is quite hard to achieve with two opposite opinions and therein lies the problem. If we remain polarized by these differences we will never move forward in beautifying our community or at best it will take years to build up the general reserve for these projects.
Since I don’t have a finance or legal background, I sought out answers as to how we might set aside some funds in order to soften the blow of the large amount of assessments down the road. I questioned both our finance people, attended a reserve webinar and sought out legal opinions from various sources as well as examining the Florida statutes.
I was told that we could increase the maintenance fee for such items if we discussed and a majority vote was reached. It was reached at the last meeting. Now due to the lack of a resident input session, we are here again for another vote.
The greatest concerns at the last meeting were twofold. The first being you can’t add additional funds to the capital reserve fund without a community vote designating use of those funds and the second being concern about future boards spending the money in an inappropriate way without resident approval. Other residents later criticized the outcome of the vote and called it a “slush fund”. That was never my intention.
Many of us learned since the last meeting that it is reasonable and appropriate to put away monies for future improvements without an immediate community vote and that is by making a motion to increase the maintenance fee by “x” amount of dollars. These direct funds should be set aside for future improvements subject to a community vote pursuant to article7 section E of the declaration.
Another option is to have an assessment for “x” amount to slowly build up a savings for the renovation of our amenities such as the clubhouse and fitness center which will come due in approximately 2-3 years. That would lessen a future expense for the benefit of the entire community.
Having said all of this, I’m asking all of you to reconsider both possible options and please remember that it is our responsibility as both board members and residents to keep this community in the best condition possible.
Having said all of this, I’m hoping we can still agree to set aside more money for these future expenses. If not by increasing the maintenance fee then by increasing or adding a line item for future renovation of the clubhouse and fitness center.
Please consider these options before you vote. Thank you.
Harvey: Well, I think I said this at the last meeting. I understand, Eileen, and I respect what you’re saying. I understand what you want to do, however, it seems, as an example, say we want to put money aside for mailboxes and pickleball and clubhouse refresh and whatever. Until we have a community vote saying that we want to do that, we have no reserve to put in. I think we’re putting the cart before the horse here. I think what we need to do, put up a community vote for mailboxes and pickleball for example. If either one of those or both passes, then we set up a reserve in the next fiscal year and put money aside for that.
Then I would vote for the additional $60,000 a year contribution, but right now, we’re putting money in, we’re already gonna be at 80% of reserve the way we are now if we don’t add $1,625, and if they cancel the fence contract, we’ll be another $20,000 ahead and we’ll be about $100,000, you know, we will be more than 80% at the reserve. So, I’m personally against going above the $1,625 with the recommendation of the Budget Committee.
[Editor’s note: Oh, this is rich; here we have Harvey talking about canceling the fence contract and putting things to a community vote when he was the one who promoted the fence/gate project along with his cohort, Marion, and specifically bragged about getting around a required community vote by doing the project piecemeal.
As far as canceling the fence contract is concerned, we already gave you the template on how to do it in the November 18, 2020 Synopsis and Commentary entitled “Money Makes The World Go Round.” It would behoove you, Board members, to read it. Here it is again for those of you who missed it; the rest of you can skip this section and go on to the next part of our report.
“[Editor’s note: having the person who made the ill-fated motion and the one person who voted against drafting the letter is the last person who should be involved in its creation or any communication with this vendor. Eileen astutely brings this up later at the Round Table discussion to make sure there is oversight on what is being written, but frankly, the task should not be handled by Marion who was the sole dissenter. In our opinion, that’s loco and is a horrible business decision.
There is nothing in the contract that we were provided which shows that a $1,000 payment was to be made; the contract says the deposit shall be 50% of the entire job. Therefore, who authorized a payment of $1,000 and why? This is nonsensical. This $1,000 was not a deposit. It was an undesignated payment which was given for an unknown and unnecessary reason. The vendor never should have accepted it. It appears that both sides were and are asleep at the wheel. Both sides are ignoring a material term of the contract: the amount and schedule of payments.
The purported contract has neither a start nor finish date. There is no evidence of any performance over the last eight months. Since the required consideration of 50% payment was not given, the vendor should not have started the project under the terms of the contract. Indeed, after eight months, there does not appear to be any performance by the vendor of which we are aware and nor should there be, because the condition precedent to the performance (the 50% payment) was never satisfied.
There was a failure of consideration. The vendor has remained silent. The payment of 50% was to have occurred first, before any performance on the part of the vendor. Since that did not happen, the only recourse the vendor would theoretically have would be to sue on the contract for damages.
However, it would be virtually impossible for the vendor to establish damages, because there was to have been no performance prior to payment, so the vendor should not have incurred any damages for labor and/or materials. If the vendor started work, it did so at its own risk because it failed to enforce the condition precedent. Thus, essentially, while there is a contract, it is, as a practical matter, not enforceable. The parties just walk away. See how simple this is?
As for the $1,000, the HOA should demand its return as it was an improper payment, and if that is refused, then the individuals who paid that to the vendor, those Board members who authorized and signed off on that payment, should reimburse the HOA because they had no right to make that payment. They are probably not legally obligated to repay the HOA, but they should do so because they acted outside their authority and contrary to the specific terms of the contract.
It is incumbent upon the Board to approach this matter from a position of strength, not weakness. It is important not to write things in a letter that could be construed as admissions against interest or waivers of defenses. Be careful. Words matter.]”]
Richard: you can’t put money into the capital improvement… I said no because… it should be up to the community vote… I’m against putting more money… because it means the Board can spend $40,000 without going to the community for a vote…if you set up a reserve for something, you can’t move it to another category…
Sue: …perception that the Board has money to spend without going to a community vote… the problem… as HOA dues go up, so does the amount of money in the one percent and 5 percent cap; therefore, it gives the Board more discretionary decision making… perception…obviating the need to go for a community vote. Secondly, the budget was never intended to be a slush fund, except as you raise the due, you raise the cap on the one and five percent… people including myself do not necessarily understand the words and terms…that are being bandied about and maybe misconstrue…
what Eileen was saying…people need and want improvements, but how they pay for it and who decides how they pay for it is in question… next time we give out budget information, we clearly understand this is a proposal, this does not lock the Board into any decisions, we discuss it, we establish procedures along the way where residents have plenty of input and we give them a fact sheet giving them the information, define terms…
and we need to establish clear procedures, not only for us, but for the residents as to how the budge works in clearly delineated, understandable rules. The reason why I voted for the $1,650 was because I thought we needed more money for additional items that people said they wanted…
Linda: if the community wants mailboxes or resurfacing pickleball, a vote has to go out. If positive, we do an assessment… people want control of their own money… they don’t want the Board to have more control of their money… I didn’t understand this before… original owners… we moved into a beautiful community that was brand new… now, the community is aging… we have a commitment and a responsibility to keep Cascade Lakes as beautiful as it was in 2001… I want to keep the budget at $1,625 and then if you want something, you put a vote out… and then an assessment.
Eileen: Harvey, you’re absolutely right, and I have amended this week, I stated it in my statements, that you’re right: pickleball and mailboxes are additions to the community, hard surface, mailboxes, however, I don’t know that everybody heard me because one of the residents asked where do I want the money to go.
I want it to go to the clubhouse and fitness center because communities generally do their upgrades every ten years. I would like to put money in there so that we have some of it before the hardship of having a very, very expensive assessment. Now we can leave the $1,625, but then I would propose an assessment so that we stagger it and do it over time where we can eventually get an architect in, we can do it the right way, and so I wanted to emphasize that before any of you vote. Thank you.
Richard: Refresh, we have to look at the numbers. In the general reserve we have money set aside for the refresh, maybe not 100%... if you set up a reserve for the refresh, you can’t use it for pickleball and you can’t use it for mailboxes… Eileen: how much… Richard: I don’t know; we have to analyze it…components… over 300 items listed in the reserve study… there is money… it’s a significant amount… every item in the reserve has a different life… the biggest thing is …if we replace something before its anticipated life…
Marion: [Editor’s note: Marion appeared to be reading from written, prepared remarks]: I understand there are two sides to the issue… Budget Committee $1,625/quarter…7.1% increase…it just costs more to maintain the community… money for a rainy day: at first I thought it was illegal. It is in fact legal, but just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s right… it’s always easy to find a way [to spend] …at the end of the day, we are a political entity…I don’t believe the association needs $60,000… we have an option for an assessment… Board transparency… fiscal responsibility… I respectfully ask my fellow Board members not to add to the $1,625… we can make ends meet with $3,900,000.
[Editor’s note: this one’s talking about transparency? This is the one who engineered secret Board meetings which we called out in 2019 and for which she sicced the HOA lawyer on us the first time.
We received an email from another Board member confirming these secret meetings, but because your Editor posted the fact that these secret meeting were taking place and contrary to the Florida open meeting law on the HOA message board, Marion had those factual posts removed and ultimately had your Editor suspended from the message board for thirty days for calling attention to what she was doing. This is the last person who should be lecturing anyone on transparency.
This is just campaign rhetoric; earlier, she rightly described the Board as a “political entity.” Clearly, she has politics on her mind with the March elections looming.]
Harvey: Point of Order. Motion on the floor for $1,625. Eileen: I have very, very mixed feelings about this… almost every community similar to ours has started to make major improvements…if not now, when…and…how.
Marion: we voted last meeting, to have a vote for pickleball and mailboxes for 2021…
[Editor’s note: false. There was no vote; it was merely a discussion. Someone needs to take over the reins of the presidency.]
Marion: …it’s tough to get 75%... if we market it…
Sue: I’m also torn… I understand both points of view…we are all fiscally responsible… overwhelmingly the residents want $1,625…I will consent to $1.625.
Marion: All in favor of $1,625 per quarter for the budget for 2021? Unanimous. Thank you, everyone.
Second Residents’ Input Session:
1. Jeffrey D. Green: I just want to thank the Board for having faith in the Budget Committee and the Audit Committee. Eileen, I understand where you’re coming from, putting money away, think of people here who might be selling their houses in the next two to three years; they’re putting extra money in that they’re not gonna see any benefit on… when we do the refresh… we’ll let you know… you have a copy of the reserve study… more money into an account that you don’t…denote… is not fair to the people who may move…
2. Wayne Keyes: This is Wayne Keyes again from Spring Oak [pod]. I had a question related to something that I had read about the Board president having discretion each month to spend up to $1,000 for projects. I wanted to know whether or not that was true, and if it is true, what is the basis of the authority for the grant of that discretion.
Marion: that is true, but I will tell you I have never spent any of that money nor will I ever. It is just there for an emergency.
[Editor’s note: why, Marion, do you have it, and why do you brag about it, twice this year at two separate Board meetings, which is how we found out about it, because it doesn’t show up anywhere we could find. As to the claim of emergencies, there are specific procedures in place for emergencies, including in the Florida statute, and this made-up policy is not one of them.]
Marion: that’s how it came about; it was voted on by many, many Boards and it’s just been followed through by policy.
[Editor’s note: “voted on by many, many Boards?” That makes no sense. If there were a Board vote, there would be only one Board vote, not multiple Board votes for the same thing. Further, the statement that “it’s just been followed through by policy” is the opposite of a vote. A policy is not a vote. So, both of these statements cannot be true, and the first statement surely is not true.
Furthermore, we don’t believe that it was voted on. Marion stated above that the community vote for pickleball and mailboxes was voted on at the last Board meeting and in fact it was not; that was just a discussion. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Marion to specify exactly when it was allegedly voted on and where in any HOA official Minutes that purported vote can be found. An on-going policy is not a Board vote. Show us the Minutes where this alleged voted occurred. We bet there are no such Minutes because there was no such vote.
In fact, we were advised that it was a policy instituted by former president Rich Ruskin and it was originally $500 and that somewhere along the line it increased magically to $1,000. Show us the Minutes where this was voted upon, and if you cannot or will not, then we will be left with the conclusion that this is just another thing you made up.
It bears repeating, this makes no sense. If it were voted on, then it need not be followed through by policy. If it is policy, then it appears as if it were never voted on. It cannot be both. So, once again, there is a lack of transparency and a total lack of candor, and this apparently unauthorized discretionary fund needs to be nixed by the Board forthwith.
This $1,000 per month discretionary fund deprives the community of the votes on expenditures that the other six Board members who represent the community would otherwise have. It is a disenfranchisement of the community because it deprives the other elected officials of their vote on behalf of the community.]
Wayne: ok, so the Rules & Regs don’t allow for that, is that correct? Marion: No.
[Editor’s note: Wayne is correct; Marion’s response is confusing. There is nothing in the Rules & Regs that permit this outrageous made-up policy.]
Wayne: ok, so you’re saying that the Board itself voted to allow that discretion every time a new Board is elected? Marion: [contradicting herself]: yes, it is an ongoing policy.
[Editor’s note: he didn’t ask you about an on-going policy; he asked you if the Board votes on this every time a new Board is elected. And in fact, there was no Board vote on this since this latest Board was elected on March 26, 2020, so Marion’s statement is demonstrably false when she states that the Boards vote on it repeatedly. And why is every single Board member listening to this exchange remaining silent when they know damn well that they did not vote on this?]
Marion: and I will tell you that every expenditure is done through vendors, they have invoiced the community for every expenditure.
[Editor’s note: this is another deflection and is completely irrelevant and would only occur after the expense were incurred or the vendor were hired to work. This has nothing to do with what Wayne is asking.]
Marion: There’s a three-person process to approve the invoices before they are paid.
[Editor’s note: again, this is completely irrelevant. If they were not paid, the HOA would potentially be sued; this is after the fact and has nothing to do with this improper made-up policy.]
Marion: and every invoice is audited by the Audit Committee.
[Editor’s note: again, this is likely inaccurate; more accurately, the invoice may be audited at the Audit Committee’s discretion, but again irrelevant to the issue.]
Marion: And I will tell you once again I have never spent any of that money.
[Editor’s note: this is demonstrably false by the hiring of the attorneys to go after your Editor and your Roving Reporter multiple times for a total expense to the HOA in the amount of $6,052.35 per the information given to us by the property manager’s office. There was never a Board vote at any open Board meeting as required for this expenditure, just like any other expenditure. This needs to stop now, without the need for a membership vote, because it was never proper to begin with.]
Wayne: I understand that it hasn’t been spent, but that doesn’t prevent, but that doesn’t prevent you or any other future president from expending that money, and with or without the knowledge of the membership.
What I would ask is, is there a process whereby there could be some type of a vote by the membership as a whole as to whether or not they want that policy to continue, or if that is something that should be written into the Rules and Regulations with maybe some guidelines as to how it can be spent, and how, if it is spent, how that information can be disclosed to the membership.
Marion: ok, Richard, a quick answer, thank you.
[Editor’s note: deflecting to Richard is manipulative. This is not about what happens once an invoice is generated after the fact. This is about the $1,000 per month that the president is claiming without any legal basis therefor. What is the legal basis? It has not been articulated, and the reason it has not been articulated is because there is none. Wayne’s articulate questioning has borne that out.
By the way, prior to his retirement, Wayne was Assistant Counsel, Office of Professional Discipline, New York State Education Department, and Special Assistant Attorney General, so we think he knows what he’s talking about. More importantly, Wayne was also our September Resident of the Month.]
Richard: every invoice requires - anytime a president issues a payment, has to be approved by the Treasurer…
[Editor’s note: so what? That is still only two Board members and no notice to other Board members or the community, and what you’re talking about is after the fact of how all invoices for goods and services that already occurred or were used are approved and paid. It has nothing to do with this outrageous made-up policy in our opinion.
And Richard, based on your admission, it appears that you approved a portion of the $6,052.35 in legal fees used to go after us to try and intimidate and silence us from reporting on Board meetings. What is your justification for that?]
Wayne: I understand that, but my question is, is that something that can be taken up at a Board meeting with the vote of the membership as to whether or not they want that discretion to continue, or if there should be -- Marion: [interrupting him and cutting him off]: Mr. Keyes, I don’t know that answer but we will talk with our attorney and find out. Wayne: thank you.
[Editor’s note: This is pure hogwash. This has nothing to do with anything the attorney could possibly contribute to this issue. There is nothing to discuss with the attorney concerning this matter; this is Marion’s pat answer to shut down conversation. And Marion, if you do contemplate calling the lawyer to try and save this improper made-up policy, stop incurring unnecessary legal fees to keep power that you have no right to have.
This is just more deflection and it is time for this Board to put an end to this so-called “policy.” One of you on the Board, put this on the Agenda and have a vote on it and be done with it.
In the meantime, it is incumbent upon Marion to show the membership the Minutes reflecting this so-called vote to which Marion refers which allowed for this monthly $1,000 discretionary fund. We strongly suggest that she will not be able to do so because none exists. Marion, if you cannot do so, in our opinion you owe the community $6,052.35 because spending that money on the lawyer without a proper Board vote in an open meeting was an abuse of power and beyond your managerial/administrative functions. The rest of the Board: it is time to speak up and speak out; why so silent?]
3. Joyce Winston: Mike, where did you get the picture on the screen… [something about no video of residents in the Zoom meetings]. Mike: nobody, only the Board.
Harvey: $1,000 discretionary fund – if something breaks and needs to be fixed immediately… it’s not petty cash, to go out and do things willy-nilly.
[Editor’s note: this pearl of wisdom is spoken from the guy who tried to do an end run around the community’s right to vote on a project that totaled over 1% of the budget. On point, Deborah, the property manager, has that discretionary fund, and if it is something bigger, call an emergency meeting. Deborah is running the daily operations of the community, not the president.
The president’s authority is strictly spelled out in the statute and the HOA’s governing documents: preside over meetings, sign checks and promissory notes, and make sure resolutions and orders are carried out.
This improper expansion of presidential authority coupled with a $1,000 per month discretionary fund tilts the balance of power away from the other equal Board members and should be eliminated immediately.
Harvey appears more than willing to give his power and authority over to Marion, thus making him less than an equal Board member representing the community. So, if you’re giving your otherwise equal power away, why do you need to be on the Board? Resign and let someone else who understands that all Board members are created equal take your place. Having five Board members is still a quorum, so no loss there.]
Eileen: …I implore you to look at future expenses…
Richard: Deb, we’ll get together at 10:45.
Linda: I’m asking residents, when the vote goes out to improve the community, what you’re paying is to improve yours, our community… think about 599 other homes that should be improved… you want to live in a community that…is competitive… think beyond your own scope…that’s what being in an HOA is all about. Happy Thanksgiving.
Sue: I wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. Thank my fellow Board members and Deborah for acting expeditiously for closing the facilities and pool… it may be impossible to contact trace every single person over the last two weeks…want to thank the residents, your input is [invaluable] … we represent you, so thanks very much…
Harvey: I want to wish everyone a happy and safe Thanksgiving; thank the rest of the Board for their vote… maintenance fee, never going to go down because our expenses don’t go down…
Marion: I want to thank everyone on the Board… questions regarding Covid19, I recommend getting tested… we can’t trace everybody, but we did call everybody that was in that pool hour…
Harvey: motion to adjourn. Sue: second. Marion: 10:23am.
[Editor’s note: no vote was called to adjourn the meeting, which is one of the few functions that Marion as president is required to perform, but utterly failed to do; what else is new…]
[Editor’s note: Once again, a big shout-out to Zoom operator Mike Blackman and his faithful assistant, Arnie Green, for doing a great job administering the Zoom meetings. We thank them for their continued service and volunteerism.
And so concludes the board annual budget meeting of November 25, 2020; next Board meeting: December 2, 2020 at 9:30am. Cheerio until next time.]