Our new board will meet during a "workshop" closed session early in October. This meeting will also be attended by our professional manager(s). The purpose will be to determine which roles and positions each of the board members will assume. This meeting will also be for the purpose of determining the budget for 2010.
Our association has a number of positions specified. However, last year some of these remained unfilled or the duties of multiple positions were performed by a single individual. For example, the Architectural Director performed that role and also the role of the Treasurer. The new position of "Communications Director" was created during last year's "workshop".
There exists in our association a list of duties and responsibilities for some of the positions. For other positions, such as "Communications Director" I am unaware of the job description, nor do I know if one exists. This information has not been released in our official communications, which is our newsletter. However, I did post an older list of board member job descriptions in June 2009, and a link is contained at the end of this post.
As of this morning, the official results of the election have not been posted in my building and so I, as is the case for any of the unit owners who are not in the inner circle or did not attend the election meeting to the full conclusion, am unaware of the official results. However, I do have some information.
Unit owners provided sufficient votes to allow the Architectural Director one additional year to work with yet another new board. He ran for a two year term, to assure that the programs can reach some level of fruition. Completion, if the board allows it, could take 5 or more years. I understand that he has declined this invitation because one year is unworkable.
The individual who performed the role of Architectural Director was also our Treasurer.
Among the reasons to vote against him, were the fact that he has supported our professional managers and he was not endorsed by our Communications Director. He also supported assessment increases and he has been criticized for allowing me to work with him. I volunteered to work with our Architectural Director last year because by attending meetings I became very aware of what he was attempting to do, became alarmed by the efforts to delay the projects, the formidable conditions that were against him, and the urgency facing this association. In 2009 he pressed hard to commence the roofing and driveway projects in the few months of available good weather. He was delayed in those efforts by our Communications Director and by our Landscaping Director. This was accomplished by disruption of meetings, bickering over such minutia as who was to change light bulbs in the association, bickering over the need and method for drainage improvements, the relocation of downspouts, arguing over bid necessities for such things as $500 concrete work, the delays in coordination of landscaping, etc. and lengthy discussions about the capabilities and qualifications of our maintenance company and unauthorized presentation by a competitor. All of this prevented the board from coming to a consensus and delayed project approval. This is why our 2009 roofing projects got such a late start, and the driveways have not yet begun.
At this time, the status of these projects is unclear. I understand we no longer have a Treasurer or an Architectural Director.
References
Job Descriptions: http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2009/06/board-of-managers-part-4-job.html
Duties:
http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2009/05/board-of-managers-part-3.html
Above: Intermittently, for a time, boards informed owners of association finances
Newsletter 2008 excerpt is an example of earlier board willingness to communicate with owners.
The boards of 2019-2021 prefer not to do so.
https://tinyurl.com/BLMH2021
Life and observations in a HOA in the Briarcliffe Subdivision of Wheaton Illinois
Best if viewed on a PC
"Briarcliffe Lakes Manor Homes" and "Briarcliffe Lakes Homeowners Association"
Updated Surplus Numbers
Updated Surplus Numbers: Actual surplus 2018 per audit was $85,163.
Boards 2011-2018 implemented policies and procedures with specific goals:
stabilize owner fees, achieve maintenance objectives and achieve annual budget surpluses.
Any surplus was retained by the association.
The board elected in fall 2018 decided to increase owner fees, even in view of a large potential surplus
Average fees prior to 2019
Average fees per owner prior to 2019:
RED indicates the consequences had boards continued the fee policies prior to 2010,
BLUE indicates actual fees. These moderated when better policies and financial controls were put in place by boards
Better budgeting could have resulted in lower fees
Better budgeting could have resulted in lower fees:
RED line = actual fees enacted by boards,
BLUE line = alternate, fees, ultimately lower with same association income lower had
boards used better financial controls and focused on long term fee stability
Again, your comments are full of negativity and inaccuracies. Can you at least get the facts correct before you publish them. How do you know, without being on the board, that certain individuals were to blame for the delay in the roofing and the asphalt project. Get a life.
ReplyDeleteIf owners want to sell a unit, all they need do is price it at a value that buyers are willing to pay. In this area, prices have decreased to about where they were in early 2005.
ReplyDeleteIf you are attempting to sell for a higher price, you will be disappointed. Don't believe me - talk to someone who is unbiased and conservative in their pricing; for example, a banker. Discuss an equity loan and if you are deemed qualified your banker will run a check on the true value of your property. You will then know what a realistic price is.
It is important to realize that a realtor is a saleperson. Their goal is to sell your property, but at the highest possible commission. So they may attempt to convince you to make improvements to raise the perceived value, the selling price and thusly their commission.
However, if you price higher than what a potential buyer will pay, you only spend good money and still cannot sell. You have priced yourself above the market.
"Nirvana means to extinguish the burning fires of the Three Poisons: greed, anger, and ignorance. This can be accomplished by letting go of dissatisfaction." - Shinjo Ito
Source: Shinjo: Reflections, Page: 94
Last year was a year of fear; this year is another year of greed.
--jm
Ah, it's about time conversation got rolling. The silent majority speaks. The only problem is the silent majority was happy with the status quo and was not aware of the ROC until it was too late. Most of us were happy with the way things were...but now? I have been to meetings...our 'communications director' (suppressor) appears stoned half of the time and totally unaware of the conversation happening around her. She reminds me of the Pied Piper of Hamelin leading all of the rats into the river. But hey, at least there won't be an increase in fees, right?
ReplyDeleteIs anyone else concerned about the fact that the ROC advocates nails in this guy's tires? These people are dangerous and childish. What's next, eggs?
ReplyDeleteWait, fees were increased? I can't tell if people are being serious or sarcastic when they say "at least fees didn't increase!".
ReplyDeleteSarcastic.
ReplyDeleteMine haven't gone up yet....
ReplyDeleteDuring a recent association meeting, I thought I heard the FUPM manager state that it was going to be their recommendation for NO fee increase for the coming year.
ReplyDeleteThat's not official because the new board has to approve a budget, and you can't figure out how much to collect until you also figure how much you are going to spend. Or can you??
Official or otherwise, there has been no mention in the newsletter.
Looks like Normans' offspring joined in on this blog.
ReplyDeleteNormans'? Are there multiple Normans? I thought it was "Norman's" singular possessive. Maybe this is one of our 'new' board members posting.
ReplyDeleteWHAT % INCREASE WERE ASSESSMENTS INCREASED??? OUR ASSESSMENTS ARE ALREADY ABOVE THE AREA AVERAGE
ReplyDelete"WHAT % INCREASE WERE ASSESSMENTS INCREASED??? OUR ASSESSMENTS ARE ALREADY ABOVE THE AREA AVERAGE"
ReplyDeleteIf you have been an owner for a year, then the previous fee increase was noted in a mailing to you. How long have you been an owner here?
However, the most recent fee increase was described in posts dated November 13 and 22, 2008.
http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2008/11/where-our-assessments-will-go-in-2009.html
and
http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2008/11/thursday-13th-board-meeting-and.html
Ohhh you mean the ones from last November....the ones that Norman drooled over because he supports higher assessments for some odd reason. Our assessments are already $100+ than what other condo fees are in the area. I guess higher assessments don't bother you when you're collecting a Social Security check.
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be an obvious disconnect between some people who live in our community and basic economics at both the micro and macro level.
ReplyDeletePrices have a tendency, over time, to go up. This is referred to as 'normal inflation.' No matter how much people try to deny that inflation is normal, we have a couple hundred years of experience in this country, and several hundred years worldwide to support the data. If you don't believe me, check out the statistics.
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/outside.jsp?survey=ap
Now, from 2007 to 2008, most items that consumers purchased at their local markets had gone up. From 2008 to 2009, they either leveled off or actually decreased slightly. Hence, and increase in our association fees from 2008 to 2009, but a proposed 'no increase' from 2009 to 2010. This is reactionary to the market, with an expected one year delay.
So piss and moan all you want about a price increase. If the cost of goods and services go up, the association still has to pay for it. Even the most basic understanding of Econ 101 can explain it, but maybe you missed that day in class.
You want the service, you gotta pay for it. You don't want it, fine, but you'll have to leave. We're all in this together, whether you like it or not.
Last poster: You forgot to explain in your economics lesson why our fees are already ~30% higher than other condo associations in the area? Surely "econ 101" would help explain that for you as well? That's some expensive groundskeeping there. I know a few friends in the city who's condo fees are around the same as ours. Good luck trying to sell your condo when the fees are this much higher than other condo units in the area.
ReplyDeleteIf you've ever attended a board meeting, you would realize that we own quite a bit more around here than your typical association. More ownership = higher fees. Again, basic Econ 101.
ReplyDeleteAnd why do people always claim that nobody will be able to sell? Clearly we all bought in at one point, and clearly many of us move on. It's quite possibly the dumbest argument I have ever heard about keeping association fees low.
FYI - Previous two places I lived in had lower property values. Association fees?
1 - $198/month with a $120/month special assessment for roof repair
2 - $210/month with a $96/month special assessment for parking and roof repair
The report you get is the $/month base, because the special assessment is never worked into the equation for the buyer. It's always the seller's responsibility to pay, even if it has to happen all at once at closing. How many special assessments have we had around here?
In response to a unit owner question from the floor, the FUPM manager stated at a recent board meeting that this association is playing "catch-up" and that is why the fees are higher than some might expect.
ReplyDeleteThe blog post for November 13, 2008 includes a rather detailed review of fees and this is posted at
http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2008/11/thursday-13th-board-meeting-and.html
Go to that post and read this section:
My Additional Comments and Observations: Playing "Catch Up" with the Reserves, and dealing with rising costs:
The author makes the case that this catch-up is absorbing a lot of our fees each month and is due to the underfunding that occurred prior to 1999.
To demonstrate the consequences of these choices, as of January 1, 2009 I will be paying a monthly assessment of approximately $47.28 to the roofing reserves. And so it is with paving, concrete and masonry reserves, to which in January 2009 I will be contributing $34.15 each month. These items combined are consuming $81.43 of my assessments each month!
In March 26, a detailed argument was made at:
http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2009/03/method-for-arriving-at-assessment.html
I may not like this, but this is the way it is. With only 336 unit owners, there is no responsible way to avoid this. Or to put it crassly, "there is no free ride".
You can moan, complain, stamp your feet or whatever. But that is the way it is. Blaming others will not solve the problem.
You can moan, complain, stamp your feet or whatever. But that is the way it is. Blaming others will not solve the problem.
ReplyDeleteBut that's exactly what this blog is doing against the ROC, so I guess it's ok then?
No, Norm seems to put together conherant and logical postings as best as I can tell. There isn't any stomping of the feet going on here at all. If you've taken any time at all to read them, you can see they are very well researched and thought out. No doubt his opinion (which I disagree with at times) is sprinkled in with the facts and figures, but that's the glory of owning the blog. The stomping of the feet referred to above is regarding those short-sighted individuals who don't have enough sense to understand that if you want to maintain the beauty of our property and fix the problems that exist, it will cost money. The only thing I hear is "FIX IT! BUT I DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT!" Those are the rantings of a child.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't have said it any better myself.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the other comment, I am just a concerned homeowner, no one of authority, but I do keep myself apprised of what is going on to the best of my ability. I want to know what is happening with my association fees, if my property will retain its value, etc., etc.
Election Mistakes (Part II – Proxies/Tabulation).
ReplyDeleteQuite frequently, boards mistakenly use proxies as absentee ballots.¹ A proxy is a legal document allowing a unit owner to appoint another person as his/her attorney-in-fact to vote in his/her stead at an annual meeting on his/her behalf.
During the election process, a proxy holder must bring with him/her a properly executed proxy, which is exchanged for a ballot at the annual meeting to be voted consistent with the unit owner’s preferences, if identified.
Another frequent mistake with elections occurs after the voting has concluded. Boards mistakenly tabulate the ballots secretly. The Illinois General-Not-For Profit Corporation Act of 1986, and the Condominium Act permit candidates and/or inspectors to be present for the tabulation of ballots.
It is our recommendation that all association boards, not simply condominiums, retain ballots for at least one (1) year in the event the validity of the election is challenged.
Re: Election Mistakes (Part II – Proxies/Tabulation).
ReplyDeletePlease post the source which you have quoted.
Thank You!
Source for the previously submitted information.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lplegal.com/12-common-board-mistakes/