Is This Sign Difficult to Understand?

At a recent association meeting, a board member stated that "some residents were confused by the entrance signs."

It's unclear who these unnamed persons are, but it was suggested that because of the confusion, the board should consider changing the signs. There was no specific recommendation made of how to help the confused resident(s). The board did not discuss this further in the presence of owners.

This post includes a photo of one of two signs which are at each entrance. I assume this is the sign that is the source of the problem. I have posted a revised sign which would be more consistent with the association's current approach to rules and regulations.

To explain the problem, each entrance has two large signs. The first is shown on this post, The second sign is a standard, bright blue on white,  "WARNING" sign stating that vehicles will be towed, who will do the towing and how to retrieve your vehicle if it has been towed. I didn't reproduce that sign here.

These signs, combined, make it clear that there is "no public parking" at BLMH, and what the consequences of violation will be. (Note 1).

Perhaps the problem, as with many rules here at BLMH, is really about "why do we need these inconvenient rules?" Of course, these rules are part of the social structure that makes this a community. So is the problem really about a few inconvenienced owners who complain to the board? Is it also about board members who are committed to satisfying these owners? (Note 3).

The signs we see on entering our community and which I photographed and posted here, clearly state "Parking Subject to the Regulations of Briarcliffe Lakes Manor Homes." Those regulations prohibit boats, campers, trucks of certain sizes and commercial vehicles. They also prohibit garage and estate sales.  (Note 2).

However, is that so difficult to understand? To be honest, the rules do at times inconvenience me, and I suppose they do others. For example, I have an old sail boat and I'd love to store it in one of the parking lots. So what if it takes up two parking spaces and inconveniences a few neighbors? If I parked it here, that would work for me, and that, it sometimes seems, is what ultimately counts at BLMH.  As an owner once shouted at an association meeting "What do we get for our money?" I guess his point was that we should each take as much as we possibly can. So, why not push the rules to the limits?


Perhaps, what is being suggested would be a change in signage to something like this:

If rules don't work for a few, then why should the board enforce them? Why not disregard them instead of inconveniencing an owner or two? If no one complains, everyone is happy, is the logic.

If too many owners complain, then perhaps the board will enforce a rule. It's to be a tug of war between opposing positions. The problem for the board might be "how to keep everyone happy?" The answer is, "we can't." Nor are we supposed to. I see nothing in our charter, bylaws, rules & regulations, or the Illinois Condominium Act, which state that it is the duty and responsibility of board members to keep the owners happy. Common sense and experience also tell me that it is not possible for people "to be completely satisfied." So why would we or board members even attempt this?(Note 3).

I can only wonder what the next step will be? Will it be to remove these signs?  (Note 4).

Perhaps someone can enlighten me?

Here's a photo of one of our "confusing" signs:
This is the sign currently posted at our entrances. It is un-retouched. 

Comments, Corrections, Omissions, References, Miscellaneous News

Note 1.  The sign above is one of those hints that BLMH is an unusual community. It's a PUD. Click on this link, to go to a post for more information: 

 Benefits of Owning a PUD - October 12, 2010

Note 2. A former board member related a story to me about an estate sale that was held on the property a few years ago, in violation of the rules. There were complaints, and it was reported that there were cars parked on lawns, blocking owner's driveways and garages, etc. But, the argument is and has been "it couldn't happen here." It might be useful to quote George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Note 3. In the area of rules, I too am somewhat confused. Why is it that one or more board members are willing to take up the complaints or viewpoint of those who are opposed to enforcement of rules, or break them? Yet, these same board members, ignore owners who state that they want the rules enforced? At the annual meeting, one owner stood up and said she didn't want to "live in a ghetto." She admitted that was an exaggeration, but her point was that rules need to be enforced, including the trashing of sofas, mattresses, and other discards while tenants move out, or in advance of garbage pickup day. 

I find it confusing that people complain to the board about the difficulties they have in selling their units in this terrible real estate market, and then the board looks the other way for other inconvenienced residents. 

This somewhat capricious approach to rules enforcement was culminated by the posting of a political endorsement of a board candidate by the R&R Director, in violation of the rules. That led me to conclude that rules enforcement is going to continue to be arbitrary and inconsistent here at BLMH, to the detriment of owners. It seems that rules are only to be kept if they are convenient. I inconvenient, they are to be ignored. 

Perhaps with more pressure from residents, the board will shift to a more consistent and pro-active stance. However, I now see a bench in the common areas, which I understand was placed by an owner. I'm sure another 335 unit owners probably have things they would like to place on the lawns, or modifications to the exterior of the buildings. How about a portable gazebo or two, a shady rest, a portable garage, custom painted doors, decorations all over the exterior, special awnings to keep the sun out, etc. These would each benefit various owners, so why shouldn't we be allowed to do whatever it is that benefits each of us?  Why not any and all modifications to the limited common areas? I'm somewhat tired of the color of my lobby, the color of the door, my drab garage door, etc. How about something lively and less "retro?"

Note 4. Continuing this line of thought, if paying the association fees are also an inconvenience, then why should we? These are difficult economic times. Perhaps anyone with frozen wages should get a freeze on the fees. Someone working reduced hours should get a reduction in fees. Those unemployed should get a suspension of fees until they are again employed. Finally, if you are unemployed and your "unemployment compensation" runs out, perhaps the association should start paying you to live here. Let those of us who can afford it, pay the fees. The rest of us won't. Of course, we all expect to get a new roof, a new driveway and we expect the association to respond to any complaints and write a work-order for each and every repair. However, I suppose if this situation were to occur, that someone else, like me or you, should pay the bills. Is that a reasonable definition of community at BLMH? I realize that such a thing would be an extreme example of a well-meaning but misguided owner or board member.  I work with clients in industries in which the unemployment reached an "official" 18.2%. I understand the extreme difficulties which some are facing today. However, I also understand that for an association to operate, it must have funding. Funding to pay for maintenance, our newsletter, and all manner of services and replacement projects, such as our roofs. These times will pass. We had a nasty recession (two actually) in the 1980s. We will again experience growth, more normal employment and better times. BLMH needs to continue to prepare for the future and take care of business. That business includes doing sufficient things to maintain the property. 

After watching the rules enforcement for the past two years, I must say that I am glad that in general, fee collection isn't in the hands of the board. In some respects it is; the board is involved with owners who are delinquent or tardy. The board has the power to set fees and could, I suppose, waive collection. It's important to remember that the board makes all decisions at BLMH. Our managers, maintenance company, cleaning and landscapers are all "employees" who follow the direction of the board in all things, and are hired and fired by the board.