Let's party like it is 1999 - Another Mud Pit Eliminated

One step at a time, slogging through one mud pit at a time. "Mud pit" is a metaphor for the problems dumped by previous owners and boards, upon me and the boards from September 2010 to the present.  It is also a description for a real situation.

1999
I recently reviewed my documentation for the association. Back in 1999 this association allocated $20,000 to reserves, or slightly more than $59 per owner, per year. That was about 2.25% of the annual budget. This information was provided to me after a conversation with management and my attorney.

Wow. At that rate, this association would collect sufficient funds in 85 years to do the roofing project the board of 2002-2003 decided upon. Don't misunderstand me. This association would have collected nothing for streets, driveways or any of the common elements. In far fewer than 85 years this place would have been beyond a dump. It had only taken 24 years to run it into the ground.

Recently, a former board member expressed his concern. We are currently allocating about 33% of our annual budget to reserves. Where was he in 1999, when boards allocated a little more than 2%?

In a recent post about the situation in 2001, which is the year I considered purchasing here I said this: "Back then, we were experiencing "entropy." In science, "entropy always increases and available energy diminishes." In other words, back in 2001 this association was dying."

Yes, those boards and the owners at BLMH apparently did decide to do their best to kill the association. No wonder that a few years later a long term board member stated to me "You can slap some paint on a pig, but it is still a pig." Back in the "good old days" this association spent money on utilities, painting 1/5 of the buildings each year, the janitorial contract and on the landscaping. If there was any money left over, it was then spent on other maintenance. So I guess that board member was really telling the truth.

Back in 2001, the budget was $280,063 for utilities, snow removal, janitorial, grounds maintenance, and utilities. Back then this association budgeted $5,000 for water and $60,000 for electric. Our maintenance and grounds (that's maintenance and landscaping) was budgeted at $135,000 for the year and there was nothing spent on tree maintenance or drainage. The budget for total common area maintenance which includes these items was $191,000. For the next year, the board cut the budget for these items to $154,536.

The  can was apparently being kicked down the road.

Return to the current Reality, 2016
However, that was then and this is now.  Recent boards have spent nearly seven years dealing with and addressing long term issues, including a failure to fund reserves and perform some essential maintenance. Here's an example from what should have been a simple problem. A nearby owner said this about our efforts to deal with the "Mosquito Glade" which formed during every significant rainfall on the walks and grounds behind two buildings:

"I would like to THANK the board of Briarcliffe Lakes for the wonderful green grass outside my patio door. My patience has finally paid off after at least ten years of crabbing. So once again, THANK YOU!"

I appreciate that owner's sentiments, but I do get a lot more damning emails than empowering ones.

The above photo is a cut from my YouTube video of that location on August 3, 2010. That's normally the dry season here. So that view of walks and lawns is something typical of what occurred in spring, and early summer as well, or during any significant summer rainfall. Notice all of the trees which provided the shade? Those were planted by the developer because this location was one of the first built and they wanted to show some foliage. After 30 years the area was overgrown, trees were intertwined and the place was a mud pit. Three walks were underwater. This was exacerbated when boards in 2002-2007 decided to add additional gutters on the buildings along the garage side, as part of our HOA roofing project. Those gutters directed water into concentrated areas. In the photo above, the downspout added after 2010 funneled even more rainwater into the area in this photo.

So we had a small pond forming with each and every rainfall of more than 1/3 inch. This carried soil onto the walks, and the deep shade prevented grass from growing. Boards failed to put in ground cover. So our HOA had our own little swamp. BTW, some couldn't figure out why property values were falling. A lack of reserves, a scarcity of maintenance solutions, and unhappy owners.

That doesn't sound like a formula for fulfillment or success to me.

This was indicative of the mess I inherited in September, 2010. Our major street had failed 8 years after replacement, there were water mains bursting, garage floors failing, about half our roofs were 18 years old (or older), about a third of our driveways crumbling. streams failing, a building settling, patio replacements incomplete, multiple drainage problems, etc., etc. ,etc. And then there was the reserve study which indicated a need for multiple 10% fee increases and a $1.5 million panel and trim replacement project. Oh, yes. That was a banner year. While we can argue about the individual issues, it is the cumulative effects that are more important.

The above photo is the same area of the "Mosquito Glade" today. You can see the new downspout which added rainwater to the area. Not visible in the photo is the incredible, but subtle work done to create a shallow swale and carry the runoff to the walk, and from there into the street and to a nearby storm sewer entry. To accomplish this we had to lower that walk about 18 inches, and put in a retaining wall. "Another simple problem as determined by our uninvolved owners."  This is indicative of the approach I have taken for each and every project here.

Here is a longer view of the same area; this was once deep shade, overgrown with intertwined trees and mud, and frequently underwater:

Why did it take so long?
No excuses, but when boards decided in 2002-3 to embarked on a really expensive program for fancy roofs, added gutters and downspouts but made no allowance financially or otherwise to deal with the consequences, well, it takes time and money to change the course. I appreciate that those in our
"instant gratification" or "entitlement" society might have some difficulty grasping the magnitude of the problem and the fact that something that takes 20 years to create could take a few years to correct.

After attempting to figure it out, four members of a board after 2008 simply walked. They realized a "neighbors club" wasn't going to get the job done.

I do understand. This is a mostly thankless job that requires determination and financial acumen. It requires a really long term perspective. Certainly not a job for the "hip shooters" or politicians in society. For every email I get thanking me for whatever it is I did, I get many more cursing me. A few years ago I even got nails driven into the tires of my car, and more than once.

How to shift a HOA?
I decided to tackle the problems directly and do what I could to convince the boards to deal with the issues. I also decided to open up the Newsletter and expand it into a really informative, but possibly boring fact sheet about this association.  Interestingly, some were resistant and some were so resigned that they refused to believe that change was possible. Today, a few prefer to pretend the problems remain insurmountable, the water mains will fail and that how this has been achieved was simple luck. Hogwash! On the other hand, that makes the naysayers invaluable, as the seers of failure.

This specific project, which is really a small one, took more than a few conversations with the contractor, management and me to figure out the best way to do this. It took some surveying to determine the actual change in elevation to the east and to the west, to see which was the better approach. It took some discussion about where best to simply send the water. It took further measurements after JULIE told us where the natural gas, phone, cable and power lines were. We needed to determine just how deep those power conductors were, before I could commit to a plan and place it before the board.

Then I got a budgetary number for the approximately 75 feet of replaced walkway, and grounds work to accomplish this. As a maintenance/project item we prefer to use sod for large areas, and that was the approach. We can't wait for grass to grow to keep the soil in our sculpted swales in place. Nor do we have "an army of handymen" to pluck the weeds.

Even after all of this planning, it was determined a small tree tucked into the corner of a building should be replaced, so we can properly grade the area. That tree, because it was planted immediately adjacent to the building has been hacked and trimmed many times. It was one I decided not to remove in the first stage of the project. This is consistent with multiple board decisions to "save our trees". But dealing with water runoff from board dictated roofing projects is also a requirement. You will note that downspout. It didn't exist prior to the time the roof was replaced. Prior to this, water could flow to the front of the building. Now it is directed to the rear. Multiply this problem by 84 and you get some idea of the magnitude of the the problem we've been facing with the new roofing project. Ditto for the problem at 84 entrances.

You will notice another one of those 84 new downspouts in the photo below. That water flowed into the "Mosquito Glade." The hacked tree is still waiting to be removed, so we can properly do the required drainage work. Multiply this by 168. 84 entrances and 84 building rears.

A multi-step solution
First, I had to get the trees thinned out. In a HOA where everyone "loves the trees" this can be an issue, and was. I mean, we all love our trees and grounds, but when push comes to shove, a lot of owners simply don't want to spend any money to maintain them. Ergo the $0 tree maintenance budget for 2001. In 2002 a board relinquished and budgeted $15,000 for that purpose. In fact, even the Landscaping Director in 2009, when confronted with the condition of our ornamentals and their age, stated to me "They live a long time" in response to my concern as an owner about the fact that most ornamentals only thrive for 25-35 years, and we really needed to budget for the failure of hundreds of trees. In 2008 this HOA was 30 years of age, as were most of the trees. Some, including the weeping willows on the property were even older.

After thinning out the trees in the "Mosquito Glade", this permitted additional sunlight to dry out the mud pit. This was not a real solution, simply a stop-gap measure.

It took another few years to get this to the top of the queue. In the mean time I, as Architecture and Maintenance Director had to replace 70% of the roofs on the property (about 30), replace our failed major street, replace about 300 feet of water mains, do stream maintenance (significant concrete repairs), replace about six garage floors, about 30 driveways, provide drainage improvements to deal with the rainwater and spring melt runoff of the extended, relocated roof gutters at about 50 entrances, replace a failing bridge and the sinking common area patio it led to, complete the concrete patio project suspended about a decade earlier, and of course, figure out how to prioritize this, present it to boards over a span of six years and determine how to pay for all of this.

During the same time, our boards also spent tens of thousands of dollars on tree removal (old willows, dying ash, etc.) and so on.

My point is, there are a lot of plates to keep suspended here. And that included the fireplace fiasco.

So it is finally, in the fall of 2016 that I am able to complete this project. It is typical of hundreds of projects in the HOA. That's what I mean when I say to owners "We are catching up on a maintenance backlog."

It is also why boards in HOAs such as this really need a long term perspective. We've had boards which survived only 2 years. On the other hand, becoming a boat anchor isn't all that empowering or effective, either. We've had a few of those, too.

This is typical
This project, which in the scheme of things cost this association little money, as compared to the roofs, driveways and Lakecliffe street replacement, is in fact typical of the problems larger HOAs face. We all have limited budgets and we do need to prioritize projects.

Some boards prefer to kick the can down the road, and some like the power, forcing owners to come and beg, so the "squeaky wheels get the grease." What a terrible way to run a HOA!

Responsible - What Does It Mean?

"Responsible" is a word that we use from time to time. I use it, for example, when I say "responsible finances." But what does that mean? A couple of years ago, I used that and my statements got twisted. When I advocate "responsible finances" it seems some decided this meant that  "Norm is in favor of high fees." How did they get to that conclusion? By what leap of faith? I think certain statements are rubbish and pure politics.

Free Speech
This country prides itself on free speech. So it's possible to say just about anything.  "Norm is in favor of high fees" is a perfectly legal thing to say. It is untrue and inaccurate, but you can say it. Why do people say these things? Perhaps they have a secret agenda. Perhaps they simply don't like "Norm." That's fine.  I may not like someone and I may not understand someone. So I can say whatever I wish? Let's use another example, is it responsible to tell people that "Norm is dangerous?" This word means "able or likely to inflict injury or harm” on others. But it's a free country, you say? So I can say that? What are the consequences for the listener, the person I say that to?

If you were told that a certain someone living down the street was "threatening" or "dangerous" or "hostile" how would you react? If you were a woman living alone and you were told that about your neighbor, how would you feel? Would you think you are safe and that you live in a nurturing, comfortable environment, or might you experience apprehension and fear?

Another example. How would you feel if you were told that there were suspicions of financial wrongdoings on the part of management or by the board. Lets add to that. How would you feel if you were told the money in this association is poorly spent, or frivolously spent? Or that the board was trying to raise fees "as high as possible!"

The Possible Consequences
After months (years?) of exposure to some of the previous examples, I think some people would begin to experience concern about their financial well being, and the health of this association. I think some people would worry more about the perceived and gossiped "special assessment" or "terrible fee increase" that is rumored to be coming. Would you feel better and sleep better at night after being told these rumors and gossip not just once, but many times? Would you be more trusting of your management or the board?

I say that after hearing this stuff, and hearing it repeatedly, most normal, sane, competent people wouldn't feel very well. They might notice there is a small knot in their stomach, they might find they are worrying more about money. Financial or political news on the TV might seem more ominous.

Responsible Finances
To me "responsible finances" means on a personal level, living below my means. Same for the association. It means being careful with the collection and with the spending of money. It means providing for the present and saving for the future.

For example, if someone owes you a debt and refuses to pay, what do you do? If you are "living on fixed income" and that annuity check doesn't arrive, do you just sit there, or do you get on the phone and call to collect? Remember, if you don't you won't be able to pay for that Nicor bill or groceries. So you call. Are you being fair? Of course you are. How would you feel if the insurance company on the other end of the phone said "You're not being fair.  We're going to call someone. We're going to call the state's attorney!" or said "You're picking on me" or "that's repression." No it isn't. It's an agreement and a debt, and if you are unable to get that annuity check, then you won't be able to pay your bills.

Well, this association is also "living on fixed income." Your board and management are attempting to maintain the standards in this association and by that I mean, responsibly maintain the property.  That means, save money to replace roofs in a timely and fair manner. That means replace driveways and repair garage floors. That means keep the streams running, the lights lit, the water on, the garages and hallways cleaned. The budget to do that in 2011 was determined 10 months ago. This association lives on the timely fees graciously paid by 336 owners each and every month. We're living on "fixed income." Our CDs are getting less income than yours. Why? Because this association is a business, whether owners here want to believe that or not. But the banks do. So they offer this association much lower interest on Money Markets, CDs and so on.

If people tell you otherwise, I say they are feeding you rubbish, and they are tearing you and this association down. If you engage in these types of conversations, then you are contributing, too!

Responsible Ownership
Think of it this way. You own a piece of this association and each of your owner neighbors also own a piece. It isn't "your view" and it isn't "your building". Your neighbors own a piece of your building! You and your neighbors each own a piece of every building, tree and shrub on this property. You also each own a small piece of every sidewalk and all of the lawns and streets. If you think your "piece" is the building you live in, the stream outside your window, the street you are on, or the driveway outside the garage, you are missing the big picture. You "own" a small piece of each and every other throughout the association. What you can say is truly "yours" is your unit. That's it. Anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know what they are talking about.

The association is responsible for the maintenance of all of those shared, or "common" elements. You are responsible for the maintenance of your unit. What you also own are "your" heating and air conditioning, windows, garage door, gas line, water and waste lines, and the electrical system from the meter all the way to your outlets. Those are yours and you are free to spend as much or as little of your money as you want, to keep them spotless and painted and in 100% working order. What you do is your business, as long as you keep the rules in the process.

So when you pay "your" fees and maintain your unit, you are being a responsible owner, and your neighbors are grateful. Paying your fee each month means that their view will be maintained, too. It also means that some of your neighbors on the other side of the association will get a new roof, or a new driveway. That will happen because you paid your fees.

When that water main breaks on your street, or a tree falls in a storm, that will be repaired and cleaned up because of your neighbors financial contribution to the association.

So everyone contributes and everyone wins. That's the way it should be with "neighbors."


Comments, Corrections, Omissions, References

Note 1.  I've read a few wonderful articles on the subject of "Your Castle is Part of Everyone's Castle" and the point of those articles is what I'm attempting to convey here.

Note 2.  I've decided that being a reaction to malicious stuff and that includes gossip is not a good thing. I've decided to take the high road. Honest and responsible communication is one way. 

Some Issues with the Most Recent Newsletter and Meeting Posting

I raised several issues which included the June newsletter with the board. This was voiced during the "Homeowners' Forum".

First, I was concerned that the board had decided to post an advertisement for a unit owner, who happens to be a handyman. I asked what criteria was used for approving this advertisement. Our Communications Director seemed confused by my questioning and did not give me a direct answer. I persisted, and I was told two things:

1. The advertisement is for a resident and is therefore not an advertisement. Any business of a resident can be posted in our newsletter.
2. She stated that a precedent had been made in 1997 in a newsletter.

I asked if the board had approved the advertisement. Her statements indicated that board approval was not required as far as she is concerned.  I asked if the "handyman" had the proper licensing, insurance, bonds and so on. I didn't get an answer and then I said "so the board, and specifically the CD has decided that the association will take on the responsibility and risk if this "handy man" does damage, or is injured or causes injury." I did not get a direct answer. I then persisted and asked "if any unit owner and specifically myself, were to write an advertisement for anything or service I could perform, would it be printed?" Our CD responded that yes, it would be printed "as long as it isn't pornographic". I stated to the board that as far as I was concerned, an advertisement in the newsletter is a recommendation of that business or service by the association. That would be a reasonable assumption and conclusion on the part of someone reading the newsletter, wouldn't it?

During the interchange, another board member interjected "perhaps we should print a disclaimer" and I pointed out that the advertisement was already in circulation. A disclaimer would be a little late in this case. Perhaps there should be some ground rules for the newsletter?  I stated that this discussion had occurred at earlier board meetings, and that the CD had stated that she wanted to post residents or unit owners' "ads" in the newsletter. The board in 2009 decided not to do this, after an association meeting discussion about such postings representing tacit approval by the board, of what was contained in the ads. There had also been concern about unit owners and residents conclusions that these advertisers had been screened and approved by the association. The board at that time did not want to take on that responsibility. However, I stated at the June meeting that now with a new board, the CD had finally gotten her way. 

As for the CD's position that a similar advertisement was contained in the newsletter in 1997 and is therefor acceptable due to precedent,  I can only observe that the "precedent" of the 2009 board which decided that such ads were not in the best interest of the association, that "precedent" was ignored by our CD. She was our CD then as she is now. However, she now has a more compliant and more gullible board to deal with.

I can only wonder why such a position of "precedence" wasn't taken by the CD when the time to vote for a fee increase came before the board. The precedent for most of the previous 10 years was to vote "yes" if for no other purpose than to keep fees in line with the increased cost of utilities, suppliers and contractors, etc. However, as has been frequently the case, any position is justified if one can find a precedent, any precedent, to point to as an excuse for a specific vote or action. This is what politicians frequently do to justify their actions; find some statistic or information, take it out of context if necessary and proceed with their desired course of action. The "precedent" of the 2009 board deciding that such ads were not in the best interest of the association, that "precedent" was ignored by our CD. 

Second, I objected to the order of business on the posting for the Association meeting. That posting placed the "Homeowners' Forum" before the "New Business". I viewed this as a covert attempt to shut out unit owners and prevent unit owners from making comments to any new business. I objected on that grounds and stated that this order of business had been posted during some previous meetings, that unit owners had objected during the meetings for the order of business and that the board had agreed to adhere to an order of business in which the unit owner forum occurs after the  "new business" discussion of the board, but before the "executive session" which is closed to unit owners. I requested that the unit owners be given the opportunity at this meeting to address the board after "new business" session. The CD didn't see the problem, but the board did not object to my position.

Comments, Corrections, Omissions, References
================================

1. My issue and concern about the newsletter is very general. The newsletter is a representation of this association. The newsletter and its contents represent us, the unit owners. The newsletter is not a political document and should not represent the position of the board or of a single board member. The board, in performing its duties as fiduciaries and representatives of us, the unit owners, should be aware of that and act accordingly. Apparently, as in many other issues, I am among the small minority here at BLMH. 
2. There seems to be little interest in this board, overall in acting as representatives of all of the unit owners. If a single unit owner or resident, which includes our renters, has an issue or problem, the board seems to take the position that it must accede to that one person's position. Is that representation? I also object to the use of the term "residents" by board members. This is a continuation of previous attempts to elevate renters to the same status as unit owners. In certain aspects, that is acceptable. However, renters do not pay association fees and can not vote on association matters. That distinction seems to be something that must be undermined by members of this board.