The Future and Where to Go from Here?

The board elections have been completed, the vote tallies are in, and we have three new members on the board. Congratulations to them. To the other members of the board and to the members who have lost in this election, I say "THANK YOU" for all that you have done to get this association to where it is today.

I began this blog as an exercise. The original purpose was to post my personal "adventures" and observations as a BLMH Condo Unit owner. During the campaign of the ROC, I became aware that the communications system in place at BLMH was inadequate from the perspective of countering falsehoods, rumors, or erroneous statements; all of the things that some campaigns generate. I decided that my blog would become a dissenting voice to the ROC so as to provide a measure of balance and fairness to the campaigning juggernaut.

The ROC campaigners ran on a slate which included improved communications. Now that the election is over I expect that they will keep that promise and provide an official BLMH website, open to all residents and which supports a true dialog between residents and the board. So my blog could revert to what is was before, a reflection of my observations in the pastoral and sometimes sleepy community that BLMH appears to be, or, I can use it to be of service to that community.

At this moment, I am inclined to become a more visible and vocal part of the residents of this community, somewhat like a watchdog. While I do want to be of service and make a contribution, this is not simply altruism on my part. As I have stated previously we the owners of BLMH are bound as a group who share shelter and a significant investment. I have a personal vision of where this association should be in 5, 10 and 30 years. I have the past promises of the board on how the reserve contributions I make will be spent. My personal financial contribution to that endeavor is about $30 each month to a fund for the declared purpose of replacing our roofs and another $16 each month to a fund for replacement and repair of paving, concrete, masonry, carpeting, and lake restoration. (This based on the actual budget for the year 2006). I want to see this association grow in a manner consistent with my vision, protect my investment and see those programs to fruition.

What about you?

Let me know where you want this blog to go. You can email me at:

letmethinkaboutthisblog@gmail.com

How to Use this Blog

Instruction on navigating and using this blog

This blog is arranged chronologically, that is, each new or current entry I make is at the top. Entries are called “Posts”. Previous or older “Posts” are arranged beneath the current one.

So as you scroll down this blog you will see “Posts” arranged from the most current to the older, and eventually you will get to the oldest post.

How to Make a Comment
At the bottom of each “Post” there is an opportunity to make a comment and read the comments left by others. All you have to do is click on the pencil symbol to open the window for entering your comment. Or, click on the word COMMENTS, at the bottom of the post and which looks like this:

Each comment is public. So be courteous. If you choose to leave personal information, such as your name or phone number, you should be aware that it can be viewed by anyone. So I suggest you DO NOT do that. You can use a nick name or if you want, something like “Thames Resident”.

To leave a comment, once that you have clicked on the pencil symbol or the word COMMENTS, you will be taken to a window where other comments are listed, and which includes a pane called "Leave your comment". Once you are there:

1. Type your comment in the box, and then in the CHOOSE AN IDENTITY section click on the circle (bullet) to the left of "Name/URL".
2. Then type the name you want to use. In the example below, I chose the name "Tree Lover on Thames". If you consistently use the same name, I'll get to know you. However, anyone else can use your name, so you could be impersonated. The advantage of the blog comments is you can leave a message for others to see, you can see what other people are saying, or what the same guy has said 200 times! HOWEVER, THE ONLY WAY TO GET A MESSAGE TO ME SECURELY IS VIA EMAIL!
3. Finally, click on the box "Publish Your Comment" to send your comment on its way!
   

How to Email me
If you want to reach me directly, you can do so via email. The email address I use for my blogs is:

letmethinkaboutthisblog@gmail.com

How to Get to Older Posts
As you scroll through the posts, you will eventually get to a point where this message appears:

Older Post

All you have to do is click on "Older Posts", and you will be taken to the next group of older posts, which otherwise are not visible. After you read the next group of posts, you will again see “Older Post” at the bottom of the page. Clicking on it will get you to the next group. You can repeat this over and over, until you finally get to the oldest, or last post.

How to Get to Older Posts Arranged by Topic
There is a much faster way to get to older posts. That method uses the labels of the post. At the base of each post, you will see the following:

“Posted By” refers to the person who wrote the post. That’s me, and my nickname was “What the Heck”, but I have since, simply changed this to display my email address, which is "LetMeThinkAboutThisBlog@gmail.com".

Beneath that are “Labels”. These are topics and if you click on any topic, for example, “Condominium Board”, it will take you to the blog posts that have that label and contain text about those topics.

Another Way to Get to Labels (otherwise known as TOPICS)
Another way to get to the topics is from the right of the screen. As you scroll down, you will see a list of labels which looks somewhat like this:
What you are looking at is a list of all the Topics and Labels. The numbers in parenthesis, for example (3) is the quantity of posts which refer to that label. If you click on any of these labels, you will be taken to posts that have these labels.

How to Get Back to the Top of the Blog

There is a quick way to return to the topmost entry, which is the most current, for the blog. If you have been navigating through the blog for a while, you may see this word:

Home

All you have to do is use your mouse to “Click” on the word “Home” and you will be returned to “Home”.

There are over a million blogs out there so you can have some fun looking for blogs, and seeing what other people are writing and posting.

HAPPY BLOGGING!

My Observations at the Board Elections

We were given the opportunity to meet the candidates for the Board. This included the three candidates of the ROC.

I learned that one of the ROC candidates has a dog, and a fellow candidate also has a dog. Two of the ROC candidates first met while walking their dogs. I also learned that this candidate had an issue of the speed bumps that were proposed for the BLMH. The speed bumps were never implemented.

This candidate acknowledged responsibility for posting the notices to all of the unit bulletin boards last year regarding fighting the alleged decision to ban pets at BLMH and the forthcoming assessment increase. I believe the candidate made a statement from the podium to justify the posting, which is in violation of "the rules and regulations" by describing a conversation with a fellow candidate who had cautioned this candidate about the rule violation. The candidate's response was something to the effect "that rule was stupid and so I posted the notices anyway." This candidate has made prior statements about being a long term, 22 year resident at BLMH. That means that this candidate is one who was present most of the years 1982 to 1998 and benefited from the very low and nearly ruinous assessments. So I can understand why this candidate would be upset about assessment increases and become a leader in a coalition to overthrow the board.

I was given the opportunity to ask one question of the candidates for the ROC. I had four pages of questions and it was difficult to choose. I also knew this was pointless. Proxy ballots had already been cast and with few unit owners in the room to hear any of this, what I or anyone on the floor or the podium said would have no influence on the election results. So much for a commitment to "open communications".

However, I used that one opportunity to direct one question to the candidate who was a 22 year resident and apparently the leader of the coalition. I asked about the statement that the ROC had made in their mailing several weeks ago about “the majority of us”. I asked if, at the time of the mailing “did the ROC have a majority”. I was not given a direct answer. Instead I was told that the ROC had members in 45 buildings. I pressed again “Did the ROC have a majority of UNIT OWNERS", and I gave the number of units that would be. I was finally given a partially straight answer, and that answer was to the effect "no". At that point, I knew that I and the other unit owners had been deceived. In my case, multiple times. So I pressed again “Then you deceived me in the mailing and in your letter of response!” I was not given an answer. I see this as an integrity issue. In a written letter to the ROC on September 11, I asked "I construe from your statements that you represent a majority.... 169 units....you have made certain statements and should be willing and able to back them up. If you don't I must conclude that some of the statements the ROC has made are false, and designed to deliberately mislead". I reiterated this several times in my letter. The written response "we make no exaggerated or false statements."

It is unfortunate that this election was based on deception. How many people voted for the ROC thinking they were voting for or with the “majority”? Was this a fraudulent election?

Whatever the election results, I have to say at this point, that this is not a good beginning. As I said in my comments written prior to the election “Honesty and the ability to manage are my greatest concerns about any of the board candidates.” This group has not been honest. In response to my questions they have repeatedly said "this was not about assessments" but in fact, this group was formed immediately after the budget meeting last year when, according to the leading candidate "angry people met in the street after the meeting". At the podium the candidate claimed responsibility for organizing the unit owners to attend and protest at the budget meeting. The material sent to all of us by the ROC stated in their FAQ that "none of the ROC candidates have had conflicts or disagreements with the current board." Literally that may be true; for the budget meeting, this candidate stirred up the owners who were then set upon the board. I guess that would be called a covert conflict on their part.

The ROC candidates do not at this point have my trust. If their candidates do win this election, they will have one year to get tangible results. I don’t mean improved color brochures or better xerographic copies. They will be evaluated first, on their ability to perform the "Powers and Duties of the Board of Directors, which each candidate signed. Second, in this case, they will also be evaluated on how they performed the duties and promises on the "ROC Slate of Objectives".

During the meeting, the current board president did not actually manage the meeting, but sat quietly while other board members fielded questions or dealt will issues from the floor. This was very unusual; it is my opinion the president was in resignation. For this reason the meeting was more unruly and less organized than most I have attended.

I will post the election results after they are made available.

My Comments Prior to the Board Election

Here is my perspective about the candidates and the core issues which influence my vote.

Since purchasing 6-1/2 years ago at BLMH our property values have consistently increased. I attribute that in part to the city we live in but also to the fact that the board has a program in place to preserve or enhance the value of our condominiums. To put it another way, the value of our units is in large measure due to the excellent condition of the BLMH complex and it's current financial health. At present, our financial reserves are growing, the complex is well maintained and the board has plans in place to handle some of the major maintenance issues, such as the repair of the roofs. This complex is 30 years old and there will be increasing challenges ahead as the BLMH infrastructure ages and continues to deteriorate. It is our board that will be charged with making the difficult choices we face ahead. It is our choice as unit owners to invest in BLMH or not. Either way, there will be consequences. I would hope that this association will continue to be well maintained so that my property values are protected and we will continue to have the wonderful grounds and views from our windows and balconies. However, these are privileges which are not guaranteed. They are purchased with the funds I put in my assessment envelope each month. The decision of how to use those funds will rest with the board we elect tonight.

For this election, there are two groups, comprised of members of the existing board and a new group called the “Residents of Change”. The ROC is represented by three candidates.

I have two sources of information for making my selection and voting. I have my observations of the actions of the current board, the budgets, the monthly newsletters and I have a campaign letter mailed to me by the ROC. In response to that campaign material I wrote a four page letter to each of the ROC candidates on September 11. The ROC response included comments to my letter, an email, a “FAQ” and an “ROC Survey”.

I conclude that this election is about resources, communications and possibly misplaced anger. This association has finite personnel on the board, volunteers and limited funds to address the concerns of the unit owners. How these resources are allocated determines the quality of life here at BLMH. As I have stated elsewhere (in my blog) and in my letter to the ROC, I see the unit owners as a diverse group. I also view “change” as not always a good thing. The unhappiness about increasing assessments is an expression about unwelcome change.

Each board member has what I call an “open ended” agreement. They have to do whatever is necessary to satisfy the “Powers and Duties” of their position and they have limited time each day to do that. So if there is anger or outrage on the part of some unit owners, perhaps it is because we have failed to support the board in fulfilling their duties. If there are complaints about “being heard”, then a larger question is what can we as unit owners do to assure that our board members are available to be heard? The issue is not about making other people wrong but about seeking solutions. The board is in the hot seat of providing the time and making the critical decisions. I am but a unit owner, mostly an observer, sitting in the audience and expecting it will all turn out to my personal satisfaction.

The ROC Candidates, in their material, make statements from which I conclude that they feel they would do a better management job than the current board. The only way to know is to elect them and find out. There are risks in doing so.

It is very easy for things to get out of hand, and simple decisions made with good intentions by our board can have consequences for many years. The assessment decisions made in the period 1982 to 1998 have today affected each and every unit owner living at BLMH. During that period, a decision was made to hold the increases in assessments to a low value, an average of 2.59% per year. During that period unit owners were apparently happy, even though the association was going broke. However, when my spouse and I conducted informal interviews of residents while making our decision to purchase, there were complaints about the increases to assessments in 1999 and 2000!

In my letter to the ROC candidates I asked a lot of questions about their positions regarding assessments and budgeting. Why? Because I don’t want a repeat of the decisions made in 1984 to 1998 and which culminated in the financial condition of this association. There is every indication that the board was the “voice” of the unit owners in that period and as such, some poor financial decisions were made. The ultimate result was last year’s meeting in which to quote the ROC candidates “outraged residents demanded a reduction in the proposed 8% increase”. I wonder if there were any outraged members attending meetings in 1984 after a 10% assessment increase? The following year, the assessment increase was 0%.

Unfortunately, the ROC candidates have not revealed to my satisfaction how they will provide better management of the BLMH. On the issue of rising monthly assessments which resulted in a stormy association meeting last year, the ROC has stated in a written response to my letter of September 11 that “Interestingly, you are only the second person to ask about the rising assessments! We've been surprised that that topic is not first on everyone's mind, but it seems that the other issues surrounding the board have taken precedence”. The ROC candidates stated in the response to my letter that “Our election is not about expenses and assessments” and in that same e-mailing to me, the ROC candidates also stated that the ROC was formed at “last year’s budget meeting when outraged residents demanded a reduction of the proposed 8% increase” [to assessments].

The ROC candidates also have stated in their communications to me that “being heard… is really what the residents care about now”. In that same response to my letter, they further stated that “The current system allows no communication. Again, see our [enclosed] FAQ”.

The ROC candidates say that communications is not possible, and people aren’t being heard. But they also say in their published material that we, the residents were heard and as a result the proposed 2008 assessment increase of 8% was reduced to 5.5%!

I am a bit confused by these and other conflicting statements made by the ROC candidates. It may well be that the ROC is a good idea, but their candidates aren’t up to the task of board management.

As a resident, I have successfully communicated with the current and previous BLMH boards. By “successfully” I mean that I received responses that included letters, memos and telephone calls. I have attended several monthly meetings and all but one annual election. Sometimes what I was writing to the board or the management company was acted upon in the way I wanted and sometimes it was not. However, whether or not the board and our management company do what I want as I express my complaints or requests is not a measure of successful communication. That is about outcome or results, which is a different matter entirely.

After receiving the response to my letter to the ROC candidates and reading it several times, I debated about meeting with them but I decided against it. It is my position that they need to generate this, and not simply echo back my letters to me. For example, I noticed that the printed material they issue is not dated and I suspect that the “FAQ” and “Survey” were generated by the ROC candidates from my letter of September 11.

I must admit that some of what the ROC candidates have stated in their letter and publications did concern me, and the tone seemed undermining. There are five items in particular. There is the statement about “a majority of us” in their first mailing to me, but their unwillingness to even give me the number of units in that alleged majority, their slate to champion what they think are “forward thinking ideas” and possibly repress what they construe as backward thinking ideas, their agenda of fear; i.e. the current board is to be feared and will “retaliate” on unit owners, their statements that “there is no communications with the board”, and their opaque agenda regarding the projects they would fund from our assessments.

After reading their response and their materials, I find the ROC candidates to be an enigma. There is no doubt they want to place themselves on the board. Their primary agenda seems to be “trust us” and we’ll do a better job than the other candidates and the current board.

Things at BLMH are not perfect. I know communications could be better. So the choice is to vote for a group professing change and who thinks they can do a better job and hope it all turns out, or vote for the existing board. Either way, I now have the knowledge that there are some unit owners who are very unhappy and will continue to press their agenda, whatever that is. As an individual who has made a living successfully “managing change” I know it isn’t easy and I also know as a successful businessman that some of the choices facing this board are “mutually exclusive”.

As for the ROC, I am most disappointed that they have chosen to use the fallout and consequences of responsible decisions made by this board as a springboard for their candidacy. Most notably the “outrage” of unit owners over the assessment increases. In their material to me, the ROC candidates have not promised that they can or will reduce assessments or expenses. Merely that they will “keep our assessments as low as possible”. Which implies that it is the belief of the ROC candidates that the current board is not. The ROC candidates unwillingness to make promises about the management of BLMH that affects the bottom line, that is, my assessments, leads me to conclude that they know the board is hamstrung by decisions made nearly 25 years ago or they are oblivious. Either possibility is chilling.

There is the problem of “outraged” unit owners and how they treat our volunteers. I must have missed most of the confrontational meetings. I wonder how our board has been treated by “outraged” unit owners or those who harbor “bad blood” as the ROC calls it? Would these “outraged” unit owners been less “outraged” after last years budget meeting if the assessment increase had not been reduced? Is this about “being heard” as the ROC candidates say, or is it really about getting our way?

Honesty and the ability to manage are my greatest concerns about any of the board candidates. Hindsight is wonderful and forward thinking may be desirable but what we really need is foresight.

Quoting Gandhi in the ROC literature was a nice touch but for the business of managing and running a condo association with a million dollar annual budget, I think the following is more appropriate:

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” George Santayana.
“A goal without a plan is just a wish”. Antoine de Saint-Exupery.

Assessment History

This is our Association Assessment History. The percentage information is from the "Welcome Packet" which is given to each unit owner. An updated sheet is available on request, or it is possible to use the budget information given to each unit owner each year to update that contained in the original welcome packet. Either way, the information is readily available.

To construct the chart, I used the percentage increase each year, and with a spread sheet, I plugged a starting amount into the spread sheet which, with all of the annual increases, yielded the current amount of my assessment. There may be rounding errors, but they should be trivial. I also calculated the "average" of all of the increases.

I have included some observations later in this post.

This is the table of values which was used to construct the chart above:

1978 = 35.00%
1979 = 22.00%
1980 = 26.00%
1981 = 25.00%
1982 = -12.00%
1983 = 0.00%
1984 = 10.00%
1985 = 0.00%
1986 = 0.00%
1987 = 5.00%
1988 = 0.00%
1989 = 12.00%
1990 = 5.00%
1991 = 0.00%
1992 = 0.00%
1993 = 6.00%
1994 = 3.00%
1995 = 4.00%
1996 = 5.00%
1997 = 3.00%
1998 = 3.00%
1999 = 11.00%
2000 = 11.00%
2001 = 9.00%
2002 = 6.00%
2003 = 7.90%
2004 = 6.50%
2005 = 5.80%
2006 = 5.40%
2007 = 6.00%
2008 = 5.50%

Here are a few of my observations from the above data.

The monthly assessment "starting amount" in my chart was $50.00 per month in 1978. By 1984 it had risen to $93.00.

While constructing the chart, I noticed the large assessment increases in the period 1978 to 1981. This was followed by a negative assessment, and then an assessment of 0% in 1983. If these "start up" years are removed from the table and from the calculation of "average", the assessment increases from the period 1984 to 2008 were 5.2% per year.

You will note in the table and chart that after four years of large increases, 1978 to 1982, the assessment was actually a negative 12% in 1982 and then 0% in 1983. In fact, there were 7 years in which the assessment was either 0% or a negative number, which was an assessment decrease to the unit owners.

As I noted on the chart, the average of all assessment increases is 7.29%. However, a consistent increase of about 6.10% each year would have yielded the same monthly assessment in 2008.

I have a few opinions about all of this.

As the writer of this blog, I have the opportunity to include my opinions.

One could ask, why would a lower annual percentage of 6.1% yield the same results as the actual, higher "average" assessments that unit owners have been paying? Higher increases are required to make up for years with 0% or negative assessment increases. Of course, actual costs do not always rise by consistent amounts each year. Economists say we passed through a decade of lower than usual inflation. Inflation has jumped the past few years and the average may be above normal for a few years. But we and they have no crystal ball.

In the table you will see large assessments in the early years. It is my understanding that this is not a unique situation. The builders sometimes provide an initial reserve amount. I have been told that in the case of BLMH there was NO initial reserve, so the "start up" was, as they say, a bit rough, and assessments were increased in jumps to cover the actual operating expenses, breakdowns, and post construction problems. After a few years the finances reached an equilibrium where assessments were at least equal to the costs of running and maintaining the association. At that point, if reserves are adequate, it might be possible for the increases of assessments to be reduced. That is what apparently occured at BLMH. However, I personally think it is a mistake to lower assessment increases to 0%. Why would I say that? Because costs are always increasing. It's due to that phenomenon called "inflation", or the erosion of purchasing power. Economists say long term inflation is normally about 4%. So it would be reasonable to expect operating expenses to increase by that amount at an absolute minimum. That's why I think assessments need to increase at an amount sufficient to offset inflation, or about 4% per year.

That is only part of the story. The cost of replacement must also be included in our assessment fees. Things do wear out, so in addition to utilities and maintenance items (painting, lawn care, snow plowing, etc.) we also need an amount in each assessment to cover replacement of things that wear out. These “things” are the common elements like roofs, street paving, curbs, electrical and plumbing infrastructure, patios, etc. Finally, other unforeseen events my also come into play. Large insurance increases, law suits, fire, broken water mains, etc. can all result in larger than anticipated expenses. Paying these will come from the reserves, which must then be replenished, and may require a larger than normal increase in the annual assessments. Or a special assessment.

I would therefore expect a unit owner’s monthly assessment fee to include dollar amounts to cover operating expenses, maintenance, reserves for replacement plus an additional amount to cover inflation.

If an association does not have adequate reserves, and it is my opinion that at one time this association did not, the monthly assessments must include not only money for expenses and replenishment of reserves plus inflation, it must also include an amount to build up the reserve that did not exist in the first place.

That is what the board has been doing. As I noted in an earlier post, when I purchased a condo here in 2001/2002, the association had reserves equal to about $300 per unit. That was in my opinion far, far too small an amount and it was also the opinion of an independent accountant who reviewed the financials at my request.

If an association does not maintain adequate reserves, then once we dig a financial hole, which financial planners sometimes refer to as "mortgaging our future" it can be difficult to dig our way out, because we not only must pay for ongoing operating expenses and repairs from funds currently assessed, but we must also pay a “hidden” special assessment each month to build up the reserves.

As I see it, that is what I have been doing for the past 6 years. If you look at the chart you will notice that it began sloping upwards in 1999. That coincides roughly with increases for the purpose of building up reserves. As I noted in an earlier post about where my monthly assessment went, about 19% last year was directed toward building up “reserves”. This is no different than a special assessment each month for a building fund for replacement of that roof overhead that is wearing out each and every day.

Perhaps it would be more correct to call it that on the bill for each month’s assessment instead of burying it the overall fee. In which case I am paying a $46.42 special assessment for roof, paving, lake restoration and concrete. Of course, that doesn’t change matters as my total bill is still the same!

Finally, there is the psychological damage when associations issue special assessments. I have read other blogs where unit owners rant about special assessments. In one case, a $2000 paving fee at another condo resulted in some harsh language about the management company. Owners are always concerned about their property values. When I inspected BLMH prior to purchase, I reviewed the assessment history. Frequent or large “special assessments” would have been construed as a negative.

If I were to attempt to sell my unit, I assume other perspective buyers would also do their “due diligence” and special assessments would not be helpful.

Here at BLMH our unit values have increased pretty consistently. I attribute that in part to the community we live in but also to the fact that the board has a program in place to preserve or enhance the value of our condominiums. To put it another way, the value of our units is in large measure due to the excellent condition of the BLMH complex and it's financial health. At present, our financial reserves are growing, the complex is well maintained and the board has plans in place to handle some of the major maintenance issues, such as the repair of the roofs.

Finally, is it possible for assessments to decrease? I don’t know. If we have sufficient reserves to do all of the repairs identified and if costs do not continue to spiral upward, then I would think the board would review the fees for reserves and see if they are excessive. As a former home owner, I know that roof repairs are required about each 15 years. However, this complex is 30 years old and other things, such as those that are buried underground, may also require reserves. The city we live in is spending $1 million more each year on street repairs than it did just a few years ago. At one time those repairs were covered by taxes collected from motor vehicles. Now, that $1 million difference is being paid from general revenue. According to the Mayor, this is a difficult thing to do.

It is our board that will be charged with making the difficult choices we face ahead. We too will feel the pressure of these cost increases. It will be our choice as unit owners to invest in BLMH or not. Either way, there will be consequences. I would hope that this association and it’s complex will continue to be well maintained so that my property values are protected and I will continue to have the wonderful views from our windows and balconies like that photo at the top of this blog. However, these are privileges and are not guaranteed. They are purchased with the funds I put in my assessment envelope each month.

The Cost of Our Utilities Over a Period of 5 Years

Here's a link to a blog I posted recently which gives some idea of our utility costs.

http://letmethinkaboutthis.blogspot.com/2008/09/cost-of-our-utilities-over-period-of-5.html

Residents of Change Summary of Documents

Here are the various links to the posts regarding the "Residents Of Change". These are for all posts prior to September 22, 2008. I've assembled them here to save you the trouble of hunting through this blog to find them.

The ROC Email response in response to my Email dated September 12, 2008:
http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2008/09/roc-email-response.html

My Letter of September 11 to the ROC Candidates:
http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2008/09/open-letter-to-roc-candidates.html

The ROC Letter in Response to My Letter:
http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2008/09/roc-letter-in-reponse-to-my-letter.html

The ROC Survey Document:
http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2008-09-15T06%3A55%3A00-07%3A00&max-results=7

Methods for Association to Reduce Costs

One of the ongoing issues for unit owners is the relentless nature of annual assessment increases. These are necesary to combat the ever increasing costs of energy, for example. In this year alone, electricity is supposed to increase 6-1/2%.

The association has high efficiency lighting, but there should be some other great ideas out there. If you have any suggestions, let me know.

Here are a few "energy and utility" cost saving methods that might be appropriate for consideraton. Of course, there are other areas of operation in which savings might be achieved.

Solar Power Roof Fans.
Variable Speed AC Drive (VS) for stream pumps.
Ban on use of association water for cleaning automobiles, etc.
Energy Credits applied to Roof Projects and improved insulation? Note (1).

I am certain there are other areas that we could address, such as ongoing maintenance items.

Notes and Comments:
(1) This is added after the presidential election. President-elect Obama has stated that he wants to promote energy initiatives. It's too early to determine what will occur, but there may be incentives applicable to our roofing project.

Projects Status

When we purchased our condo, we concocted a list of projects. With the exception of the kitchen, these were all considered to be "optional" and discretionary spending. However, building this list has kept me on task, and my spouse and I review it from time to time.

There was an inital "surge" of projects which we deemed absolutely necessary. We have budgeted funds and tackled the projects as soon as possible.

Since that time we have been saving on a monthly basis to handle these projects, as well as to build up an "emergency fund" or reserve. This is similar to what the association is doing to build up reserves for the roof and other large projects.

We have performed other maintenance, such as carpet cleaning, fixing the sliding door and screen on the patio, replacing the faucets in the sinks in both bathrooms, but these were relatively small projects that did not require work on or in walls, etc.

Here's a summary of the projects on the list and their status:

1. Repair leaky valve in hot water heater and repair damage = completed 2001.
2. Upgrade the kitchen = completed 2002.
3. Install new handles on Dining Room Cabinetry = completed 2002.
4. New wallpaper in closets, baths = completed 2002.
5. Upgrade certain doors = completed 2002.
6. Paint living room, hall, dining area = completed 2002.
7. Remove loose tiles in bathrooms, repair showers = completed 2002.
8. Upgrade spare bedroom to Library with bookcases = completed 2002.
9. New kitchen waste disposal = completed 2003.
10. Glider and Dining Furniture for patio = 2002m completed 2003.
11. New Bedroom furniture, paint and decor = completed 2004.
12. New sofa, chairs and area rug for Living Room = completed 2005.
13. Replace HVAC Compressor = Breakdown, completed 2005.
14. Art and decor for the living room = completed 2006.
15. New hot water heater, new floor in utilit room = completed 2005.
16. Newwasher and dryer = completed 2007.
17. Replace shower valves and faucet, guest bath = completed 2008.
18. Replace shower valves and faucet, main bath = partial, purchased parts 2008.
19. Upgrade in-ceiling insulation - not begun.
20. Upgrade main bath fixtures and cabinets - not begun.
21. Upgrade furnace and HVAC - not begun.

More Water Problems!

We have also had water in the garage. We share this with other unit owners and we each have a seperate overhead door. Last fall, I noticed that the asphalt had disintegrated at the base of the downspout. I took a couple of photos, including this one, and forwarded them with a letter to the management office. They responded with a "cold patch" of concrete.

That had a side effect. If the driveway is not kept clear, and for example, ice and/or slush collects at the downspout, it can prevent water from flowing downhill and we can have water in the garage. I have reported this to the management office. The same situation occurs if we get very heavy rain and wind from the proper direction. Water is then blown against the overhead door and flows under it. Sort of a miniature "storm surge".

Here are a couple of photos of this event. The water normally stands within about 4 inches of the garage floor. If the wind is from the proper direction, then the water is pushed against the doors and into the garage:

Rain, Rain "Go Away"

Interestingly, most of the "breakdowns" involving our unit have involved water. Fortunately, problems have been few and far between, and the management company and board are usually responsive. A roof leak incident was probably the "perfect storm". Oops!

From my experience, one of the things I do not like about being a unit owner, is the need for coordination and cooperation between management, contractors and neighbors and the lack of power in that process. As a home owner, I was accustomed to making decisions in which I had purchase authority. As a unit owner, I have no such authority or power with contractors or my neighbors. As a result, some simple problems can, and do become much larger ones.

I have kept copies of the letters I use to resolve these and other issues at the unit. I also have a "diary" and a task agenda. The "diary" keeps track of names, dates, conversations and so on. It's simply a day planner with notes. These get rotated out each year. The task agenda is used to establish priorities. I prefer to use letters as follow-up for conversations because they document what is going on. A letter is also a means of controlling what I say; conversations are less rigorous and it's easy to make verbal promises and agreements and then promptly forget about them. Then there are those dreaded "senior moments" that people keep warning me about. Letters are a form of documenting who promised what to whom, etc. I am also very careful that what I write is accurate. Of course, in the end you could say it is all my opinion. I prefer to view these as my "assertions". There is evidence to back up what I say. However, I do agree that this is from my point of view.

I have found that conversations can be very, very sloppy. That said, here's a couple of "water incidents".

A Leaky Water Heater

In April of 2002, our hot water heater's valve developed a minor problem and a drip. Not all of the water went down the drain in the utility room, which was only about a foot away. Unfortunately, a flaw in the floor caused some of the water to find it's way into the unit below, rather than into the drain per se. Our neighbor alerted us to the problem, which after inspecting their utility room, I was able to confirm. This was not easily resolved. I "capped" the hot water valve to stop the water "drip". I also called the general maintenance company recommended by our association and asked them to contact my neighbor to gain access to their unit and to provide me with an estimate of repairs. I'm reasonably "handy" but for liability reasons, I decided not to do the work in my neighbor's unit.

It took a while to figure out how the water was getting into the unit below. It was a very small trickle which did make it to the drain in the floor. After a few inspections from below, it was determined that water was running along the outside of the drain pipe. I stripped the tile from the floor above and determined that the cementatious underlayment had a crack. Water apparently found this path and ran along the outside of the drain pipe and into my neighbors unit. The contractor confirmed this from below.

I decided to cut the lip of the drain pipe, which was extended slightly above the level of the floor, patch the crack and the seam along the outside of the drain pipe where it passes through the floor, using epoxy cement. I then replaced the tile. I also extended the tile into the drain, so that water hitting the floor would be guided into it. However, to do this "right" would require replacement of the entire floor of 12 x 12 tiles with a single sheet of plastic vinyl. To do so would require a new hot water heater. The repairs to my neighbors ceiling were completed and they confirmed that the repairs were "satisfactory". Accordingly on May 16, 2002 we issued our check #1056 to the contractor, in the amount of $700. This was an expensive repair, in part because it took multiple visits by the contractor who stood on a ladder below with his head in my neighbor's ceiling and with me above pouring water from a bucket onto the floor. We eventually determined exactly what was happening and how the leak was getting into the unit below. I was then able to make repairs above, and that had to be completed before the contractor could replace the ceiling.

We decided to postpone replacement of the hot water heater until such time as I could also do the repair to the floor and install the vinyl waterproof floor. This was finally done in January 2007. At that time I replaced the floor with a single sheet of vinyl, put an aluminum pan under the new hot water heater, and sealed the entire edge with a vinyl cove base and generous amounts of silicone sealant. The vinyl floor was installed so that it extends over the edge of the drain. Any leaks in that room should not reach the unit below.

A Leaky Roof

In 2004, we developed a leak on the roof. It was traced to a missing cap on the chimney. However, the repairs took some time and my neighbor was very unhappy with me. It took quite a number of telephone calls, coordination with a contractor, and ultimately a letter to the management office. There was more than enough frustration to pass around and for a time we were not on speaking terms with one of our neighbors. This is the letter that finally got the problem resolved. I have deleted names, etc. but otherwise, this is the exact letter, spelling and grammatical errors included. On re-reading this, I was struck by a similarity to the premise of that movie "groundhog day":

July 21, 2004

To: Director of Management

Dear Sir:

This is to advise you in writing, of the UNSATISFACTORY and UNRESOLVED status of a problem at BLMH. What should have been a relatively minor problem, speedily repaired, has been anything but. I suppose I should be thankful this was not a major problem. However, this has gone beyond a simple nuisance and my neighbor below is a problem, as [he] would like to believe that any water entering [his] unit from above is my problem, my responsibility and can be controlled by me and that any resulting damage is my financial responsibility.

This was reported over 30 days ago to [the management company] (on June 16) but as of today has not been resolved. There is ongoing and spreading water damage to two units and a significant amount of water is collected in [my unit] each and every time it rains, with continuing and spreading damage to the utility room ceiling of the unit below. On June 21 and again on July 15, we were told by [the contractor] that this was a chimney cap problem. The parts were supposedly ordered after the June 21 inspection but in a second inspection on July 15 my spouse was told that the required parts had not been ordered. This morning I spoke with [so and so at the contractor] and he said that the proper cap is not immediately available and that he would attempt to make temporary repairs. However, I don’t know if this will be successful and prevent water entering the building.

I appreciate [the contractor's] efforts; I don’t know precisely why it has taken this long to solve this problem. My work requires extensive travel and so my spouse has been attempting to coordinate this to the best of her ability, with minimal success. As a consequence I have altered my business to permit me to be in the area for the next week or so. My neighbor below has requested that I pay for repairs to [his] utility room.

The bottom line is this. 35 days for minor repairs is excessive. It is my understanding the roof, chimney and caps, and flashing are the responsibility of [the association], not the unit owners. However, I am absolutely capable of orchestrating the necessary repairs and therefore, if this is not resolved by 5:00 pm on July 28, then on the morning of July 29 I will at my own expense hire the necessary contractors and make any and all necessary repairs to the roofing and/or chimney and related structures at [my address].

If I do have to bring in a contractor I will backcharge [the association] for the work. If, after issuing a backcharge I am not reimbursed within 30 days I will then deduct the amounts from my assessments until I am fully reimbursed. Further, and to avoid any confusion in this matter, I am a responsible owner not a renter and I do understand the difference and I believe I am acting accordingly.

To give you the complete story, the problem involves one or more roofing and/or chimney water leaks above [my unit] at [my address]. This has resulted in damage to both [my unit] and to the unit below it. However, I understand the damage to the unit below [my unit] is more extensive and includes bubbling of the utility room ceiling. Photos of [my unit] are enclosed and includes both the utility room and the adjacent bathroom ceilings in [my unit]. I do not have photos of the unit below, which is owned and/or occupied by [my neighbor].

Chronologically, this event began on Wednesday, June 16, 2004. As I stated, my work requires significant travel on my part and I was away that week. In fact, in one recent month I was on the road 29-1/2 days. This makes my involvement difficult and puts an additional burden on my spouse. However, I have altered my business for the next week or so, even though I should be at several clients out of state, so that this problem is fully and completely resolved. I digress.

On June 16, my spouse, reported to me that [my neighbor] knocked on our door at about 10:00pm to report water leakage in [his] utility room. My spouse investigated our utility room and found evidence of water leaking from above. She called me long distance about this. At 10:30pm [my spouse] called the night Operator at [your office] and reported the problem and requested assistance. [My neighbor] also promised [my spouse] that [he] would call [the management company], but we are unaware that [he] in fact, has ever done so, and according to [your contractor] they have no current work orders from [my neighbor].

On Thursday June 17, we had not received any response from [your office] so on Friday June 18 [my spouse] called [your office] during normal business hours and was told “there will be someone soon”.

On Monday June 21 [so and so] of [your contractor] arrived and investigated. [My spouse] advised him of the problem and after an inspection he advised [my spouse] that the leakage is occurring in the ductwork leading from the roof (this ductwork is compartmentalized, with inner and outer ducts, and according to [the contractor] there was water moving between the inner and outer). While he was in our unit I spoke with him via long distance telephone and he informed me of his findings and advised me that a chimney cap was missing. However, he declined to enter the attic and confined his inspection to the exterior of the roof and the utility room and bathroom. He advised [my spouse] that this would be corrected quickly, but that a chimney cover would be placed on order and so repairs could not be done immediately.

Upon return from my business trip, I made an inspection of my own. I entered the attic and looked for evidence or water leakage. Beneath the ductwork leading from the roof I installed an aluminum pan under a seam at a 90 degree elbow, in the area above the bathroom ceiling which is stained as indicated in the photo. At the time the duct was dry, but there was evidence of water (water marks) in that area of the duct. Also, it is possible that more than one section of ductwork is affected. However, the major leak is in the duct which goes through the utility room of [my unit] and to the unit below, and which I understand is causing bubbling and damage to the utility room ceiling in [my neighbor's] unit. I inspected that duct in my utility room in [my unit], but the water appears to be running vertically within the duct and is beyond my control. I also inspected the appliances in my utility room, including the HVAC unit, water heater, humidifier, washing machine and water and drain piping. The underside of the water heater and the entire floor was bone dry. There was absolutely no evidence of any internal leakage in the utility room. The nylon tubes which convey condensation from the HVAC exchanger to the drain and from the furnace humidifier were properly inserted into the floor drain. The humidifier tube was internally dry; the HVAC tube and had typical “scum” inside of the tube, but was freely conveying condensate into the drain.

I do understand there are several possible sources of water. These include and are not limited to:
1. Water from appliances and HVAC situated inside the utility room.
2. Faulty plumbing or drain piping within the utility room.
3. Roof leaks.
4. Faulty floor drain including cracked piping above the ceiling of the unit below.

Now, when the unit was purchased about 2 years ago, we discovered a faulty hot water heater drain valve. At that time we also discovered a crack in the cementatious floor of the utility room, and a defective drain which had a lip about 1/8” above the floor level. These all combined to channel water into the ceiling of the utility room below. A work order was issued to [your contractor] for which I paid $700. Work done at that time included removing floor tiles and sealing the cracks in the cementatious floor of the utility room, cutting the 1/8” lip off of the drain and sealing around the drain and floor opening with vinyl cement patch, installing a cap on the hot water heater drain to prevent any leakage, and repairing the drywall of the ceiling of the unit below. Since that time, there have been no further problems, until now.

To continue with the chronology, during and following rainstorms the week of July 5 we did collect water dripping from the ceiling above the utility room in [my unit]. Depending upon the severity and duration of the rain, each storm has resulted in about ½” to 1” of water accumulating in a utility pail I installed under the stained area of the ceiling. On July 5 [my neighbor] complained to [my spouse] about water dripping from the ceiling of the utility room in the unit [he] occupies.

[My spouse] again explained to [my neighbor] the cause of the problem and the status, and again and repeatedly suggested that [my neighbor] contact [the management company] directly for assistance in dealing with this problem.

On July 8 [my spouse] called [the management company] to determine the status of the chimney repair. She was advised that [the contractor] needs to be contacted by [us] directly as [the management company] was unaware of the status. [My spouse] left a voice message with [the contractor] and telephone tag ensued with [the contractor].

On July 13 a second appointment was scheduled with [the contractor] to occur July 15.

On the night of July 13, [my neighbor] again complained to [my spouse] of water dripping from [his] utility room ceiling. [He] insisted it must be an internal problem and convinced [my spouse] to have another contractor look into the problem.

On July 14 a contractor, “Mr. xxx” the handy man from [some company], arrived at our door.

According to [my spouse], Mr. xxx inspected the utility room and bathroom, and blows on the nylon tube existing the HVAC unit. He tells [my spouse] that he might have fixed the problem! From our unit, [my spouse] telecons [our neighbor] at [his] work as requested to give [him] a report and Mr. xxx gets on the phone and tells [my neighbor] that “he has solved the problem – it was the air conditioner”. At that point [my spouse] interrupts, but [my neighbor] refuses to discuss this with [my spouse].

I think [my spouse's] allowing Mr. xxx into the unit was a lapse of judgment, Mr. xxx apparently ignored the stains on the ceilings and would not check the attic. While he was there he offered to fix other miscellaneous problems and for whatever reason, [my spouse] assented. He look into a leaking flap valve within the bathroom toilet (ignoring the stains on the ceiling) and also tightened some of the handles on the bathroom water valves. Of course, all of this does absolutely nothing to resolve the problem of the leak(s) from above. It’s just a lot of cosmetic touches. For his service, Mr. xxx presented a bill, for which my spouse signed a check!! [My spouse] was quite upset that Mr. xxx told her that the AC might be the problem but then told our neighbor that it was the problem and he has fixed it!!

I have telephoned [the handyman company] and talked to Mr. xxx regarding [his] involvement. On July 20, 2004, I discussed my issues with Mr. xxx. I advised him that I completely disagree with his statement made to [my neighbor] that the HVAC in my unit is the cause of the water damage. I told him that I believe his statement was both incorrect and misleading. He attempted to say he did not place the blame on my air conditioner. I believe he did a disservice and in my telephone call I told him so. I told him I will not allow him or his firm into my unit in the future and have so instructed my spouse. His response was to hang up on me.

To support my position, during two inspections related to this problem, [your contractor] has not found any evidence of water damage from my air conditioner, or for that matter, from any of the other appliances in the utility room. Of course, it is always a possibility for an air conditioner to leak but in this particular case, it is not doing so. It is also possible that the piping from the floor drain is cracked and this is an additional source. However, Mr. xxx didn’t check this! YOU CAN CONSIDER THIS LETTER A FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST [MR. "XXX" THE HANDYMAN].

When this problem began I inspected the air conditioning system, the water heater, and the washing machine, etc. All were and are bone dry. The floor, top of the HVAC unit and interior of the bottom of the furnace were and are all bone dry, with absolutely no evidence of any water leakage, condensation, etc. etc. I want to point out that the HVAC system is not the original unit and is in EXCELLENT condition. Two years ago it was thoroughly inspected by a professional and some minor repairs were made at that time.

Returning to the chronology, on July 15 [your contractor] arrived and re-inspected [my unit]. Prior to his arrival, [my spouse] telephoned [my neighbor] and advised [him] that [the contractor] is available to inspect [the] unit but [was] declined. He performed the same check that [his predecessor] did a month ago. He checked the interior of the [my unit] and the water stains in the ceiling of both the bathroom and the utility room. He went further however, and entered the attic from [above my unit] and he advised [my spouse] that there are moderate water stains on the ductwork leading from the roof. Prior to mounting the roof he stated to [my spouse] that he suspected a chimney cover may be missing. After inspecting the roof he confirmed that a chimney cover was missing. He advised that [his company] needs to acquire one and install it. This is the same thing we were told nearly a month earlier!!! Obviously, [my spouse] was not happy to hear that it had not yet been ordered. [My spouse] discussed the issue of the air conditioner and he stated that that is possible, but that the evidence of water from above and the extent of damage described to the unit below, is more substantial than that possible by an air conditioner problem, for which there was no evidence, and was consistent with the leak from the roof, above.

[The contractor] also advised [my spouse] that he is in charge of work orders and that he never received work orders from or regarding this problem and [my neighbor's] unit. So I must conclude that [my neighbor] has never called [the management company] to report the problem in [his] unit.

At present and to the best of our ([my spouse] and my) ability we have been collecting water dripping from above in a bucket. However, any water running inside the duct or walls and entering the unit below is beyond our control. It is my opinion that “Mr. xxx the handyman” performed a disservice and should not have been paid by [my spouse]. However, I was not there to prevent this from happening.

I must conclude that [my neighbor] will not assist us in resolving this problem by contacting [the contractor] and [the management company]. So be it. However, I will not accept financial responsibility for damage done by roof and or chimney leaks to my neighbor’s unit, nor should I. I am sending a letter to [my neighbor] to advise [him] to deal with [the management company] directly. I will not be the scapegoat for roof or chimney cap problems and 35 days to fix this problem is excessive. [My neighbor] can knock on your door!

As of July 20, I left a message at [the contractor]. On the morning of July 21 [the contractor]returned my call. He advised that he has no cap but that if necessary he will have one made. I advised him that my neighbor is holding me responsible for the problem and had become a problem. He told me that I am not responsible for roof leaks and that if the drain pipe were cracked it could be a source of leakage in the unit below. However, he is not aware that it is cracked. I also advised him that the prediction is for severe storms today (60%). He advised me that he will attempt something today, even if it is temporary and agreed to call me on my cell phone if he does make repairs.

If it rains, without repairs I am certain we will collect additional water and that [my neighbor] will also be knocking on our door to complain about leakage which [he] insists is from our Unit.

Please advise me of what further action I am to take. However, if this is not resolved by July 29, rest assured that I will unilaterally take action to resolve this and fix the roof, chimney or whatever is necessary to stop this problem.

Sincerely,

More on Change! Are we having fun yet?

It would seem that the ROC thinks that change is a good thing. But while our little election here is unfolding, much more significant events are occurring on Wall Street. There are many people in government and banking who would argue that "change" is not always a good thing. The people on Wall Street, the SEC and the Fed are definitely NOT having fun.

But it would seem that some of us are oblivious to the risks of what we are undertaking here at BLMH.

Here are a few headlines from the Wall Street Journal "online". You may need a subscription to access some of the articles:

Wall Street In Crisis!

Financial markets around the world were rattled by the rushed sale of Merrill Lynch and the bankruptcy-court filing of Lehman.
AIG was facing a severe cash crunch as its credit ratings were cut. The insurer was scrambling to raise as much as $75 billion, after seeing its shares fall 61%.
The rapid demise of Lehman and Merrill represent a watershed in the banking industry's restructuring and a continuation of a decline in financial firms' market capitalization.
Dow Takes a 504.48-Point Dive
Stock prices fell, derivatives markets froze and investors flocked to government bonds as traders and investors struggled with the end of two Wall Street giants. The Dow suffered its biggest percentage drop in more than six years.
Lehman in New Talks to Sell Assets to Barclays
Lehman was negotiating a last-minute plan to sell large portions of itself to Barclays, the U.K.'s third-largest bank.
Concerns Shift to Goldman, Morgan
Pressure is now on Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs to persuade investors that they will survive.

My Initial Thoughts on the Response from the ROC Representative

I'm glad I did get a lengthy response. Of course I have more questions. When I composed my letter, I designed it with some "baiting" questions and statements. I focused on assessment issues because there has been at least one "stormy" meeting with the board about this. However, reading the response of the ROC representative, I am of the opinion that they don't think it's the major issue. On the other hand, in that response it was pointed out that during "last year's budget meeting when outraged residents demanded a reduction of the proposed 8% increase....that was when ROC was formed.."

The fact that the budget meeting was the catalyst for the formation of the "Residents of Change" seems to validate my opinion that assessments were and probably are the major issue for this group. If the existing board is being opaque about the budgeting process, that would rankle owners who are upset about assessment increases.

Communication and community. Sounds good. So does advocating change. But to what purpose?

I particularly like the comment that "there can be no website unless the board allows one." Well, I guess this blog doesn't exist then! Of course, I do understand that an officially sanctioned website with details of budgeting, etc. cannot exist without board approval and the release of certain documents.

I also noted that in the response letter, the ROC representative obliquely responded to my questioning of their statement that they represent the "majority" of residents. This leads me to believe that they do not.

From what I have received to date, I am of the opinion that, for this group, there is a lot of mistrust of the board. To be honest, at present I have more trust of the current board than I do of this group. What is really lacking for the ROC group is a comprehensive "mission statement" or direction for BLMH. Of course, that's a "chicken or the egg" question. We can't have an official mission statement unless it is formulated by the board. Or can we?

I'd like to see an inquiry of "Where do we want this "community" to be in 20 years"? If there were such a comprehensive statement of that type, then "we" the unit owners could determine if the actions of this group were consistent with that "mission statement". The ROC seems most concerned with changing the board. I can understand that; they can't do anything to affect the changes they want unless they are on the board. However, I'm concerned about the possible consequences of anarchy. What happens if the board is reformulated for a small but loud group of dissatisfied unit owners? Will the majority be represented, or that group of dissatisfied unit owners?

I am grateful for the response. However, I must note here that since this is the first time I have been made aware of the FAQ and Questionaire, and because they were not released with the original letter from the ROC that I received last week, there is a possibility that these documents did not exist prior to the response I received.

That does not invalidate this group.

I'm still formulating a formal response to the ROC response and when I have finished, I'll post that complete response here!

ROC FAQ received with the email

I received a FAQ from the ROC with the email. Here it is. The text is posted after the image. Sorry for the fuzzy image! I have removed names, addresses, email addresses and phone numbers. If you want to contact these people directly, if you are a BLMH resident, email me with your email address and a telephone number and I'll either email the FAQ to you or give you the telephone number of the ROC representative. Sorry. but I cannot release this information to you until I have verified that you are a resident!

Here is the text from the FAQ. I have removed names and telephone numbers, etc.

BLMH Residents Of Change (ROC)
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
The Residents of Change candidates have been talking and listening to a lot of folks over the past few weeks and we want to share with you some of the most frequently asked questions they’ve been receiving. If you have questions of your own, please call or email ______, ______or _______. Or stop by their homes—they are always willing to chat!

What is your opinion of [the professional management company]?
Let’s say that [the professional management company] is a baker and provides biscuits and bagels to BLMH. We don’t know the recipe that they use to create their products, we just know that we get our biscuits and bagels from them. Once we get into the kitchen and see how they blend the ingredients we’ll have a better idea of why their products taste the way they do. Perhaps they’ll allow us to tweak their recipe so that we may accommodate a wider variety of palates. We will say this about [the professional management company] - and it is our firsthand experience—they are not responsive to calls or even face-to-face inquiries. We will encourage them to become more responsive and courteous to the residents who pay for their services.

Have you had conflicts with current board members?
None of the ROC candidates have had conflicts or disagreements with the current board. That is one of the reasons why the Residents of Change organiza-tion chose us as candidates. There is no bad blood or contentious history between us and board members. Another reason why we were chosen is our back-grounds in conflict resolution and team building. Our success in our jobs depends upon our ability to overcome objections to reach common goals and work effectively with our colleagues. We intend to bring these on-the-job skills to our role as board members.

How will you work constructively with continuing board members?
We believe in team work. That is why we are running as a team with unified objectives and an implemen-tation plan. We will regard our fellow board members as part of the same team—after all, our goals should be to direct the association with fairness and consideration in an open and honest manner.

What do you mean by "forward-thinking ideas"?
Call it just plain old common courtesy, but we believe that every question from a resident should be answered, even if it is simply to say that their inquiry was received and someone will get back to them regarding it. Under the current directorship of our association, there is no mechanism in place to receive residents’ suggestions, comments, general questions, and yes, even complaints. We hope to change that by establishing an email address, a mailing address, and by publishing the phone numbers of board members who are willing to take calls from residents. Right now, it would appear that only ROC candidates are willing to have a discourse with residents. Our phone numbers, mailing addresses, and email addresses are readily available to all. If you note on the back of our association newsletter it clearly states in large capital letters "Contact [the professional management company] for all association related issues and maintenance." So, residents are virtually prohibited from expressing their thoughts to any board member. We would like to make it easy for anyone to express themselves. And be assured of a reply.

Another forward-thinking idea that also relates to communication is to develop Residents’ Roundtables as a sort of clearing house for issues that concern residents. The thought is that neighbors and friends can host a coffee-klatch, or after-dinner, or a Sunday afternoon get-together on a regular basis to find out what each other are thinking. This would be a great forum for exchanging ideas, bringing forth improve-ments, and sharing knowledge for the benefit of all. The candidates are all willing to attend these neighborhood roundtables and find out firsthand what people are thinking and saying.

Can you define "repressive measures"?
Well, the definitions of repression are to hold back or keep from some action; to control so strictly or severely as to prevent natural development or expression; to impose an inhibiting discipline that discourages free thinking. How much brighter our community could be if we lived under the opposite umbrella of progressiveness, enlightenment, open-mindedness, tolerance, cordiality, and good humor.

Do you intend to make changes regarding our landscaping?
Absolutely not! We love how BLMH looks and we will continue to maintain the grounds as beautifully as they are now. But, we believe that our residents deserve the same respect and attention that we currently give to the trees that line our streets.

Do you plan to raise or lower assessments?
Until we become part of the process that determines how assessments are levied we cannot know if they will rise, remain the same, or be lowered. We will certainly scrutinize every dollar amount in every account number and see if there might be ways to economize without losing or downgrading services. And, we’ll brainstorm with other association boards to see how they maintain services without overburdening residents with ever-increasing assessments.

Got a Question? Call or write us—we’re always happy to hear from our neighbors.

[names, addressess, telephone numbers and emails withheld]

ROC Survey document

I also received this survey document with the email response and letter. I have deleted names to comply with the confidentiality goals for this site. Sorry for the fuzzy images. However, a text version is included at the end of this post. If you want an original then contact me:

BLMH Residents Of Change (ROC)
Tell us what YOU think.

You’ve been hearing a lot about us lately. Now, we want to hear about YOU!

What are some of the things you and your neighbors are talking about?

Below are some ideas that have been generated by residents we’ve talked to. Let us know if you
agree or disagree with them and add your own to the list.

Participate in “Resident’s Roundtables” to talk about issues informally
Organize a Block Party!
Publish board meeting minutes and board agendas
Change the board meeting to Saturday
Reopen discussions on visitor parking lots
Use building bulletin boards for association notices
Allow semi-annual community garage sales

Post bylaws and board business on a website
Raise money for certain projects with fundraisers
Find a new meeting place for board meetings
Your idea? ___________________________
Your idea?____________________________
What are your positive experiences of home ownership in BLMH?

______________________________________________

______________________________________________

______________________________________________
What changes would you like to see in our community?
______________________________________________

______________________________________________

______________________________________________

How do the following meet your expectations?
SATISFACTORY or NEEDS IMPROVEMENT
Building Exteriors
Building Interiors
Grounds / Common Elements
Pest Control
Snow Removal
Management
Additional Suggestions?

_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________

Who are you? (optional)
Name____________________ Address_________________
Phone ___________________Email ___________________

PLEASE RETURN SURVEY BY 9/25/08

To submit your survey . . .
1. Fax to xxxxx at (630) xxx-xxxx or Email to xxxxxx@yahoo.com or
2. Call any of the ROC candidates for pickup at your home
[names and telephone numbers removed per site confidentiality promise]

Thanks for sharing your ideas with us!
Together we’ll make positive changes for our community.

ROC Letter in response to my letter

This is the text of the letter received in response to my letter. The responses of the ROC representative are in red:


September 11, 2008
ROC board candidates and the ―Residents of Change

Dear Sirs and Madams:
Thank you for your letter, the enclosure and voting instructions. On reading them, I have questions and concerns. Since the group you represent is requesting my vote and this is a serious matter, in the name of "open communications" I would appreciate a written response to this letter. I have sent it as a "pdf" document via email and via US Mail. You should respond in kind. Please spare me the color backgrounds, etc. Simple B&W text will be sufficient. Norman, we‘ve answered questions directly on this document. Please see our notes in red.

You have stated in your letter and enclosures that "a grassroots movement.... has been growing" and has "now organized the Residents of Change (ROC)". You also stated that "we have chosen three candidates to run for the positions open on the board in 2008" and that "a majority of us have been displeased with the board.

From your letter and enclosure I conclude the three candidates to whom I am addressing this letter are running at the request of the majority of the unit owners, who are dissatisfied, and whom they represent. You are requesting that I and the other unit owners who are not members of "ROC" vote in support of your majority.

I‘d like to make an informed choice. I construe from your statements that you represent a majority, that is, at least 169 units, who are, you say, displeased. If so, you should have no difficulty in providing me with a list of the units whose owners are a part of your majority. I don‘t think this is an outrageous request. Your request is not outrageous but fulfilling it at this time would be irresponsible on our part. Many people are concerned about retaliation by the board if their affiliation to us were known. Please do not scoff at this—certain of the board members have intimidated many residents. We will happily show you our roster at the election meeting—whether you choose to vote for us or not.

You have made certain statements and you should be willing and able to back them up. I expect substantiation from my board and from potential board members.

If you don‘t provide details, then I must conclude that some of the statements the "ROC" has made in the letter and enclosure, etc. are false, and designed to deliberately mislead me and my fellow unit owners. We make no exaggerated or false statements. We invite you to speak with any of our supporters whom you will meet at the election. Or, prior to the meeting, we can direct you to several who are not afraid to be Residents of Change.

If I seem concerned, it is because I am, and I have a lot of questions. But first, let me give you my perspective.

The issues seem to be about "being heard" and about expenses and assessments. May we correct you regarding the issues? They are primarily about, as you say, being heard. That is really what the residents care most about right now. Go out and speak to your neighbors. Ask them what they think of the board. Ask them if they have ever gone to a board meeting and left feeling like their opinions didn‘t matter. Ask them if they felt disrespected. Our campaign is not about expenses and assessments. Those are critical issues, to be sure, and they will be explored with the full knowledge and input of residents. Something that is not done now, as witnessed by last year‘s budget meeting when outraged residents demanded a reduction of the proposed 8% increase. Did you by any chance attend that meeting? That was when ROC was formed, by the way.

BLMH has amassed significant reserves which the current board has allocated to specific repairs. The funds are published in the annual budget and balance sheet. These are allocated to roofing, about 45%; paving, about 28% and the balance to concrete, masonry, lake restoration and carpeting. I am paying a monthly assessment of which a substantial amount, that is, about 19% is currently allocated to reserves for these published maintenance items. I have paid these amounts for years because I support the maintenance items and to avoid special assessments. We, too, support maintenance items and wish to avoid special assessments. Over the years I have discussed this, written the board and received responses from the board.

On the other hand, the "ROC" has given me no substantive information at all and I think my concerns are very, very warranted. According to what you have sent me, you have been planning this for some time. So why no specific program ideas in your letter except advocating a website? We have other ideas that you might have overlooked. We‘ve attached our FAQ and Survey if you would like to know more. I appreciate that you went to the expense of mailing a letter ($141.12 by my calculator). However, I do not understand why there is no "ROC" website supporting the running battle which has apparently been waged for some period of time and at which I could get "the whole story". The website is to be a BLMH website, not a ROC website. The website would contain the bylaws, association rules and regulations, board meeting minutes and monthly agendas, the newsletter, and other topics of interest that residents might like to post. The board does not allow any such communications; therefore there can be no website unless the board allows one. That‘s one of the reasons why we are running for election. To make those kinds of changes.

As I see it, unit owners have differing financial and life style issues and choices. BLMH includes seniors who have been here for 20 to 30 years and newbie‘s who have purchased a unit within the past 2 years. Some of us will be here at BLMH for another 20 years, and some are planning on moving in one or two. Within this diverse body there are unit owners who are involved and are out there watering the lawn during droughts, or shoveling the snow when we get that frequent dusting, or salting after icing, clearing iced gutters, etc. Some pick up the newspapers and trash that collects in entryways, and even vacuum the halls. Some are board volunteers. Others do absolutely nothing. Some probably care little about the grounds except as a dumping ground for their pets and others would love to use the grounds for lawn parties and barbecues. The unit owners have different perspectives and I suspect it is not possible to keep all of us happy. For example, BLMH assessments pay for the water used to wash unit owner‘s automobiles. That could be considered wasteful and poor use of BLMH funds. Certain "forward thinking" communities are, in fact, banning this practice.

Each month I pay an assessment, the allocation of which requires the balancing of the differences of the unit owners. This includes the accumulation of reserves for capital expenditures and spending for "preventative maintenance", and for out of pocket costs for utilities. I don‘t think we will all agree on what is important or significant. Some unit owners would consider using certain resources to be wasteful or unnecessary. This could include hiring professionals to clean the garages or entryway and stairways. On the other hand, some unit owners expect this level of service and are willing to pay for it.

Some unit owners, who are planning on selling in one, two or five years probably view putting aside large sums into reserves as a poor use of their money. Others see it as a prudent savings program designed to avoid special assessments.

Some may think the association reserves should cover the replacement of windows, others not. I think unit owners should pay for specific repairs to their units. That includes windows. I think that building common elements which extend to or over multiple units, such as roofs, should be covered by the assessments.

Some are in favor of special assessments, others are not. Do you advocate the accumulation of reserves as does the current board, or are you proposing a "pay as you go" special assessment approach? We certainly are proponents of reserves.

This complex is approximately 30 years old. Some repairs are necessary. However, there are differences in opinion. What are your criteria for repairs and your philosophy? We believe that prioritizing repairs is critical. We don‘t really have a philosophy about them.

You are running on a slate of "change". That‘s an unfortunate term; I would prefer that we seek "solutions". Perhaps next election you can write the campaign material. We‘ll be running ROC candidates every year. Your letter stresses the proposed ROC board members‘ qualifications, and generalities about complaints about being heard, displeasure with the current board and management, reducing expenses, achieving the lowest possible assessments, etc. I assume you and/or the "ROC" members have specific changes you want to make upon your election. I assume the current direction is not the way you want to go. Otherwise, there would be no reason for changing the board as you intend to do. It would be appropriate for you to share your specific intentions with me and the other unit owners before the election. That would be a good demonstration of open communications.

I have the record of the current board and that includes their published intentions for the cash reserves. All I have from you are complaints and some nebulous promises. Here are specific questions for you to address in your response. Based on that response, I may have additional questions or request clarification:

1. I have been a volunteer in other capacities. The board is a body of volunteers. I suspect there is a lot of work involved. As with most organizations, either the volunteers do the work, or professionals for a fee do the work. How much time can you devote to this? You included a brief resume for the three board candidates who are all full time "professionals". What you did not state was that you will make the commitment including time as required to fulfill your obligations on the board, and your promise that we all be heard. You must have overlooked our statement on the ballot. You should definitely refer to it.

2. Your "Slate of Objectives" specifically states as an objective "We will seek ways to reduce expenses and keep assessments as low as possible". What does "as low as possible" mean? It means the opposite of as "high as we can go". You are implying that expenses will be reduced, for the goal of reducing assessments. No, we are implying that we will seek ways to reduce expenses. Maybe we‘ll find out that we can‘t reduce expenses. But, we will certainly look at what is being spent now. How will you achieve this and what are your specific proposals to accomplish this? We intend to go through each budget line item and see what amounts were paid for what services. We will also invite bids from other reputable and recommended firms for major projects instead of just giving the work to the current vendors. I am certain you are aware of the rapid rise of inflation, in particular for commodities and energy.

3. The ROC slate of objectives includes "We wil be the voice of the residents ...... champion[ing] forward thinking ideas". The board is the elected voice of the current residents. The current one is and the next one also will be. However, the board does not and will not always act in accordance with my personal wishes. It is also true that the board has far more power than being simply my or our voice. The purpose of the board is responsible representation. Someone who can be trusted to responsibly use the funds I put into my assessment envelope each month. The ROC slate includes the statement "We will seek ways to reduce expenses and keep our assessments as low as possible." So would you tell me where they stand on these issues:

a. I assume the website you mention is one of the ROC‘s "forward thinking" ideas. So how about giving me an idea about what other forward thinking ideas you have and are planning? Please see our FAQ.

b. How many of our residents have the ability to reach the website you are promoting? If they do not, then what? Then we post it on the building bulletin boards. And, put it in the newsletter. How much will that site cost? Will volunteers do the work and function as webmaster, etc. as part of their duties on the board, or will it require monies paid from the monthly assessments? If so, what reduction in service will be used to offset this cost increase? If none, then where will the money come from? Many of our supporters have IT experience and have volunteered to host the site.

c. The ROC and its candidates have stated that they will encourage open, two-way communications". They further state that suggestions will be via email or written note. That is not significantly different than the current system and would be inadequate. You are quite mislead if you believe that, Norman. The current system allows no communication. Again, please see the FAQ. To empower change and ―open communication it will be necessary to have a web site open to all unit owners and where ALL letters and responses are posted. Unit owners should be able to post their questions and concerns without censure by the ROC, the Board or anyone else, within the limits of what is considered to be non-obscene. Who would moderate this? Would you like to moderate it? The job is open.

d. Electricity is slated for a 6-1/2% increase this year. What reduction in services are you planning to offset this and other cost increases? If no reduction then where will the money come from? We cannot answer that right now, as we are not privy to what is paid for any of the services. Do you have a copy of last year‘s budget? You will be regarded as a genius if you can figure out who got paid what.

e. This association has accumulated financial reserves, which are increasing as unit owners pay their monthly dues. Each year I am contributing about $750 to the reserve fund. Do you consider the financial reserves of BLMH to be excessive? Or adequate? Or inadequate? And why? Again, we don‘t know the answers until we are able to look at all the financial records. We will certainly consult you and all the other residents for consideration of what you and they feel is adequate or inadequate.

f. Costs involve the day to day cash outlays to cover operating expenses. Monthly assessments are the collections to offset those expenses. It is possible to lower monthly assessments while costs are increasing. For example, you could deplete reserves to cover the differences between funds collected and ―costs. This I would call the "mortgage your future" approach. Are you planning to use this approach? No, we are not planning any approach to deplete our reserves. If so, how much will you divert?

g. What are your ideas regarding monthly assessments and special assessments. Specifically, will you reduce monthly assessments and replace them with special assessments? Will there be any special assessments? We are opposed to special assessments, as are most of the residents.

h. The current board and management has an agenda for building up the association reserves for the purpose of roof replacement and repair, paving of streets, lake restoration, concrete, masonry and carpeting. Will these programs continue? Don‘t see why they would not. Are you opposed to these programs?

i. If you are not if favor of the current capital spending programs then what specific programs do you favor for the spending of the reserves? What projects are you advocating? We are not advocating any projects. Remember, we are the voice of the residents. If they want a new project they will tell us.

j. Will there be balloting for all future uses of financial reserves? If so, will the results be published with the vote by unit and therefore verifiable? If that is the usual procedure, then, certainly we will stick to it.

k. A "giveback" of financial reserves would be a windfall for certain unit owners. Are you planning or advocating such a program? No. If so, how would you disburse funds equitably; for example, using a formula based upon the amounts actually paid by the current unit owners?

l. Are you planning on investing the cash on the accounts of BLMH in some other location than the present ones? No. Unless you know of a great bank with high interest rates.

m. Will you replace the current management company? If so, why? Please see the FAQ.

n. What other changes are you planning? We are hoping to make BLMH a real community where neighbors know each other and care about each other. We are hoping to encourage the active participation of residents in the governance of their community. We hope to replace apathy with involvement. We are hoping to change the current environment from a ―gripe fest‖ to one of jubilance and joy. Our ideals are not lofty. They are rooted in the most basic concept of an individual‘s right to be respected. And, that is the greatest change we can bring to BLMH. And, Norman, while you regard "changes" as an "unfortunate term" we respect your right to have that opinion.

Thank you for your consideration and prompt response.

"A Very Concerned Unit Owner",