Anonymous Comment: Litigation?

The following comment was posted anonymously on July 28, 10:58pm. It referred to my post of July 28:

""Another item of interest, if you had a chance to watch the news this evening, you might have heard of a pending lawsuit regarding a Twitter post against a buildings management company. I believe the suit was regarding "defamation".Very interesting news since it mentioned Twitter and blogs."

I'm not certain what point the anonymous poster was trying to make. For those who are interested, here is a news article referencing the "pending lawsuit":

http://cbs2chicago.com/local/twitter.post.lawsuit.2.1103625.html

I have one comment. Litigation works both ways. Individuals can sue our Association and Associations and management companies can and do sue individuals. Suits have also been brought against the Board of Managers at other Associations.

This underscores some of the comments of our Architectural Director which were made during a recent Association meeting. He stated that we live in a litigious society. That comment occurred during a discussion of insurance requirements, should the Association hold an officially sanctioned "block party". At the time, his comments were met with jeers and boos from some unit owners who were present. Apparently his comments did not fit the perception that some unit owners have regarding a nice, friendly society.

As has also been pointed out at Association meetings, and as an attorney recently told me, should a unit owner sue the Association, they are, in essence, suing themselves. It was the attorney's opinion that such suits are a "lose - lose" proposition in which nobody wins. However, he also stated that such suits are sometimes how he earns his fees.

Anonymous Comment: Access to Information?

The following comment was posted anonymously on July 28, 10:41pm. It referred to my post of July 28:

""I'll post further information on this particular issue, as it becomes available. However, Association financial information as it applies to individual unit owners, or fines, are treated as confidential matters by the Association, the Board and the Management." Than [sic] as a BLMH owner I am very concerned that you have access to such information without being a board member. Care to comment."

Here is my comment:

I find it interesting that "Anonymous" was concerned that I might have access to privileged information. No such concern was stated about the unit owners who brought up this topic and presented the information to me and to others. "Anonymous" didn't ask how those unit owners got the information about a purported “fine”!

I want to point out that the title of the blog post was “Rumor of a Large Fine is Inaccurate”.

Most association information is a matter of public record. Certain matters, which are discussed by the Board of Managers during "executive session" of Association meetings are not available to others, and that includes to me. I have verified this with legal counsel.

However, a unit owner may speak with other unit owners about any matter in which they are directly involved. It is their choice. Once something is discussed in public, it can then be passed from unit owner to unit owner, as apparently occurred with the "$157" item. Anything discussed by unit owners in public becomes a matter of public information, or "disinformation". Anything that is discussed during open session of the Association meetings is a matter of public record.

I did not broach the subject of the "$157" item. Other unit owners broached the subject, standing in the driveway of a nearby unit, and they presented their opinion about this and of management and the board. I was not the only unit owner present at the time. Based upon their comments, I think it is reasonable to assume I am not the only unit owner with whom this item was discussed and this information was probably passed to others.

Question: How much is discussed outside of Association meetings by unit owners, or groups and how much of what is discussed is passed as "information" by various unit owners?

As I have stated frequently in this blog, a great deal is discussed during the portion of Association meetings which is open to unit owners. This includes maintenance and related items, unit owner concerns, opinions and complaints, and special projects, etc., etc. I continue to suggest that unit owners attend Association meetings. I realize most of us have other things to do and these meetings may be an inconvenience. It's a choice.

I should point out that some of what is presented at Association meetings by unit owners may be opinion. It may also be political in nature. Reference: the ROC documents circulated by the ROC, some of which have been published here.

I will post additional information, if and when it becomes available.

Rumor of a Large Fine is Inaccurate

Several days ago, while talking with neighbors, I was advised that a large fine had been levied on another resident at BLMH. This was purported to be $157 for a BBQ left on the grass, or so the neighbors stated. The Director of Rules and Regulations was walking by and she was asked how the Board could allow this.

Her response was that she was unaware of the alleged "fine" and she stated that it simply did not make sense, and that even the amount seemed strange. Violations are usually noted with a letter, but occasionally preceded by a verbal warning. After the letter is issued, if not corrected in a reasonable time, an initial fine is levied. Failure to pay or continued violations will result in increases in the fines as the amount of each is ratcheted upwards. She stated that she was unaware of a violation, of a letter or a fine. The initial amount of the fine is relatively low, as the goal is to encourage compliance with the rules.

The Director of R&R agreed to check into this. After she departed, the discussion with the neighbors continued. They were skeptical of management and stated so. They felt this was another example of "injustice" at BLMH. They stated that the person who was fined was experiencing a health issue, and stated in effect that they felt the Association should take this into account when enforcing rules. However, they agreed that the amount seemed strange and stated they would talk further to the individual who had been allegedly "fined". The conversation devolved into a re-hashing of the truck incident. The tractor portion of a tractor trailer had been towed off of the property several months ago. This, they stated was "unjust". etc., etc.

I have since been informed by another resident that the amount was not a fine, but was a charge for services. To explain, it is not uncommon for certain types of work by contractors which includes common elements and unit owner responsibility to be billed to the Association. In such a case, the contractor bills the Association and the management, in turn, bills the unit owner for their portion of the work. In essence, the Association makes a short term "loan" to the unit owner, who then repays the Association for the money advanced to the contractor. For example, this is the approach that is being used for the "dormer" style windows which are being replaced as part of the roofing projects.

I'll post further information on this particular issue, as it becomes available. However, Association financial information as it applies to individual unit owners, or fines, are treated as confidential matters by the Association, the Board and the Management.

Reader Comment: Should I Run for the Board?

On July 24, an anonymous reader posted a comment to my April 9 Blog entitled "Upcoming Posts". Here is their comment and my response.

"Norm, you are a very observant BLMH owner, with interesting views and many comments about how the board operates. If you have all this free time to attend all meetings and write about them in your blog, why don't you become proactive and run for a position on the board. Let's see how well you can do".

Good question, and worth considering. Here are a few issues and concerns I have about becoming a board member:

1. I'm open to a serious conversation about the pros and cons of my running for the board. I am considering running and I have concerns about that.
2. The reader got it right. I can use "free time" to write this blog. That is sometimes time spent late in the evening or very early in the morning. This blog is sometimes written at a great distance from our city. Board business doesn't occur in the middle of the night and meeting are grounded near BLMH. I attend meetings as a choice and can choose not to, should business or other matters interfere. As a board member, I would not have that freedom. Being a member of the Board of Managers is a commitment I would not take lightly. That could create a problem as I might have mutually exclusive commitments to contend with.
3. I realize this blog has limited impact. Officially, it does not exist and is ignored in the published newsletter, etc. Unit owners who cannot attend meetings, unit owners who only get information on BLMH via the newsletter, etc. are not aware of many of the issues at BLMH or of the existence of this blog. I am relying upon you, the reader, to pass the existence of this blog to other unit owners who may be unaware of its existence. I think informing unit owners of what is going on in our Association is a useful service, and I consider what I am doing as "proactive" but limited.
4. As a writer of this blog, I can report somewhat independently. A member of the Board of Managers is supposed to limit his or her communications to what is essentially "the will of the Board". A board member is required to uphold his and her "fiduciary duties". That is not a request, it is a requirement. The Illinois Condominium Act, the Oath and Agreements that are made by each member of our Board are not an elective and cannot be selectively honored or ignored. They are a requirement for the position. That is not my opinion; it is fact and in the case of the Act, it is law. A Board member may choose to skirt or ignore the law and agreements, but should not do so and is prohibited from doing so. There can be legal consequences. When current board members act independently or sometimes ignore their fiduciary duties, that is a choice they make and there should be consequences. If I were to become a member of the board, I would be bound by the Act, Oath and Agreements. If I were acting in good faith and with integrity, I would be at a disadvantage to any board member who operated differently.
5. As a member of the Board of Managers, I do not believe I could continue this blog. Association Newsletters, websites, etc. are each "official" communications of the Board of Managers. They are the Board approved communications to the Unit Owners, or are supposed to be. Presently, our newsletter is not. Obviously, this blog would have to cease or change dramatically if the writer were a member of the Board. That is one of my criticisms of some board members. They operate at times in a manner that is independent of the Board. They should not. Of course, there is always the possibility that someone else will continue this blog. However, at present I am unaware of that person's existence. Are you interested in the job?

Thursday July 9, 2009 Association Meeting Highlights

The meeting was attended by 13 unit owners, which is approximately 4% of the unit owners. The Communications Director was not present for the meeting. The meeting began at 7:00pm and ended at approximately 9:30pm.

Highlights include excerpts from the Treasurer’s Report, Management Report, Architecture and Maintenance Reports, Landscaping, Newsletter and Communications Report, Homeowners’ Forum, etc.

Congratulations to our Recording secretary Director, who is a happy mom and to her husband. They were present at the meeting with their new arrival.

TREASURER’S REPORT

1. The Treasurer gave a statement of CDs and Money Market Funds, and of certain changes. Interest rates are very low and in the current environment, it was stated that interest rates offered are less than 1%. For that reason, no new CDs were taken out.
2. Budget variances were discussed. The Treasurer stated that he will provide more specific information during future meetings. Certain costs have increased above the budget and the board will have to decide where these funds are to come from. At present, there are increases in Janitorial (as requested by unit owners to improve the condition of halls and stairways), electrical costs are slightly greater than the budgeted amount, postage has increased due to the larger newsletter, printing and duplicating costs are also increased due to the larger newsletter, the rental of the room for the Association meetings which was not budgeted is $1800 per year and is not in the budget.

MANAGEMENT REPORT

1. Work order histories were discussed and approved.
2. It was noted that there are more carpenter ants this year and this is attributed to the increased rainfall.
3. Painting issues from last year were discussed. Several unit owners were dissatisfied with the quality of the painting and funds were withheld from the painting contractor pending correction and satisfaction of the unit owners.
4. 95% of the unit owner census forms have been received.
5. There was a discussion of carpet cleaning scheduling. Carpets are to be cleaned before the Thanksgiving holiday.
6. The janitorial service responded to including replacement of light bulbs in their scope of work. The goal was more frequent and lower cost replacement. However, the janitorial service responded that bulbs above 8 feet height will be billed at $12 each. The Board decided to have the maintenance company replace these, as the cost would be lower.
7. The reserve study update was tabled until the August meeting.
8. It has been noticed that there is some algae in the streams. At present, treatment is budgeted at once per month. However, to control the algae treatment may have to be increased to twice per month.
9. Walkthrough of the recently painted buildings will occur on Monday July 13.
10. There are presently ten driveways scheduled for replacement, for a total of 20 thousand square feet. Two proposals have been received and two more are expected. The management company requested a telephone vote by the members of the board of managers one the other proposals have been received, so that work can commence as soon as possible.
11. Discussion of the driveway replacement included the need for an architectural review of the water dispersion requirements of each driveway. Driveways must be individually evaluated due to differences in slope and landscaping adjacent to each. It is to be determined if the pitch of each is proper and if there is positive drainage. Work related to dispersion must be included in the budget and it was requested that the board review.
12. It was recommended by the professional manager that certain street repairs be accomplished at the same time as the driveway replacement. The goal is to reduce cost and the contractors have indicated a reduced fee as they will be on site with men and materials. There are other repairs and a discussion indicated that a disadvantage would be delay until the driveways are done. Also discussed were the need for concrete and grate work in the vicinity of Plymouth and Lakecliffe. The Landscaping Director made a motion to have the maintenance company do this immediately. The motion was seconded and voted.

ARCHITECTURAL AND MAINTENANCE

1. A leaking fire hydrant was discussed at Gloucester (Comment: Fire hydrants are part of the “common elements” at BLMH].
2. The gazebo was discussed. A unit owner had complained that it was “rotting and in disrepair”. After inspection, the gazebo was declared to be “structurally sound” and in need of paint. It was stated that the gazebo does have carpenter ants.
3. There was a discussion of certain unit windows which were painted brown.
4. Recently two streams pumps were down due to float failure. These have been replaced and a spare has been purchased and will be placed in inventory, to minimize future down time.
5. It is planned to complete the installation of Limestone sills at two buildings this year and work is proceeding. The purpose is to replace brick sills which are spalling. [Comment: Over time the ice and snow which accumulates on the window sills results in flaking of the brick in layers, as the ice thaws and re-freezes. As the brick thins, this results in leaks into the units, which is corrected by expensive repairs and if not done may result in mold. As explained by the Architectural Director, the limestone sills are impervious to water and spalling and only require periodic caulking along the edges. This should eliminate the damage to the units. One complaint has been the white appearance of the limestone. However, over time it will darken and will become less apparent]. Here is a statement from the Indiana Limestone Institute: Advantages of Choosing Natural Limestone
6. There was a discussion of the recently completed building painting, including complaints about painted doorknobs and mis-communications to unit owners. [Comment: one building on Harrow was scheduled for spray cleaning and a date was posted by the painting contractor. However, cleaning did not occur that day. A unit owner called the painting company, spoke with the project manager, got the date and posted that information in the hallway. When painting of the patios on the same building occurred, there was no notice posted and unit owners were not informed by the painting company].
7. There was a discussion of the status of “B” unit window selection by unit owners in the buildings to be re-roofed.
8. There was a brief report on the building to be re-roofed; piers are scheduled to be installed the week of July 13, the roofing project will start in approximately three weeks (approximately August 1), and it will take 5 to 6 weeks to get the new window for the “B” units.
9. One of the buildings on Harrow is missing a section of roofing shingles. The Architectural Director stated it will take about $1500 to repair. He proposed that this roof not be repaired, but instead be re-roofed this year (2009). This was seconded and voted. See “Action Items”. [Comment: for a photo of the roof section missing the shingles, see this blog: http://briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com/2009/06/roofing-damage.html
10. The Architectural Director will meet with the unit owners of the building on Harrow to select the “B” unit windows.

LANDSCAPING

1. The Landscaping Director briefly described repair issues and his walk through the property.
2. He described his discussion with the landscaping contractor about the need to disperse water prior to work.
3. Tree removal issues were described. The unit owners involved must be approached to decide if they prefer a nice patio or shade.
4. An additional $43,000 proposal obtained from the landscaping contractor by the Landscaping Director was very briefly discussed. The Landscaping Director recommended that work be confined to grassy areas and that pond work be avoided. He stated he wants to discuss this further with board members.
5. The Architectural Director made a request of the Landscaping Director. He requested that the landscaping of each building be inspected, front and rear. The buildings would then be described and ranked, as is done with other aspects of repairs. The goal would be to develop an eight year plan with budgeting. There are issues to be resolved. For example, buildings which have a lot of shade can be solved by installing stone, or grass, or groundcover or tree trimming or some combination of all of these. Trimming of trees should be discussed with individual unit owners, who will be affected. Drainage, slope, water dispersion and other issues would be included in the evaluation. There have been discussions about the pros and cons of adding gutters.

NEWSLETTER AND COMMUNICATIONS

1. Our Director of Communications was not present for the meeting. The issue of dates for submittals for the August newsletter was discussed.

WELCOMING

1. Our acting President and Welcome Director announced the sale of a unit.

OLD BUSINESS

1. There was no old business to discuss.

NEW BUSINESS

1. The Architectural Director reported on some of the issues he has encountered regarding windows as part of the roofing project. These issues involve the types and manufacturing details. He stated that he has a concern that there are different types of windows, some with grids and others without. In one window the grids are installed between the window layers and this may compromise the window seal. Some windows are white and tan with the exterior painted. The warranty for painting is only 5 to 10 years. He left the board with this question: How to deal with this in the future? He views this as a pending problem.

HOMEOWNERS FORUM

1. Some comments involved issues between unit owners or renters and it would be inappropriate to include all of the comments here.
2. Recent fire on Gloucester – the unit owner made a statement “personally thanking” the professional manager and the maintenance company for their assistance.
3. Painter. There were some complaints about the power washing and painting. This included cleanup by unit owners after the contractor did his work.
4. Plymouth. There was a discussion about a dead tree, for which a proposal has been solicited and the contractor is awaiting approval.
5. A tree was reported as diseased or dying at 1777 Gloucester.
6. Landscaping and tree removal. Unit owners suggested adding ground cover.
7. A unit owner was advised that their driveway on Thames is on the list of those to be replaced.
8. The Architectural Director discussed that there are 44 building pillars to be done. These were originally brick and have been damaged by reoccurring freeze thaw action.
9. There was a question and answer session about the fire at Gloucester. This was caused by a ceiling fan in the utility room. There were questions about whether exhaust fans should be allowed to run in the utility room; this creates a negative pressure and a concern was expressed about carbon monoxide if the furnace or hot water heater are starved for oxygen. The board agreed to look into this further.
10. A unit owner asked if there were any issues (insurance or otherwise) about storing gasoline on the premises of unit owners. This question was asked because some unit owners were using electrical generators during a recent power outage. These are usually gasoline powered. The board and professional manager could not give an immediate answer.
11. On unit has a landscaping problem including exposed roots and standing water which becomes mud during rain storms. The Landscaping Director advised that he is working with the landscaping contractor on this problem. The solution is not yet determined but stones and drainage are being explored.

ACTION ITEMS

1. The Architectural Director requested that the roof on Harrow be added to this years work. Cost of the roof was estimated at $42,000. This would be the second roof to be completed this year. He stated there were very few landscaping or drainage issues at this building. This was motioned, seconded, voted and passed by the board.
2. Tree pruning proposal and tree removal and stump grinding was motioned, seconded, voted and passed by the board.
3. A dead willow was discussed. This is an expensive item because a large crane is required. The professional manager was directed to get a second proposal.

Garage Sale Issues

From time to time, the issue of garage sales come up. This is discussed at Association meetings and there are a few unit owners who would like to have such an event. Unfortunately for them, garage sales are prohibited in BLMH.

I received an email about this and responded to the writer. Here is that email and my response:

"Hi, I live in Briarcliffe but I am not an owner. I would really like to have a garage sale and so would everyone in my unit. I would think because all 4 homes want to have one that I would be allowed. Who do I ask? Thanks [name withheld]"

My response:

"Hi [name withheld]:

The issue of a garage sale is determined by the bylaws and rules & regulations. As a renter, you may not be aware that the streets, walks, lawns, etc. within Briarcliffe Lakes Manor Homes (BLMH) are owned by the association and are entirely private. Unit owners and the association are responsible for all maintenance and repairs, and any damage and insurance.

Most of the streets in our city are maintained by the city, and liability for repairs or accidents passes on to the city. That is not true in BLMH, and all costs are passed to the unit owners. Liability for all accidents or damages are also passed on to the unit owners and the association.

For that reason, there are restrictions on the use of streets, drives and all other property in BLMH. As a renter, you are also restricted. Living in a "Planned Urban Development" has some advantages for the unit owners, such as extensive landscaping and grounds with a park like atmosphere, and completely private streets. The disadvantages include the lack of "deep pockets" as the unit owners shoulder the burden of all financial responsibilities.

The subject of garage sales is discussed from time to time during association meetings, which are attended by unit owners.

I suggest you contact the management office with your request and ask for a clarification of the rules. You could also discuss this with the unit owner from whom you are renting.

Norm"

My Reply to the Communications Director

This is the third of three consecutive posts regarding our newsletter and correspondence with our Communications Director. I have had no further correspondence or communications regarding this matter.

Upon reading the June 17th response from our Communications Director to my June 14th email I created this reply and emailed it that day. It is slightly edited and the edits are in square brackets:

"Hi [Communications Director]:

Thank you for your reply.

It would seem to me that you need an “error and omissions” section in the July newsletter, in which you add all of the necessary and agreed credits for the photographs and images contained in the June, 2009 newsletter. The goal is to protect the Association. This can be achieved by assuring that all copyright and ownership issues are properly addressed, and that owners of copyrights are properly acknowledged when their images, photos or text is used in the Association newsletter, websites, etc. “with permission”. That should avoid disputes and possible litigation for previously omitted acknowledgements. Printed media routinely includes an “errors and omissions” section and that would seem proper for a corporate newsletter. You could and should correct other mis-statements, such as the one regarding roofing project “costs” in the June newsletter. You will recall that I pointed this out to you during my “one minute” at the unit owners Forum portion of the Association meeting on June 12.

For the vast majority of BLMH unit owners, the only source of “official” and verifiable Association communications is their monthly “Manor Briefs”. It is their only source of information. There are and will be “clicks” and sub-groups in any organization. Your home may be the equivalent of the “water cooler” at the office where people can congregate, pass gossip, spread rumors and so on. However, it is not the official BLMH information nexus. I would hope you realize that.

I am a bit unclear. In your email response you stated that you “ emailed [the image owner], the creator, and asked for permission to use it temporarily. My note to him explained that we’re “. . . developing a website and the newsletter pdfs will be posted to that site. On the mastheads, I've added a hyperlink to your website to acknowledge your ownership of the image. Do you require any further copyrights?” “

This sidesteps the fact that you are and have used his images on the Association newsletter with no credit to him. From your statements I am not convinced that he is aware that we are using his images on a printed newsletter. Nor is it clear that he has given the Association permission to use his images on a printed newsletter. You stated that you had obtained permission for “developing a newsletter”. It is not in development. It has been printed and mailed. This is simply my conclusion based upon the information you have provided me in your email. I am the owner of copyrighted materials, and I take a dim view of attempts to skirt the ownership of my materials and diligently protect them. I do not think I am unique in this.

When (on which date) did you email [the owner]? Was it before or after you received my email? Ditto for the [Salisbury] photograph. Whatever the date, that information must be provided to the Board of Managers so it is retained to avoid litigation or disputes. You should print copies of any and all emails and provide them to our professional managers for retention should an issue occur in the future. The statute of limitations goes beyond the current term of your membership on the board. Or, to put it bluntly, the actions of any member of the Board of Managers today, may result in dispute at some time in the future. As clients have expressed to me, they adhere to the “Mack Truck” philosophy in which they assume I wlll be struck by a large vehicle and am no longer on the planet. However, my work and the consequences thereof will continue after I am gone. So too with you or any other member of the Board. Copies of the printed and distributed newsletter, websites and so on will exist for a possibly very long and indefinite period. I am sure you are aware of that. You must take all reasonable and prudent steps to protect the Association.

Returning to the matter at hand, the printed and distributed version of the June, 2009 newsletter did not give [the image owner] credit for the images contained therein. Your solution for future editions of the newsletter would seem adequate, assuming you are diligent in obtaining proper copyright clearances, and that [the image owner] is aware you are copying his images to a printed newsletter and has clearly and concisely stated that is acceptable and stated any conditions he might place on the printing thereof, which the association then satisfies. You stated that “To prevent future credit oversight, I’ve added a photo/image credit section to the newsletter template so all copyright attributions will be in one place. The June online version includes this section.” Unfortunately, the printed newsletter omitted this, didn’t it? Ergo, the need for an “errors and omissions” section in the July newsletter.

If you disagree, please advise me. However, you stated that “I am aware of copyright infringement policies, and respect them, as I routinely use photographs, diagrams, and other media at work”. You are therefore proficient and knowledgeable. The Association is consequently exposed.

By the way, the June newsletter makes no mention of the “June online version” nor does it provide a URL. So how are unit owners to know what is going on at BLMH? Isn’t that a significant oversight? The website was not mentioned in a prominent location in the June newsletter. Perhaps I missed it! So when are you going to tell the rest of us, that is, the 95% of the unit owners who do not attend Association meetings, coffee klatches or whatever, what the website URL is? “Everything can be resolved in communications” I was once taught. Others have said that everything can be controlled through communications. Which is your commitment?

I have taken the liberty to cc: those included in your email to me.
Regards,
[My Name and Address]

Reply from Communications Director to Copyright Issue

On June 17th, I received an email reply from our Communications Director to my email to her on June 4th. This the second of three posts regarding this.

Here is a slightly edited text of that email [square brackets denote edits]:

"Hello Norman,

Thanks for your note. I am aware of copyright infringement policies, and respect them, as I routinely use photographs, diagrams, and other media at work.

Before I used the Mistylook image for the Manor Briefs masthead I emailed [the author], the creator, and asked for permission to use it temporarily. My note to him explained that we’re “. . . developing a website and the newsletter pdfs will be posted to that site. On the mastheads, I've added a hyperlink to your website to acknowledge your ownership of the image. Do you require any further copyrights?”

[The author] replied “Thanks for writing to me. I am OK as long as my link is mentioned.”
I also emailed the photographer of the Salisbury Cathedral image, [the author's name], and explained that our “. . . June newsletter features an article on Salisbury that I illustrated with one of your photos of the cathedral. I've added a hyperlink to your website to acknowledge your ownership of the photo.. Do you require any further copyrights?”

[The author] replied “It sounds like you are doing the right thing. However, in addition to the photographer credit, you also need to indicate that the image is licensed under the cc-by-sa-2.0 license. I think you can even find a logo for this on the Creative Commons website.”

The online versions of the newsletters contain hyperlinks on all the photos. In the June issue, hyperlinks can be found on the masthead, Flag Day poster, Salisbury Cathedral, fireworks photo, and the CertainTeed shingle. To honor [the author's] of indicating the CC license, I also included the Creative Commons logo and hyperlinked it to their website.

In the print version of the June issue, a second line to the caption under the cathedral photo gave credit to [the author]. After the issue was printed, I noticed that that line was missing, and in checking my documents, I discovered that an earlier draft of the article (which did not include the photo credit) had been used in the final version of the newsletter.

To prevent future credit oversight, I’ve added a photo/image credit section to the newsletter template so all copyright attributions (sic) will be in one place. The June online version includes this section.

Regards,
[Communications Director]"

The email from our Communications Director included an Acrobat 6.x file created June 17th. It was a color version of the newsletter which contained photo credits added to page 2, and a reference to the "cc-by-sa-2.0 license". I sent a final reply to our Communications Director on June 17th, and I made several requests. One of my concerns was the lack of an "errors and omissions" section in the newsletter. The June newsletter had been published with several errors, including the "costs" of projects and which I pointed out to the entire board during the June Association meeting, and it had been published and distributed without the proper copyright notices. That email will be posted as the third in this series.

Copyright Information - Email to Communications Director

I have added a (c) 2009 and "briarcliffelakes.blogspot.com" notification to photos for copyright and ownership purposes, to make it obvious. This was prompted by a recent event not related to this blog. On June 4, 2009 I discovered that photos in the BLMH newsletter were copied from copyrighted sources but that was not acknowledged in the newsletter. So I sent an email to our Communications Director, who is responsible for the newsletter, with copy to the President of the Board of Managers. I'm posting this with several links, as an informational aid to others considering publishing. Tomorrow I'll publish the response I received.

Here is a slightly edited text of that email [square brackets denote edits]:

Dear [Communications Director]:

A matter of importance has come to my attention. This is pertaining to the Newsletter. I am advising you so as to protect the association. This is being sent to the email address contained in the June newsletter, and the President of the Board of Managers.

1. Some of the photographs you are using in the newsletter are copyrighted works and cannot be in our newsletter unless you get written permission from the owner.
2. [Certain] photos were copied from his theme at the WordPress Blog and placed in the newsletter. This is copyrighted work and by clicking on his name at the bottom of the “BLMH Homeowners Association” blog at http://briarcliffe.wordpress.com/ you will be taken to his WordPress theme site where he explains the rules for using his themes and that includes the photos they contain. Briefly, the rules are: 1) The themes are copyrighted. 2) His name may be removed from the BLMH Homeowners Association blog which uses his theme, but only if a fee of $20 is paid. 3) The “License Info” on his site states “You need to get explicit permission from us, before releasing any work that is based on our work”. His photos are used in the newsletter. Did you get “explicit permission” in writing to copy his work and place it in the newsletter?
3. If you use copyrighted works in the Association newsletter, the blog or website and do not get written permission to do so, you are exposing the Association to the possibility of lawsuits and legal fees and judgments.
4. Copying photos or images from the web is very dangerous because it is difficult to determine who owns the content. Courts are sometimes lenient with individuals, but a Corporation such as our Homeowner’s Association is exposed and is subject to fines and civil penalties. Courts are empowered to levy fines for each offense in the amount of $750 to $30,000, plus legal fees. As Communications Director you should know, use or authorize in the newsletter or any BLMH documents only photos, graphics, etc. which you can prove are in the public domain and available for legal Association use; i.e. not copyrighted. Failure to do so may expose the Association to legal action. You must check sources. For example, prior to copying the images from the BLMH blog, you should have clicked on the theme authors name as I did, and then at his site you should have clicked on “License Info”. You should also be maintaining a file of all image sources, which will be available for legal defense of the Association should this come up. The file should list specific sources. The burden of proof is on you and the Association, should someone claim copyright infringement.
5. Do you know the specific source of other photographs and images you have used in the Association newsletter? For example, the photo of the cathedral which was given prominent space in June’s newsletter? If you cannot prove the source is a truly “open” one, that image may also be an infringement.
6. Here are a couple of websites which provide you with more information regarding piracy and copyright infringement. The first is a US government link, the second provides some general information and the third is a Wiki article.
   http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html
   http://www.chillingeffects.org/piracy/faq.cgi
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Infringement
   

Great Weather for Ducks

We've had a wetter than normal spring and I have heard remarks that "this is great duck weather". I took the opportunity to walk BLMH with family during the downpour on July 4th, in search of ducklings. I noticed five different flocks of ducklings on parade. It was great weather for ducks! Here are a few photos taken that day.

Budgeting Issues

Perhaps you did not have the opportunity to listen to the Mayor's speech on the "State of the City" which was delivered on January 15, 2009.

A link to the text of that speech is included at the end of this post. However, here are some budgeting statements excerpted from the speech. I have highlighted several parts that apply directly to our budgeting:

"In terms of the City’s finances, these are quite challenging times for us nationally and locally, and Wheaton is not immune to the effects of the nation’s economic crisis. Since the Council passed the 2008-2009 budget in April, the City has been working to eliminate an estimated $4.2 million difference between expenditures and revenue in the General Fund. This is being achieved through expenditure reductions and also a planned increase in revenues.

The reasons for differential include dramatic increases in costs for materials necessary to provide basic services that we have in town. The products include asphalt, fuel and road salt. The cost of asphalt rose 30 percent in one year. The price of road salt skyrocketed 300 percent in that period. There’s also increased costs for personnel, including union contracts and unfunded mandates that we get from the state of Illinois.

There’s also been a decrease in revenue due to downturn in the economy. The City received less revenue from sales tax, less revenue from utility tax and less revenue from the real estate transfer tax. Taxes make up 84% of the City’s General Fund revenues.

The $4.2 million differential in the 2009-2010 budget will be addressed by reducing spending, such as the following. We will reduce spending for the annual road program, sidewalks, legislative services, employee recognition, vehicles and fuel consumption. There are personnel reductions. The City has a relatively small workforce, and a fewer employee-per-resident ratio than most communities our size. However, about 69% of General Fund expenditures relate directly to personnel costs. The reductions include eliminating open positions, also. "

Link to: State of the City Speech, January 2009