Friday, May 15, 2020

Board Meeting Sat updated

Meeting Agenda  May 16, 2020....updated with the agenda
The Weakender is on line.   It has the wrong date of May 8, 2020, but for Surfside, that's pretty good.
It is also stated that you can listen to the meeting on their "official" FaceBook page. 

Surfside Homeowners Association
Regular Board Meeting AGENDA
May 16, 2020 at 9:00 a.m.
Call to Order - Regular Board Meeting (S. Winegar)
Adopt the May 16, 2020 Regular Meeting Agenda (S. Winegar)
Safety Message (S. Winegar)
Approval of the April 18, 2020 Regular Board Meeting minutes (S. Winegar)
Floor comments (20 Minutes)
Old Business
Update on Covid-19 Loan application
New Business
Surf Crest appeal (Charlie Guthrie)
Long Term Property Maintenance Plan
Proposed change to operations Manual regarding fine language
Approval of various signs
Salary Policy
Approve the proposed decrease in the group conservation rate from 6,500 cu ft to 4,000 cu ft.
Approve bid for asphalt repair- Oysterville Loop Water Main Project/
8. Communications
a. Incoming Correspondence
b. Outgoing Correspondence
Meetings & Contacts
Staff, Trustee & Committee Reports
Water Systems (J Clancy)
Treasurer’s Report (R. Turner)
Architectural Committee (K Olds)
Community Relations Committee (A deLeest)
Tree, Brush, & Noxious Weed Sub-Committee (A. deLeest) No meeting
Land and Buildings Committee (R Minich)
Fish & Waterway Management Committee (J Clancy) – No meeting
Business office/Compliance reports (T Reber)
Emergency Management Committee (M. Scott) – No Meeting
Other reports

Less than 24 hours before the meeting, and nothing posted.
No Weakender.

What happened to all that high tech. the best minds on the Board came up with?  Call in, listen in, etc...
Maybe Clancy needs to do a study on this and make a spread sheet or action plan. What's another 5 to 10 thousand dollars?

Here is a suggestion:  Appoint a tech committee to make recommendations.  Oh! forgot. We tried that once.   I wish there were people or a company that you could hire that could set up and put in place the technology the Board has been attempting.  There must not be.  I am sure Curt and Reber will figure this out.

45 comments:

Anonymous said...

Remoting a Board Meeting is not rocket science.
I'm sensing this isolation is going to be used as an opportunity to keep us further in the dark. This is a not for profit organization. Communication isn't an option, it's the law!

Fed Up said...

I have the answer: let’s bring Deb back to assist those meatheads! “STUPID IS, STUPID DOES” as Forest Gump would say!

Anonymous said...

Please. The majority of members isolate themselves from the board, happily. But since you feel that it is so easy to set up the remote broadcast why don't you go down there to help by showing them how?

David Tollefson said...

Indeed, the Technology Committee had prepared and was scheduled to present the findings including remote broadcasting, online voting, HOA website options and the full results (over 150 member participation) of our HOA Member survey. Regretfully, we were disbanded without notice and unable to present the findings and options. the Board did not want to hear the results.

David Tollefson said...

The Technology Committee did prepare its findings and recommendations to be presented to the Board; however, we were disbanded by the Board without notice prior to the scheduled Board Meeting. Our recommendations were based upon our research based upon Membership input through our Survey which had 140 responses and included remote broadcasting options, online voting options and upgrade requirements, options and costs. The Committee was not allowed to present those findings and recommendations due to the Board's decision to disband the Technology Committee.

Anonymous said...

Shoa hired IT guy should have been there to teach. Not on the phone. Person on our end, said didn't even use facebook.

JoAnne said...

Well that lasted just long enough to get frustrated!

Anonymous said...

I attempted to view the board meeting this morning and while things started out ok it quickly deteriorated as the meeting progressed. The video/audio was constantly being paused or quit completely. Anybody else have bettr luck?

Bob Haskin said...

I watched it, it went fairly well.

Someone needs to be the moderator with mute power, that open mic during the break was just silly and I don't think they realized all could here them

george said...

Well now..That was a 3 hour waste of time. I think it can best be described in two words...Pathetic and embarrassing.

Poor audio and video. You had to jump to the home page time and again to bring the live stream back. I hope the written summary will show who voted and for what. A three hour meeting that should have taken an hour or less.

JoAnne said...

I could never get back on after the break! Never could understand the noise fine. Did they vote to put it in the procedure manual or restrictive covenants? I still think they should do a complete survey about the sheriff situation. I’ve heard many other opinions. I’m looking forward to your synopsis on the whole meeting George!

Anonymous said...

What a bunch of whiners - never happy.
I'll give them credit for trying something new. Nothing is perfect the first time and I'm confident the kinks will get ironed out.
Of course the faction on this blog will keep right on whining...

Steve Cox said...

Since we know that the community has NOT suffered financial losses, Why not show some sense of conscience and use the $10,000 to spread some good will ? With over 200 bogus tree complaints filed in the last year, the total cost of tree maintenance (incurred at least every other year) is surely between $15,000 and $20,000. Send all who paid for this so-called maintenance, a rebate of $500.

Then declare a moratorium on Tree height restrictions for the calendar year 2021. We know that all owners will be losing wages or money on investments. Many owners may have lost jobs, healthcare, or lost money on rental properties.

Dropping the credit card charge was a pretty feeble gesture, saving a few people a few bucks. We aren't likely to be able to return to the lives we lived a couple of months ago, jobs may not be restored, businesses may not survive the closures, so this is an ideal time to take a serious look at what matters most to the community as a whole.

JoAnne said...

Steve, not sure as to the restrictions on the $10,000, but I’m sure there are some. Maybe the board could let us know what that money is to be used for.
As far as whiners go, something new isn’t the problem! This is something that should have been in place way before now! It’s being done everywhere and has been for sometime!

Doug Malley said...

Anonymous @ 1:25

Please use your name or get off the blog! George??????

This is the 21st Century, middle school kids can do this without a glitch, why can’t a multi million dollar HOA.

All I saw was a bunch of BS presented and approved by the BOT. Really a $100 dollar fine for a barking dog recorded by some pissed off neighbor?

Why don’t you stop the white Honda with the fart can muffler that delivers drugs all over the Peninsula at all hours of the night and day?

Open your eyes to the real problems, they are not trees and barking dogs or someone sitting out by their fire in the evening with music on.

Shed break ins are at an all time high and occur every year, drug sales are rampant in the area, amongst other crimes.

No the answer is not paying for another deputy for Pacific County, hire a good private security company and raise HELL with the County Commissioners for no Sherriff coverage! People are arrested and turned loose with multiple warrants, really why did the judge issue the arrest warrant? To put the people in jail!!!!

There are big problems all over the Peninsula and they do stretch into Surfside no matter what you all believe,



Anonymous said...

Sounds like Clancy is having a hard time swallowing all of this.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Malley - how long have you been here? Less than a year?
You seem to have the answers so perhaps you should run for the board or volunteer for a committee.

JoAnne said...

Doug, I believe the $100 fine is for excessive noise complaint, not dogs. I just understand if this was added to the procedure book or the restrictive covenants?
It’s very interesting to me that all the time we did have sheriffs presence here, we never once saw anyone stopped for speeding here on the oysterville approach! It’s pretty obvious that drug deals are happening at the approach, but again never have we seen a police presence! The speeding cars on the beach is also an accident waiting to happen, but much more important to cut down trees and worry about lights being too bright!

Fed Up said...

Our countries citizens are suffering greatly with the pandemic. Jobs are lost, mortgages can’t be satisfied, food banks are crying for donations, businesses will never revive from this pandemic. This is a plea to the HOA board to use common sense and empathy during these painful times and immediately put a moratorium on all tree heights for at LEAST through 2021. These difficult times do NOT warrant neighbors filing complaints against their fellow members as you have no idea what hardships a family is suffering. Members must not be harped on about how tall their trees are. Have a heart and do the right thing and consider your fellow members! How can anyone argue this request? Please folks, join in with me to request this moratorium.

Fed Up said...

Our countries citizens are suffering greatly with the pandemic. Jobs are lost, mortgages can’t be satisfied, food banks are crying for donations, businesses will never revive from this pandemic. This is a plea to the HOA board to use common sense and empathy during these painful times and immediately put a moratorium on all tree heights for at LEAST through 2021. These difficult times do NOT warrant neighbors filing complaints against their fellow members as you have no idea what hardships a family is suffering. Members must not be harped on about how tall their trees are. Have a heart and do the right thing and consider your fellow members! How can anyone argue this request? Please folks, join in with me to request this moratorium.

Doug Malley said...

Anonymous @ 6:36

Whey don’t you step up and identify yourself in your post, being anonymous lends no value or truth to what you say.

You are just spouting gibberish that you are afraid to backup with an identity.

And yes I have been here less than a year and have witnessed some really sad and disturbing things going on.

How can I run for anything? There will be no open seats till next year’s members meeting if the BOT has its way.

JoAnne,

Our place is on I street and starting about 4:30 to 5:00 am I sware the green flag is waved for the start of the Daytona 500.

Cars and trucks go by from 40 to 60 mph, a few radar gun set ups every week around Surfside could greatly increase the Sherriffs budget and they could add additional deputies.

Not sure what was passed as far as the fine, I just know it was something more that I don’t see as needed. Kinda like trees, lighting, pre sale inspections.

My point is that there are more truly illegal activities going on, let’s concentrate on those things and let members that are basically good people enjoy their time at the beach.

Anonymous said...

Sorry to interrupt your rant, but you do realize the HOA/board doesn't have control over traffic on I nor can the enforce anything right? So instead of complaining here contact the Sheriff.

As far as the noise complaint goes, it may not be an issue to you but I have no doubts that if it was happening next to your house it would be a different story.

Doug Malley said...

Anonymous 11:32

It has happened at my house in Kennewick in an HOA for over 2 years, 2 barking dogs all day long while the owner is at work. The difference is the HOA is not willing to take a stand and open themselves up to lawsuits because someone stands with a cell phone and records the dogs.

It is a violation of the Kennewick Municipal Code, but you must file a complaint with a log showing dates and time of the violation covering 1 month. Then the City Attorneys will decide if they want to file charges and if they do the complantaint must go to court and testify against their neighbor. Then after all of that it is a $50 fine.

As far as the Sheriff goes you are correct the HOA has no control, even when we the members were paying a Deputies yearly salary we received no service. So what good is calling the Sheriff?

And what I am saying is not a rant, it is facts as I see them. Take off your blinders open your eyes and look around, or are all those bad trees blocking your J Place view?

Anonymous said...

I have been on both sides of the dog issue, and I think the policy could be less vague. What is disruptive to someone with a migraine or a nasty temper is different from normal life. Normal life should be the grounding space for policy. So what is normal? I think you have to define that, to begin with.
1. Dogs should not be left loose in the yard, unattended for ___________ period of time.
Would that be all day? Or an hour? Or 15 minutes? You need to say what it is.

2. Dogs should not be barking outside before 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. That is pretty obvious.

3. How much barking is okay? Is it 10 minutes? Is it 15 minutes, twice a day? If the dog was let out to run and relieve itself in a fenced yard, in the morning and evening, and it amused itself by barking at passers by, would that be an infraction? Some cities are very clear about that. A dog could bark, say, five times a day, at intervals of two hours. Or a dog could bark twice a day for 10 minutes. But if a dog barked three times an hour, all day, that would be a problem.

I think Surfside needs to make these decisions ahead of time. if Surfside is dog friendly, the policy should include the dogs as part of our community. They do have a right to exist and make a little noise in the same way that children playing or cars passing by or neighbors laughing out loud, or running a lawnmower, or birds singing, or the Coast Guard helicopter passing by, are also part of the community.

JoAnne said...

Doug Malley, yes! We lived in two different HOAs in Richland and micromanaging was not on their agenda! Surely we have a county dog nuisance law and a noise or ordinance, they should handle these matters. We had neighbors who were mistreating two dogs and all we had to do was keep a log, turn it in and they handled it. Those two dogs ended up going to Coyote Ridge and were trained by the inmates for service dogs
I really don’t know why we’re so special up here to require extra protection! Crime is everywhere in this day and age. Let the agencies given this responsibility do their job. We need to get ourselves out of being a small city and just be an HOA

JoAnne said...

Pacific county Ordanance #9 addresses all these problems including fireworks. Let them take care of these problems We’re just duplicating issues that the proper authorities should handle, not us

Anonymous said...

3:02 here: I agree with JoAnn, but since that is not the plan, and they would rather make larger fines and more complaints, and they actually do micromanage, then I suggest the policy at least be fair and predictable.If they are going to micromanage, they should at least do it right.

Anonymous said...

The county/sheriff won't do anything. They don't have time or resource regardless if it is their responsibility. That is why we need the separate patrol as a deterrent.
How many times did Travis bring in people on warrants only to have them be released - a lot...

JoAnne said...

Wish I could post a photo here! Just got back from a walk and someone couldn’t wait until tomorrow so the tore down the barrier! Cars on the beach already!

Doug Malley said...

Anonymous @ 3:02

Yes you are correct in your thoughts and I do agree as a lifelong dog lover and rescuer of many dogs, dogs are easily trained and only want to please their human companion.

That is why I have never filed a complaint against the 6 different home owners adjacent to my property in 21 years of living in my home.

Even though those dog owners chose to shove the dogs out the door, rain, shine, snow, (up to 3 or 4 feet) in bad winters, sometimes at 5 am and not returning until 6 pm. And yes we have called for welfare checks, only to be told they have a dog house and water.

It just boils down to neighbors tolerate their neighbors downfalls or negligence, or ignorance, or what ever and usually just a discussion helps unless the neighbor is totally ignorant which we have seemed to encounter many times in 21 years

I just don’t see where a $100 dollar fine is warranted or legal, no matter what the noise complaint is!

There are just bigger fish to fry and this just seems like another control issue brought on by the BOT, what are the City, County,State, and Federal laws concerning noise, because in a court of law that is all that matters.

Once again just my thoughts, and that is what a blog is supposed to represent.

BPSHOA said...

Dear Anonymous 11:32,

While the roads are in fact county, "back when" we had Larry Clark as our local Deputy for Surfside, he would patrol SHOA and write tickets. We really didn't have nearly the issues with crime and traffic that we do now. I Street has become worse of a speedway. There were 2 different pickups (one was a local woodcutting one) that exceeded the speed of sound as they went by; blink and you would miss them. Larry also changed his patrol shifts around so people wouldn't get used to him being on duty at the same times.

JoAnne said...

Found out some interesting information from department of community development. You cannot rearrange or bulldoze the area by the dunes without a permit. None was gotten for the recent destruction just to the south of the Oysterville road
This is not the first time these condo owners have done this! Perhaps the BOT should think about putting up signs about this🤣

Steve Cox said...

No one should have to put up with a neighbor dog barking all of the time. I would bet that the offending member has been asked civilly to no avail. We have a neighbor across the street that has a large black lab that has had no training and barks for hours at a time. He has been asked countless times to do something about it. It's likely a fine is all that can be done to try and get the owner to tend to this.

JoAnne said...

Steve, county ordinance #9 addresses excessive dog barking. Has anyone tried this avenue? If enough pressure is put on the county, they will have to respond and enforce the ordanances

Anonymous said...

@JoAnne - that is not correct.
@5:14 said it accurately.

JoAnne said...

Sorry whoever you are, but I disagree. I know it can work as it’s supposed to!

JoAnne said...

With the discussion at Saturday’s BOT meeting about signs, I have another suggestion. We need to place signs all along the dunes facing east to remind members you cannot disturb the dunes without a permit from the county!! The board should be actively involved in this illegal activity as much as they are with trees, lights, noise, dogs and sheds!!!

Steve Cox said...

I don't know what signs the BOT is considering, but this comes up every now and then. This is something that should address a clear need that cannot be addressed better by other means. Too many signs, and they all will get ignored. The condo-plex that has done the recent excavation undoubtedly has it's own designated governing committee. This is something that they have surely collectively decided to do, knowing full-well that this is a violation of the Shoreline Act.

They are banking on the State and County being too busy to address it as the serious matter it is. But look at the attitude that Surfside has perpetuated by its' relentless savagery of the landscape via the Tree Policy, and we see that the HOA doesn't have any respect for nature or an appreciation of aesthetic beauty. I agree that Surfside should report this activity to the State and County, and such audacity should merit putting a Surfside fine in place that is significant, such as $1000, no excuses, no exceptions.

At the same time, the HOA should frequently remind owners that altering the dunes is a State crime. My bet is, the HOA won't do a thing. They won't take a stand on it either in print or action. Nature is too resistant to HOA control, so their enemy apparently. But signs are not necessary, when this is a contracted job, and not just a whim.

The condo structure at Oysterville Road access is huge, and blocks any view of the excavation without viewing from the beach. But I believe they are 2 story condos, so can see the Ocean just fine without f***ing with the dunes, owned by the citizens of the State of Washington.

JoAnne said...

They discussed signs at the meeting, some are being put at the compactor to help members follow the rules and they discussed others for the dunes. These would inform people of fireworks not allowed in Surfside! You can put up all he signs you want, but there will always those who won’t follow! The 25 mph limit on oysterville road is a prime example that I’m aware of
As far as this condo group following the rules, this is at least the third time they’ve done this with no consequences. I know when I contacted the surfside office then, I was told that they had nothing to do with that private property! Can you imagine? It’s everyones responsibility to protect the dunes. I do have high hopes this time as photos were taken and a letter sent out by a county official. Last time the remark was made by one of the condo owners that “ we’ll just pay the fine, it’s worth it”

Anonymous said...

Why are you guys getting worked up about scraping down a dune? The condos probably applied for the dune modification. and even if they didn't, so what? are you jealous that you don't have a view?

JoAnne said...

Dear anonymous whoever you are! They did not apply for a permit once again. What is it ok to break some laws but not others? Everyone should be concerned about the dunes, it’s much more than a view. If you feel so strongly about this post your name!

Steve Cox said...

Do you grasp why laws are made in civilized societies ? Do you understand that Surfside HOA spent well over a year trying to settle with the State over the HOA's blatant building without a valid permit in designated "Wetlands" ? Besides an initial fine of several thousand dollars, and attorney fees, the HOA paid $12,000 in mitigation costs.

The citizens of the United States have fought hard for various protections of natural areas, National Parks, laws that protect drinking water, limit industrial pollution, seek to protect clean air, wildlife, and natural resources. Such a dumbass statement sounds like a J Place owner - thinking everyone is jealous of your funky "view" over the chopped tree landscape.

Many, if not most of us can see the big picture much better than you can, and go find an unspoiled view whenever the spirit moves us. We have principles that are worth fighting for, speaking out for, unlike your sorry selfish behind.

Steve Cox said...

JoAnne.... Who was it that told you the HOA had no authority to address this dune bulldozing ? I'm guessing Reber. If that's the case, then how does the HOA justify having a standing committee that enforces restrictive tree heights on about 65% or more of Surfside properties ?

State law does NOT support this over-stepping of private property rights, yet this policy has been enforced for 20 years or more in Surfside. State law DOES forbid alteration of the dunes - and Surfside has no authority ? That's a whopper of a contradiction ! The HOA is afraid to hassle this large condo, but happily, even joyfully, showing no mercy or willingness to change or compensate individual owners for senseless topping and killing trees on private property by mandate.

Russ said...

9;06AM, What a dumb a** remark.

JoAnne said...

Steve, no not Mr Rebel. This was I think about three or four years ago. Actually Tom was down at the site when I went down to take photos. I haven’t called him yet to ask his findings. I’m more optimistic this time as someone is actively worked on this violation of state law!