It appears that our covenants are enforced by a secrete police.
How is it we have a Sheriff Report and a tree report, but nothing on other covenant violations? If members know that all types of covenants are being enforced, common sense dictates that the members may be more inclined to abide by the rules. It seems that the only time we are aware of violations, other than trees, is when there is an appeal filed. We than know the location, type and member. The members need to be more informed as well as the Board. How else will we know if our funds are being spent for a good reason and the results justify the cost?
In the past, the General Manager prepared a "Compliance Report" that included discussion. The new Compliance Officer should do the same and include number of pro-active as well as complaints submitted by members. The report should include statistics on the number of multiple complaints written by a single member. Full disclosure may reveal that Surfside has far less violations than we think, other than tree height harassment.
Below is the current tree report that contains location information of violations. The same should be done for other covenant violations. Below is a partial list. The full list is in the Tree Committee Minutes.
FEBRUARY 2021 TREE REPORT
Prepared by Georgia Olson
There are 124 open tree/weed cases currently. There were 21 cases closed in January 2021.
12 = First Letter = L
3 = Second Letter = W
14 = Fine Letter = F
75 = Tree Plan = TP
1 = Referred to Attorney
19 = No Action Taken as of this date – these are the last remaining proactive cases surveyed in August 2020 that still need 1st letters
124 Total open tree/weed cases.
21 cases were closed in January and are included in this spread sheet as closed:
5394, 5484, 5539, 5546, 5547, 5560, 5585, 5608, 5649, 5652, 5673, 5675, 5682, 5690, 5692, 5693, 5694, 5702, 5713, 5722, 5724
2 cases opened in December:
5760, 5761
14 cases are in fine status
Date Open Case # DBL Address Status 8/28/2012 4072 12-04-16 707 336th PLACE R
2/21/2019
5186
06-02-17
707 318th Place
TP 2/21/2019 5195 06-03-09 31905 I STREET F
2/21/2019
5214
05-01-06
31604 G STREET
F 2/21/2019 5217 04-03-06 31401 H STREET F
2/21/2019
5225
04-05-15
31307 I STREET
F 5/5/2019 5283 09-03-09 32116 G PLACE TP
6/24/2019
5307
03-01-04
30011 I STREET
TP 6/26/2019 5309 19-01-27 711 352ND PLACE F
9/6/2019
5394
19-01-12
0 (E OF 707 354TH)
C 9/6/2019 5398 18-01-17 0 (E OF 510 352ND ST) F
9/3/2019
5413
18-OB-01
35707 G STREET
TP 9/3/2019 5414 18-TR-OB 0 north of 35601 G St TP
10/16/2019
5460
04-05-10
31205 I STREET
F 3/2/2020 5468 04-06-07 31303 J PLACE F
4/27/2020
5481
10-05-01
32601 I STREET
F 4/27/2020 5484 10-05-11 32710 H PLACE C
4/27/2020
5486
10-03-20
32816 G PLACE
F 6/23/2020 5505 09-05-08 804 324TH PLACE TP
7/6/2020
5524
19-04-19
35117 I PLACE
TP 7/6/2020 5528 19-04-20 35113 I PLACE TP
7/6/2020
5529
19-04-21
35109 I PLACE
TP 7/6/2020 5530 19-04-22 35105 I PLACE TP
7/10/2020
5539
09-04-16
32305 H PLACE
C 7/10/2020 5542 09-05-08 804 324TH PLACE TP
7/13/2020
5545
06-04-05
31809 I STREET
TP 7/13/2020 5546 SRF-VW-03 31906 J PLACE C
7/13/2020
5547
04-06-22
31212 I STREET
C 7/13/2020 5549 10-08-03 32808 I STREET TP
7/13/2020
5550
10-08-04
32900 I STREET
TP
36 comments:
Good point George. Should be a compliance officer monthly report just like the deputy.
Claims of rampant covenant violations can never be susstantiated with factual data. In the 5 years we've owned here, we have never received a compliance notice, and neither have our 4 plex neighbors.
It's rare that anyone receives notices other than tree height discrepencies. No one can accurately measute tree heights, so they're estimated. They tend to grow a foot or less annually when healthy, so are a few inches over, a violation ?
Since we know for fact that no one determines if views are blocked, how urgent can compliance be ? Yet there are hundreds of properties cited annually, and thousands of dollars spent on attorneys that send member letters threatening fines and other legal measures. Such a waste.
From my observations of the peninsula, Surfside appears to be a more neat and attractive area than others. What distracts from the natural beauty of the area are the butchered trees. Most of the residence and rv lots are maintained in a neat manner. I do think that many undeveloped lots could be better maintained with dead tree and brush removal. The association needs to set an example by doing a better job of maintaining and improving common areas.
We really don't know if other notices are rare or not since there isn't a monthly compliance officer report. Has there ever been a monthly compliance officer report? If there are but a handful of covenant violations, as Steve suggests (other than trees) then it probably doesn't even justify the cost of a compliance officer. Would love to know exactly how much the tree covenant actually costs the association. Compliance officer, office staff time, attorney.
And the cost of the chipper site too.
Remodel for compliance office at a cost of $3,113.28.
Good observation George. We're spending a whole lotta $$$ to make our area look terrible.
The new compliance policewomxn is a retiree who probably relishes in being a 'karen'. Writing up violations without any checks or balances and most likely no accountability nor technial or personal relationship skill requirements is a dream job to some.
The tree covenant costs members individually and the association as a whole $1000s. What is the PURPOSE of this covenant? It seems to benefit about 25% of the membership so they can assure their view of the ocean. But is it in the best interest of the association as a whole? $$$$$ If the HOA ever asked for feedback on this covenant (like they did with the square footage change) they would probably hear from many more members in favor of eliminating it as opposed to keeping it. Could be wrong. Never know unless you ask. Could the HOA please initiate a request for tree covenant feedback? Starting with a clear statement on the PURPOSE of the covenant.
Fyi 2:20:
A few years back the HOA DID ask for feedback on the covenant (like they did with the recent lighting change). They heard from many more members who favored keeping it than those who opposed it. Like the lighting, the meeting was made known to the membership with emails and letters allowed.
Everyone needs to be aware of the $200 transfer fee that was passed in 2019. When selling or buying, the property entails a $200 inspection in order to make sure everything is in compliance. And there are items found during this compliance inspection that have not been addressed previously. This justifies the hiring of our compliance officer, but I’m still of the opinion if not addressed in the past, this would be selective enforcement!
I do know when we bought here in 2008 these complaints were not this big problem. What changed? Going from complaint to compliance in my opinion
They went pro-active because everyone was complaining that they had to tell on their neighbors for an issue affecting them. So now we have it both ways, you can file a complaint and they go out or the compliance person goes out once a week for pro-actively and when there is a a sale of a property.
I've lived in HOA with much, much more restrictive covenants to follow than these. Personally I'd take these over some I've lived under, these are easy!
2:20....I've heard vague references to such an inquiry. Two things stood out in these re-creations....very few members responded, and most favored the covenant. The lack of member response reflects our elections - few participants, and most favoring the Board's position. But the outcome of opinion is suspect to say the least.
With every property west of the ridge being forced to waste money killing their own trees, and hostile enforcement forcing compliance, most properties biannually, who can pretend that these owners FAVOR this policy ? The BOT has long shown favor for J Place candidates, and avoids any members NOT favoring the Tree Restrictions. Each year the 300 voters re-elect J Place owners. Do we see a pattern here ?
A few years back the HOA didn't have pro-active compliance. Would be interesting to know what the feedback would be today given how dramatically things changed. What's the best way for the HOA to get real feedback? In addition to putting it in the Weekender and on Facebook send an email to all members. Add it to other paper mailings like the dues and assessments statements or the annual meeting notice. Won't cost anything extra. Still would like to understand the purpose of the covenant.
Just sold n got the heck out of surfside, was charged the transfer fee, but was not aware of any inspection. But, then again, had no trees,lol
I sold and got out of Surfside too. I was charged the transfer fee. There was no report, nothing. My light was in violation of the CC&Rs. Good one Surfside. You've scammed your members once again.
Oh and by the way, I was never provided a copy of the CC&Rs when I purchased my property.
The transfer fee is a blatant rip-off. It is the HOA's answer to their own incompetence. The members have been bilked of funds repeatedly for computer related spending on equipment and technical assistants. How is it that the HOA is not capable of keeping accurate records of member accounts ?
The Assoc. seems hot to have multiple fronts of enforcement, so should be expected to keep accurate up-to-date records. Aside from tree restrictions, few other issues come up, so it should be simple to keep track of individual compliance.
The transfer process is a simple one, and a simple check of compliance status should not require an on-site inspection. Many owners never receive any compliance violations.
Surfside is a NON-PROFIT organization, and office wages are not $200/hour. This transfer fee is a violation of our non-profit mandate, and typical of our HOA, the fee cannot be legally defended.
Actually, it helps the buyer. Can you imagine moving into your new home and you get hit with covenant violations. This helped when we moved in because the property needed some work. We were made aware prior to closing and then able to make a more informed decision. We bought here for the covenants and had no problem with them. But the previous owner didn't want to comply so he would've left us with the issues without advising us he was out of compliance. I appreciate knowing in advance what we were getting into
1:13 anonymous, the point here is not that the previous owner ignored whatever covenant it was, but that it was also ignored by the board when we were complaint driven. Now after many years they have chosen to be compliance driven. If you look at the definition of “selective enforcement “ this is it!
Sorry JoAnne, I have to respectfully disagree and suggest you revisit the true definition of "selective enforcement". The complaint system in itself created a situation where selective enforcement actually occurs because not all members were treated the same.
For years you would hear from people who that it was unfair when they received a notice that they were not compliant because there were other member properties that violated the same covenant. The only difference was they didn't get a complaint which meant the HOA didn't respond to the violation. So while both parties were guilty only one was forced to comply. That is selective enforcement.
Now with the requirement of all members to be compliant and having someone tasked with making sure they are the selective part is gone and you're left with equal enforcement for all. Of course those like 1:13's previous owner who didn't want to follow the covenants they signed off on are upset. Meanwhile those of us who do keep our place within the rules feel it's about time.
Anonymous 7:57. My statement is from doing research about HOAs. Here is what I found concerning selective enforcement, may just be an opinion, but it has been upheld in court.
“Additionally sometimes new board members may feel that the previous board was too lax, resulting in the enforcement of rules that the previous board members did not enforce. Or there may be an uptick in a certain type of violation and the board may misguidedly believe they need to ‘make an example “ out of one or more homeowners. Regardless of the cause, the result is the same-improper selective enforcement”
“On the flip side, if the HOA turned a blind eye to violations, the entire set of covenants could be declared nullified by failure to enforce them over a period of time.
HOAs have a new trick they use to meet these obligations, the so-called “resale inspection rule”
Just from research I did when I felt we were treated as a example with the complaint about our lights in 2019. Our observation and documentation found many out of compliance, but we were the ones cited and drug out until March of 2019 to finally receive our letter that we were in compliance.
Exactly @March 18, 2021 at 7:57 AM
Just like the complaint and trouble Joanne has had to suffer over the Edison lights. She gets all kinds of heartache while others around here are still living peacefully living with string lights hanging. It's BS and if I was Joanne, I would go back to full light bulbs on her porch. Just take a stroll down G street North side, I noticed two homes with string lights the other evening and not the nice kind like Joanne has. Drive along J, both sides north and south, string lights. It's all kinds of WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! I'm not a rat and not going to "turn anyone in" but it's not that hard to see if you need a defense!
7:57 gives a very good explanation of selective (complaint driven) enforcement and why it is unfair. JoAnne has a valid point as well.
Does the HOA bear any of the responsibility, given the fact that it chose NOT to enforce the covenants fairly for 40-50 years? This time frame might a little off, but no question it has been a very long time. Definitely gives people the impression it is not necessary to comply. ESPECIALLY on the tree issue. Just look around.
At the very LEAST the initial communication about the change should have been a WRITTEN letter to ALL members members explaining what was going to happen and why. Instead, the first thing people got was a threatening letter, with a 3 week time frame to come up with a plan. And mind you this was in the middle of a pandemic. In that sense, I completely understand their anger and frustration. A small gesture of understanding from the HOA might have been to leave the chipper site open.
The manner in which some of these issues are handled is part of the problem.
The problem is a small group of J Placers who want this recreational community to be changed to an HOA with enforced covenants that only benefit their own selfish desires. They have turned member against member and a board that has become us against them. Them being the members.
So true 1:53. Really the whole peninsula is a recreational community.
Does anyone know how the board is planning on enforcing the lighting covenant? Is the compliance officer going to drive around at night looking for violations? Sounds like there are currently lots of lighting violations That's how they're doing the tree enforcement....going street to street..... measuring trees.....looking for violations. Will the compliance officer be checking every RV for a permit? Do we know what other covenant violations they are looking for? If the goal is fairness the compliance officer should be actively searching for all violations.
The goal is not fairness. Could that be why the compliance officer left? The tree chairwoman said that she wanted tree height violations to be the priority for compliance. That should tell you what the compliance officer was about.
You are welcome to your opinion 1:53 but I disagree. When the board decided to go with having all properties compliant the trustees who didn't live on J signed off on it. While it was known by the meeting minutes that were published that the change was coming I do agree that a reminder should have been sent out to all members since it was a year or so before it went into effect.
In the spirit of better communication, it would be nice if the board meeting minutes were emailed to all the members, in addition to being posted on the website. This is not a time consuming step for the office staff. Use the all-member email list, attach the minutes and hit the send button. I'd certainly appreciate getting important information by email. Probably lots of others would too.
I know for a fact the tree committee meeting minutes are altered. It has been stated a few times, "this won't make it in the minutes will it". Seems they have things to hide. All committee meetings should be recorded for all to hear.
Good suggestion 3:36. Committee meetings could be handled in the same way as the board meeting. Live stream on Facebook.
Well we won’t be able to see or hear the meeting today! So much for open meetings! Quite a few interesting items today also!
So how do all the board members see and hear each other? If they are zooming, open it up to all members. This technical glitch is total bull and they know it.
I'm so glad I'm out of there. They are total abusive, dictator, jerks!
2:34:
If you feel the need to make comments constantly even though you moved you are really not out of here and in reality it is YOU who is coming off as a jerk.
Our board tries their best. They are good people working for our community.
Just because I live on J Place, doesn't mean I'm biased.
I wish more members would actively get involved.
These aren’t as bad as others is not a good defense
Post a Comment