Tuesday, June 1, 2021

SURFSIDE UNITED

 New member group...

Surfside United

P.O. Box 614, Oysterville Wa. 98641

A new member group is under development. I am not a member, but am happy to provide information as it becomes available.  I am sure they would appreciate any suggestions you have so that they can become more effective.  At this time, all I know is the Email I received and publishing below. 

George
Go public now 

Please ask anyone who wants information based on facts and evidence not opinions  on the candidates we will be supporting for upcoming election will be mailed or emailed.  Return address (not names unless needed for mailing)requested but will honor requests not to use address. 

Constructive criticism only we all know the bully tactics on present board do not condone nor practice.

Information that can be substantiated on board tactics will be addressed.
After election we will not address anything labeled anonymous but we will also not require any member to be a target anything we address will be as a group.

49 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sweet, I'm all in!

Anonymous said...

Finally- yes!

Anonymous said...

What an odd email. Do you know the person who sent you the email? Or is this just an attempt to find out who people are on this blog?

I'm suspicious it's a ploy by the opposition and crooked BOT who like to call us "malcontents" and are just using this as a decoy.

Anonymous said...

Me thinks 6:37 is fishing. Worried? You should be.

Anonymous said...

The nose knows

Anonymous said...

It is inconsistent to respond to an anonymous invitation by identifying oneself. You would be talking to a shadow on the wall. The stated goals are fine, but the energy and courage are missing when they remain nameless. Say your name. That is my suggestion.

Anonymous said...

Your name. There, is that better?

Anonymous said...

I can't remember all the times that a faction group has formed to "save" Surfside without success in the 15 years I have lived here. Rebellious folks should have learned by this time that it is better to truly get involved in what is Surfside as it is to accomplish changes in a righteous and forthright way with respect to laws, regulations, covenants and policies.

Anonymous said...

That's a load of BS. The board doesn't follow any laws, regulations, covenants, and policies. They make everything up as they go. Don't preach while being a hypocrite!

Anonymous said...

@2:48 - we will see what has changed a year, or even six months from now. There has been many attempts at these types of groups with no traction.

Steve Cox said...

2:26....No one has outlined an intent to "save" Surfside. The lack of any corrective change to compensate for mistakes made, and the recent obsession with creating new and unneeded restrictions is reason for discussion of how to remove the current regime of status-quo dedicated J pl. Tree-loppers.

Anonymous said...

I agree Steve Cox. The status quo dedicated J Placers tree loppers need to go. Maybe then we would stop being Stumpside.

Anonymous said...

We don't need a new group, we need a new board. Can we get to a new Board without a new group?

Anonymous said...

I'm with you--- May 28, 2021 at 1:30 PM!

Anonymous said...

Soon you will receive information in mail and proposal of 4 new candidates to replace 4 existing members. This is not the “United group ” as far as I know.

Anonymous said...

Have to point out the obvious to Cox. Those J Place Tree-loppers got more votes then him. That was also shown to be true when the Blagg coup got voted down at the annual meeting. So the majority of the members who care enough about the HOA to vote apparently like the status quo. I realize him and people like 1:19 don't like to hear that but many people bought here because of the covenants in place, not in spite of them.

Anonymous said...

It is possible to favor the covenants, but disagree with the current Board's behavior. Surfside does look better than some other areas on the Peninsula, and that is attractive. It is the toxic attitudes that screw us up.

Anonymous said...

Google shows the PO box belonging to the Espy Foundation, however, this foundation dissolved in November 2020 and the box may be issued to another at this point.

It is my understanding, if a PO Box is for "personal" use, the identity is private, it is for "public" use, it is not private and the ownership can be divulged by request to the post office.

At this point, I would not entertain any information about this cloak and dagger group. Sounds scammy.

Anonymous said...

Exactly, 9:55 AM. We are already lacking transparency, why would anyone give this any credence? Just more smoke and mirrors

So ridiculous.......

Steve Cox said...

About 300 votes are cast each election. That is not enough to tell us anything substantial about the prefences of Surfside members.

I WAS elected but denied a seat. 92 members voted for me, but the seated Board refused to appoint me to a Board vacancy, which they had done routinely for years.

Mr. Winegarwas an appointee, seated in a May meeting. He became B. Pres. In Sept. of that year.

Steve Cox said...

It looks terrible. But it has filled with high end homes that no one seems to use. New and nearly new homes look really nice. Do you think they vote ?

It looks like a ghost town much of the year. I doubt that these rarely seen owners are very involved with Surfside.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Cox, you weren't elected, you did receive votes.

Steve Cox said...

I was elected and refused the position Mr. Trustee, elitist nit. No one was appointed even though our documents require that the position be filled. Only a bunch of assholes would be so righteous as to think it disastrous to appoint someone with an independent attitude for 9 months. An appointee only serves out the end of the term of the Trustee they replace.

The Board has the ability to remove an appointee, or any member they collectively think is a bad fit. I have several years of experience on an HOA Board, and understand that the objective is to get things done in a professional manner.

By the way, how many times do you think the seated BOT should be allowed by the membership to ignore following our written requirements ? They refused to fill a vacancy on the BOT which caused problems with elections, by having too many seats to fill, and they refused to put my member proposal for a Bylaw change on the ballot by holding an unauthorized vote on it.

Members have the right to change the Bylaws by making a motion to vote by proxy, in advance of the intended vote, and the Board refused, in violation of our Bylaws.

Why do we have rules, Bylaws, covenants ? To establish the means in common for conducting HOA procedures. We do not have an autocracy, State Law requires democratic governance in HOA Boards, and because they rely on the integrity of the people who serve, do not have RCW police. The members are expected to exert pressure on their Trustees to follow the HOA rules with a conscience, and not the indifference of the volunteers who have been elected temporarily.

I volunteered my time and experience to be a Trustee, and the fact I was not elected outright was just fine. But getting f*cked around over the appointment stuff just pisses me off - that these people are so controlling and petty that they refuse to follow our standards, held in common, members and Board. Not 2 different species, but all are ONLY members, with one vote in elections, and each with something to contribute.

Anonymous said...

You were not elected - you can continue to try to rewrite history and call names and pout but it doesn't change anything...
Not on J, not an elitist, not on the board, etc...

Steve Cox said...

What is your excuse for being so spineless that you sanction a Board that doesn't have the integrity to follow community policy ? No name, weak and full of attitude. I don't need your confirmation to see the truth behind the posers.

JoAnne said...

I would like a member who has lived here a long time to let us who are not familiar with the history of Surfside to tell us when the last time a trustee seat was left vacant.

Anonymous said...

Mr Cox, you know exactly why you were not seated as a trustee and refuse to accept responsibly for your verbal attacks over and over against the board, but you continue to rant on and on “whoa is me” just read some of your own comments and you might figure it out, we already have a couple of blowhards on the board, we don’t need another one!

Anonymous said...

Where exactly in my comments did I sanction the Board?
Where did I exhibit attitude other than to point out how you are acting?
There was an election - you didn't win. Later a seat came open.
This was unrelated to the election. You weren't appointed.
Whether or not my name is applied doesn't change the facts. You are quick to defend anonymous posters when they support your position but resort to names when they do not.
From my perspective, it is clear why you weren't appointed the empty seat. You have only shown a my way or the highway attitude, cannot admit when you are wrong, and need to be the smartest person in the room with the last word.

Anonymous said...

Right on 8:41

Anonymous said...

819 - typical.

Bury anyone with a differing opinion. Keep the J place junta in power. It was disgusting 4 years ago, and has gotten progressively worse. Poor security. Boil water notices every 2 months. Compactor full. Election properly stacked.

What the hell do you and yor cronies do, except pat yourselves on the back? You can't even follow your OWN rules, slanted as they are.

Why don't you move somewhere else, so you can make another set of neighbors miserable?

Anonymous said...

@8:49 - Can you please provide name of the J Place Junta in power or is it just anyone who happens to live on J?

Steve Cox said...

8:41.... Attitude ? You continue to make this about me personally when the issue is corruption in Board actions. You avoid addressing any of my questions in this regard.

I'm sure that I am a much happier person NOT having had to deal with being on a Board bent on continuing on the same old track, avoiding any progressive change that would enhance the overall happiness of the community.

So my complaint, which you ignore, is with an abusive Board that ignores community rules at their pleasure. That is called "sanctioning" their actions.

I wasn't appointed because I openly criticized the Board's 2 year cover-up of their multiple failures, building in Wetlands, allowing mishandling of Asbestos, and receiving tens of thousands of dollars in fines.

My only venue was the blog, so I guess the blog does get read by Trustees. But in politics, if you make bad decisions, you shouldn't be surprised by criticism, and should be able to deal with it. My objectives have never been personal. Nice people make mistakes of judgement, and how they deal with that is huge. Transparency cures that.

I don't see myself wanting to get involved with the HOA. I offered my services, and was too honest to be seated as I should have been.

But to judge how I conduct business in a formal setting by my blog comments is pretty small-minded of you and others. You can't handle the "truth".

Anonymous said...

I am only pointing out that you weren't elected - full stop. You are the one who thinks that my pointing out the facts turns it personal.

Anonymous said...

You know something? Your both blowhards. You should be friends. Your both alike. Other than Cox and this jerk, who really cares if Cox is on or off the board? You both need to shut up and let us have a discussion on the real issues.

Anonymous said...

Here's the irony. Do I like the some of the current people running for the BOT? Do I always like Steve? The answer is no, actually I don't like some of the people AT ALL, having had negative encounters with them most of the time they are around. But, the big BUT in the room, I'm still voting for anyone who is not currently on the BOT.

WHY? Because I have seen the how disrespectful this little group of long term people have become. And your attitudes continue as if you have a RIGHT, a RIGHT to act like you do and disregard the changes needed or just the basic following of laws of the bylaws are ignored to serve your evil mindset. You have become mean, spiteful, and just UNKIND to the members who live and own property here. We don't want to pay for some of the stupid stuff you dream up in your heads. I definitely don't want to pay for an ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEE!!!!! Who's stupid idea is this? You still require people to complain against their neighbor (or anyone just because they bored) instead of fostering neighborly compliance before the problems occur. The money should be spent on education not strong armed, forced compliance for just a random amount of homeowners. Honestly, these covenants are so grossly outdated and do not, I repeat DO NOT meet today's style of living.

Time for new faces on this BOT and changes to meet the times. Go create your own blog to figure out how to be better champions for our HOA instead of coming here and trashing those who are trying.

George Miller said...

At present, this is the only place members can express what's on their minds. That's the only reason I keep this blog going. I would really rather dig in my flowers and like the most rest of you, just be left the hell alone. Want the blog to go away? SIMPLE..replace it with something where the members can speak and be listened to. And, get a respectful answer. Is that asking for to much?

Steve Cox said...

I've been talking about "the issues". The current Board violates community policy by manipulating who is on the Board, and blocking legal and properly presented member request for a community vote on a Bylaw change.

That Bylaw change effort was supported by the HOA attorney, to be put to a vote. 5 of the Trustees voted to block it even though they have no authority to do so.

Are you okay with a group of volunteers who you probably don't know denying member's their rights ? Having full authority to change or create covenants at will ? Covenants remain in place as Board members come and go, so changing the Bylaw to require a member vote on any covenant change is a bit of protection against an over-zealous enforcement regime such as we now have.

Anonymous said...

At this point there have been several statements that the BOT has ignored the rules and By-Laws. If that is true, then let's go down that rabbit hole...If the BOT is out of compliance with state law then where is their authority to exert power. I wonder if a lien placed on a property by a BOT which is out of compliance with State Law is valid, or subject to a countersuit. I wonder if such a Board can call itself legitimate in Court.

Steve Cox said...

You make an interesting point, but it's my understanding that HOAs caught on quickly in municipalities, and soon became an overwhelming responsibility for the State. As a property manager put it - there are no RCW police.

So any legal matter needs to stand on its own. Denying member rights would be a vague matter to pursue, where being forced by the hundreds to whittle one's trees to death would be much more solid an issue.

Why haven't these people organized and brought a lawsuit seeking reparations ? The Trustees are somewhat protected by a system that grew beyond manageability.

The HOA is defined by its' commitment to integrity and to be fair and honest with its' members. What seems to happen in Surfside, and many HOAs is that the trustees see themselves as celebrities and can do as they wish.

Anonymous said...

It just seems to me that the RCW's define what is a legitimate HOA. I read somewhere that the main reason HOA's lose in Court is :Process issues" - thus the long verbiage about complaints, redress, etc. But if you get past that, you go farther back, Process would include the basic RCW"s.

Anonymous said...

@8:58, I can name a few, Pam Harris, and Kurt and Peggy Olds. Go back to Arizona Kurt and Peggy and Pam go back to Idaho! We don't need or want you

Anonymous said...

Speak the truth 8:41. Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Since you're giving unsolicited advice 5:51, here's some for you.

We don't want your attitude here either, so why don't YOU move where it would be appreciated.

Anonymous said...

Yah, move 5:51. Get out of here.

Anonymous said...

@5:15, the majority would love it if you folks moved.

Anonymous said...

Sorry 6:40, unlike you I like it here so not going anywhere.

Anonymous said...

Me neither 5:15 or 9:40. You are stuck with me and that's pure laughter

Steve Cox said...

What the hell are you talking about ? The RCWs express a very basic framework for a democratic community governing body. Nothing more.

MB said...

All I can say is "wow". I am 'newer' to the community and typically ignore the ongoings of the HOA unless there is an issue that directly impacts me. Does someone have a summary of the outstanding issues that people are hoping to get addressed besides the board itself? Background for these issues might help people understand better why things need to change.
To date, all I have heard contention over is the height of trees in certain areas. Are there other items that people want changed?
Minimum size of structures?
Ability to rent less than a month at a time?
Just curious what others are looking for as I get to know my new community better.
Thanks for your time and personal views, it helps people have a better understanding of what is going on throughout the entire community - which to my experience seems to be pretty quiet in the real world.