Happening in Surfside.....updated 7/29/2018
About Jim Flood.
What I am hearing. Some not substantiated.
1. Can't find a contractor willing to do dig up and removal of AC pipe.
2. Water Dept. charged for labor with Emergency cache.
3. Water Dept. not charging for work at chipping site.
4. Expensive calls with attorney continue.
5. Contractor charging for tree top removal and dumping at the chipping site.
6. Johansen buys property in Surfside.
7. President Williams continues activity without informing full Board.
8. Employee notified authorities of AC pipe disposal violation.
9. Last year for Flood on Board.
9. Jim Flood made the statement during the special Board meeting following the Annual Meeting that he wanted to be Vice President again, because it was his last year on the Board.
23 comments:
So business as usual, with no hope of better management in near future. Good job in picking leaders Surfside.
OK. If not substantiated, why post it?
Key word is some.
The blog host way of creating controversy. Just like Trump. Create a problem and then sit back and watch the sheep fight
8:57 … Looks like you are into creating the drama. By acknowledging all of these comments are not substantiated, bloggers with information can verify or offer insight. That distances George far from Trump, who just knowingly lies, and when confronted, lies some more. No amount of factual information can dissuade Trump from his delusions.
California is burning down for the second straight year, and the last 5 years have been the hottest on record in the northwest. Virtually all scientists validate global warming is a certainty, yet Trump denies it, and has been busy removing regulations that limit air pollution and factory and auto emissions.
Don’t we have enough bull on this blog with out your view on national politics? Save it for your Facebook page.
I don't use any social media and never have. You are obviously a Trump supporter, as you call my statement b.s., and ALL of it is factual. I think you are a moron.
Wow Steve, bad day? What party I choose is in no way reflected in my statement. But if your going to not be anonymous, why not with all statements? Btw, “this” is social media. Least I have the good taste to not mix politics with this mess we have here. The name calling here is bad enough already.
Don’t ever mix politics with this blog again! I am a President Trump supporter. Shameful that you stated such hateful nonsense. George, please block this whack job from ever making crazy comments again. He is so bizarre, he forgot this was a SHOA blog.
Enough already!!! No more Trump comments pro or con.
I didn't bring up Trump in the first place. How can it escape anyone's notice that the president of the United States is a pathological liar ? It has been documented time and again, and the news outlets rave about it daily. It's just a fact - as is everything else I said at 10:32.
That's whack in your book huh ? You can't save yourself, it's sad. "You can't handle the truth."
Steve Cox - I suspected that you are a jerk. Now I know it. BTW, I despise Trump so we can agree on that. Are you unable to keep your political opinions to yourself? You shame yourself. Grow up.
Never give up honesty for the garbage that passes for political correctness out here! That way, the trolls win.
Well, this all took an interesting turn didn't it? Let me add some fuel to the fire.
Unless you are new here, even when he comments as anonymous most know it's a Mr. Cox post so the name isn't really needed. I see though that him and I agree on Trump. While not rising to the level of Nixon going to China or Kirk working with the Klingon's, encouraging non the less.
What I'm here for is to address his comments on the fires and global warming. I too have watched the Ca. fire coverage. One constant that has been reported on all channels has been officials blaming the quick spreading on high winds. You know, like the winds we get here routinely. I bring this up because I seem to remember that when myself and others make comments on how it could easily happen here for those exact reasons and how we should take steps to prevent it he was quick to pooh-pooh our concerns since it went against his let the trees grow statance.
Back to the original topic. This blog is pretty much like most. It is part factual information, part biased information and straight up part B.S. The percentages of each varies day to day and topic to topic. I feel like others here that creating a topic that includes unsubstantiated statements doesn't help. It can create some interesting reading so I guess that is a plus.
Well 10:18, I'll have to try to live on somehow, bearing the weight of your anonymous opinion.
Political comments are just another way to turn people away from this blog. Repeating their same opinions over n over didn’t work. Now they want to use devisive politics. Not surprising these kind of people will sink so low. See it in national politics, now here too. I guess we just can’t escape self righteous and self serving losers shoving their narrative down everyone’s throats.
I have said that following basic procedures to cut seagrass, trees and shrubs away from contact with structures is enough. Other extreme comments have included suggesting removing all of the trees and mowing all of the seagrass. That I have called ridiculous.
If you want to denude your property and cover it in gravel, so be it. To suggest that there is any sense to that approach is absurd. What I have said is that you can't provide for every contingency, and worry your life away trying to assure nothing bad can ever happen to you. We all adapt that attitude toward Tsunami danger, because we know it's entirely unpredictable.
Taking some basic precautions should be enough to give some peace of mind, without obsessing over it.
No, you forgot this was America when you voted.
1:36 … Most of the opinions on this blog are political as they relate to the HOA Board and their actions. I'm puzzled by your statement about bloggers who make statements about politics - "these kind of people". "These...people" are Surfside members commenting on Surfside issues. Using your rationale, all who have opinions are righteous, losers, and want to cram stuff down people's throats.
The actions of the Board drive opinions about Surfside on the blog. Most members have opinions about these decisions, and many have no problem expressing their opinions. The worse the dynamics on the BOT become, and their actions self-serving, the more opposition speaks up. It's a predictable reaction that is not a new development, nor the creation of "trouble-makers".
Bad governance creates opposition and hostility.
Opposition and hostility may also create bad government. The bottom line is that the covenants exist and are known to potential buyers and owners. If you but and then believe that you can't abide by the covenants, you are a troublemaker and hostile to the association.
Change is possible with reasoned and majority agreed upon issues. Change is not going to happen in response to a few troublemakers with self serving issues that have arisen basically due to buyer's remorse.
Drawing national politics (currently a matter of extreme views and outright hostility) is simply a ploy to stir up more hostile feelings. There is no need or justification for bringing national politics into this association. Those who think that divide and conquer will work in little old Surfside to achieve changes wanted by a minority are troublemakers. Wrap your head around this. Most members, the majority, want a safe, peaceful and friendly environment for their vacationing, residence or property investment. Complaint driven covenant enforcement creates an environment of neighbors hating neighbors. A minority pressing for self serving changes in the covenants creates and environment of neighbors hating neighbors. Rotten information flow to the members creates distrust and neighbors hating neighbors. Association money wasted on projects and legal battles that do not serve the general membership well creates distrust and neighbors hating neighbors.
Your dismissal of the fire issue by comparing it to a Tsunami danger has one major flaw. Unlike the Tsunami, we have had fires here. We have seen the damage done due to the high winds. We have seen its spread caused by large burning embers coming of short trees being sent many yards down wind. We have also seen how small of an official response we got, where if it weren't for members with their own hoses things could have been worst. We have also seen first hand how it was members who pointed out to the fire crew that the fire had spread to the eaves of the one house that sustained the most damage. If they hadn't there is little doubt there would have been even more damage done.
To use your earlier response, ALL of that is factual.
I don't recall reading people making suggestions for removing all trees. I have seen people like myself say that if a fire could spread so far and easily from crown effect on small 5 ft trees it would be worst with a 30+ one with the winds. Again a fact.
One last fact. It's easy to be dismissive when you have another residence to go to if anything were to happen to yours here. Those of us who's only residence is the one we own here see it differently.
When you can’t differentiate between Surfside politics versus devisive national politics, and ignore the difference is a part of the problem. Can’t win an argument, throw trump in there. Yeah, that makes sense, n u just lost half your audience. I felt the same way about Obama, but didn’t throw a hissy fit. You should respect the office if not the man n wait for your turn.
9:44 ... You can obsess over this all you want, but the HOA has no real authority to set specific requirements of owners in this respect. The Tree Policy is also on shaky ground as it is not based on any solid safety concerns, and protects views, though there is no covenant that speaks of it.
Actually, taller trees are not a greater fire danger. Most have few if any lower branches, and the bark of conifers repels fire to some extent. You insist that I am dismissive, and I'm not. It's your right to worry day and night about fire danger. You miss my point, which is that there are many potential dangers to our existence, and you can only do what is practical to try and prevent harm coming to you, your family, community, planet.
Bomb shelters were a controversial craze back in the 60s. Over 50 years later, the U.S. has never been bombed by a foreign aggressor. Sensible measures could ban assault rifles and help prevent gun ownership by the mentally disturbed. That would create a safer country. Funny, most of the developed countries have little to no gun violence. Where we can learn from their example, few measures have been put in place to stem the tide of gun violence.
There are many dangers to consider, and many are fairly simple to safeguard against. We have beach property with a fifty foot wide lawn between the house and the beach grass, and no trees anywhere near the house. The house is covered with Cedar shakes. Such shakes are common at the Coast - and very flammable. The house is about 60 years old, so the shakes are working out fine.
Post a Comment