This is another example of information that you will find only here on this blog.
Board Trustee, Larry Raymer, spent hours in the field doing inspections of association owned property for this report. For more information on the covenant violation numbers, they can be found on the association web site under covenants.
He talks about the need to set a good example of the association following it's own covenants. When Board President, Gary Williams, was recently confronted about an association covenant violation, his reply was that "no one had filed a complaint" Mr. Raymer states that the association should be proactive in regards to it's own property.
Click on the report once or twice for a larger read:
 |
| Larry Raymer |
48 comments:
with a lengthy history of complaint driven covenant enforcement, I don't think that Surfside taking better care of its own properties would result in any improvement in members taking care of their lots. your are dreaming.
Did not James Clancy do the same appraisal 2 years ago? I believe he also had developed a maintenance plan. What happened to his maintenance plan obligations?
5:30 .... You totally miss the point. The HOA has a number of responsibilities clearly stated in the covenants, and annual revenue of 1.25 million dollars to fund required maintenance of HOA properties. It is considered a given that the HOA will maintain our community properties in a safe and presentable condition, and that is obviously not the case.
If the HOA is going to pursue a questionable enforcement issue into Superior Court, after failing to be successful twice in Small Claims, they are posing as a higher moral voice that is not to be questioned. Yet here's the BIG question: "Why isn't your own house in proper order ?" It is expected that the BOT will monitor the needs of the community and address them with proper actions.
Lack of proper maintenance was emphasized last year, and Larry and others completed a number of projects successfully, such as repairs and painting of cabanas, and cleaning debris from Bear Lake. The lack of maintenance to HOA properties reflects badly on the community as a whole, and property values suffer as a result.
More work is needed, as is more of the BOT's attention to their full range of responsibilities.
The land and "cabanas" are little used. I vote to sell these budget draining sites and use the money to build a decent club house, a pool and amenities that the members could truly enjoy on a regular basis.
That would be lovely 9:06. Should sell the ocean front property as well and move the use to a less desirable lot.
Agreed. The water dept. storage buildings near 314th on G are a ridiculous use of these properties.
In the 10 years I have been coming to Surfside. I have yet to see anybody use the Sea Breeze Cabana, Let alone have a fire in the fireplace. Does little or no use really warrant the expense to maintain this cabana. I do walk by it twice on most weekends. Maybe it is used during the week but I doubt it.
Cabanas benefit the realtors only.
The only cabanas that look nice are on the east side. They all need sprinkler systems n maintenance if they are to continue. But I agree they mostly benefit the realtors. Better use for one would be a dog park.
10:18 sez .... For those who insist that the covenants are written in stone, and cannot possibly be changed, the state of our community property reflects that same contradiction. With proper routine maintenance, these properties can continue to withstand passage of time, as part of the original vision of the community back about 50 years ago.
It makes sense to have some types of public facilities scattered throughout the community. For visitors who drive through the community looking at real estate, or enroute to hosts homes, there should be restroom facilities available. Having a public access point on the lakes is necessary for fishing and boating.
There are properties that could be sold or repurposed, but that means CHANGE, and solid decisions by the Board of Trustees that commit to such changes. Ideally, such a decision would be prompted by an assessment of which properties would be the least missed, better sold-off, better re-purposed. But this is a decision best made by the membership.
By rejecting electronic voting setup by the HOA, the community is still a long way off from being willing and able to embrace the entire community as one whole, and stage a community-wide vote that actually means something. 89 voting members attended the Annual Meeting, and about 300 or so voted.
Having so few members deciding the fate of our community property seems like a bad idea, when the covenants require the HOA to take proper care of our shared holdings. The cost of tearing down cabanas, storage facilities, and such would be much more expensive than maintaining them. Sales of some of the property could compensate for the expense of removing structures, but it would mean a commitment to CHANGE, much feared in this community.
The cost of tearing down the so called cabanas would be minimal in comparison to the ongoing expenses of maintaining almost totally unused sites.
While I totally support using technology to best advantages, I seriously doubt that it will make much difference I the voting unless serious attention is paid to disseminating accurate, timely and trustworthy information to the members on which to base votes.
With so few voting, I would assume they have no interest in an hoa. So why continue to have an hoa that is controlled by so few? Hoa should be reduced to just garbage n water n that would be all that overall majority would want.
10:56 .... So visitors to the community can use your restroom ? Do you actually have any idea how much it would cost to tear down these facilities and truck the debris off of the peninsula ?
The purpose of having a Tech Committee is to figure out what internet options are available, and what would serve Surfside needs. Obviously, everyone seeks secure communications, and determining how to balance points of view offered on Surfside issues is what is currently missing from the Weekender and Surf-InSider. You want to complain but offer no basis for your views, but skepticism.
How do you think change tales place ? It requires committed people to work together constructively, sharing ideas. It takes optimism and motivation, both in short supply in this community. That was my point initially. Change requires solid decisions to try a different approach, and a commitment to see it through.
1:09 You don't think. If there is no "cabana" site why would anyone be thinking of going to the restroom at my house or your house unless they live there?
Effective change takes place with research, reliable data and strategic planning to sell a new concept if one is needed or wanted. Getting an idea into a few people's heads and then trying to cram that idea down the throats of an entire membership doesn't fly does it.
1:09 sez ....Surfside has a lot of Real Estate activity, a lot of clam-diggers, a large gathering during the Fishing Derby and Fourth of July celebrations. At times there are a lot of visitors to the spit which is several miles long. Many visitors are just site-seeing, and may not know anyone in Surfside. MOST people (not you apparently) require restroom facilities from time to time. Without public access, how can lakes be accessed unless you own shoreline property ?
You make a haughty statement about change, but are obviously just blowing smoke. No one is trying to cram anything down anyone's throats. I think the only change you can handle is your undershorts.
Classy as usual,👍👊
You want to pretend this is a question of class ? You are clearly a Williams supporter, so sanction the unpardonable actions by the complicit Board members who have ignored covenant required procedures to eliminate opposition in the Boardroom. I'm guessing you have also helped wage this endless hazing of Blagg and Johansen, and supported the campaign of disrespect for George Miller and Larry Raymer.
Can you actually distance yourself from this needless warfare against anyone who has shown themselves to be independent thinkers and open to new approaches ? I think not.
The seated Board has expressed a willingness to be a part of a dictatorship, which does not fall under the heading of "CLASSY" or "compliant" with our Covenants. Deceiving the membership cannot be considered "classy", nor excusable.
All forms of government are, in essence, a dictatorship once a vote is taken.
Calm down 5:11, I was referring to undershorts comment only. Not good to jump to conclusions. I’m anything but a supporter of this so called HOA.
You can independently think all you want. What you cannot do is force your thoughts onto other people who may disagree with your thinking. The minority lost. Why not try to be graceful losers?
We're not talking about "thoughts" but simple facts that those who support Williams choose to ignore. And 5:56 - what the hell are you talking about ? Yeah folks, why bother looking at the facts and thinking for yourself ? It is much easier to just let it all go whatever ridiculous direction it will - that can't be argued.
We will be paying the price of your complacency long-term residents, and Williams supporters. The community will be paying very large fines for lack of compliance to State requirements regarding asbestos disposal, and likely be paying out large sums of member funds to cover legal fees incurred in William's efforts to eliminate Patrick Johansen financially, as a property-owner in S.S., and as a Trustee.
I Think it is certain that if Patrick perseveres, the Superior Court will see clearly that the HOA has mounted a tireless program of harassment of Mr. Johansen, and attempts to intimidate the entire community, by creating fear of dissent or espousing change.
It is perceived as a threat to the community to disagree with Mr. Williams, in his mind, and we will pay the price of his personal inability to administer without limitation or accept opposing views.
Government doesn't work that way, and he will fail.
The courts, if needed, will see that Mr. Johansen did not apply to the Arch. Committee for approval to make an addition to his storage shed. It really is a simple matter of a member not following the rules.
There is no mention in the CCR's about overhangs so why would a member bring to bring it up in the first place? Not a fan of Patrick but this issue(non) needs to go away with no more $$$ being expended. Why no mention of the home and shed on the south end of F that has been there for many years. Pick on them for a change. I think it looks great but the haters won't.
The point, 10:31, is that Patrick added something to his storage shed that was not included in the approval for the storage shed that fit within the specifications of the covenant and the county ordinances. Do you think it would be okay if I tied a baby elephant on top of my car because doing that is not addressed in the laws?
11:09. Really? He addressed every item required by the Covenants. The Covenants don’t address the type of windows or doors, color, lights, outlets, locks, shelving, etc. The County doesn’t require a building permit for storage buildings. The only factors the Architectural Committee should consider in approving a shed are the setbacks, foundation, enclosed space, height and construction materials.
Really 4:11 Who made you the goddess of the covenants?
Most HOA architectural committees develop procedures and policies that set precedents for their decisions when something happens a little outside of the norm with a covenant.
1.13 "Storage Shed" shall mean a storage building on a residential platted parcel designed for yard and personal items, and not used for human occupancy.
Definition of a shed id copied from covenants above. I have doubts that an overhang or porch would be suitable in our climate or really anywhere else due to thievery to store yard or personal items. As noted, it is not for human occupancy so a porch used for lounging, cooking, cleaning clams or other human occupancy uses wouldn't cut it. A storage shed is simply for storage.
Cleaning clams etc is not “human occupancy”, get a dictionary!
how you going to clean a clam without a human being there doing it. you know occupying the space in order to clean the clams.
6:26: You can’t be serious?! How are you going to put items in the shed to story without a human occupying it?
One occupies a place by merely taking up space. When you’re inside a shed, you’re occupying it. You can do almost anything you want with a shed. It can be used for storage, for a workshop, for hobbies, for a dog house, for lounging, cleaning clams, brewing beer, napping, watching TV - even for making ridculous posts on the internet. Sheds can have electrical outlets, lights and appliances. By county code it can’t have plumbing and it can’t be used as living quarters - a residence or other space where humans live.
“Our climate” is perfectly suitable for porches or overhangs which are adequately supported. There are porches and overhangs on sheds and other structures all over this Peninsula. I have no idea what thievery has to do with either. Sheds can be secured by locks, security always and surveillance cameras.
Isn’t it about time you quit splitting hairs over a simple shed? Your logic escapes any reason. Why don’t you go down to the County and check your theory with them?
Does it really need to be explained? Human occupancy means living in the shed. Duh!
Q: Can I have an RV cover or other structure with my RV?
A: Structures such as decks, RV covers, lean-to’s, garages, shops, carports, etc., are NOT allowed in conjunction with the recreational vehicle usage; however, one storage building, not exceeding one hundred twenty (120) square feet in size, being temporary in nature and placed on a temporary or portable foundation, is allowed.
From the Pacific County website, seems he can't attach anything to a shed per the county
Thank you 7:34 ! Good grief ! All of this hostility and petty concern over what RV owners may choose to use their shed for. There is no rule against having electricity in a shed, so it is a covered area where shop-type activities can take place, and are in compliance with written standards. It's a covered space out of the weather.
Unlike lots with houses, RV lots can have only one outbuilding. We all tend to accumulate a lot of "stuff", so storage is easily maxed-out. As long as no one's sleeping in these sheds, there really is no particular limit to how an owners shed may be used. No reason why a shed can't also double as a work space if there's room.
Blagg takes the bait every time. Congratulations on getting her to reveal a little more each time. The protests that she is merely looking out for the good of the entire membership of this association is indeed pure BS.
Cleaning clams and several other activities described by Blagg are certainly a matter of occupancy not storage per legal opinions.
My Oh my ------ seems like there is a deck at the recreational usage lot of the Blaggs.
Some have a storage shed confused with a man cave or a she shed. Think again about what the ordinances and covenants actually say.
8:42. The county rules for sheds are the same for a house lot or an RV lot. Don’t ignore the semi-colon in the Ordinance you quote. This is para 21.I, which pertains to RV usage, not storage buildings, which can be found in para 21.F - and applies to all sheds, whether on a property with a house or an RV. You can’t put a cover over an RV, or have a lean-to or deck on an RV. This is because RVs must remain mobile and not become permanent. It’s why they must be licensed and operable at all times. Sheds must only be movable and many are sold ready-made or in kits which include patios and extended roofs. Get over your obsession with sheds and RVs!
8:46. Nice try, but if you would actually read the entire Zoning Ordinance - you would understand that decks are raised and over 30” in height and require a permit. We have built a walkway and landscaped around our flower beds. Our walkway is perfectly legal. I’m continuously amazed at how low you can go to criticize. We have developed our lot to be both attractive and functional, yet you still manage to criticize. Get over your obvious dislike of everything associated with RVs. Perhaps you should have paid more attention when you purchased your property in a mixed-use community. Residential and RV lot owners can co-exist in harmony. It just means you need to drop your rocks.
The only restrictions the county places on the use of sheds is that it can’t be used as a dwelling. This is probably why it can’t have plumbing. Why does anyone care what someone uses their shed for as long as they aren’t living in it?! What a bunch of killjoy busybodies!
A friend shared with me that a nearby RV neighbor removed a washer and dryer from their storage shed and hauled them away in a trailer this past week. The RV people had used the washer and dryer regularly when visiting their property with many gallons of waste water from the washer spilling out onto the sand. This went on for years with guests with no permits visible of the RV member also freely using the washer and dryer. My friends attempts to politely inform the RV neighbors that plumbing was not allowed in storage sheds and waste water should go into a septic system were met with crass and stupid lying by the RV members. Many of us do care about the health of our environment but remain unwilling to file complaints against our neighbors. Blaggs opinions and her interpretations of laws are offensive and mostly off base. It makes us wonder what is being said on the secret RV Facebook site that is closed to members who aren't RVers. The killjoy, busy bodies would be the RV members who are engaged in breaking the rules and pushing the boundaries of responsible behavior in Surfside. I'm told that the walkway at Blaggs looks more like a low deck and is used as a deck would be used.
2:10. A household washer and dryer would be difficult to use without plumbing. However, there are portable washers that connect to a faucet or sink and could be stored in a shed. If the lot has a septic line the washer could be drained into the septic line with a garden hose. Consider other options. As far as our walkway, it is less than 12” tall and serves as a landing for our stairs. Nothing illegal about it. I can also use my lawn and fire pit area “as a deck would be used”. What difference does it make to you?
Deb holds herself out as a self righteous rule follower. Yet, there are always discrepancies in what she says and what she does. Who, but a few RV users give a damn about her opinions and interpretations of laws.
Blagg will always have an excuse, explanation or spin on things that makes her feel righteous. It is a personality problem.
2:51 - Suggest you just scroll past my posts and refrain from commenting on them when you don’t give a damn. I follow the rules as written in the Covenants, Ordinances and laws. Like all, I exercise my judgment in so doing and unless those in authority say otherwise, I will continue to do so. I am not moved by those who just make petty claims of wrong-doing or about how I live my life. You might give it a try sometime.
3:11. We all have our own personalities. I admit to being pretty headstrong - especially when dealing with critical, belligerent bullies. Righteous indignation is a natural response when dealing with bullies.
Per internet, average width of a walkway is 24 minimum to 48 maximum. Enough said. We got it Deb, you feel free to push the limits as long as it suits you to do it. Your judgement has been questioned over and over again. Most of us sincerely work at cooperating to meet laws, ordinances and covenants as they are printed, not as they are personally interpreted.
4:26. 30” high makes it a deck. This is a landing, walkway, landscaping or whatever you want to call. It. You want to call it a deck? Fine, but the county doesn’t so let it go.
Post a Comment