Update: It has been reported to me that there will be a follow up story in the Observer.
The Chinook Observer, a local weekly news paper, has published an article about the violations on handling and disposal of our asbestos pipe. I found some of the information as new, especially concerning the investigation and violations. I was contacted by the news paper concerning this mess, but I declined to respond. However, much of the information was available on this blog site.
Some of the information they provided is not fully accurate. None of the information is an over statement, but rather understated. The legal fees they reported are much less than the actual amounts and the workers involved were Surfside employees. However, I am sure there were also North Beach employees also exposed in their own system maintenance.
As for willful violations, specifically, knowingly violating safety practice, is proven with testimony and documentation. I would expect this to be made public once charges are filed.
If AP or other news reporting picks up on this article, there could further spreading of this Surfside mess. Not good publicity for this community or North Beach Water. Will this impact property values and the local real estate market? Time will tell. Thank you to the Chinook Observer for being an informative source for our members. Surfside failed to be out in front of this mess.
For a larger read of this 5 page article, click on each page once or twice.
57 comments:
Thanks for the information George. How do you recommend I get a paper copy? I can't come into town until Saturday.
Reporter sure wasn’t very accurate. But at least got some of it right. Wondering who they talked to?
Does that really matter? The good thing is that the members and public are now aware of this mess! Best case scenerio: lock the doors at office and file bankruptcy. Only way to financially survive this fatal, underhanded act.
This will do wonders for property values. The Members have been so screwed by our Board. Who do you think will foot the bill for the fines, penalties, legal defense and likely civil judgments awarded to workers who were exposed to hazardous materials? This article doesn’t even touch on the other mess with the Carbon Treatment Plant and Surfside’s failure to obtain required permits and conduct environmental studies.
the article is very benign in my opinion? Mostly a bit on what asbestos is, oh and b the way NBWD mishandled it.
Kind of makes it sound like NBWD's problem? That would be nice.
slow down there Deb, one problem at a time here.
Hope somebody gives the paper the correct numbers and story. Deb, you up for that? $13k for cleanup, $27k for L&I fines, not to mention $10k fine for permit and $80+k for frivolous lawsuit. Should be some jail time in there somewhere.
8:49. It’s important that we engage the press only with information we can back-up with documents that are verifiable. At this point, letters to the editor might generate more interest from the Chinook Observer and help get wider press exposure, perhaps from the Seattle Times and Oregonian. Writing letters to elected officials - our State Representatives, Senators, County Commissioners and the Secretary of State (oversees non-profit corporations). Exposing the mismanagement and corruption of the BOT is needed. As bad as all of this is to members financially, this may be the catalyst needed for change. We just have to get the the 75-80% of silent, disengaged members to wake-up and step up.
The BOD and former (knucklehead k) board members will be rooming with bubba soon! Will the elitists host a Going Away Party in appreciation for all they’ve done?
Disolve this damn place and get the name surfside removed from the map. Might e able to sell and get out of here.
I'm starting to figure out what it would take for dissolution.
There is a follow up article on the way.
With the Asbestos issues coming under investigation this year, the other major blunders made by the Williams Board this year, (the wasted lawsuit pursuit at around $75,000, failure to get Wetlands Study $10,000 fine, building without a permit fines and stop work order, shortage of funds to replace budgeted CTP filters,... ) all are a part of a colossal failure to manage our community.
There's a lot of stuff needs to be addressed as there's more to come. How will the failure to properly protect employees from asbestos exposure be addressed legally ? It will be a while before we are in a position to dissolve the organization that is responsible by law, for all of these issues. And dissolution is not really practical. It may look like an "Easy-button", but isn't.
Because I don't want massive retaliation against me, I'm not using my name.
This forum is for comments and not much more.
Please don't assume all who speak about dissolution think it's easy. I've already spent about 20 hours of my free time documenting email correspondence with Surfside HOA, documenting dialogue on this blog, one conversation with an attorney, submitting public records requests, two conversations with past members, a conversation with a current member, and a couple conversations with neighbors.
This all takes time and I'm doing something about the situation.
My apologies for insinuating that dissolution of this HOA was a snap of your fingers! My frustrations to the events that have taken place have clouded my rational thinking. I support all members that move forward with dissolution. What’s the most infuriating fact is that all of this could have been prevented if we would have had an honest BOD leading this association. Corruption and mishandling of funds have sunk this HOA to the sewer. When members Patrick and Deb tried to alert folks to what was happening, they were practically tarred and feathered out of Surfside by the Mob.
I feel your pain 2:01. I accept your apology and completely understand. Your statement of apology demonstrates your high quality character. I too have had my thinking clouded a time or two by some of the vitriol by some on this blog.
Keep The Vision Of Change
If Gary Williams had been removed from office, as there was a motion to do just that at the last annual meeting how much money would have been saved from that time to present.
Mike Riley..
I have a news paper for you. Will leave it on table on porch in case I am not here.
Just as for the parliamentary procedure to restore order at a meeting, "good of the order", is there a corollary that would be "for the good of the HOA" that we may apply to get rid of the folks that caused this mess ie the entire Executive Committee, some of the past Board members should be held as complicit and wouldn't bother me to see the "angrys" DeLeest (may have spelled it wrong, but that is how much I care) and Olds be included in that group. One may say Olds hasn't even done anything yet, but has anybody ever heard of "behind the scenes"? As for the Bullys, grow up!
Thanks George!
Please explain and/or provide evidence how deLeest and Olds are responsible for this asbestos thing or are part of some cover up. Same with others on the board. Don't just say it is because they are on the board when this happened. If that's the case, why do Patrick and Deb get a pass. Same with George.
Last I check the board doesn't go out in the field to check what is going on everyday with the water crew. That is why we paid Neal to do it. Notice in the paper how they point the finger at NB water as part of the issue.
I realize some have an unhealthy hatred of Olds, but how can you seriously come to the conclusion that you keep repeating concerning him.
5:57, you do not have a clue. Board members are out at well field all the time. Errors by reporter were understandable, as no one would even admit to the fines when asked. Those errors have been corrected. Look for follow up article soon.
5:57 They are puppets of Williams and just as guilty for the current situation.
5:57, those people know exactly what they are doing. DeLeest has been on the board for almost 3 years. Olds are nobodies who came here to be a somebody.
A prevailing attitude in the Boardroom has been a righteous disrespect for anyone critical of the Board or its' policies. Any vaguely progressive proposals have been seen as treasonous and faced great resistance. The very conservative element in the community has seemed to support this attitude that change of any kind is dangerous, and independent thinkers are not welcome on the Board.
Everyone's entitled to their opinions, but the fact is, the focus on doing everything the same, and discouraging creative thinking, tends to allow bad policies and procedures to snowball out of control. The notion that critical thinking is disloyal and ill-intended has been prevalent in the Boardroom and in many blog comments, but is really what has lead to the mess we're in.
While it is true that deLeest and Olds are proud protectors of the conservative lock on policy, and can be seen as part of the problem as such, they have not been directly responsible for putting the policy in place that has gone off the rails. But the attitude of disrespect for more liberal views and calls for policies to be fair and respectful of all owners have been ridiculed by the conservative block.
The preoccupation with neutralizing Deb Blagg and Patrick Johansen, shed roofs and tree heights, all quite trivial, has resulted in complacency and incompetence in managing the Water Dept. and the community at large.
Board members can become quite smug about their authority, with the covenants offering a somewhat vague but enticing legal protection for all they may do as Trustees. We will undoubtedly see just what the limitations of that protection are, as the legal issues move forward.
Anxious to see if the WEAK ENDER will update members on expendtures for BOD blunders! Rising legal fees and depleting the memberships bank. I’m beginning to question how safe the water is in Surfside. I’m afraid to find out the real answer. What else will be undercovered?
To 9:45: So far, all we have heard is "no more dogs in the office". Really?
Well said.
Nobody's overhang on their shed or house hurts anyone else.
A 16 foot tree height is unreasonable and rediculous.
Excellent question! Start with the legal fees and work back.
Are they on the current Board, participating fully without intimidation and rancor?
As tightly as that Board is stacked, its evidence enough.
I just spent close to a $1000 to have all water coming into my house filtered. That is how much confidence I have in the water quality in SHOA.
Tried to work through SHOA water, and was told even though I am on the end of the line, the problem was mine.
Couldn't really afford it, but can't afford to have health problems from bad water, just because these fools can't get their act together.
I wish to state unequivocally that this is a management issue. Water employees have been responsive, but don't have any answers.
9:45 - no surprise, the Weekender mentions nothing about this article. A decent HOA President would have included a message to members updating members. The supporters have suddenly grown very quiet back under their rocks.
Just a reminder. deLeest voted to keep the tech committee while Raymer voted against. Yet you have never seen one negative comment aimed at him while she gets many.
To the Olds. They are "somebodies" who donate their time doing things for the community. Please tell us what you have done 7:54 beside being insulting.
Just a reminder: The board has had these elections wired tight for at least the last 3 years. People do not get kudos for pursuing their own self interests.
I have no interest in delineating the various positives and negatives of board members. At this point, if they are there, they are guilty. Any sane person would have run away by now.
6:03 - Perhaps you would outline your community accomplishments as opposed to bagging on others.
Please elaborate on how for the past three years the board has stopped people from running for the position and has also stopped people from voting on who they want.
To your request. I don't need to provide an outline because I was responding to another comment (yours?) from someone being critical of people who donate their time here. I appreciate ANYONE who steps up to do so, whether I agree with them or not, unlike you.
No one has been elected to that Board that wasn't pre-selected by the current Board. Others tried and failed. People see this and wisely decide to not get involved. I am one of them.
I appreciate the people that volunteer and donate time. I just wish they were working for the betterment of an honest organization.
12/13 10:09 PM. People came with votes on November 17 and many were rejected. Plain and simple, there were votes to be cast and the BOT chose to reject them. So much for democracy in SHOA.
What's the point of a Proxy vote if it's mailed in the day before the actual vote? It makes no sense for a non-profit HOA.
Oh yeah, it's for the BOT to cover up those votes or say that they were blank and therefore a BOT voted for that person. I want to know the vote totals and who voted for what. How many times have BOTs voted multiple times for one issue or election?
Show me the votes on the SHOA website now.
7:54 said it exactly correct. The Olds and deLees participation on the Tech Committee was just to make sure it would never get past the Board. Pure quest for adulation from the rest of the bat sayers. Their motives are very transparent.
6:03.... Larry Raymer has never supported the waterline replacement project. Yes, we have heard repeatedly that deLeest voted in favor of the Tech Comm. That was after giving Deb Blagg months of grief claiming the Committee's statement of purpose was not acceptable, (even after several rewritings), voting to make the committee answerable to the Community Relations Comm., and voting to make the committee temporary.
We are all aware that most Trustees make some contributions, and many mean well. The problem that has lead to the Federal investigation, is a direct outcome of intolerance to disagreement and any semblance of progressive thinking. To progress is to be willing to find new solutions, and to monitor the success or failure of policies and procedures.
It would have been progressive to have established constant review of Water Dept. procedures, and to seek some outside the community assessment.
People are overlooking the fact that proxies also weren't counted because a couple Trustees didn't show up either. Bottom line as I have said many times over the years. Don't take a chance with a proxy if you want to make sure your vote will be counted. It isn't that hard to submit your vote.
To 7:32:
So you're saying that deLeest voted against the majority to keep the tech committee so that it wouldn't get passed. Then Olds spent his own time going to meetings and doing work outside of those meetings for the tech committee so it wouldn't get past. How does that make any sense?
What is transparent is just your blind hatred of these two with no supporting facts
Get real 6:11. Do you think we are stupid? Deleast only voted after stabbing the members of the committee in the back, making the committee useless. And Olds "own time"? What other kind is there. Most other volunteers have spent way more of their "own time" than him. Your right about the hate, but justice isn't blind with covered up supporting facts. His only issue is his damn view. He is mean and vindictive, just like his wife.
7:45 you nailed it right on the head! Mean Peggy is just that! MEAN AND VINDICTIVE. She is all about her view and nothing else matters.
I really hope the Chinook Observer is not looking to this blog for the facts in there story.
It's people like this that give a bad name to surfside. They should not be allowed to be on anything. Disgusting behavior from both.
Worried 9:26? Lol. Def tells em where to look.
We need to step back and take a look at what we have and where we are going as an Association. The water system has its problems but delivers water to those who are using it, the infrastructure is in place, though not utilized properly, some folks have taken the Covenants as a crutch to bolster their lack of authority, but we are all living comfortably. What we suffer from is a lack of a good management team and the desire of some individuals (who probably never had any authority in their entire life) to try and become demagogues over the rest of us. The first step would be to do away with the present Board, they are the primary source of the management problem. A company that suffers such a malady does not attempt to rehabilitate such poor behavior, for just as this Association, it is a bad investment
We must insure that the new Board hires a competent manager, to be interviewed not only by the Board, but a team of residents as well. Then we need to address the covenants and those who feel they are chosen to enforce them. There seems to be a number of folks on both sides of this and the only way we are truly going to know the direction of the populace is to have a fair and fully participative vote, not the sham voting that currently permeates this organization. We are in trouble on several fronts, but things are workable, you just have to realize that changes are due.
It was very apparent from the start that Deb Blagg's proposal to create a Tech Committee was opposed by the conservative element on the BOT. That's what all of the delays and objections were about. Then came the vote to hobble the committee, and give it a temporary status. All before the committee had done anything. The fear that Blagg had ulterior motives (based on nothing) was fed by blog comments and hateful dialogue there.
The only thing I have heard of that is inconsistent with what was on display in meetings, was that deLeest voted in favor of the Tech Comm. . She may have felt it was inappropriate for Williams to take his anger at Blagg as an excuse to eliminate the committee. That would be an indication that she recognized his actions were motivated by anger, and not in the best interest of the community. Clearly, community business should not to be treated with such disrespect, with this being one of many instances he has done so.
Had deLeest felt strongly that the Tech Comm. should continue, she would have objected to the Williams statement of opposition to the ballot measures, and proposed the committee be reinstated. That continues to be a good idea, and Surfside's best hope of renewal.
Please stop identifying the Board and their associates as "conservative". I have been a conservative all of my life, respect the flag, vote Republican and believe in the freedoms we enjoy. I see a need for changes in the Surfside world and in no way see that as "Progressive" (which is a huge misnomer anyway). It is not a conservative/liberal argument. It is a right/wrong argument.
10:55 I agree we need to keep our partisan politics out of this discussion and focus on the problem at hand - a corrupt, deceitful and self-serving HOA Board. Their negligent actions threaten our community, finances and property values. We don’t need to be divided by our political preferences, which have no bearing on the mess we are fighting in Surfside.
I would like to no why the tech committee couldn't still work on it's own to the betterment of SHOA just not sanctioned by. At the next annual meeting a motion could be put forward again with results this time by doing as was earlier suggested by taking over the meeting. After all it is our meeting.
In total agreement with your comments Martin. I’m afraid that Czar Williams and his royal jesters would more than likely be sure Barney Fife was there to keep THEIR order. Is there an attorney or someone experienced in legal matters amongst our membership to accompany members to the next meeting? Without some assistance from a legal expert, I can’t see our membership going too far with any actions. I, for one, am willing to join members with contributions to secure an attorney to oust the whole court of jesters/jokers! Any reasonable thoughts?
10:38 sez ... When I speak of the conservatives on the BOT, I am speaking of the majority on the Board who tend to vote in a block to resist anything new, discussion of changes in policy, dead-set on preserving the status-quo. This stuff has been talked about enough on the blog that you know exactly what I'm talking about when I refer to the "conservatives on the Board". I have used different references at different times, as it is about the politics in the Boardroom and not the issues.
I find it petty that you want to complain about my use of the term "conservative", as by now the intent is obvious. Did some trustees set out to do bad things with asbestos ? Of course not. There has evolved a culture of folks in Surfside who feel a sense of entitlement to run the community, and are committed to running the community the same way, never questioning policies (trees, Rvs, Business Office and BOT procedures, Water Dept. business, ...)Intolerance of independent thinking has been very apparent, with Patrick and Deb Blagg getting abused and marginalized, and a "our way or the highway" attitude conveyed by the President.
It's questionable that Surfside can muster any political will to take over this stale dysfunctional BOT. Many staunch supporters of the past Boards have very elitist notions, such as that fulltime owners should make all community decisions, all RVs should be pushed out, keep the Tree restrictions !! Maintain the views for J Place !!Tighten restrictions !! No fires, fun, noise, or bright lights !!
Agreeing not to use the term "conservative" or "liberal" isn't going to get us any closer to working together for change, which is our only hope, and nitpicking about terminology isn't going to get us any closer to rallying a significant number of owners to work toward solutions. It wasn't that long ago that being conservative or liberal was considered more of a style of doing things, than of good versus evil, as it has evolved.
In a sensible world, we would all accept that we each have conservative and liberal opinions, and we need not be identified as one or the other. To stop seeing politics in such a black and white, good and evil way, is to find a good place to start working for a better Surfside.
Please do not confuse all “full timers” with j placers n their cabal. Most are live n let live.
Well said 10:02. I see no solutions with the present Board. Fix it or get rid of it. I don't see it getting fixed.
12:37... I hope what you say is so. I think we probably agree that we should judge others only by their words and deeds. There has been a very organized effort made annually to secure open Board positions with individuals who are willing to tow the conservative line without question. Mr. Winegar and Mr. Olds come immediately to mind. Both were hand-picked by the conservative cadre.
How is it that Mr. Olds was a write-in candidate and received about 90 or more votes ? Will he be asking Mr. Williams and Mr. Flood to step down for their obvious incompetence in managing the community ? Of course not. It's this effort to homogenize the board into minions that has led to our management failures. We can't continue down the same track and expect a better result.
Is there an attorney that we can contact about getting out of the SS hoa? Sometimes I think this may turn out like the water problems of Detroit.
Sadly enough, you are paying for an attorney everyday with your dues. Downside is, your attorney is only available to the corrupt board. Something wrong with this picture? Members have to hire an attorney to represent themselves against the association attorney they pay for! It’s time folks to clean house. Plenty enough evidence to send them on their way
Post a Comment