This is a forum to share and discuss information and issues about our homeowners association.
The blog host is not responsible for the content of comments.
As with all blogs, you have to use your own judgement as to the accuracy of the postings and comments.
Thursday, February 14, 2019
Board Meeting Saturday
2/16/2019 meeting agenda...
Click on agenda to enlarge...
39 comments:
Anonymous
said...
This is their chance to go to closed session and remove Flood and Williams.
The building is the one known as the ocean side well field. It is off 315th area and was used to store parts. Not the old water warehouse. This would be a good place to store the gravel rather than pay to store it on golf course property. If we wanted to save money, that is. Been told there is a lot of rot in the building. We spent a lot on the fence there, so why not use it?
Why tear it down now? Wait until the end of the year and see if there is enough funds to do it. Was this in the budget to remove and an amount? Does anyone have a clue or a plan for anything?
The budget I voted for said nothing about tearing down anything. Take it out of Gill's high priced wage. Next thing is he will want mileage for all that driving around he does all day. He is another waste of funds.
@7:41 - Perhaps you have rationale to justify such a post. Please take ownership of your comment by including your name and advise what would compel you to personally call out a Surfside employee as earning a "high priced wage" and as being a "waste of funds". Gil has assisted our family many times and has always been professional, courteous, and kind.
Gil is a patsy. He just does what he is told. He is not in a position to buck the system. Concentrate on those giving the orders n making policy, not those following them to keep their job.
Gil has always been "professional, courteous, and kind" and he has a nice smile and a two faced suck up which is all good for keeping one's job with Surfside but he has been so far over his head for years.
Considering all that has occurred under his watch are these the traits Surfside needs now or into the future?
I can't believe that we were allowed to see that ultra nasty comment about Gil. Would the poster sit across from Gil and say it too his face ? I think not.
Why oh way George didn't you zap this one? It really crossed my line and that's really had to do.
Gil worked under Bob Haskin and knew the proper procedure for the handling of asbestos pipe, yet after Haskin was stabbed in the back and removed, Gil supervised the pipe replacement without regard for worker safety. He became nothing more than a yes man for Flood, Williams and Neal. This is why they are all subject to criminal investigation. Sometimes you have to stand up like a man and do the right thing, especially when it comes to the health and safety of workers that you are responsible for. Who knew what and when did they know it and further, what did they do about it. If the four mentioned had been removed years ago, we would not be in the situation we are now. Now they are all involved in a cover up that only makes the situation worse for them and the association. They have reason to worry and hide.
I don't see Williams and Flood on the agenda. Where are they, hiding? Will Neal be there? Looks like another nothing meeting. Are they going to make poor Travis give his keystone cop report?
Thank you for your comment. I agree 100%. This is the major problem with any social media when anonymous comments are allowed. Quite sad really. It has always been allowed here to say what you want about certain people who work and volunteer in our community while comments about some "friends" of the blog get deleted.
I know 5 members who are boycotting this blog due to the unfair deletion practices of the blog host. This blurs the truth and makes the blog another place to be assured that you are getting slanted and unreliable information. Sad about that.
Good for them. I'm glad they're off here. They're attackers who want the status quo of limiting member voting through proxy voting, giving BOT members multiple votes through proxy voting, hiding voting results from us all, rediculous overhang rules, forcing members to cut trees for other's gain without compensation, violating federal, state, and county regulations, and much more. We don't need their vitriol here.
02/16 2:12. I have a single vacant lot. I'm just beginning my dream of having coastal property. One of the boycotters posted that I don't have neighbors. Do you think I don't have neighbors? That is one post one of those boycotters posted that was deleted. Do you think that post was truth? Do you think that post was respectful of me?
Boycotting the blog? Page views are at an all time high with 500 to 800 a day. Today, should break a half million views. Pretty good by any one's standards for a local blog. I don't think we can attribute all this to Kirby Smith and Deb Blagg. It indicate's the members are searching for information and the truth. Our thanks to those who share information and their points of view here. I should probably delete more of the garbage and bs.
5:38....That's a lot of malarkey. We've all witnessed ruthless baseless abuse of Deb Blagg and P. Johansen in particular, often ganged-up, one after another - something that is otherwise uncommon. No doubt the one's whimpering about fairness and transparency. George has no problem acknowledging any mistaken information that he or others publish.
These fools want only to be abusive, having no solid point of view but character assassination of those who offer their names, are confident and outspoken.
They are fearful of the truth so pretend to be an angry mob. The rest of us want information that is never forthcoming from the BOT or newsletters, and is often fabricated nonsense. Williams: "we work hard to assure that Surfside is in good standing with all regulatory agencies." (A blatant lie on the front page of the last "Surf-In-Sider").
Here is email dialogue that gives Gary Williams' email response to me regarding the January 2019 Surf-in-Sider.
From Me SHOA BOT: Your Response related to First Page, Fifth Paragraph What are you saying hadn't happened yet? You write a summary of the year in early May? Why would that make any sense? Submit it? What are you talking about? Submit to who in early May? Me
From Gary Williams You, See my responses below: Ø First Page, Fourth Paragraph – Recommendation made by Architectural Committee and yes the BOT approved the change at the August Board Meeting after consideration taken from member input including but not limited to submitted at Annual Meeting. Ø First Page, Fifth Paragraph – Page one is the President’s address submitted in early May and does not include any reference to WA L&I investigation as incident had not happened yet. Attorney nor BOT was not consulted nor do they need to be consulted. Finally no, it will not be revised. The balance of your questions are irrelevant and do not warrant a response based on my above statement. Thank You!! Gary Williams Surfside HOA President 425 890 7553 surfsiderver@comcast.net
From Me SHOA BOT: First Page, Fourth Paragraph Did a member recommend the structure overhang limit change? How did the member recommend it? Did the member submit a Member Request Form? If a member recommended or requested the change, who was the member? Did the BOT unilaterally decide to implement the structure overhang limit change? First Page, Fifth Paragraph Did our lawyer approve this language? Did all the individual BOT Member lawyers approve this language? Does the BOT think the WA L&I violations demonstrates "good standing with regulatory agencies"? Does the BOT think the actions taken related to the CFP demonstrate "good standing with regulatory agencies"? Based on my response here, does the BOT intend to revise this Surf-in-Sider (Newsletter)? Me
to 2:02 PM, I am sorry for the response you received from the Board President, Gary Williams. His disrespectful reply does not represent the board or the members. This is just one example among many that show his unfitness to serve on the board in any capacity. He should be working to bring members and board together, not division. We have many good members both on and off the board who have honor and integrity. Please do not judge us all by the actions of a single board member. We applaud you for asking the questions. Thank you for sharing this with us.
2:02....Two Trustees, Kirby Smith and Chris Hansen, were on the Architectural Comm. and wanted to create enforcement trouble for fellow Trustee Patrick Johansen. A neighbor reported to Patrick they had seen Hansen trespassing on the property to inspect Patrick's 10 x12 shed, facing the canal and hidden in the trees. They also buzzed his RV with a drone, which was witnessed by Patrick and his wife who were in the RV at the time.
Months later, Hansen proposed a new covenant restriction on shed eaves, limiting them to 14", in a Board Meeting, where it was promptly approved, but it was pointed out it could not be put in effect without presenting it to the membership at a "member meeting" for comment.
It should be perfectly obvious that eaves were not creating problems for the community at large, so why this was immediately embraced was also obvious. The only members this would directly affect was RV owners. Anyone else could claim they had a porch on their "workshop".
So this was enacted as a new restriction last August, knowing that at least a dozen well-built sheds would be put into non-compliance with the new covenant change. That demonstrates a very vindictive and elitist attitude, and does not jive with the Trustee's stated duty to serve all members without prejudice. It also is improper to make such a change retroactive, so any contest in Court would certainly be struck down.
02/17 11:20 AM I assume you are talking about 02/16 2:02 PM. You know have knowledge of that information. Decide for yourself. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
I deleted my comment about myself and comments that others made concerning me and the blog. I have made an effort that the blog discussions about me is not the issue. The figures I present are accurate. I have many other statistics that I do not see a need to post. They are there to assist me in making blog topics.
About all I can say is...Read the disclaimer at the top of the page. It is your choice to read the blog or not. It is your choice to comment or not. It is your choice to use your name or not. This is not a scientific journal, it is a social chat room. You are welcome to start your own blog and I would even provide a link to it here. Again, thanks to all who provide thoughtful comments here.
The blog host never deletes comments that compliment or praise him. What gets deleted is the comments that note that he deletes comments that are not offensive or nasty but disagree with his propaganda goals.
George clearly indicates what is his opinion and what is not. He does not publish "propaganda". Is that what you think the legal issues are that have prompted these investigations ? 3:33, your unsubstantiated opinion of blogger's character is of no interest to anyone here, and particularly when most commenters are participating anonymously, you included.
Most of the mean-spirited comments I see that are later deleted are worthless, as is this comment at 3:33. Many comments that are published cannot make a statement of opinion without making over-the-top insults. One comment recently published stated an unsubstantiated opinion about a commenter and said "just run along little man." Seriously ?
Speak of propaganda, and here you are again. What gets deleted are probably the personal and vindictive comments YOU post. You call it propaganda. We know it is fact. No manner of childish crying will change that.
Very well said 02/18 9:12 AM. Nobody is forcing anyone to visit this blog. The people who want transparency and change have very little power given this SHOA BOT. The SHOA BOT has complete control over the membership. And some cry propaganda about this blog, absurd!
Transparency includes ALL opinions, data and facts. Making changes to cater to a minority view of how thing should be is not a good idea for any association. Transparency is not a matter of promoting only agreeable opinions and data. Facts are facts until you apply selection to facts to achieve a particular goal. ALL factual information should be available to association members on Surfside websites including this blog. If members have observed something about another member or situation it should be known.
Seriously ? You're demanding Blog "transparency ? I'll bet you're one of those "rules are rules" people, yet can't accept the basic premise of the Blog as stated at the top of the home page.
George seeks to expose the truth of matters that affect Surfside owners, so does not seek to satisfy anyone's demands, and certainly not as you state - " to cater to a minority view of how things should be". You are desperately trying to justify your warped view, full of denial and preconceived notions.
39 comments:
This is their chance to go to closed session and remove Flood and Williams.
What building is Gil talking about, the one on G street with the $17K metal roof?
Better keep building till find out if can keep new one. Plans for that property we not aware of?
The building is the one known as the ocean side well field. It is off 315th area and was used to store parts. Not the old water warehouse. This would be a good place to store the gravel rather than pay to store it on golf course property. If we wanted to save money, that is. Been told there is a lot of rot in the building. We spent a lot on the fence there, so why not use it?
Why tear it down now? Wait until the end of the year and see if there is enough funds to do it. Was this in the budget to remove and an amount? Does anyone have a clue or a plan for anything?
The budget I voted for said nothing about tearing down anything. Take it out of Gill's high priced wage. Next thing is he will want mileage for all that driving around he does all day. He is another waste of funds.
@7:41 - Perhaps you have rationale to justify such a post. Please take ownership of your comment by including your name and advise what would compel you to personally call out a Surfside employee as earning a "high priced wage" and as being a "waste of funds". Gil has assisted our family many times and has always been professional, courteous, and kind.
Agreed Mr Applegate!! Gil is very kind and he is a great asset.
Gil is a patsy. He just does what he is told. He is not in a position to buck the system. Concentrate on those giving the orders n making policy, not those following them to keep their job.
re: February 15, 2019 at 10:37 AM
Is spot on with their assessment.
Gil has always been "professional, courteous, and kind" and he has a nice smile and a two faced suck up which is all good for keeping one's job with Surfside but he has been so far over his head for years.
Considering all that has occurred under his watch are these the traits Surfside needs now or into the future?
I know I'm posting but bear with me. I discovered this quote yesterday by Oscar Wilde - Include me when you consider his words.
" Man is least himself when he
talks in his own person.
Give him a mask and he will
tell you the truth."
I hate to admit it but it's mostly the truth.
I can't believe that we were allowed to see that ultra nasty comment about Gil. Would the poster sit across from Gil and say it too his face ? I think not.
Why oh way George didn't you zap this one? It really crossed my line and that's really had to do.
in response to February 15, 2019 at 12:02 PM
The comment as stated is correct and I have stated just this in the past and Gil knows it.
The most important sentence in the comment was
"Considering all that has occurred under his watch are these the traits Surfside needs now or into the future?"
Sometimes the truth hurts buttercup.
Gil worked under Bob Haskin and knew the proper procedure for the handling of asbestos pipe, yet after Haskin was stabbed in the back and removed, Gil supervised the pipe replacement without regard for worker safety. He became nothing more than a yes man for Flood, Williams and Neal. This is why they are all subject to criminal investigation. Sometimes you have to stand up like a man and do the right thing, especially when it comes to the health and safety of workers that you are responsible for. Who knew what and when did they know it and further, what did they do about it. If the four mentioned had been removed years ago, we would not be in the situation we are now. Now they are all involved in a cover up that only makes the situation worse for them and the association. They have reason to worry and hide.
I don't see Williams and Flood on the agenda. Where are they, hiding? Will Neal be there? Looks like another nothing meeting. Are they going to make poor Travis give his keystone cop report?
Interesting how 3:39 can make a statement like "stand up like a man" while attacking someone under an anonymous post. Typical B.S.
12:02:
Thank you for your comment. I agree 100%. This is the major problem with any social media when anonymous comments are allowed. Quite sad really. It has always been allowed here to say what you want about certain people who work and volunteer in our community while comments about some "friends" of the blog get deleted.
Again, that's just how people are nowadays.
Not fooling anyone 5:38. Look up transparent.lol
I know 5 members who are boycotting this blog due to the unfair deletion practices of the blog host. This blurs the truth and makes the blog another place to be assured that you are getting slanted and unreliable information. Sad about that.
Good for them. I'm glad they're off here. They're attackers who want the status quo of limiting member voting through proxy voting, giving BOT members multiple votes through proxy voting, hiding voting results from us all, rediculous overhang rules, forcing members to cut trees for other's gain without compensation, violating federal, state, and county regulations, and much more.
We don't need their vitriol here.
02/16 2:12. I have a single vacant lot. I'm just beginning my dream of having coastal property. One of the boycotters posted that I don't have neighbors. Do you think I don't have neighbors? That is one post one of those boycotters posted that was deleted.
Do you think that post was truth? Do you think that post was respectful of me?
What a minute. I can see one person working the night shift but 2 or 3, all making a comments within an hour? Something smells here.
Health problems throw off my sleeping patterns. It's a drag.
Boycotting the blog?
Page views are at an all time high with 500 to 800 a day. Today, should break a half million views. Pretty good by any one's standards for a local blog. I don't think we can attribute all this to Kirby Smith and Deb Blagg. It indicate's the members are searching for information and the truth. Our thanks to those who share information and their points of view here. I should probably delete more of the garbage and bs.
We should have a celebration for half million views! Good work George! Congratulations!
Mike Riley
5:38....That's a lot of malarkey. We've all witnessed ruthless baseless abuse of Deb Blagg and P. Johansen in particular, often ganged-up, one after another - something that is otherwise uncommon. No doubt the one's whimpering about fairness and transparency. George has no problem acknowledging any mistaken information that he or others publish.
These fools want only to be abusive, having no solid point of view but character assassination of those who offer their names, are confident and outspoken.
They are fearful of the truth so pretend to be an angry mob. The rest of us want information that is never forthcoming from the BOT or newsletters, and is often fabricated nonsense. Williams: "we work hard to assure that Surfside is in good standing with all regulatory agencies." (A blatant lie on the front page of the last "Surf-In-Sider").
Here is email dialogue that gives Gary Williams' email response to me regarding the January 2019 Surf-in-Sider.
From Me
SHOA BOT:
Your Response related to First Page, Fifth Paragraph
What are you saying hadn't happened yet?
You write a summary of the year in early May? Why would that make any sense?
Submit it? What are you talking about? Submit to who in early May?
Me
From Gary Williams
You,
See my responses below:
Ø First Page, Fourth Paragraph – Recommendation made by Architectural Committee and yes the BOT approved the change at the August Board Meeting after consideration taken from member input including but not limited to submitted at Annual Meeting.
Ø First Page, Fifth Paragraph – Page one is the President’s address submitted in early May and does not include any reference to WA L&I investigation as incident had not happened yet. Attorney nor BOT was not consulted nor do they need to be consulted. Finally no, it will not be revised. The balance of your questions are irrelevant and do not warrant a response based on my above statement.
Thank You!!
Gary Williams
Surfside HOA President
425 890 7553
surfsiderver@comcast.net
From Me
SHOA BOT:
First Page, Fourth Paragraph
Did a member recommend the structure overhang limit change? How did the member recommend it? Did the member submit a Member Request Form?
If a member recommended or requested the change, who was the member?
Did the BOT unilaterally decide to implement the structure overhang limit change?
First Page, Fifth Paragraph
Did our lawyer approve this language? Did all the individual BOT Member lawyers approve this language? Does the BOT think the WA L&I violations demonstrates "good standing with regulatory agencies"? Does the BOT think the actions taken related to the CFP demonstrate "good standing with regulatory agencies"? Based on my response here, does the BOT intend to revise this Surf-in-Sider (Newsletter)?
Me
to 2:02 PM,
I am sorry for the response you received from the Board President, Gary Williams. His disrespectful reply does not represent the board or the members. This is just one example among many that show his unfitness to serve on the board in any capacity. He should be working to bring members and board together, not division. We have many good members both on and off the board who have honor and integrity. Please do not judge us all by the actions of a single board member. We applaud you for asking the questions. Thank you for sharing this with us.
Care to delineate this experience you want us to acknowledge?
Take the good with the bad. Anonymous postings at least allow communication without repercussions, which has been an issue.
2:02....Two Trustees, Kirby Smith and Chris Hansen, were on the Architectural Comm. and wanted to create enforcement trouble for fellow Trustee Patrick Johansen. A neighbor reported to Patrick they had seen Hansen trespassing on the property to inspect Patrick's 10 x12 shed, facing the canal and hidden in the trees. They also buzzed his RV with a drone, which was witnessed by Patrick and his wife who were in the RV at the time.
Months later, Hansen proposed a new covenant restriction on shed eaves, limiting them to 14", in a Board Meeting, where it was promptly approved, but it was pointed out it could not be put in effect without presenting it to the membership at a "member meeting" for comment.
It should be perfectly obvious that eaves were not creating problems for the community at large, so why this was immediately embraced was also obvious. The only members this would directly affect was RV owners. Anyone else could claim they had a porch on their "workshop".
So this was enacted as a new restriction last August, knowing that at least a dozen well-built sheds would be put into non-compliance with the new covenant change. That demonstrates a very vindictive and elitist attitude, and does not jive with the Trustee's stated duty to serve all members without prejudice. It also is improper to make such a change retroactive, so any contest in Court would certainly be struck down.
02/17 11:20 AM
I assume you are talking about 02/16 2:02 PM.
You know have knowledge of that information. Decide for yourself.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
I deleted my comment about myself and comments that others made concerning me and the blog. I have made an effort that the blog discussions about me is not the issue. The figures I present are accurate. I have many other statistics that I do not see a need to post. They are there to assist me in making blog topics.
About all I can say is...Read the disclaimer at the top of the page. It is your choice to read the blog or not. It is your choice to comment or not. It is your choice to use your name or not. This is not a scientific journal, it is a social chat room. You are welcome to start your own blog and I would even provide a link to it here. Again, thanks to all who provide thoughtful comments here.
The blog host never deletes comments that compliment or praise him. What gets deleted is the comments that note that he deletes comments that are not offensive or nasty but disagree with his propaganda goals.
Hey 02/17 3:33 PM. See 02/16 3:05 AM.
However, I hope George deletes your 02/17 3:33 PM post and this one.
George clearly indicates what is his opinion and what is not. He does not publish "propaganda". Is that what you think the legal issues are that have prompted these investigations ? 3:33, your unsubstantiated opinion of blogger's character is of no interest to anyone here, and particularly when most commenters are participating anonymously, you included.
Most of the mean-spirited comments I see that are later deleted are worthless, as is this comment at 3:33. Many comments that are published cannot make a statement of opinion without making over-the-top insults. One comment recently published stated an unsubstantiated opinion about a commenter and said "just run along little man." Seriously ?
Speak of propaganda, and here you are again.
What gets deleted are probably the personal and vindictive comments YOU post.
You call it propaganda. We know it is fact. No manner of childish crying will change that.
Very well said 02/18 9:12 AM.
Nobody is forcing anyone to visit this blog.
The people who want transparency and change have very little power given this SHOA BOT.
The SHOA BOT has complete control over the membership. And some cry propaganda about this blog, absurd!
Transparency includes ALL opinions, data and facts. Making changes to cater to a minority view of how thing should be is not a good idea for any association. Transparency is not a matter of promoting only agreeable opinions and data. Facts are facts until you apply selection to facts to achieve a particular goal. ALL factual information should be available to association members on Surfside websites including this blog. If members have observed something about another member or situation it should be known.
Seriously ? You're demanding Blog "transparency ? I'll bet you're one of those "rules are rules" people, yet can't accept the basic premise of the Blog as stated at the top of the home page.
George seeks to expose the truth of matters that affect Surfside owners, so does not seek to satisfy anyone's demands, and certainly not as you state - " to cater to a minority view of how things should be". You are desperately trying to justify your warped view, full of denial and preconceived notions.
Post a Comment