It can make a difference....
I have been receiving questions about the July Board Trustee election.
The requirements to be a Board Trustee candidate are:
1. You must be a Surfside member. This means that you are listed on the record as an owner or co-owner of a lot in the association. This could include a trust.
2. You must be a member in good standing. This means that you must be current in your dues and assessments or making agreed payments.
3. Once elected to the Board, you must agree to the outlined responsibilities as stated in our governing documents. Example would be to be considered present in 60% of the Board meetings.
While not required, there is usually a Board candidate packet published on the official Surfside web page. We should see this soon. This contains all the filing forms needed and explains the procedure. It is quite simple. You are not required to be nominated. A nomination is only required if a candidate is nominated from the floor at the Annual Meeting in July.
The reason there is a deadline date to submit your candidate application is so that your information and a picture can be included in the News Letter that is sent to all members in June. Also, to get your name on the printed ballot that is mailed. At this time, there is not electronic voting.
Many candidate wait until the last minute to file, because they want to see who is running and decide at the last minute. This is part of the political game. It is not unusual to have only 3 file, and this assures a win. In rare occasions, a nomination from the floor has won a position on the Board.
There are three (3) positions up for election.
1. James Flood
2. Kurt Olds
3. Larry Raymer
At this time, none have declared on way or another if they will seek re-election.
They have to fill out all the forms the same as anyone else if they decide to run again. They can also wait until the last minute and file or not.
A candidate that is presently seated on the Board has always appeared to have an advantage in an election. However, with that being said, with all the issues we have, it may not this year.
Good luck to us....we need it.
21 comments:
Flood is a perpetual candidate and usually garners a fair amount of votes so the non bloggers must be truly ignorant of the facts presented here (derision on purpose)or just go with a name they know. I would bet that the majority of endorsed candidates by bloggers are now part of the criminal conspiracy.
I have no idea what you said.
You talking to me? You calling me a criminal? For what?
Dissolution Now!
Let's face it. The CC&Rs need a complete assessment relative to the new WA RCW Act 64.90. All duplication must be cleaned up.
Just by replacing a few new BOT members won't get that done.
03/02 4:31 PM.
A while back someone on this blog asked me to run for the BOT. Are you accusing me of engaging in a criminal conspiracy? Do you know what slander and libel are?
Mike Riley
I respectfully submit Mr. Riley, that if you actually DO have interest in running for the BOT, that you try and ignore some of the taunting. I think you have good intentions, but in a best case scenario, serving on the Board requires some patience and compromise.
We have very challenging circumstances to navigate, and as desperately as the attitude in the Boardroom needs to change, there remains a contingent of members who have a deathly fear of constructive change. Business as usual isn't going to get us out of the predicament we're in. Some pretend that the Federal investigation is a hoax I'm sure.
Based on all I've been through in my short time here, the experiences of others I've learned about, and some of my posts exhibiting my frustration and impatience, I will not run for the BOT. Having said that, I'm willing to help the cause for change.
Mike Riley
Not that it matters I guess, but didn't you say you were leaving? But thanks for letting us know you are not running.
I put my lot up for sale. I will only sell and "leave" if I break even or make a profit. There is a very low chance I'll get the price I need to break even or make a profit. Thus, I'll likely stay. In fact my Lighthouse Realty agent hasn't even put a for sale sign on my lot and has asked my neighbors to buy my lot.
When I first came here I was so excited and wanted to get directly involved in the community. I wanted to become active on the BOT and start a monthly Bingo Night and a Coffee and Donuts Social. Now, I'm focused on gathering all the information and evidence of malfeasance about this current BOT I can.
All the good people are leaving.
See a trend here, people? This board needs to be dismantled immediately, either through voting them out, or dissolving the organization. The illegality cannot continue!
So Mike I do know what slander and libel are. Slander is spoken and libel is written. Libelous comments occur on this site all the time.
My comment was meant to convey that praise is frequently heaped on new or potential board candidates and then soon rescinded when that person has some time to do nothing or do things not in accordance with your personal wish list.
8:44 --- I think you describe an imaginary scenario that has no relevance to this HOA. With only about 300 votes cast annually, there has been no great ground-swell of support for any candidate, and there is rarely any useful information offered by the HOA, describing the candidates and their views on community issues.
The HOA needs to make a serious effort to make electronic voting available in order to expand the voting base, and in so doing, involvement in elections and issues. And the membership needs to take some responsibility on to hold its' Board to a much higher standard of fairness and honesty in its' procedures.
Just wait Mr Riley, Once you do something as a trustee that this blog doesn't like, they will string you up just like the rest of them
That's utter garbage. Plenty of room for differing opinions.
It's the "all is well" platitudes that are thrown out here, coupled with resistance to anything resembling progress that brings the rebukes.
Its not all well, far from it, and trying to portray that is an insult to our intelligence.
I won't even address your divisive statement.
Quite honestly my hope for this year is a big BOT change directed by the Feds. Aside from that, the only way I'll get on the BOT this year is through a floor nomination and I don't get the price I want for my lot.
I would always stand for transparency. I would always stand up for myself. I would disclose all my votes even if I didn't have to. I would never vote for anybody else even if asked to do so. I would motion to vote on vote by mail and electronic voting repeatedly until it gets done, be it through a BOT vote or a all member vote. I would always acknowledge and admit when I make a mistake.
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
Mike Riley
Now we just have to get past that unfortunate proclivity for the board to spoon feed us candidates.
Change is badly needed. Mike, I wish you luck!
Word on the streets is James Clancy is running again. Anyone from the blog running? We need good candidates not repeat offenders!
9:02 AM your comment is ridiculous. So is yours 2:42 PM. Board candidates for the most part are cajoled into running. And Clancy was the best qualified treasurer in forever. Better than Hanson for sure.
Thats not saying much.
This trend of recycling Board members needs to stop. I have enjoyed several conversations with Mr. Flood, and have nothing against him.
That being said, this little gang needs to be broken up. Hand selected candidates need to go. The pattern is obvious, and not in the best interests of the association.
10:09 So are you going to run? The problem is no one here likes the current board yet no one is running? Got to have a board so unless we get some new candidates, we will have the same recycled trustees as per usual.
Flood shouldn't be on the board, he cannot attend 60 % of meetings, which is required.
Can we get it on the ballot to have him removed?
Term limits also need on the ballot and reduce the BOT to 3
Post a Comment