Board candidates: Olds, Clancy & Minich
What they don't tell you:
They don't tell you that they all live on J Place and if elected, will join two others who also live on J Place and would represent a majority on the Board. Mr. Olds does not disclose that his wife, Peggy Olds, is chair of the Tree Committee. Mr. Clancy does not disclose that he writes many tree complaints.
They do not answer the questions...
Do you support killing trees and imposing a safety and financial hardship on members so that you can support the view policy?
Would you recuse yourself on issues involving tree topping?
Will you continue to write tree and other complaints?
Will you recuse yourself on budget approval for any of the above?
The current issue of the Surf-in-Sider, states on the top of the page "YOUR 2019 BOARD CANDIDATES" ...
"To view full resumes, go to www.surfsideonline.org/"
That information is not posted. Is it because it would disclose their addresses or other information they really don't want you to see, such as the excellent experience and qualifications of the other candidates, or the lack of with these three candidates?
The Board Trustee to the Tree Committee, Annete deLeest, another J Place resident, is also trustee for this years election process. It is her assigned responsibility to provide full disclosure and see that the full resumes are posted on the Surfside web site. She has failed in her duties. Many members that vote, have already made their voting choice based on less that promised additional information.
Is it any wounder that members have lost trust in our Board and some volunteers? Many good honest members and volunteers, have given up hope of any meaningful governance that represents all members in all matters in a fair process.
Electing any of the above will only continue the downward spiral we are in today. In fact, it will escalate lost confidence and trust. It is a shame. It doesn't have to be this way, but will continue with less than honest people in decision making positions of power.
30 comments:
Funny, a couple elections ago the RV owners and former owners outnumbered the J place owners. None of the J place folks came on here crying about it.
At least Ms. deLeest isn't a quitter. She shows up for her duties and hasn't failed the people who elected her to office. She also volunteers her time both for committees and other goings on for the community, more so than the other Trustees.
Can the host say the same? NO!
I live on the West side and there are living trees on my property and on both properties next to me. Meanwhile on the East side casa George has a bunch of stumps from murdered trees around his.
Also, I find it interesting how one can complain that some don't give "full disclosure" while at the same time backing Riley who gives none. Not to mention if the host lived on the West side he would have been included in Riley's death wish along with us other old members.
But that's ok, right?
Wow, j placers on here hot n heavy, no fact, n negativity as usual. Ever try adding to convo in a constructive manner? U all work for CNN? Lol
The election is not about George, it's about those three J Place clowns. Are they going to call this fake news? I checked and the facts agree with the topic.
I will vote for Flood over Clancy any day. Flood keeps the dues low while all Clancy wants to do is spend, spend and spend. He has a stupid spend plan that he does not even follow himself. Nothing more than a big obnoxious bag of hot air. His ugly barn has lowered property values all around him. Mr. know it all writes many tree complaints against all his lower neighbors. What a jerk.
I looked up DeLeest address and it is NOT on "J" place.
They sold their old place on 357th and bought a place on J Place. Probably not recorded yet.
Fact check:
The above is correct. I don't know about the "recorded yet" It does take some time before A sale or purchase will show up on Tax Sifter.Maybe Freddy will tell us, as he likes to comment on this "Blob".
Question 12:06:
Since calling people clowns is going to be on every comment you make now, are you an expert on clowns? Raised in the circus were you, the spawn of the bearded lady and the dog faced boy perhaps?
12:23:
You have no proof that Clancy's place has lowered property values. And if the lower neigbors took care of their trees they wouldn't get complaints. Quite simple really.
Many of us "lower neighbors" responsibly take care of our trees. It is shameful that this HOA persists in demanding complaints to achieve compliance with the covenants. Where the hell is the responsible management of this HOA and fair and timely enforcement of the covenants?
Clancy has done nothing but spend money and screw up projects while demanding exceptions to the covenants for himself while serving on the board. Be smart, don't vote for him. He does not have the best interests and welfare of his neighbors as a concern. It is all about him.
Your right 8:01 It's all about him but he has managed to screw up everything else for the rest of us. Now he wants to spend 300,000 on the rv storage lot. Is this guy nuts? And they want us to elect him and the other clown on lands and buildings? This is more than just clowns, it's a freak show.
“Lower Neighbors”? Who died and made you King? You are a sick reminder that some think of themselves as “elitists”. Sorry Freddy you are nothing but trash. BTW does your buddy Mr. K know you classify him in with this “lower” group?
Trustee for the election process? Yeah, I'm gonna trust the result of this election, just like the last one.
A level playing field demands honesty and communication. Here, we get neither. The foxes are in charge of the henhouse, and this election will be as tainted as the last.
Freddy Olds, Kurt Deleast, Peggy Deleast and Annette Olds, Rick Clancy and James Minnick, you can't tell one from another. King Flood is the Dear Leader. A three ring circus.
"LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BOYS AND GIRLS, GET READY FOR THE GREATEST FARCE ELECTION OF THE YEAR" starring Ringmaster Williams. Come one, come all, for your proxy votes.
Are we allowed to make member motions at the Annual meeting? If so, I will make a motion to remove Williams. Will anyone second it?
Yes. This is the one and only time a year that members can make motions. You can also make a motion to have a ballot sent to the members to vote on Articles of Incorporation and bylaws changes. Removal of a board member can be made at the Annual Meeting and a cause for the removal is not required. The association can be sued by the members if their rights as set forth in the RCW's are denied. This also applies to the Articles of Incorporation. Covenants can only be changed by the board with the only requirement being that they hold a public member meeting for member input. They can then do as they want, and usually do.
Unless lawyer lies n is used to bully.......again.
good luck not a lawyer, you won't have a chance at that meeting. been tried without success, and I'm glad
Don't let the naysayers keep you from trying!
Last comment sounds like a person who already knows that the fix is in. Nice of them to roll Flood back in, keeping the inbred Board intact. He was the first President that looked me in the face and lied.
Unless you are a J Place owner and already have representation on the BOT, there's no rational reason to oppose motions that enhance the voice of the members, and member rights. It should be a "NO BRAINER" to vote for covenant change that requires a vote of the entire membership to approve/disapprove of covenant change. The same goes for adding an Electronic voting option.
Personally, I find the voting instructions to be screwy every year, even though they are rewritten every year. The ballot should be called a "ballot", and not a "proxy". The instructions seem to require a designated person be named if you choose to vote by mail. That is not necessary, as the BALLOT is being sent to the neutral elections address. If a proxy option is offered, there should be both a proxy form and a straight ballot.
The only rationale for opposing approving these two motions, is that you are given privileges as a J Place owner as the system is now, and making the elections easier to participate in, and granting all of the members an equal say as to covenant changes, minimizes your undue influence.
The "blob" June 26, 4:49 pm host invited me to comment, so I will. Annette will not contribute to this blog. I have no such self restrictions. We are not really sure why folks are so interested in where we live but I guess since my better half is a trustee some folks want to make it their business. Yes we sold our small home on 357th where we owned for 7 years, we played by the rules that we signed up for and enjoyed our mixed neighborhood of full time, part time and RV owners. Since that property had some serious restrictions with wet lands behind in PC flood district number 1 that compromised any future expansion we decided to purchase property and build a larger home up on J Place. No builder will even talk to you without plans ready, in order to do that, land must be cleared, engineered, septic design completed and approved, any varience delt with, a mystery drain pipe under the road researched and questions answered. Then and only then can you design a home to fit the land, many thousands of dollars later you can take those plans to a builder, county and the HOA for approval. After that comes the wait time of about 2 years for our builder and the high six figure sticker shock. Annette and I did not want to wait that long or spend that much so when an existing home 2 lots away lowered their asking price we purchased that home and will be very happy there. I hope that clears up some of the answers for the folks that continue to hide behind anonymous and still spew their hate, untrue information, complete falsehoods and utter lies or make it their business to tour around other prospective trustees and put out incorrect information. I have to say I respect Mr Cox for putting his name on his posts, we might not agree on all issues but at least he is not afraid to put it out there, even though some of the information he recieved about us, our property and supposed actions from my wife that he has mentioned in past posts were completely untrue, unsubstantiated, second hand information. Respectfully Fred de Leest
Why is it ok for you to get a variance for an over height house on J Place and not ok for someone to get a tree height variance? Are you calling Mr. Cox a liar for stating that your wife said his answers "would not fly"? You also cleared a hill side slope of vegetation without a county permit. Your drain pipe across J Place is not county approved and may contribute to flooding and erosion to another's property. A check with the county also found that there are no required permits for the chipping location. There seems to be two sets of rules to follow, yours and others.
Poor Mr. Annette. He does not know the truth from a lie. Annettee has said to many, including me, that she reads the blob. I have a new name for your elite group of tree, rv and shed haters. "The Blobs"
Cant quit laughing about the ELITISTS new title: THE BLOBS is so RIght on. RESPECTFULLY, FED UP
BTW: don't believe a word they say. Vote them out in this election.
There has never been more than 2 RV lot owners on the Board at the same time. We have 2300 members and less 30% of owners reside in Surfside full time. The BOT has never been representative of all members and both part-timers and RV lot owners are always underrepresented. We should elect Trustees by geographic boundaries to get a better cross-section of Trustees.
I agree 10:11. The only way a selection of board members by geographic boundaries is by electing the right trustees now. The J Place blobs will never give up their control.
Freddie, Freddie, Freddie. Me thinks thou doest protest too much. Your property did NOT need to be cleared first that is why the builders are also site preparers. You did it because you knew that your design, exceeding the height restrictions would be approved
by the ARC, and figured you had it made. Then sticker shock? You should have expected that. You jumped the gun, ruined property and figured there would be no pushback, but there was, from your bank book. Too bad.
Mr. deLeest...I think you were trying to be candid about this stuff, and I think the responses are presumptive and needlessly harsh. I've had very little to say about you or Annette overall, so I don't know what "information" I've spoken of that is untrue. Annette insisted on confronting me at the chipping site, very put out about my criticism of the Tree Comm., and the statement I made about the denuded lot.
I had commented that it was your choice to bail on the property, but neighbors were left with the eyesore of a stripped lot, and it will contribute to storm water problems that already exist. Neither comment can be construed to be false. Plants absorb a great deal of water, and are a lot more attractive than what remains. I question somewhat the necessity of stripping the lot, but at the time it may have seemed appropriate.
It sounds like it was a nice coincidence that the other place worked out, and can understand why you changed plans. I have no great resentment of you folks, and wish you well in your new home.
I think you need to accept that it is a fact that J Place interests have undue influence on Board policy, and drive the Tree restrictions without any concern for the damage it has done to the community, or how pointless. It is blatantly unfair and improper that this policy should continue. It is not legally defensible, as there is no guarantee of "views" nor any definition of what specifically constitutes a "view". It continues primarily because the owners of treed lots are fearful of taking the HOA to Court, threatened by the financial might of member payments, wielded by the BOT.
You personally cannot be held responsible of course, but any and all J Place owners have the ability to publicly state opposition to the policy as currently enforced, and create momentum for that change.
So long as J Place interests seek to dominate policy, you should accept that there is resentment toward this elitism that preys on all lots west of the ridge. So you need a little thicker skin, and need to accept that much that has been said is true.
Bear in mind that I would never speak specifically about anyone in a public venue and knowingly make false statements, so I challenge you to point to anything I have said on the Blog about you or Annette that is false, and to use your words - there is a difference between "completely untrue" and "unsubstantiated and secondhand information".
But I also see the role Annette has as a Trustee and the decisions she supports, as separate from your personal lives, which we know nothing about. As such, we have no reason not wish for your happiness, as well as the happiness of everyone else in Surfside. We can adjust policies to show that is our objective, and you can help that happen should you choose the community's welfare over J Place demands.
Post a Comment