Community identity destroyed...
Surfside has had it's ups and downs over the years, but the down has never been so low as it is now.
A few came like "thieves in the night" and managed to destroy the sense of community that took years to build. They have managed to pit neighborhood, neighbor and member against member. Rather than work for the good of all, they have taken control to achieve their own personal agendas.
A large part of this happened by keeping members in the dark as to what is really happening. This practice continues today. If the members do not know of a problem, then few know there is a problem. What information is made public to the members, is months old, incomplete and inaccurate with half truths and false information. In a short time they have managed to take the trust away that members once had. It took years to build that trust.
Board and committee personal attacks against fellow members has become the norm.
Those attacks have only divided the community more, at a time when serious problems need attention.
We still have a few members who are willing to seek the truth and work to make the needed changes. Can it be done? I really don't know. There is an old but true saying..."the people get the governance they deserve". Sadly, that may be the case here.
36 comments:
Your negative view of our neighborhood is not healthy. There is another old saying about a glass half full. Of course, to the overly negative person it is half empty. Surfside is experiencing growing pains. The roll of the board is changing. We were always a small group with few problems. With the building growth and more people in closer quarters we are experiencing new and more difficult problems. Board members are still making decision as if we only had 200 members. Trustees need to come to grip with the new reality. Surfside has morphed into a small city and the way we are managed needs to change with it. The way forward will be difficult but in the words of Billy Joel, the good old days were not always good and tomorrow isn’t as bad as it seems.
Bad management or no management is worse than no management. Are we better off today than yesterday? I think not. There is no greater growth today than yesterday. It continues at the same slow pace. For sale signs are not an indication of growth, they are an indication of people wanting out.
The blog shares a lot of the blame for the dysfunction of Surfside. Allowing a small minority of members to anonymously bash anyone and everyone with no fear of reprisal is wrong. We are a country where one is supposed to be able to face their accuser. Where facts should rule the day and not innuendo. We gave an electronic toy to someone with too much time on his hands and his minions ran with it. Sad.
7:38. If you believe that, we should be able to see any complaint that is filed against us. (Face the accuser, etc)
Cant have it both ways 7:35, one hand, it is said very few read the blog. Other hand has your opinion. Far as growth n change. We are no different than it was 10 years ago when i moved here, other than personal agenda politics, that hurt the majority.
And 7:35 signs as "Anonymous". I guess he is a part of the small minority bashing. You should be glad that the blog gives you a place to bash also. What are you hiding? Other than your name.
6:19 & 7:35....You talk the same tiresome b.s. that we hear defending the BOT's behavior when there is no real excuse. The community has not developed more problems and conflicts. We have at least one Trustee, filing hundreds of bogus complaints annually, and a Board that wants to perpetuate a myth that there is great conflict, requiring heavy compliance policing.
Meanwhile, our BOT refuses to serve the membership in good faith, and will not conduct business transparently, hiding key matters and expenditures from the membership. They are telling members that there will no longer be a "Complaint-driven" system, when HOAs are obligated to address all member complaints and concerns.
Until this year, the Tree Policy was generating about 100 complaints annually, most coming from one Trustee, Jim Clancy. Beyond this, there have only been about 30 complaints on other issues, with a few relating to lighting. Since the BOT approved Winegar's "Pro-active Enforcement" program, we suddenly have Clancy and others filing far more bogus complaints. About another 75 Tree complaints and so far, 50 lighting complaints have flooded the docket.
A system intended to be a means for members to take neighbor disputes to the HOA for mediation, has been used as a tool against the membership by Trustees and Committee members. What we do know is, claims by the manager Mr. Reber and others, that they do not know who is filing all of these complaints, is bullsh*t. Those who file complaints can be protected as "anonymous" by the HOA, but the HOA is supposed to contact the writer of the complaint with a report of the outcome of enforcement efforts.
The Manager, the BOT, and the Committee members know who the authors of these complaints are, and are ALL treating the members as criminals, when they are all complicit in a program of abuse of member rights and State laws of public information.
Key in this drive to build a "proactive police force" is Bus. Office manager Mr. Reber, who it is rumored, wrote the new lighting policy, and worked as a committee member of the Arch Comm.. he does not own property in Surfside, and is not a member. He has no business writing restrictive policies in a community that he isn't a member of, setting rules he doesn't have to comply to.
For about 6 months out of the year, there are only a few hundred people in Surfside, most just minding their own business. Claims of rampant non-compliance are a lie perpetuated by the HOA, and needless restrictions, exaggerated enforcement, and disregard for member's rights, breeds needless legal conflict and a huge waste of member funds on compliance officers and legal fees. There is NO limit on BOT legal expenditures, and most of it is hidden from the members in obscure categories with misleading descriptions.
753 - would love to see that challenged in court! Someone will make some money.
735 - this blog is the only source of HONEST news to this dysfunctional excuse for an organization.
I've been here 18 years now, some have some knowledge prior to the Williams/Flood regime. There was no division, like today. It goes hand-in-hand with this management era....and it's not over.
I used to trust the board and the committee's. Most things were just fine and the dues hardly went up. I did not see the need to attend board or other meetings. Now that trust is gone. I will never again believe any thing they say or attend any of their meetings. I vote to end this HOA.
You have my vote for dissolution as well.
Get real. 15% of the membership votes, and 2/3 of those voters elected 3 J place owners to the BOT last election. Probably the Articles state how many of ALL owners must vote to approve dissolution. It's probably 3/4. That would be about 1500 votes favoring dissolution. In what reality do you think this is possible ?
It's true the blog host deletes posts, and, is now selective in what posts are "allowed" to be approved and shown.
To Steve Cox - 100's of bogus complaints? How could you possibly know that hundreds of complaints were filed by a specific individual and how do you know that they are bogus?
And as for the 1/14 at 8:24 poster. There was no bashing of individuals in his/her complaint about the blog causing many of our issues.
Here's a thought. Maybe a certain someone is posting various themes just to pass the time?
9:30 - This has been addressed by numerous people here on the blog. It is well documented, and if not would be foolish to name the l person well known to be the author. You should be able to grasp why this is a dicked-up thing to do. As I said, it is intended to be sparingly used by members to seek HOA assistance in resolving issues with neighbors that cannot otherwise be resolved.
Clancy routinely files dozens of tree complaints at a time, when owners are expected to only cite issues that effect them directly. Now, the rumor is, partially verified, that he filed 50 lighting complaints at once. He is not a designated compliance officer, and common sense would tell you, that all members could start doing this with just as much legitimacy.
It is intended to be an honor system and not an opportunity for every person who always wanted to be a cop, to play community policeman. There have been about 200 tree complaints filed this year alone, most by Clancy.
I guess if you just start making out complaints from a Surfside list of addresses, among a hundred randomly cited properties, there's bound to be a legitimate one. The problem is, this is blatant abuse of a system intended to be used in a neighborly way, and not as a weapon against the membership. Technically, ALL member complaints are to be investigated.
And, knothead, consider what I also pointed out already, this is basically all regarding a community of 300 to 500 households occupied at a time, during most of the year.
930 - wake up. Maybe you are just trying to stir the pot, like usual. Otherwise, you're not watching.
The Reverend says...
Cox back to name calling... Didn't take long for that new leaf to turn back...
Where is it noted that the complaint system is to be sparingly used and only if unable to be resolved between neighbors. Or that it is to be an "honor" system. While that may be the civil approach, it is not defined anywhere to support your statement. The fact that non-compliance's weren't enforced for a time does not mean the violator gets a pass. The number of people residing and at what time of year has no bearing. Finally, please share how you partially confirmed your rumor...
Just to be clear, I did not write that entire comment. While the part about the name calling I had written in the past 5:58 should have used quotation marks for it or a space between it and the rest of the comment. If you got a problem with Cox take it on yourself and please leave me out of it.
I will admit now that what I said isn't completely accurate. As people can see from his comment above and many others Cox has never stopped with the immature name calling. Always easy to be brave when you're sitting behind your PC, isn't it?
Fake name said...
How stupid you think we are?
Yes, yes,....I'm so immature. Being an idiot doesn't mean you get a free pass, to use your analogy. You have a lot of questions based on your continued efforts to dismiss obvious bad behavior by members of the BOT and some committees, when I call them on their bad behavior.
No, the covenants do not specify how complaints should be used, nor do they put limits on how many one individual can make. If you manage to understand what you read, then you might note my comment, that the Board and Committees know that Clancy in particular does this, and have made no efforts to reign him in or rewrite our covenants to preserve this approach.
I also pointed out that this behavior is also a green light to EVERY MEMBER, that we ALL can start writing random addresses as being violators of covenants, whether or not they are. Why don't we ALL flood the HOA docket with fake complaints ? Because most of us have some integrity, and take filing a complaint on another community member seriously. It needs to be valid and justified.
The Tree Comm. doesn't make accurate measurements of trees, because they estimate the height of the road's crown, relative to the base of the tree they are measuring some distance away. So writing random tree complaints has a good chance of yielding bogus violations. There is also no specific guideline for how much a tree must be OVER the stated limit to be cited, and that is flaky.
The 'complaint based" system has worked when used sparingly, recognizing that perceived problems with neighbors have always been assumed to be issues that should be discussed civilly with the neighbor involved, trying to be friends, and finding simple solutions. Before HOAs, that has been the only means of addressing neighborly issues that do not merit calling the police.
I think that it's likely that at least half of the members have NEVER written a complaint filed with the HOA. I haven't. My friend Larry Raymer never has. Fake 'Reverend", maybe your husband wrote the rest, eh ? Righteous !
Id say no more than 5% have ever written a complaint.
No where in the Reverend's comments did he "dismiss" bad BOT behavior. Merely pointed out how you like to state your opinion as fact. If there is a problem with invalid complaints it should be addressed but that is separate from what the Reverend stated.
1011 - What do you do when a trusty writes complaints in the double digits? Like Clancy?
I would be happy to separate myself from what the reverend stated. Cox makes a lot more sense.
5% of members, not complaints,lol. Clancy is out of control.
And with the loss of our contracted Sheriff things will quickly go from bad to worse in SHOA.
Thanks Steve for agreeing with me on your immaturity. Being self aware is a admirable trait in my opinion. NOW why is it YOU feel like YOU have to SHOUT all the TIME?
It took awhile but once again your false allegations against the tree committee return. You haven't one bit of evidence that they are making inaccurate measurements. It's as 10:42 pointed out, you constantly state your opinion as fact. You also continually make the mistake of assuming the all complaints are invalid. Yes it would be nice if neighbors could work it out. But given the type of attitude you exhibit who would want to approach someone like you? That's why the complaint system is in place.
And where did you pull that whole husband thing out of? Never mind, we all know.
8:59..
Loss of contracted sheriff? Where did that come from?
Using caps is just to emphasize a word in text. Why would anyone assume it indicates "yelling"? You are a self righteous turd, obsessed with belittling my comments, but lacking any real evidence for your comments. I'm convinced you are on the Tree Comm. as you are stuck on defending their despicable practices.
I said a Trustee uses all caps when emailing members. Entire sentences in all caps have been written to me.
Thanks for making assumptions and calling me names Cox.
Yes Travis is leaving, fed up with bullshit.
"You are a self righteous turd, obsessed with belittling my comments, but lacking any real evidence for your comments"... Nice.
Pot meet kettle...
You'd be surprised that not everyone who disagrees with you is on the BOT, Tree or Architecture committee, or lives on J.
At the risk of getting in the middle of this it is pretty much a known thing in the online community that constantly using caps is considered shouting.
Speaking of evidence, since Cox had to use "turd" pretty much is proving the Rev's point. He always likes to talk about being civil when it comes to the complaint policy yet when someone disagrees he is always quick with the salty language which is uncalled for. Unfortunately that's just how things are I suppose.
1:35 AM. I guess that's why we only have 8 Trustees lol.
Turd, really? How a grown man can be so childish is beyond me. As 1:35 states it is a known fact that using caps is shouting in text form so it isn't just an assumption.
I find it interesting that you bring up "lacking any real evidence" because that is precisely the point of my comment. You throw out accusations and rumors without evidence to back it up like in this case with the tree committee. I have called you out on it before on other matters too. To your new rant, again all they do is to go out and document if a complaint is valid. Your problem with the covenant is one thing but to blame those volunteers is akin to blaming the radar gun when the trooper catches you speeding.
Now to your constant fixation about me being on the tree committee, we can easily put this to rest. I'll wager $1000.00 that I'm not. I will even give you as much odds as you would like. So how about it Stevie, care to put your money where your little potty mouth is?
I never use all caps, so you've got your head up your backside.
Post a Comment