Few attend...
Attending from Surfside:
R Minich
R Turner
T Reber
L Raymer
B Neal
No other members were present. The County was represented by a Mediator.
Surfside presented their plan and answered questions. It was stated that if all had worked together at the beginning, there would have been no reason to be here.
There will be a decision within ten (10) working days. Permits will be required to be obtained. It appears that the association will be allowed to buy into the wet lands bank. How much, what permits and possible fines will be presented in the final decision within ten (10) working days.
I will have a copy of the County decision and post it here on the blog.
This is going to cost the association, but probably not as much as it could have.
The bottom line is.....The Board has once again failed in it's duties and responsibilities. That is the real reason this happened.
12 comments:
Nice job board. Neal was there? It is because of him and Clancy that we have this litigation. Nice to see the board is on top of this. They need to pay more attention to the real issues, rather than sheds, trees and member lighting.
Next, I'll be investigating the outfalls issues.
I don't think there is any evidence that Bill Neal had anything to do with the improper permitting. The HOA had hired a contractor to do an evaluation of the Water Dept. well field and adjacent property, a requirement for permitting to build at the site. Word is, Clancy fired them and filed for permits on his own. That soon resulted in Surfside being cited for improper permitting and a hefty fine.
Bill and Larry Raymer managed to get the County to delay fines of $1000/day, after Clancy once again went "rogue", setting up an appointment in the first week of October 2019, then failed to attend the meeting. They set-up a meeting with the County rep who set the fine, getting a 30 day delay. From that point Winegar and the new attorney began negotiations. I think that is accurate.
Neal may not be responsible, but was def aware n said nothing. Buck has to stop somewhere. If not partially responsible, why was he there?
Typical Clancy. Puts himself in charge of a project, screws it up and arranges to be away when responsibility for the mess needs to be assigned to him!
4:50 sez - This was a case of a Trustee taking independent action without any BOT approval. Neal was subordinate to the BOT, and it was out of his hands at that point. We can only guess at details that you assume true. No one is going to cop to anything, and the Board has not prevented Clancy from taking inappropriate action in many ways, such as pumping out bogus complaints by the dozens annually.
Newsflash. Few attend because few actually care. If people don't care enough to go to a board meeting why would they go to this?
Board members do not and should not run our hoa. We have paid staff for that. Board members are elected to oversee and that obviously doesn't always work. This post will be ridiculed for its naivete but that is what you get with volunteers. The Board is not even allowed to schedule workshops or private meetings due to state law and member fear.
9:51 - It's not likely many members knew about it, since the only announcement was on the Blog. Many probably don't know what it is about as the HOA has not publicly addressed it or admitted to the mistakes that lead to it. And the meeting was on a Thursday in Long Beach.
I'd intended to go but had doctors appointments Wednesday and Friday. It's about a 2 1/2 hour drive from our Lacey house. I plan to attend the Meetings on the 18th, and will be in Surfside about 10 days. You may be a mind-reader as you claim, but such a meeting isn't a matter of just driving across town for most members. If the BOT was honest, we would get a report on what happened at the meeting.
Word is, the County will make their final judgement in 10 days, so about the 23rd or so. Most likely, only the Blog will have a report on it once the judgement has been made public.
I made a comment so Pacific County told me I would be notified of the decision.
1:24:
Actually the issue HAD been discussed at a couple board meetings I had attended so your statement is false. Contrary to what you and others say, you do learn things at the meetings.
I have never claimed to be a mind reader, something you do on almost a daily basis along with spreading unsubstantiated rumors. Thanks though for announcing your arrival. Sorry I won't be able to attend the meeting to witness what will no doubt be a circus. Will you be the ring leader or just one of the clowns?
I heard a brief and obscure report by Mr. Minich at a B. Meeting. There is so much that the Board does not publicly address, there is no real defending them. This stuff materialized more than a year and a half ago, largely due to Mr. Clancy's rogue actions which led to large fines, and the need to dig a drainfield around the new Warehouse which had flooded due to another of his unilateral decisions. Yet no action was taken to prevent Clancy's further improprieties.
He got us into big trouble with the County by independently setting a meeting, then failing to attend. A fine of $1000 a day was set to go into effect because of his actions, Oct 1st. Raymer and Neal interceded, delaying the daily fines.
You make a lot of accusations about my statements, but never can verify that I am not correct in my statements. That the mitigation was taking place is not a full explanation of what happened and why, which has only been explained on the Blog. You don't know anything about me to suggest that I am not respectful of the Board's process in a public meeting. That's total b.s.
I stand by my statement that most members do not know what this is all about, why it is happening, or the management failures that will end up costing the membership 10s of thousands of dollars, possibly more.
Post a Comment