Get to Know Your Candidates
Be an Informed Voter!
Marriann Schweitzer is a full-time resident of Surfside. She has lived in Surfside for the past two years and owns property on both the East and West side. She describes herself as someone who will listen, weigh the facts, and make a reasonable determination.
For 30+ years she worked in the corporate world for large employers such as Microsoft and Starbucks and smaller em-ployers as well such as a law firm. Marriann has a vast knowledge in Payroll, Payroll tax accounting, law, management and real estate appraisal. She has served on boards and taught classes at Bellevue Community College. She supports proactive compliance as she believes the covenants are more equitably enforced. Two of her top priorities would be our water system maintenance and operation and derelict properties. These affect property values for all members.
Marriann would like to see Surfside residents get more involved by serving on committees. She strongly believes this is how your voice gets heard. She wants everyone to have a voice in our community.
TOM ROGERS
Tom is a full-time resident of Surfside and a previous Board member. He has lived in Surfside for over 30 years. He is a retired professor with degrees in Communication Systems Modeling and Civil Engineering. He has worked around the world as a project manager on multiple large projects including industrial construction and wastewater systems.
Tom is a current member of the Architectural committee. As such, he recommends caution in granting variances. He understands and supports our covenants but at the same time acknowledges that some changes to our governing docu-ments may be necessary.
Tom is committed to the HOA. He believes our water and garbage costs would go up significantly and in contrast, our property values would go down just as significantly as properties continue to deteriorate with little county oversite.
With his background in communication, he places a high priority on improving communication among the member-ship. A first step to achieving this would be to upgrade our Surfside website. Bringing Surfside communication into the 21st century is a high priority for him.
DAN NEPTUN
Dan Neptun has owned a home and a lot in Surfside since 2017 – 3 years and is a part-time resident.
During his Coast Guard career, Dan has traveled the world and when it came time to retire, he liked what he saw in our Surfside community. It is a beautiful community and he would like to work to keep it that way by Serving as a Trustee.
He spent 40 years of service in the US Coast Guard and has held high-ranking management positions. During his last few years of Service, he managed the Coast Guard Academy’s Board of Trustees and served as Chairman for the Coast Guard’s Military Aid Society, Coast Guard Military Assistance ministry.
Dan supports Proactive Compliance and believes it is worth the trouble to do this right. When he looks outside Surfside, he can see the difference the HOA Covenants make. He supports our governing documents but as we grow and change, he is willing to make the changes necessary to for our community.
He has always enjoyed giving something back to the communities where he has lived. Some of those opportunities have been serving as a BSA committee chair and Scout Master, which could come in handy.
Dan wants to be a doer and make a difference in Surfside.
Continued on Page 3
Weekender
Page 3
Get to Know Your Candidates
Be an Informed Voter!
GARY WILLIAMS
Gary has a part-time resident of Surfside for 16 years. He has owned a home for the past 6 years and RVd for the previ-ous 10 years. He is a big supporter of RVers. He has served on the board in 2007 – 2013 and current term 2017-2020. He has served as President on several occasions and comes with a wealth of knowledge that will benefit surfside in the coming years.
He sees an opportunity to apply his 33 years with Boeing to utilize new process improvement and new technologies to move surfside forward while striving to keep dues at a manageable level.
Gary’s top priorities are to ensure we meet the ever-increasing requirements put on our water system by the State as well as establish a stable management structure and a strong business team.
He sees surfside as a family oriented diverse community of homeowners and RVers and tent campers. He wants to make it a great place for everyone.
49 comments:
Marrianne will be perfect for The Faction. The Faction will love her.
Why not give the members a real voice by requiring membership authority for governing documents amendments?
Why not give the members a real voice by following, opting in to, the latest WA RCW 64.90?
She talks of weighing the facts and the law. I see.
Why doesn't she start on a committee. She says that's where she has a voice. She must think she's too good for some little committee.
Anonymous 12:49 am. That comment is entirely unnecessary and cruel! No wonder members don’t want to get involved! Your comments are not doing anything but destroying George’s blog. I don’t know who you are but I certainly wish you’d find something productive to do with your time.
I agree JoAnne. I think Mariane is really just encouraging more members to get involved. All of the candidates have impressive backgrounds, though other than having financial background, I'm not sure being a Trustee is benefited by these very specialized skills.
Tom Rogers wants to improve community communications, and his background would seem to be an asset in making such improvements. I agree that a key goal of Trustees in Surfside should be to make efforts to draw more participation in elections, specifically voting, but in committees as well.
I do find it concerning when I hear emphasis on "proactive enforcement". The fact is, Surfside is not rife with non-compliance, with about 95% of the compliance dealing with the Tree Policy restrictions. Eliminate or scale back the restrictions, and save a great deal of legal expense, eliminating a great deal of conflict and animosity in the process.
So when Mr. Neptun calls Surfside a "beautiful community", maybe from his home on J place. Overall Surfside is a well kept community, with a lot of nice homes. But the landscape has been decimated, and is far from beautiful. The Tree Policy is to blame.
Marianne mentions addressing derelict properties, and that IS an issue that the BOT must deal with. But she is a recent member, and may not be aware of the struggles and roadblocks that these efforts have met over time. The last 2 years have seen great progress on many of these properties, and no doubt, compliance efforts have surely played a part. But much progress has been made, which probably is the result of a combination of factors, such as new ownership.
Mr. Williams will be "elected" to yet another term. He undoubtedly provides some worthwhile service to the community, and wants to be involved. But he will join Mr. Clancy as a member who is re-elected in spite of having done great disservice to the community, largely through rogue actions taken without full Board review and approval.
Williams is largely responsible for the harassment and failed legal efforts which cost the HOA a vast amount of money in the Patrick Johansen case. The community unknowingly spent into 6 figures trying to punish Johansen for putting a 3 ft. porch on a newly built log shed. Williams finally offered to drop the Superior Court case on Johansen, if he sold his property and resigned from the Board.
Clancy lays claim to the improper permitting of the Equipment warehouse and Water treatment plant, as well as the decision to build the Warehouse foundation 8 " lower, resulting in flooding of the newly constructed structure. The community has paid a great deal in fines, corrective construction, and buying into Wetlands mediation (at about $12,000). A great deal of money was spent on legal fees as well. But he's already a re-elected Trustee.
Thank you Steve and 100^ accurate and well said. The information you share is exactly what I intended with this blog. Information sharing and discussion. Thanks again and I hope the readers pay attention to what you have disclosed.
That's just my way of hoping for positive entire membership change.
What change are these candidates in favor of? Who can tell me specifically from what these candidate statements say?
What's a reasonable determination?
What changes to our governing documents are necessary?
What's stable management and a strong business team?
What are the candidate's views on the tree policy? Does anybody know?
7:36 anonymous. The weekender has instructions on how to submit questions to the candidates at the October meeting.
End the tree policy! It's illegal. Marriann is going to know that. Vote for her like Cox says.
There is no "tree policy". There is a tree height covenant. Submit your candidate questions to kimber@surfsideonline.org Do not ask a simple yes or no question. Require an explanation. Example: In what areas do you see a need for improvment?
I don't see why you would say it is not a policy. A written restriction can be fairly benign or it can be rigorously enforced as the "tree restrictions" are. How is it addressed by the HOA ? That constitutes "policy". What is most significant is HOW it is enforced and who suffers as a matter of how that policy or provision is implemented.
And I do not endorse ANY of these candidates. There's no point given they WILL be elected. It is unlikely that anyone endorsing "proactive enforcement" is going to oppose the "Tree restrictions". That was my initial point early in the strand.
Policy is a set of guidlines for the Board to follow to adhere to the govening documents that include covenants. Policy can be changed at any Boatd meeting. The covenants require a member hearing before any change is made. Policy would be in how they enforce covenants such as the tree covenants. Policy is for the everyday operation of the association. The function and operation of a committee is policy. The only mandated committee is the Archt. committee. How it will operate is policy.
Yes, like George says. Keep the questions vague so you let them avoid telling you useful information about their view, reasoning, and intent.
George's example question is excellent. Great work George!
@Steve, the sheriff contract is for 5 years...1/2 million dollars...ridiculous! For that price, I expect us to have the lowest crime rate in Pacific County.Oh and I hope the lady who drives the white car and delivers papers every morning gets a few speeding tickets
I agree Ronda. Some in Surfside were not happy with the last contract as it allowed Travis to be on call if needed, outside of Surfside. Personally, I think that made more sense than requiring him to be in Surfside fulltime, as the new contract appears to do. Of course there may be details we are yet to hear about.
We know that there is need for more coverage on the north end more generally, but there's little need in Surfside. Crime in Surfside is more likely to come from outside of the community, such as other nearby neighborhoods.
One thing for sure we’d better never have to put up with the 50-60 speeders on the approach! This has gone on unchecked ever since we bought in 2008. Speeders should not be a part of living here for anyone at this price!
The people that were burglarizing sheds were Surfside members in our community.
End the tree policy!
Thank you surfside neighbors from us in Ocean Park. It is nice to have an additional deputy near and we don't have to pay for it, You folks are not known for your smarts.
First, this is not the same contract that the former deputy had with Surfside, so it is yet to be determined if he will be on call, even if needed in Ocean Park. I doubt that you are an Ocean Park resident or you wouldn't care WHO is paying his salary.
Second, Surfside has ample funds to pay for a fulltime deputy, but it serves Surfside better if he IS available to respond to other nearby communities if needed. Law Enforcement presence is inadequate on much of the peninsula, a responsibility of the County Sheriff's office in South Bend. A fulltime officer is not needed in Surfside, so may spend most of his/her time whittling.
Shed burglary is the only significant crime other than speeding that I have heard about, and having a fulltime daytime deputy is no assurance it wouldn't happen again, even after spending $100,000. The culprits may have been tracked down from the sound of it.
Street lights and more home/property security lighting would help a lot. This community is very dark and needs to be lighted up. But no Christmas lights. They are really bad. lol
Now that’s funny anonymous 3:09! When we presented our lighting appeal one of our points was security. We were told lights did not deter criminals!!
Good Morning Surfside Neighbors!
We now have board guidance for how neighbors must interact with each other on issues that aren't covenant violations. Thanks big brother board!
@3:09, that is funny. We need more street light up on J place. I will ask PUD to put up a few.
When you use the term board guidance, consider the source.
Now they want to control First Amendment rights? When will the stupidity end?
Lighting. More attempts at invasive control where none is necessary.
I would like to see Williams recuse himself. He's a large part of the problems around here; I don't see how how his abysmal performance should be rewarded with reelection.
Recuse himself from what or drop out of the election? What are you talking about?
Tighten up your belts folks, our property taxes are about to rise again. according to the Chinook, median prices rose 30% over last year...and you thought your taxes were already ridiculous?
and now we are probably going to have to pay higher dues........
Interesting, no proxy votes. Well that should take care of those concerned about the mishandling of proxy’s. Oh, what difference will it make? Four Board selected candidates for four positions. Don’t need proxies. Will they have a quorum? Does it make a difference? Not when they can try to hoodwink you into thinking that the proxy concerns were taken care of. Oh and by the way did you know tha Clancy, the source of the new extremely flawed Sheriff contract is also Frank Wolfe’s campaign manager? Let’s see who claims the title for a more secure Surfside (at your expense) in one of the worst deals of the decade. But of course it will appear that Clancy and Wolfe are working for the residents instead having alternate objectives (like winning an election).
I thought prop values were going down in surfside. That's what all you haters keep saying. Just more B.S.
11:38 ask the candidates if they were hand picked by the board. They were not.
All the more reason to vote fir Dan Driscoll. He’s had experience with incorrect action with county officials!
Well,the HOA got their "Covid" grant of $20,000, as if we were a struggling business. We cheated our way into a discount on the Sheriff's contract.
1:32 When they had to be interviewed by the Board and approved by the Board before they were “allowed” to run, I would say that they are the “chosen ones” from the Board.
Yup, my value from the county went from 130k to 160k. Btw, valuation by county really has nothing to do with what u can sell for, also has nothing to do with turnover, someone gotta leave to have anything for sale.outsiders are ignorant and realtors sure not gunna tell them.
As a Democrat, I'm disappointed, frustrated, and embarrassed by Clancy and Wolfe. Particularly since Clancy is involved with Wolfe, I won't vote for him.
I recommend that anybody with any morals or ethics put your property on the market and get out of here.
Well 5:43, I guess ALL candidates are "chosen ones" since everyone is "allowed" to run if you paid your dues.
You're singin' this sad sad song, which we all know presumes that anyone who criticizes the Board or HOA is a "hater". Did you ever take "Government" in school ? Dissent is a protected right in the USA, and central to the function of a democratic society. Learn what hate IS, such as the 13 people who planned to kidnap and try the governor of Michigan. You are clueless.
About a half dozen vacancies on the Board have all been filled by the runner-up in the previous election in the last 4 years. By refusing to follow the Bylaws, which REQUIRES an appointment, the Board gained an advantage in this year of Covid virus and closed meetings. Both of the new candidates praise "pro-active" enforcement - code for support of the Tree Policy and status-quo. We'll see if they have anything new to bring to the situation. I
Probably not. We the members have come to expect a disfuntional Board that is only interested in their own personal agendas. The members have accepted wasteful spending as :that's just the way it is". Several of the candidates have no experience in any Surfside issues. This election offers no choice to the members. Maybe when the members get one of the new over 120 tree complaints, it will get their attention. The members have become accepting to dues and assessment increases without questioning and asking why. Bottom line is....."It is what it is". Sad. We could be a much better place than we are now.
7:38 Do you think the Board selection committee will also go out and promote say someone like Mr. Cox as well as they will for their selections? He certainly would not be a “chosen” (ie, supported) candidate. You only have four candidates because the current and recent Boards have made it such a toxic environment that rather than support it, nobody wants to have anything to do with them, only hoping it will soon implode. Also, the recent Weekender contained an article as to how we couldn’t have held an annual meeting in July. Then why has the “proxy issue” been magically resolved and we can each cast a unique vote? Seems to me that if this tact had been taken last summer we could have expunged those Board members whose terms were up and not have allowed their input on any business conducted since then. Maybe now with real voting, you could support a recall of Board members. The current and immediate past Presidents have made a mockery of their duties. Personal agendas, such as Clancy’s bidding to do Wolfe’s “work” in obtaining police protection goes unchecked. Both have very different reasons for that, not including the betterment of Surfside. Clancy wants it to look good so he can get a $300,000 profit in selling his house. Wolfe wants it to get votes, no more, no less. Suggest you ask as to what increased protection you are paying for vs what we had with Travis? Oh well, it is nice you are paying for added law enforcement for all of the County. Maybe Clancy is going to use that profit to repay the HOA for some of the fines, legal fees, etc that he is responsible for. Karma?
Give me a break. You come on here criticizing everything about the board and then point the finger at them for creating a toxic environment. Typical hypocrisy.
And I'm sorry, dissent is one thing. But spending everyday posting negative comments at some point crosses over into something different, Call it what you will. So spare me your attempt at a civics lesson.
726 - there's more than a few of us. Our board is the toxic environment. It rules on self-interest, nepotism, and greed. Keep shucking for them.
602 - why should Williams recuse himself? He's an abysmal failure that hangs on year after year due to the indifference of the members. Hes been there for 13 years - give him his gold watch and roll him out.
Currently, under his 'leadership', we have had 6 BOIL WATER notices in a year, no security, compactor full, and fools like Clancy running around without adult supervision.
We don't need any more lifers on the board, and he's responsible for more damage than progress.
That's the problem. You consider yourself above criticism, and claim that dissent is "HATE". That's elitist nonsense. Own it.
Post a Comment