Glenbrooke News

DISCLAIMER:  This document was prepared from tapes recorded by Resident Vickie G. and is not the official minutes of the Board of Directors for the Glenbrooke Homeowners Association.  This document is provided for the benefit of those homeowners who were unable to attend the meeting.

Glenbrooke Homeowner’s Board Meeting October 21, 2009

The President called the Glenbrooke Homeowner’s Board of Directors meeting to order at 2:08 pm on October 21, 2009.

The President stated he is in a new position, he is now President of the Board, we have a new member and we will pass the microphone.  John J. introduced himself and said he is a Land Project Manager to Pulte and this is his first meeting for the Glenbrooke Community, the other members introduced themselves:  Board member Leo P.,  Board member Les M. and  Board member Mike G..

Pam J. with Riverside Management Company certified proof of notice.

The agenda for the meeting was accepted.  Board member Les M. made the motion for approval, followed by second from Board member Leo P.  – motion approved 5-0.

The minutes from the August meeting had a few corrections.  The President corrected the spelling of Del Webb has two bb’s and Tim Hearl in second paragraph (a) and Board member Mike G. corrected #3 open forum from 6-3 to 63 homeowners.  Board member Les M. made the motion to approve the minutes as corrected, followed by second from Board member Leo P.  – motion approved 5-0.

President’s report:  The President announced that the board passed 2009-011 by unanimous consent to appoint John J. as Director and moving himself to the position of President.  He also announced that Rick J. has resigned from the Board.  He also noted that the trees treatment seems to be working and the landscape contractor is removing deadwood.  Also, there was a presentation on HOA operations by Carole M. on October 7^th and copies are available.  The palm trees are looking good and we will continue to monitor and we will continue to monitor the health of those trees.

In the Treasurer’s report:  Board member Les M. presented the July, August and September financials for approval.  Board member Les M. made motion to approve, followed by second from Board member Mike G.  – motion approved 5-0.

Board member Les M. said staff has been working on the budget for 2010 and are ready to make recommendation for approval today.  The 2010 budget was based on an average of 401 lot assessments which doesn’t mean that we are going to have that many buildings out here.  But it means that they have moved far enough along in the Pulte government to be included in the assessment.  The 401, is the number we are thinking of for 2010 and is  based on primarily adding a few homes each month and that would be an increase of 71 homes over what we had in 2009.  No dues increase associated with the 2010 budget, the dues will still remain $159.00 per lot.  Staff has done a good job saving some money and getting money from advertising.  New items that will become line items:  the warranty period for air conditioning and heating has now expired.  We have to get a contractor to do the maintenance and necessary work.  That is something added in 2010 budget that was not dealt with in 2009.    Fitness center now we pay full maintenance costs, its warranty has also expired.  We have an increase in Xerox and other services to keep the Arbour running.  There will be no change in operation hours included in the 2010 budget and the reserve contribution, which goes directly into the reserve will be $27.00 per lot for future maintenance items and that sort of things.   Already heard about the palm trees, one of the things talked about last board meeting that they are expensive to maintain but more expensive to take out.  They are now looking a lot healthier than when we were talking about them a couple months ago, so we will continue to be monitored versus taking them out and we will continue to wait and see how they do particularly with the winter coming along and see if they fair well and if not we’ll go back to plan B.  The submitted budget once approved will be mailed out to homeowners shortly.

Carole M. stated the rules state by the end of November.

The President did comment on the increase for the reserve which is a little bit higher this year but the Board’s thought on this is we have the ability to further put money in the reserve account by the end of this year to make it fully funded and by the end of next year it will not only be fully funded but a little extra which is good.  So if there is a risk of palm trees or any other items out there, we are in good shape to address the issue we may have.

Carole M. gave her report for the Design Review Committee – 47 applications were received; 34 were approved, 8 were denied and 5 were returned for missing information.  Their next meeting will be November 2^nd at 10:00 am.

Erin G. gave her Lifestyle Director’s Report:   September there was the Boot Scootin Boogie and Chili Cook Off, Labor Day Potluck,  Scottish Games, a Fun Game Day and an evening of live music.  October there was the Octoberfest and tomorrow we are planning Apple Hill/Red Hawk Casino trip, Bingo was held last Saturday, the Halloween Sp Boo Ghetti Dinner on the 30^th and Fashion Show this Saturday.  November will have continuation of our Senior Technology Program, which is partnered with the High School to teach homeowners to use IPOD and little computers at the library on Franklin on the first and third Wednesdays, Lose it or Use it Memory workshops which will continue through October and November.  November there will be,  November 11^th Veteran Day lunch, November 12^th Yappy hour at the Rose Garden, November 14^th Bingo as it was so successful last Saturday, November 18^th Kaiser will be at the lodge to do a presentation on annual enrollment and November 20^th Thanksgiving Potluck.  In December, on the 1^st the we will be decorating the Christmas Tree, a bus trip to San Francisco on December 2^nd to do shopping, December 12^th our Holiday Party, December 15^th caroling through the neighborhood, December 18^th the White Elephant and Cookie Exchange and December 22^nd we have group discounted tickets to the Nutcracker at the Sacramento Community Theatre.

Erin reported we had groups that applied for approval and these are the Golf Group, Dog Group, Social Group, Pinochle and Line Dancing.

The President announced the groups require approval of the Board and have discussion on each of these:

Golf Group – Board member Leo P. made the motion for approval, Board member Les M. provided the 2^nd – vote 5-0

Dog Group – Board member Leo P. made the motion for approval, Board member Mike G. provided the 2^nd – vote 5-0

Social Group – also known as Meet and Greet, there was questions about the number of people which was 17 with a couple question marks.  The President had a couple questions for our staff as the application has crossed out some things and not completed which was required by the Board.  He is not sure that is correct and doesn’t believe there was a purpose.  In his opinion is it is not quite ready so we can know exactly what the purpose is, we need to make sure it is not redundant with other groups.

Resident Darcie G asked what The President’s concerns were?

The President responded by needing enough information on the application to know exactly what they were approving.

Resident Darcie G asked what The President was unclear on and

Mina L. said she would sit down with Darcie and go over what was incomplete and there was a question on the cross out whether or not there was a steering committee or treasurer.

Resident Darcie G responded that there was no need for a treasurer as it is an informal social group and there is a purpose to meet and greet new residents and welcome them into the neighborhood.   There is no other group that does this and it is not a duplicate, it has all the things required by the bi-laws and she was surprised if there was something not there that is required.

The President said that was his concern to have the specific for what is the purpose and not have cross outs on the application.  The Board needs a paper trail that needs to be clear and he would like staff to sit down with Darcie.

Board member Leo P. stated but it doesn’t mean the application doesn’t stop, it would carry on so they could have a paper trail.

Resident Darcie G found this frustrating as this was the second board meeting that this application has not gone through for various reasons and it is beginning to feel like discrimination.  She requested exactly what was not on the application for a meet and greet.

The President relies on the staff, approval comes from the staff so that the Board can either approve it or deny it but the approval comes from the staff.  There were a little question about the staff seeking approval but he felt it was not complete from the Board’s perspective.

Resident Glen G spoke up that the Board had not voted but that it was incomplete based on the President’s reading of it.

 

It was clarified not the Board but The President’s opinion.

Upon hearing no motion, The President was going to move forward but

Board member Leo P. spoke as a resident, that there is an importance in establishing these groups officially at this point, that this is the first go around at this and it is important to make sure we have the t’s crossed and dot the I’s.  He didn’t feel there was an issue but it didn’t mean to stop or it was not going to happen it, we just have to be sure the paperwork is correct in the file.

Resident Darcie G understood that last meeting this was to be approval also, but because there wasn’t a treasurer or steering committee that they don’t need a treasurer, there is not a steering committee, they don’t collect money, it is non-applicable and they put that on the application and now it is being turned back because it is not applicable.  It seems to her that the groups she submits are the ones that weren’t approved last meeting and that one particular Board member seems to have a problem with them and it really is beginning to feel like discrimination when other groups have been approved with a lot less paperwork, follow through and things that have happened.

Board member Leo P. said to Mina L. that can’t she can’t work out these details.

Mina L. responded that they would work out and be resubmitting the application and clarify any misunderstandings.

The President then moved along to the next group….

Pinochle Group – there was a question about the number which The President said was 11 and three first names so like 14.  The contact was Resident Darcie G and Resident Bart R..

The President had the same concerns that the application wasn’t complete.

Resident Darcie G responded that they don’t have a treasurer to play pinochle and to use some common sense that the group plays cards.

Mina L. spoke up that she had talked with Bart and that he was starting on a new application for the next meeting that has the missing information.

The President requested that the staff make sure the application are complete entirely before they come to the Board so they are not debating whether things are necessary.  The Board thinks they are necessary as they are on the form so make sure it is all there, please.

Line Dancing – there are 13 members.

Resident Vickie G asks if the applications are available for review.

The President stated very simple, every question, same form.

Resident Darcie G asked how would you like if there is no treasurer?

Board member Leo P. asked Darcie if he could talk to her after the meeting.

Carole M. spoke up that there is nothing that relates to having money and having a treasurer in the guidelines, which the Board approved.  It says you need officers or a steering committee.  The officer’s could be a President and a Secretary, as long as you have three people on a steering committee, a treasurer is not relevant and that is one of the things on the form.

Board member Les M. stated the steering committee definition for treasurer or steering committee.

Resident Darcie G responded by saying or contact people, which is it?

Board member Les M. made the motion for approval,  Board member Mike G. provided the second – vote 5-0.

The President then opened it up for open forum and as done in the past would like to keep the comments to three minutes.  He reminded these are not agenda items and that the Board could not take action on them.  He requested the member come up to the podium and if you had trouble getting up there Mina had a microphone so everyone could here the question.

Resident Bill E. was first to speak and he submitted a petition to The President.  He read his comments due to the three-minute limit.  Over 100 members attended the last board meeting on August 12 and part of the new business for the board to vote on was proposal for some new rules and regulations.  Turns out residents have no idea what they involve.  A week after the August board meeting a few members found out the guest policy changes were being proposed involving guest fees and guest limits.  It appeared to him that the vast majority of members were still not informed.  He put some information on each doorstep.  This resulted in emails from the membership to the Board.  On September 11^th the Board emailed the residents through the Glenbrooke Community Association saying that they heard us and that they were planning to remove the fees at the October 21^st meeting.  Many members were still concerned about not being in the information loop so the Glenbrooke Communication Petition was born.  The petition basically expresses our concern that too many members do not get the word via the community association website or the postings.  The first to see the petition were the Board and the lodge management.  Resident Bill E. had several canvassers asking members door to door if they would wish to sign the communication petition.  Here were the results:  about 10% of the residents do not own computers, at least another 30% do not go on the Glenbrooke Association website and thirdly Apple computer owners difficulty with the Association website.  The petitions have 232 signatures.  Of those members that they spoke to about 5% chose not to sign the petition.  But those who have a computer ask to be emailed direct to their website rather than checking repeatedly the Glenbrooke Association website.  This would direct them to the Association website at the appropriate time.  To avoid mailing costs, his group are offering to develop a volunteer group or use the neighborhood watch to place information on doorsteps unless the member chooses to access the Association website for the news.  20 volunteers can deliver 10 to 15 newsletters within a few minutes.  His or her goal is to see that each member is informed.  Resident Bill E. noted that we have a treasurer of intelligence and experience in this association.  He wishes to work with through and with the Board of Directors and the lodge management to make this a healthier community thereby promoting sales.

Resident Kent S. had a brief comment about the same policy that was just talked about.  He was at that meeting and was rather startled and disappointed to find out later that 009 had been mentioned like the residents were suppose to know what that was and that such a controversial policy had been dropped on the community like this with 200 people or so attending.  It just seemed a pretty poor way to have a relationship with the community.  Having attended a dozen or so board meetings through his former association and has served as a Secretary for four years, he could tell you that is not a good way to establish a positive relationship within your community.  In the letter that he wrote and was hoping the Board read it but in the last sentence he ask that at this meeting the Board let this policy die for lack of a second, deposit it in the trash can where it rightly belongs.  He thinks it is ill advised and what purpose it is serving he is not exactly sure.  He wrote a letter to Mina and he appreciates some of the answers he got back and thanked her for that.  But there are some things that he ask in there that he was still not clear about was when was this policy first presented to the Board, who first proposed the policy to the Board, who actually drafted it, why was it done, what was it trying to accomplish.  Resident Kent S. was just asking himself the question if two people in a community or if ten people in the community don’t happen to like something, does that mean there is a quick policy that is going to go through and be passed and the residents find out later for the 200, 300 or 400 people.  It just seems like an abstruse way and he doesn’t think it is fair or very good.  One more quick reaction about the annual meeting, having attended annual meetings in the 15 years of belonging to a homeowner’s association not once did they ever have a situation where they came to the President’s report and the answer was the President is not here today so we have no report.  He thought that how strange that an Association with a President that takes things seriously has an obligation to pass off his written report to the one that is going to fill for him and that written report presented to the community goes into the minutes of the formal records of the Association.  That is a completely unacceptable answer to say he is not here so we’ll have no President’s Report for the last year.  That is a pretty sloppy way to go about it in his view and like he said in his 15 years would never pass mustard at their 240-homeowner association that he just got done with before moving here.  He hopes that will improve and that we don’t see a repeat of this sort of policy change without an honest and open dialogue with people about a major policy change of whether to go forward.

Resident Darcie G raised the issue only have two residents on the board and no financial committee to allow resident input on the Budget.   On the idea for summer hours, it would be basically two years before there could be extended summer hours.  There is plenty of staff, so she hoped the board would direct staff to stagger their staffing so that the pool could be open and the clubhouse can be open reasonable hours during the summer.  She feels this needs to be budgeted.  This was a contention of many residents this summer and she hoped it was addressed in the budget but we have to wait not knowing that yet other than Les did say that he noted the hours were going to stay the same and that is of concern.  She found it inappropriate that the Board continues to meet quarterly with almost half built out and every month you just take little notes of that.  She hope that it is done soon, if you look at the annual report there was the issued raised about summer hours in April and was told you would get too it in August which of course was the middle of summer and almost gone by then.  Now it is October and we’re talking about financials and we are still not talking about the summer hours for the lodge.  She also requested a little more respect from the Board, The President told her personally that he would take care of three things and that we would see them next week and we haven’t.  It does feel very personal and that she would treat him professionally but would expect to be treated with respect as well.

The President thought he may have forgotten but ask what the items were,

Resident Darcie G responded that he had said the financials would be mailed out the next week, that he would take care of it personally.  Several members had problems with the Board that the Design Review Committee had sent out letters saying that we were in non-compliance when in fact everything had been approved.   The President had said he would take care of that personally and you would have an answer next week.  She has still not received the letter and neither had another resident.  There were three items you said you would take care of next week and we haven’t heard a word.  She stated that the reason it is so critical for meeting monthly because that has been three months ago.  It is the same thing with the group policy for us dangerous pinochle players it is getting kind of ridiculous that it has been almost, it will be a year before we get approval because we had the exact same thing written on the dog group.  The dog group was approved and the pinochle wasn’t.  It is interesting to her that when you meet quarterly you cannot take care of business in a timely manner and things get out of hand.  They shouldn’t have too.  If you had a monthly meeting, you could do business very quickly and any issues that come up would be taken care quickly.    The bi-law state the Board should meet monthly but no less than quarterly.  She pointed out that the Board members are working, that this was their job, you work and go home, but that this was our life.  The residents don’t go home at night; this is the community’s whole life to be here and their social situation to be here.  The community is not really concerned about forms are filled out; they are more concerned about common sense and enjoying it.  Again she doesn’t feel the pinochle is a dangerous group and that they would be a detriment to the community but that was her opinion.

Resident Vickie G raised a question that when the budget came up would they be allowed to ask questions like increase of staff, same staff?

Carole M. responded that the Board would probably take questions.

The President expressed that there seems to be a misunderstanding or a lack of understanding regarding the role of the Board.  The role of the Board and the residents of who the community elect to the Board, that it the job that the community tasking them to do at that time.  The role of the Board is to run this association and has a fiduciary responsibility to protect the association so that is what the Board is task with.  As far as going through the budget that is what you elected them for and that the residents know how to get to Leo and Les, in fact, you know how to get to all of us, all of the board as he has received hundreds of emails.  In fact he thinks it is working well and that was the whole goal.  The goal is not for the Board to sit up there and rule by authority because we happen to sit on this side of the table but with that said, at this meeting the role is for the Board to conduct their business and to do it orderly and make the best decisions they think are the best decisions for the association.  They do try to reach out to the members and get their opinions but in all due respect, they are our personal opinions and they will try to listen to them but there job here is to conduct their business.  He wanted to reiterate that, as it seemed we kind of get sideways on that point.  Like he said when they get to the budget they would be willing to take questions but he thinks it is important for the people to understand what is in it and the decisions that they made behind it.  With that said

Resident Linda O. wanted to make a comment about the guest policy.  There are some people here who have guests come in just about every day to use the fitness center and our fitness center is not that big.  She feels that there are some places in this facility that should be limited.  She doesn’t mind if guest are using the pool or the billiard room but that the fitness center is a small confined area.  She and her husband usually try to go in almost everyday to work out and if there are going to be a lot of guests in it, after we grow, we are not going to have room for the residents.  She doesn’t mind if we don’t charge, but feels there needs to be some kind of limitation on that guests can not always come and use all of the facilities.  The residents pay a monthly fee to have this, for us and if somebody wants to go to the fitness center than have them go join a fitness center versus coming here.  She feels it needs to be limited at some point so we keep this place nice for us and not have to worry about the integrity of the grounds and the facility.  She doesn’t want to see dues go up because we cannot control the maintenance and you ought to think about that.

Resident Howard P spoke that they have been here about two years and liked the community very much.  Prior to moving here he looked at retirement centers in Lincoln, Roseville, Manteca, etc.  The reason they chose Glenbrooke was because of its size and close proximity to Elk Grove where they use to live.  He has been told that a vast majority of the residents here are from Elk Grove and in addressing Linda’s situation regarding guest visits, we were told a specific amount of guest visits when we bought our home here.  He has a brother, grandchildren and daughters in close proximity here.  He is in 100% agreement if the fitness center was overused and you couldn’t get on a machine that we should have a very strict guest limit and possible fees.  But the reality of the situation if you look at what the attendance reports are that very few people in this room attend on a regular basis.  He has never waited for a piece of equipment since he has been here.  But the reality of the situation is what has upset most of us is that there are a lot of rumors going around about what the fees would be, the amount of times guest visits would change. He spoke with people that suggested getting an attorney to try to stop this and he said that was silly, he is just asking the Board to look at the attendance reports and as soon as we get to the situation where we see the people living here are being deprived of the equipment, then I think we move very swiftly to end that.  You know the old saying “don’t fix it if it ain’t broken”.   So that’s my spill.

Resident Rich H asked if we were going to be allowed to comment under new business.

The President responded  “yes”.

The President moved on to unfinished business.

Resolution 2009.010 approval of the Design Guidelines Revision.  He stated that the Board had the authority under Article V, Section 505 of the Association’s CC & Rs,  that the Board adopt what has been recommended by the Design Review Committee  and the Board that this article be amended.  As you may recall this was on the last board agenda and it had to do with separated shade structures and putting some additional language in the guidelines so it would allow the same structure that Pulte is building as an option and that structure is not allowed to be built by residents after closing.  We, the developer went to the City, it was really dealing with the zoning and worked with them and the planning department and were able to work through a compromise since that structure, the reason why it was in our Master plans when they were reviewed by the city and subsequent to that time, the City revised or put more description for that type of use and subsequently that interpretation that took place that that structure is no longer allowed to be approved.  Since then our master plan was already approved and there has been a subsequent approval process going forward so in working with the planning department they recognized there and have given us a variance for that same structure can be built by anybody provided it is the same design that is in the Master Plan.  So that was the revision that was approved for posting at the last meeting and he was curious if they received any comment of feedback from staff.  That is the resolution being presented for approval.  Board member Leo P. moved that the resolution be approved, followed by a second from Board member Mike G. – approved 5-0.

The President stated that the next item was the resolution 2009-009 Rules and Regulation Change.  The resolution stated that the Board of Directors can adopt rules and regulation that it deems proper for the use and occupancy of the association facilities and that the effective rules and whereas the regulations are applicable to all members of the association.  The revised rules and regulations be posted for 30 days before the association adopts them.  This is the famous guest policy that was reviewed last meeting and approved for posting.  Since that time The President thinks he has heard from every resident, so from his perspective he can believe it is difficult and communication that you don’t know what is happening and not sure what is going on but from his perspective they are putting together what they think is best for the community and if it is a rules change, it gets posted and then members have an opportunity to review it, think about it, and put down any comments.  Obviously this was a very touchy one and he thinks we all heard from everyone and the process is working and he thanked folks for that.  With that said he opened it up to the Board for discussion.

Board member Leo P. spoke that he had the opportunity to speak with folks after the first meeting and they got a lot of phone calls and emails and the posting did exactly what it was suppose to.  Frankly, before that he had spoke to a few people and ask them how they felt about guest policies and whatever and got the response whatever.  When the posting happened, then we got comments and very good feedback received many good suggestions.  The vast majority of the suggestions were about the same as far as ideas on how to handle the guest policies.  The vast majority also were very negative on one the charging.  So as a Board it gave us an opportunity to listen to you and it gave you an opportunity to understand that we are the Board and that we need to listen.  So besides what has been said it really does serve its purpose and we are here to discuss it further and hopefully show that we have listened to everyone here and come up with something that meets the needs of the community.

Board member Les M. was speaking too softly to really understand but he mentioned something about the format to which we were changing the guest policy and The President clarified that Board member Les M. wanted to see the original guest policy that was originally posted and the changes that were to directly to that policy so it has suitability and that was what was included in their board packet.

Resident Rich H made a point of order asking if they were going to rescind the original resolution or vote it down and reissue it or have a new resolution?  He pointed out that they had not taken action on the original that was posted.

The President stated that while the original was for posting that this was part of the issues that were raised and it depended upon what kind of motion which comes forward and at this point he didn’t know.  We could approve it, we could amend it, it could be modified, he was really looking to the Board members for their opinions and hopefully there will be a motion to move forward.

Resident Howard P asked what he meant by as posted and he didn’t know what that meant.  How was it posted and what is the policy?

The President responded the way the policy, the rule was drafted and posted or other options.  The 30-day minimum posting was a result of our meeting in August.

Resident Howard P noted that wasn’t the same policy as when he moved in there, we moved in and two years later you change the rules if you want.

The President said that is the role of the Board to establish rules and regulations.  The question about the four functions of a rule was it had to be enforceable and

(too many people started talking at once.)

Carole M. spoke at this time and said she didn’t have it with her but to get back to when we first started talking about the rule, the board has a right to authorize an operating  rule change and that the board is authorized to do that anytime whenever it so desires.  It is posted for 30 days and during that 30 days as Board member Leo P. said you all had an opportunity to make a comment and you all did and she knew the board appreciated it very much.  The board took those comments and are now looking after this after the 30 day posting with member comments and like the President said you can modify or totally drop it or you can approve it as posted.  Those are the options that the board has and there is nothing in rules in this draft form that would meet the criteria of not enforceable.  There is nothing in the draft that would meet the criteria of being unreasonable and some people would feel that it is unreasonable but that is a matter of a difference of opinion.  And the benefit of it, anytime the board makes a rule there is some benefit for the association, not to individual but the entire association.

Again, a lot of people were talking at the same time regarding Carole’s comment.

Resident Glen G spoke up and that he was the first one to send a email either that night or the next morning about the guest fees and that this is such a hot button issue and he thinks the board needs to put a committee together of three or four homeowners with a board member address this issue.  Don’t try to piecemeal this today and say ok let’s do this, let’s do that, get a committee of homeowners together and make up one that seems rational to everybody.  Have people go out and talk with their neighbors and see if that policy is what they agree with and then massage it.  Don’t make a decision today on a bad policy.

The President stated he partly agreed with Resident Glen G. and that is why he would probably be advised not like to open it up for comments but he wanted to hear comments and he knew this was a hot button issue. It might be a way to get a better understanding of what their concerns are and he supposed that was a possibility.

Resident Glen G responded that there was no rush to pass it but we need to get it right.

Board member Board member Mike G. stated that this seems to be an extremely sensitive dicey topic that is one of these situations where we are better off doing nothing.

The President expressed that he would really like to hear from our resident board members also.  He said that one of the recommendations that he heard was we didn’t want to have a fee for guest usage and he was in agreement with that.  He would like to see the fee for guest be stricken.    Let alone that the fee was too (garbled) and that the fee would be difficult to administer and what happened if the people didn’t like it.  That was one thing that he was concerned about there.  He thinks that it is possible to have this policy in place and not charge a fee and change some of the rules to be able to make it enforceable.  The other comments that he heard was the use of the fitness center, that seems to be a real hot button since it is smaller in size when people are working out in there and on the issue of fairness on their dues and the useful life of the machines being used up by non-residents.  Those were the two things of which The President heard the loudest.  He would like to see the modification to the policy address these issues.

Board member Leo P. stated, as many of the people attending knew he had discussed the guest policy with many of the people in the room.  He has received many emails; some phone calls and greatly appreciated.  The posting is working exactly like it suppose to in that it created a lot of comments and created really good ideas.  As the President was saying, overwhelmingly the fee issue it is not a desired way to go.    The key button seemed to be the fitness center and dealings with the lodge. Those are the two biggies.  Other than that, a lot of the emails he received were interesting but the vast majority expressed those two issues and made that statement but it was interesting a couple of emails came through that said that in their opinion there should be no guest allowed at the facility.  So just to give you an idea they were from bring your family and friends and have a party to no guest at all.  But again, the vast majority was no fees and restrict the fitness center to members only.  He stated he didn’t have the exact percentage of numbers but it was overwhelming with that comment so all of us individually have looked at that and taken everything you have said to heart and because there is a concern with a large number of people about the use of the lodge.  We need to care for it and we need it available for residents but then again we would like to bring our friends also.  So we have to come up with a balance.  Glen, your idea of a committee in my mind we sort of did that because of the feedback we got again we got a tremendous amount of feedback.

Resident Glen G then stated that every board I have been on, they always have subcommittees that report to the board and make policy recommendations.  He doesn’t understand why this board doesn’t do that.  You have five people, which he believed three of you work full time and this is kind of a side issue.  You really don’t have the time to put the expertise in researching all of this and finding what the community wants.  We have two board members that are residents and that is why he says one of them should be on a committee.  There is nothing wrong with a committee of four or five people, he was not saying 100 people because that would be unruly, but four or five people and write the language and then bring it to the board and recommend it to the board.  Five people have better ideas than one.  There is a lot of experience in this neighborhood, lot of experience in budgeting and you should have a fiscal committee, nothing saying anything bad about Les or Mina but you have people who budget multimillion dollar budgets and handle multimillion dollar budgets but we don’t grab their expertise.  And he doesn’t understand why this board has a reluctance grabbing that expertise.  What is the rush, do you have to keep everything close to the vest, he doesn’t think so as it is not good for the board as you don’t get the information you need or not good for the community.

Resident Bill E. felt there was another issue on the guest policy and that is four guests per homeowner.   His wife can have four guests and he can have four guests so that is eight.  But my neighbor who is single can only have four.

Board member Leo P. stated that that was not the way it works, it’s per household.

Resident Bill E. questioned per household?

Board member Leo P. was glad Resident Bill E. brought that up as that was one of the concerns and it is something that most definitely, and frankly he spent a lot of time trying to think logically and well aware of some situations.  There was one situation that came up with a family that four wouldn’t work.

Resident Vickie G made a comment that when they first moved in, in order to use the fitness facility they had to come down and go through training and Erin say it was ok you can now use it.  How are these guests getting away with it without doing training?

Erin G. responded that they are going through the training.

Resident Vickie G questioned that the guests go through training?  Well, let’s put a halt to that.

Resident Howard P replied that he had one short comment that he agreed 100% that this was a very sticky issue and the board just put their foot in their mouth with a $15 fee because you didn’t think what you had done.  The implications of that is why you got the emails and you hurt all of us, all of us in the room it hurt financially.  I think this is a real hot button issue that got a lot of input and you need to move along and get a committee together to overlook this thing and put a sensible thing together that would work for everyone involved.   That would be a very intelligent way.

Board member Leo P. stated he felt the guest policy, speaking for himself and not the board, he feels the guest policy in particular will be somewhat of a moving target because as we grow there will probably be changes and as a board we sort of put our heads together from all the feedback we got and came up with a draft that has relaxed everything that you saw in the posting considerably.  Possibly beyond what some of you want.  It is a working, living document that he thinks they can work with but he thinks it addresses the issues that the majority of the community has come up with and he thinks that looking at the lodge we can all use the facility and still have our friends around.

Resident Darcie G did have a point of order that the email that was sent out from the Board said that the fees were dropped substantially changed what was posted.  The point of order is that the amendment that resolution 2009-009 was either going to die for lack of motion or that is was going to be amended with the language in there and it sounds like you, the board have already come up with a draft, surprise, surprise, but that does have to be posted another 30 days per the bi-laws.  Because it is amended, it has been changed and it is not the same that the board posted for 30 days that this is a brand new document that you are talking about now.

Carole M. said the people behind her were telling her to stand up but

The President questioned whether it came from the board.

There was questions about the document and Resident Darcie G gave the board a copy of the email that came from Mina and was posted on the association’s website as well that the policy would be dropped.  Since that is saying it would be dropped, the point of order that resolution….

Mina L. stated that she never said it was going to be dropped

The President acknowledged that he did not receive a copy of the email.

Carole M. addressed the point about having to post again for 30 days if you had changes or modifications, we talked about this at our meeting and we covered it, so a lot of you already know the answer but for those of you who were not here she would repeat it.  The Civil Code does not require that you repost a rule change after you have posted it for 30 days and you have had member comments.  Now think about that for a minute, it kind of makes sense.  Why would you post and take comments if you couldn’t take those comments and put it into the bi laws.

(there was commotion about the civil code, Resident Glen G presented to Leo and the President a copy of the Civil Code)

Carole M. stated excuse me, I have read it and also have a legal opinion and she could also share cases with us.

Resident Darcie G commented that the Civil Code said that if that is the same point and we commented and everybody commented on it and it was posted for 30 days, the Board obviously could then act on it.  But now we are talking about an entirely different posting.

Carole M. stated that it was the same posting and if she could just say this, she has sat here and heard some very intense opinions when the Board was discussing this and she appreciated people being very concerned but she didn’t think you have given this board an opportunity to tell you what modifications they were talking about.  So you are judging something that you have not heard anything on yet and it might be in the best interest of everyone here and the board of the association to agree to have a chance to speak to the changes to what they were considering.

Resident Darcie G state she agreed but however there was a point of order being addressed during the time that the point of order so we are talking about resolution 2009.009 being in limbo.

Carole M. stated no it was up for modification by the Board.

Resident Darcie G stated so the Board put in writing on the Association website that it was dropping the fee part, which then changes it.

Several people started talking at this point……..(change of tape)

Board member Leo P. then stated he was a bad reader but to bear with him. The Board has received comments regarding the draft guest policy guest policy.  The comments reflect several concerns but that the majority of the comments are the objection to fees or guest use for the recreational facility.  Based on your comments the Board plans to remove the fees and charges from the draft policy that will be heard on October 21^st board meeting. Thank you for your comments on this specific issue.

(there was inaudible talking among the board members…….

Board member Leo P. continued can’t we read the draft at this point? Ok Ladies and Gentlemen of jury; gee we are sitting here discussing something nobody knows what we are talking about.  That’s not fair, that’s not fair to us and that’s not fair to you.  Again, I’m a lousy reader so bear with me.  This is the proposed policy, this is with the fees taken out, this is from all of your comments and this is what we have come up with.    The first part is somewhat similar but the purpose of the guest policy for Glenbrooke Community Association is to ensure availability to all members.

Board member Leo P. read the following:

Accompanied guest: Up to six guests may be sponsored by a resident household per visit in the association recreational facility; recreation facilities include pool, spa, tennis, bocce courts and billiards.  This is subject to restrictions for health, safety, rules and regulations.  A guest pass must be obtained from the association to use Glenbrooke Association facilities.  Resident must carry their community association name badge in there position and remain in the company of their guest at all times.  Guest passes will not be issued unless the resident accompanies his/her guest.

A maximum of six guests are permitted to accompany a resident at any given time.  Restricted hours for guests may also apply in some areas.  As resident population expands and the demand for facilities and programs increase, the Board may establish additional restrictions on hours or fees for guest sponsorship.

Fitness Center is for resident use only.

Unaccompanied Guest:  Unaccompanied guests are not allowed to use Lodge Facilities.  Residents must remain in the company of their guests at all times.

Conduct of Members and Guest:  All Residents and guest are expected to abide by the governing documents and the rules and to conduct themselves in a courteous and respectful manner at all times.  Misuse and/or abuse of the Association facilities by guests will result in the loss of guest privileges.

That’s it.

Board member Les M. stated this guest policy came up, he believes from the April meeting and unfortunately he missed that meeting but he got the benefit of some input after that meeting and with a collection of ideas and past experiences from Pulte other facilities that are like these.  And it was with that form which that draft guest policy started and was posted.  Now one of the things that you may recall in that draft policy included a lot of other things on the uses for children, grandchildren, children use, swimming pool, total guest usage per year, etc.  It was not included in Leo’s comment, so I think that was one of the starts that we refined the posted guest policy too because of your comments and discussions and suggestions.  But we would like to go ahead and bring forward the total guest policy as revised so that you have the benefit of knowing what else is in it.

Resident Darcie G stated her point of order is simply is now that resolution 2009.009 again, that is why there is some confusion or this should be resolution 2009.10.  This is a separate resolution and she thinks it is a fabulous policy personally except…..

The President stated it is the same resolution being modified

Resident Darcie G stated she did not think this was appropriate that it was the same resolution because it is not posted for resident comment.

The President said he had heard that a couple times and he doesn’t agree with that.  So as he recalls there was a gentleman about four rows back that wanted to make a comment and got loss in the shuffle here.

Resident Bob B. stated that his only comment was that if we continue like the gentleman in front suggested by getting a group of people together, four or five and have these committees we could have the same thing in which you guys came up with.  You are going to have people on this side of the room that don’t like it and people on this side of the room that like it.  We elected a Board to do this and take all of our suggestions and put them together to come up with what would be reasonable for all of us.  That is the only comment I have.

Resident Rich H stated that there were a couple of things that he heard there that didn’t make a whole lot of sense with some ambiguity and are unenforceable, so if we could have the ability to comment prior to the board adopting something, we are all residents here and we all pay our dues, so if you would be willing to take it upon yourselves or throw this away and reintroduce it so we can have input on it.

Resident Kent S. stated he agreed with a lot that Bob said about you elect a board to do a job but he has to say that having been with a corporation for four and a half years, a targeted committee is a way of life in the corporate world and also in homeowner associations.  He frankly felt that our former one got a little carried away and you don’t need eight or ten committees but there is definitely a time on a controversial issues to put three or four people to meet constructively and give advice to the board.  That is appropriate way to do in business, don’t let them get convoluted.  Task Force are great things and when the task is over you do away with them.  So he just wouldn’t put that off as not having some possibly some good purposes as you move forward but I wouldn’t.   He recommends that you don’t over do it but there are times.  He saw things in the financial report that didn’t even make sense but then again some people just want an annual report maybe sixty days before the meeting so we can look it over and be able to ask some questions and you would have better budget.

The President asked if there was any discussion from the Board.

Board member Leo P. stated that a lot of work has gone into this, a lot of thought, a lot of feedback he appreciates the comments, we got feedback and the draft that they have now he feels is a good working policy.  It is very durable, it allows the community to have guests, there are no fees.  Right now there is no policy people, there is nothing, we have to have something.  Unfortunately we have to do what we are supposed to do, so he would like to move forward but sees someone standing up in the back.

Resident Linda H stated that if we have another resolution it would be another six months before we had something.    (She was in back of the room with no microphone so all of what she said could not be heard.)

Resident Glen G suggested that they take it or not take it but again he felt that if the Board made a motion appointing a committee to come back within 30 days and put something out and get posted for 30 days and then you could vote on this policy next meeting.  Leo you said that we haven’t had one for the last year and half or two years, what is another three months.  Lets get this one right.  He thought the last time if he remembered right that Mike said he was a construction foreman or supervisor, that he wasn’t quite sure, but when they come down and tell you they want to do something, you don’t just say I’m going to do it, you are going to talk to your people who have some expertise in it and you’ll make the final decision but you get input.  That is all we are saying, get input.

(everyone talking at once…)

Resident Glen G that why you have a board member on it.

Board member Leo P. stated again we have a group of people whether you have five people or what we need to see what happens here.    He thought it would be appropriate now to make a motion as we got input from the community and a lot of work went into this and he made the motion to accept the draft.   Les seconded the motion.

NOTE:  there was no vote taken on this motion.

Resident Darcie G asked if it was a draft they were accepting?

Board member Leo P. responded no that we accept this guest policy.

Board member Les M. expressed that he wanted to make sure that what they do includes all of the items that were in the posted guest policy agenda and there was a paragraph missing and several of these and he thinks they need to be included.

Board member Leo P. asked how to address that.  The things that were left out were the children’s use, youth, grandchildren, so on so forth.  That is addressed in another part of the overall policy and it is redundant to put it in there.

An unidentified woman asks if that was a question of six???  Six at one time??? You could do that six days a week???  There was no limit per year???

Board member Leo P. responded yes it was six and that is correct no limit.

Unidentified woman again stated that was in the other proposal.

Board member Leo P. again stated that is in the paragraph at the bottom….

Resident Vickie G made a point or order that they had a motion and she thought you needed a second before you do any discussion.

The President agreed and what they were looking for here is to want to clarify the motion.  What they were seconding is to amend Leo’s motion.

Board member Mike G. said he was a little bit confused here on what you are seconding is Leo’s motion?

Resident Vickie G stated you need a first, and a second, and then a motion.

Carole M. spoke up to say that it was a modification to the policy as written in your packet.

Board member Les M. would second that motion and if so approved he would recommend an amendment to be substituted.   This has not only been posted but posted for 30 plus days and got all sorts of comments and he guess he feels even though it may be a repeat of something that you can read some place else, I think in all fairness we ought to deal with this guest policy that was posted and address all of the issues as posted.  So he would like to see the draft that was posted be the base for what revised policy.

Resident Vickie G spoke up that they needed a second to Les’s substitute motion.  Leo just second his substitute motion and you can discuss.

Board member Leo P. asked what he what he could do?

Resident Vickie G responded second Les’ substitute motion and then you can discuss it.

Carole M. then added that and then you can vote.

Board member Leo P. seconded Les’ substitute motion

The President then read the revision in its entirety.

In the first paragraph it talks about guest being sponsored by residents and $10.00 per adult is stricken and now it is up to six guests at a time.

Further down to the maximum of four guests needs to be changed to maximum of six guests permitted to accompany a resident at any given time.

A bullet was added that the Fitness Center is for resident members only.

Next bullet point is the unaccompanied guest it remains the same and unaccompanied guest are not allowed to use the lodge facilities, residents must remain in the company of their guests at all times.

Next bullet is the youth/grandchildren guests.   Children and guests must be accompanied and supervised by a resident at all times when using the Arbour Lodge or other Association facilities.  The guest fee being charged was stricken.  Child guest applies to children 4 to 17 years of age.

Next bullet point, Children’s use:  Children under the age of 18 are restricted from the use of the fitness center that was stricken.  Children under the age of 12 are not permitted in the spa.  No children under 10 are allowed to use the billiard room facilities.  Children must be accompanied by resident sponsor and supervision at all times.

Next bullet point swimming pool there are no changes.

Next bullet point Total Guest Usage No individual guest may utilize guest privileges more than 18 times during a calendar year was stricken.  That last one was stricken.

Membership stayed the same where two resident memberships cards per lot are issued.  If a third membership is desired for a permanent qualified resident residing within the community, a third membership ID may be purchased for $500.00.  Total memberships per lot are limited to four.

Conduct of Members and Guests stayed the same.

That is the policy that has been motioned and seconded for approval.  Any other questions or discussions?

Resident Howard P asked that when he read that did it say guests could not use the fitness center.

The President responded yes it did.

Resident Howard P said you are excluding all guest from the fitness center

The President responded that was right.   Is there any other discussion?

Resident Glen G asked if this was going to be posted.

Resident Rich H noted a simple thing about drafting a policy you didn’t say anything about kids under 4.

Board member Les M. stated that is was in there.

Resident Rich H said it says four and above.

Board member Les M. said it said under the age of 4.

The President asked if there way any other discussion.

Three people (The President, Les, Leo) voted in favor.  Mike opposed and Board member John J. abstained from voting and the motion carried 3-0.

The President said thank you.

The President moved to the adoption of the 2010 budget.  It was discussed somewhat in the Treasurer’s report but he wanted to make sure Les had the opportunity to hit on the key points of the budget.

Board member Les M. stated that the convolution of this budget evolved over time, Mina and her staff used the history of what we have for the past fifteen or sixteen months and extrapolated what the costs were and looked at some of the contracts to know where there was an increase like something that goes up 5 to 10% on an annual basis based on the original contract.  So they have gone through this and tried to extrapolate what would be the cost per lot making sure we stay within.  Pulte has looked at how many houses they anticipate being built during the calendar year and which lots are going to be part of their participation in the revenue that they produce and so he thinks that it has been covered in a lot of detail.  So he was hopeful and recommended that the Board approve the budget as submitted and it will get posted or sent to residents before the end of November.

The President wanted to say something that Pulte pays for all of the lots they have a right to sell.  They don’t pay for every house that is out there; they don’t pay for every lot that is out there.  Just to make sure everyone understands that they don’t pay for every lot in the entire community.  There are 631 if he remembered correctly, that they pay for every lot that they develop and have a right to sell and they have to go through the Department of Real Estate.  They get a white report and in order to get that white report they have to actually put in an assessment agreement and subsidy agreement to bond board and you may recall there are bond agreements in the past once the developer is relieved of that obligation.  So currently this past year as of 2009 they are paying on about 330 sold lots in that surety phase and the next phase is triggered when the first home closes in within that next phase.  So very quickly the Village lots that we are constructing to be sold,  but we are not paying on today, but the month following the first quarterly triggers the assessment for the developer so those are scheduled in December for the first closing so we feel very confident in our number of 401 unless something is happening obviously we take that risk but we will have from a Board’s perspective we will have 401 lots being assessed and about 70 to 80 lots more than we had in 2009, which has given us the ability to keep costs from going up and allowing us to keep the monthly rate same and at the same time be able to put a little more in our reserve account which will also be helpful.  He wanted to clarify that not every lot.

Resident Vickie G stated that was one of her question was how much Pulte pays per lot, so if you don’t pay per lot when it comes to an issue of voting, they don’t vote per lot, correct?

The President responded correct.

Resident Vickie G clarified that they only vote for the ones that they are paying for.

The President responded yes.

Resident Vickie G asked if he knew how much that was per lot.  What is Pulte paying per lot?

The President responded they are paying the same as what a resident pays subtracting the landscaping fees.

Resident Rich H requested that resident have the ability to perhaps get to review when the end of November when the budget is sent out, prior to the actual approval that we be able to give feedback.  For example Leo said earlier that you got a lot of good feedback and got a lot of good information back so I think that would be our way.  This is our money and we want to know how it is being spent, we want to know where it came from and

(was unable to hear as he did not have microphone)

Les responded that he used the word approved, passed, we are approving this as posted with this group.  So as submitted to the board he was suggesting that they approve it as submitted and he thought those were his words.

The President clarified that they were seeking approval by the board for the budget for 2010 today and that residents didn’t have to see it.

Someone said that residents should be notified

The President stated no that they need to be notified of the approved budget within so many days after its approved.

(low discussions among with board which was not picked up on the tape and it was among themselves).

Pamela J. with Riverside Management stated as fiduciary of the corporation the board was right earlier when they stated that the board is elected by the members to make the tough decisions for this corporation.  The law is very clear in that it says the Board shall adopt a budget and if there is an increase for your fiscal year it has to be mailed out not later than the last day in November which is 30 days prior to a fee increase if there was to be one.  It is very clear the Board is the one who takes into consideration what the budget figures are based on your actual expenses, a specialist prepares what your reserve study contribution should be and the board considers that as well and you plug those fees in and its pretty easy it basically says this is what your budget should be and the Board always has an opportunity to say they don’t agree with that and maybe modify a couple of line items.  Once the board approved the budget then they will prepare the year end disclosure packet which includes crucial information about architectural rules are, what your fine policy is, how you as members can get copies of the minutes, things that are required in the statute along with the budget that is being voted on today at this meeting.  That is the procedure and it is not open to membership for comment or posting, it is really is just a board decision.  So with that being said you have a motion on the table and seconded.

The President ask if it got a second and Board member Mike G. responded that he seconded the motion.  The vote was taken.  Vote 5-0 approved.

The President moved on to the next item which was adopting the Board Meeting Schedule for 2010.  He stated he was showing that they would meeting four times for board meetings and a fifth for the annual meeting for members.  Those board meetings being January 20^th, April 21^st, July 21st, annual meeting of member a month later on August 11^th and the final meeting of the year being October 20th.

Someone asked to be repeated one more time and Mina stated she would post it out.

The President announced again the dates and stated they were all Wednesdays by the way.  Board member Leo P. made the motion to approve the Board meeting schedule, seconded by Board member Les M. and the motion was approved 5-0.

Resident Rich H again raised the issue of having more frequent board meetings as there were a lot of things which need to be addressed via clubs, finances, whatever.  At least he would like the board to consider meeting every month and a half so that things don’t get put off too far.  He expressed we are a growing community and there are issues that the board needs to address and if the Board would be willing he thinks it would be good for everyone involved.

The President responded that he had heard that too and that he wasn’t sure that he believed there was a bunch of people who personally felt that way.  There is a mechanism too for a special meeting which if there is a large number of proponents out there that members have the ability to call a meeting if there is a necessity.

Someone ask what it takes to have a special meeting

The President didn’t now exactly what forum it would take to call a special meeting.

Someone said that also any board member could call for one but for every empty lot Pulte gets three votes.

Resident Darcie G spoke that meeting monthly would it not only helpful for the business but that the level of frustration of the residents not feeling like they have had input, but she thought the relationship of the transparency of thinking that’s a great budget or great policy adopted but it is so long between time that we feel very frustrated that our voices aren’t heard or that we don’t know what is going on.  A monthly meeting would be a more efficient way, more frequently although she knows it wouldn’t be for The President as this isn’t his life and he is working and trying to make that other but she appreciated the effort that he makes there but quarterly is just a real long time for this type of a growing community that has a lot changing needs to be done and she thinks that it would say a lot for the cooperation and relationship between the board.  Right now it is so frustrating and such a distrust because things that are said that you will take care of next week it is three months before we even get a chance to see him again.  Gosh, you say he said he was going to take care of it but wasn’t.  She thinks that is the frustration, the idea of that policy, great policy but until he read it all of us were sitting here going huh what policy.  So, we feel like we are kind of being, instead of you representing us and representing our community where we live, we feel that it is a power trip instead of it being a community association.

The President said he definitely gets that feeling that she thinks it is a power trip and that he respected her opinion and we will have to take it under consideration as a board but he was not of that opinion.

There was a question of where Pulte was on lots and Carol M. said it needed to be clarified that it was closed and not sold.

The President clarified that when he states it is his opinion and it is his opinion and not the opinion of the board.  With that said it is of his opinion meeting quarterly is sufficient.

Resident Jim M requested an answer to why we can’t have meetings after 2:00 have it at 6:00 or so.  There is probably over 40% of the people that live in this community still work and can’t get to a 2:00 meeting.  When we had one meeting at 6:00, one time, and the excuse that he heard was that the Pulte people had to come all the way from Roseville to come down here but they had traffic. He knew the Pulte people get paid when you come down here and they get paid to go home, why can’t we have meeting for our convenience rather than their convenience.  There are 64 people here and the last time you had over 100 and it was at 6:00 and you had more representation from the community.

The President responded that he was correct but from his perspective he would prefer to have it in the afternoon for exactly the reasons you just stated.  That he was getting paid and it was his job and what he did.  He thought the resident board members stated that they prefer it in the afternoon and that is what they have tried to do.  He is happy that there are quite a few people here and that was their recommendation to try to make sure annual meeting were so members could attend.   The board meetings, which is for the board’s business, and that they felt they could work in the afternoon.  That is for us to conduct our business and he stressed again it is for the board to conduct business not for the members.  And he asks for a motion or did he already have one.

Resident Vickie G clarified that he did have a motion that Les made a first and Mike seconded the motion.

The President took the vote.  Vote was 5-0.

The President called for the last item up and he showed that the next meeting was January 13^th at 2:00 pm but Les corrected him that it was January 20^th.  Board member Les M. made the motion and Board member Leo P. seconded the motion.  Vote was 5-0.

Board member Leo P. stated he was looking at Carole when he says this but it was for Bill more than anybody else but that the approval the guest policy that that has to be mailed out within two weeks, is that correct.

Carole M. responded that it was 15 days.

Board member Leo P. again stated that within 15 days it would be mailed out so we don’t have to distribute it.

Question of when it would be in effect.

Carole M. responded tomorrow.

Resident Glen G stated immediately.

Carole M. clarified immediately.

Meeting adjourned at 4:02 pm.