Glenbrooke News

I started  to write this objectively as an unofficial summary of the Board meeting.   However, it was impossible to be objective.  It started with being told the meeting could not be taped - what is to hide?   So this is my personal memory (definitely flawed) of what happened.   You are invited to add your perceptions, observations and comments at the bottom.

The draft Minutes of the meeting should be available within 30 days  (According to Civil Code 1363.05(d).  The approved Minutes will not be available until after the BOD meets next quarter.

The January 20, 2010 Board meeting began with the establishment of a quorum, and certification of proof of notice.   The agenda was approved and the Minutes of the last Board meeting approved with some spelling corrections.

Before giving his report, the President, Mr. Van Dam, stated during the last meeting the Board was informed that the meeting was being tape-recorded.   He said they would no longer allow meetings to be taped.

The President’s report continued citing the number of closed homes and stating the reserve fund was adequate.   A CPA was approved to do the annual audit.    Van Dam addressed the “communication petition” stating that they hoped the concerns would be addressed by the proposed action of selecting a new website provider later in the meeting and by distributing a survey to residents.

The Treasurer, Les McCargo was not in attendance there was no Treasurer’s report.   The October and November’s financial statements were approved.  The Financials for December have not yet been approved.

The Design Review Committee report stated there were 33 homeowner applications, 3 were denied and 2 were returned.

The next item on the agenda was the Lifestyle Director’s Report.  Erin Gormley summarized the activities of the last three months and highlighted upcoming planned activities.      She then presented four new shared interest groups to be approved by the board.   Hand & Foot and Pinochle (both card games) and Table Tennis were approved without comment.

Bingo raised issues for the Board and was denied.   See more Here.

During the Open Forum, homeowners spoke about:

Bingo – the first speaker asked what the legal concerns were and was told, they couldn’t share them.  She asked if it was in writing and was told ‘yes’ Can I see them? She asked.   No replied the President.   Who was the attorney?  She was told his name.   Can I talk to him? No.     What were his concerns?  She was told that was attorney client privilege.   Who pays for the attorney?  The homeowners.

Another speaker supported the decision of the Board stating she was very concerned about the public being allowed to use the facilities.

For the record, I respect the Boards decision to deny Bingo based solely on the possible ramifications of  the requirement it be opened to the  public.   However, I took exception to the Board’s perception that we did not qualify as we had already determined we did to the point of having city attorney’s approval for application of the permit.

Another homeowner stated he had many years tax experience and we did not qualify as a 501C 3 organization – which is true, we were told we fall in a different category.

One resident asked what the procedure was for adding an item to the agenda.   She asked, “ Who decides if it gets on the agenda?”    “We do” was the response for the President. She left the (new) podium without answers.

Another member question the appropriateness of the Treasurer being absent every January when the Board only meets four times per year.

Several homeowners expressed frustration with the lack of response to a petition signed by 232 homeowners and presented at last months Board meeting.  A written request was submitted to add that to agenda and yet it was ignored.  See HERE for more details.

A newer homeowner spoke saying it was his first Board meeting and from what he has witnessed there does appear to be a communication problem.

A homeowner pointed out to the Board that not everyone in this community has a computer or uses a computer and there needs to be other ways to get information out.

An Oakham resident said it should be a non-issue as the Board is required to mail out the agenda if requested.  He was told that wasn’t accurate and it is readily available on the web and in the Arbour Lodge.  In fact, California Civil Code section 1363.05 states residents have the right to request notices be mailed.

Board Member Leo Plumley said they were trying to address the ‘Communication Issue” by the development of a survey.  The survey would be mailed to all homes asking questions such as, “Do you have a computer?”  Other questions gathered will provide information that hopefully would help the Board understand the needs of the residents.

I spoke during this time and pointed out to the Board the pool will start to be heated on April 1.^st Since the Board doesn’t meet until AFTER Daylight Saving Time begins, the request was made the Board direct staff to adjust the hours seasonally within budget as specifications outlined in the Governing Documents.   There was no response from the Board.

While the statement about the Arbour Lodge was the only one I planned to make, I felt I had to add the accurate information about Bingo and the civil codes - of which they seemed unaware.

The board was also informed that it was a reasonable accommodation to allow the Board meeting to be taped and I would be doing so in the future.

The open forum closed.

There was no unfinished Business

Under New Business, the Board will be soliciting Nominations Committee members.    They determined the timeline requirements.   While I can’t remember the details, hopefully the draft minutes will have the dates or call Mina La Cuesta at 714-1010 for more information.

The next order of business was website selection.   Mina gave her recommendation on the selection of a new website.   The current website provider requires 90 days notice to terminate the contract and timelines were discussed.  Brain dead at this point,  Jim is writing up a summary about the website selection and it should be posted soon   (this can now be found HERE).

Again, this is only MY perception of the meeting and I encourage others to comment  below (If you have not commented before, the system might take some time post  while it is determined it's not Spam from an unknown source – thanks for your patience),