Questions or Concerns about the HOA Board Agenda?

On Board Agenda
I received an e-mail response from Mina this evening regarding my questions to her about the Home Owners Association Board Meeting Agenda. Maybe you had some of the same questions or concerns, so I am sharing the information and concerns I have:
Under NEW BUSINESS
a. Railing Proposals – I believe those are railings for the stairs at the entrance to the Arbour Lodge – but I am not sure and did not ask Mina about them.
b. Proposed Lodge Hours – Mina confirmed it is a proposal to extend hours but did not say what the changes would be in hours or days.
c. Resident Directory Update- did not ask anything about this
d. Proposed Reservation and Rental of Facilities Policy – Mina’s response is as follows:
"The rental policy is actually a document that summarizes and explains in easy terms our existing rental policy and combines it with the groups rental rules. You actually have a copy of it in your group packet. This document will help both Staff and residents understand and not have to refer to different documents."
I take issue with any provision that unreasonably restricts residents use of OUR facilities. In this case, on page 12 of the Group Leaders Meeting Agenda Packet, a sentence that reads, "Use of the facilities listed above (Spruce Room, Oak Room, Cedar Room, Warming Kitchen) without prior written notice and approval is prohibited."
You mean we can't go in the card room and do a puzzle, or play cards with our neighbors, or practice line dancing with friends with prior approval???????
This added paragraph is troubling to me, " All weekend (Friday, Saturday and Sunday) regularly scheduled resident Shared Interest Groups meeting dates will be canceled from Dec. 1 through Jan 1st so Holiday events may be booked. All Holiday Parties can be booked in person at the Arbour Lodge through the Lifestyle director starting November 1st on a first come first serve basis and a 'Resident Room Rental Fee' will apply."
So if no one has booked the room for a Friday/Saturday or Sunday afternoon we still couldn't use it for activities? This doesn't make sense. I am sure all groups would work around Associations sponsored events and Shared Interest Groups Holiday Parties, but I do not want to change priority to allow privately booked parties to take precedence over Association members use of the facilities.
#5 “Non Association resident” still needs to be defined. Per page 5 of the rules and regulations, residents are "Association Members.” Yet residents have been charged Non association resident fees for room usage.
#7 Again the Lifestyle Director is not here 7 days a week so this rule prevents residents from using their facilities. How about Lifestyle Director or their agent in their absence, have the right to monitor activities for compliance to the established rules.
If these are proposed rule changes residents have a right to review them for 30 days. Giving the packet to a small group at a meeting is not sufficient.
I did express my concerns to Mina both in a prior meeting and in response to her email. Mina stated she is working with Erin to clarify the blanket sentence regarding no December meetings. I appreciate her efforts to answer my concerns prior to the Board meeting (she was answering these after hours).
4 Responses »
Leave a Response

Good Heavens!!!!! Mina's working with Erin to clarify etc., etc., etc.!!!!!! Do we have a bunch up there that took that "420" seriously? Word needs to get out for people to attend, but time is limited. I'll admit that I sometimes think about skipping it, but it never fails that the little benign Agenda turns into a major problem before it's over. It's only with residents attending and speaking out that anything will ever be changed and since the numbers are against us, may not work anyway. All you can do is try. Some of the residents should have attended the EGCC meeting last Wed. and you would have had a taste of exactly what you can do when you get the program together.
OH....whatever!
IMO: I believe survey should be declared INVALID because it was not conducted as stated by the Board in January. Per minutes "The Board is developing a communication survey that will be SENT to all members. This directive was not followed!I It was also a biased survey and results, to my knowledge, were not reviewed by an independent group, meaning..staff AND residents. I would have thought that a petition signed by 230+ residents with concerns about communication problems, that prompted this survey, would have been an indication that it should be done fairly for all. NOT "sending" the survey as our Board stated is IMO, an unfair survey and INVALID! You ask us to follow the rules or be penalized...now it's your turn.
I know...I'm speaking to the choir, but I feel better anyway!
I agree Norma, there was no way that was a valid survey. It will be interesting to see how the board addresses it and reports the results.