Elk Grove, CA – The Elk Grove City Council unanimously approved a new city budget of $210.6 million at last night’s City Council meeting.

The $210.6 million operating budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2010 is $6.8 million more than the current year’s budget, and represents a 3.3 percent increase.  The budget reflects relative stabilization in the City’s major revenue sources— property tax and retail sales tax.

“The City of Elk Grove staff and Council should be applauded for their commitment to managing a healthy, balanced budget,” said Mayor Sophia Scherman.  “Last year, the City implemented a smart two-year budget plan that did not compromise the top-notch level of service that our citizens expect and deserve. The budget adopted last night fine-tunes the second year of that plan.”

The budget proposes that certain one-time expenses be funded by $1.7 million in City reserve funds, which were bolstered to $17.7 million after belt-tightening efforts in fiscal year 2009-10.  The City is well positioned to weather future years of economic uncertainty with its remaining reserve balance.   Officials anticipate that the City’s revenues will moderately increase as the economy recovers.

The City balanced the budget by reducing operational expenses, organizational restructuring, suspending components of employee compensation and instituting eight furlough days a year for non-sworn City staff.  The budget adds a police lieutenant to oversee the City’s Animal Control and Problem-Oriented Policing units and an Emergency Operations Coordinator.

“Recent economic times have presented the greatest financial challenges in Elk Grove’s history,” said City Manager Laura S. Gill.  “However, by limiting spending and prudent planning, we have been able to establish a balanced, healthy budget that allows us to provide high-quality services within our means.”

The Council also approved a five-year, $320 million capital improvement program, which includes funding for various construction projects in the City, including the Grant Line Road widening and the future Elk Grove Civic Center.

For more information, visit www.elkgrovecity.org.

Thanks to Norma Lee for submitting this press release.

                                                                                          Norma Lee

General Growth Properties

According to a report in the New York Times, General Growth’s lawyers have asked the U.S. Bankruptcy Court to give Brookfield “stalking horse” status, which would set a baseline for competing bids. It also wants to issue warrants to the Brookfield plan’s sponsors, according to the story.

Read more: General Growth nixes Simon offer again - Sacramento Business Journal:

For full story, click  Here.

Residents, the BOD and Management; each bring different perspectives to the table. When there is a lack of trust, cooperation and easy solutions become a battleground. Lack of trust can paralyze a community just when economics require cooperation.
EXAMPLE:
Board members who are convinced that they must follow a statute may be enforcing measures that are too rigid for the situation. Residents who lack an understanding of the authority may believe the rules can be ignored. I'm sure there are hundreds of other things that cause friction, but there is one thing in common - a breakdown in trust.

The Board of Directors: They have a big responsibility and most want "to do the right thing". But there is also a big political factor at play as well. Residents make demands, etc. which frustrate the board and it might be more convenient to hide behind the rules rather than try to deal with human nature. To follow the governing documents because that's the most logical (and lawful) thing to do may not always be the best. The right path may require a human touch, flexibility and a willingness to explore other solutions that develop trust.

Residents: Many have little inclination to understand the operation of the HOA, which may be due to work schedules, health, etc. or something that effects them personally, like an increase in dues or other enforcements that impact their lives and are quick to assume someone screwed up. Their lack of involvement in the day to day operation, infrequent attendance at meetings, failure to read bulletins have isolated them. Isolation also breeds mistrust.

Management: Managers are also cautious. If they come on too strong it can be seen as reckless, etc. These doubts also sow seeds of distrust.

To gain trust there should be no hidden motives. Be up front with your reasons for taking a particular position. Explain them carefully; glossing over the facts or altering them to suit your purpose will give others reasons not to trust you. Be clear as to why you are stating your position.
Communicate well and often, be open. Open dialogue dispels suspicion and makes for greater trust.
Be willing to compromise. Maintaining a sympathic ear will be the greatest allies. Rule enforcement for the sake of enforcement alone will erode residents trust., as will residents frequent complaints. Let the small things go. Be as good as your word. If you promise to do something, do it. If you're ask to explain something; say an invoice or an accounting, and then ignore the request or provide an explanation that is not based on fact, you will lose the trust of the residents quickly.

Community associations rely on contracts and statutes for their authority, but their leaders need trust for legitimacy. The law dictates the rules but cannot dictate trust. Remember " Lack of trust can paralyze a HOA just when economics require unprecedented cooperation".

Norma Lee

* Prepared with the help of a friend.

They just received a notice yesterday from Riverside Management(RM)  for two months dues plus  a late fee of $ 31/32. When they called Riverside Management, they were not given any information and was  told to contact the Board of Directors.     The residents didn't know how to do that and were not given the information by Riverside Management.        

After talking with a neighbor,   they decided to call RM back and when they were  told to call the Board again they "insisted" that RM take care of it.    Once it was explained the dues needed to be paid quarterly, the resident  said, no problem - they should have just explained that.  The insisted the late fees be removed, which they were.

Another resident pays her dues monthly by  direct payment from the bank, BUT when she set it up she paid for two months, and then monthly.  She said she has not received a letter (yet). 

Most of us know that dues are paid  quarterly, but for one year they accepted monthly payments and instead of notifying the resident in Nov. or Dec. 09'  that they needed to make this change with their bank, they chose to make this LEAP without notification and send a Past Due letter + late fees and when resident called they wouldn't even explain what it was all about and referred them to the Board.  I believe that's the lack of COMMUNICATION we have been talking about.  This resident could care less if they pay their dues monthly or quarterly, just notify them in advance, not with a "late fees" letter.  It seems to me RM  made an error in accepting monthly dues for a year,  but passed it on to the oversight to the resident.

Editor's note: To read Resolution  2007-03 that was passed on Nov 14, 2006  giving   authority to collect fees quarterly click HERE