Congratulations to our winners!

Congratulations to the winners in tonight's CH HOA Board election.  They were Bob Crandall, Ron Freidman and Barry Werbelow.
I am sure we all wish them the best of luck in their upcoming terms of Board service.

Questions and issues for our AGM

As you may know, our HOA annual general meeting is this coming week.  This would be a good time to confront some serious issues that really do call for answers from our two most senior Board members.  I speak, of course, of Mr. Flink and Mr. Feldman.

Indeed, it was Mr. Flink, who, at our Meet The Candidates evening in April, posed the question to the panel: "Can we trust you?".  It was my belief then, and is now, that Mr. Flink would rather have asked us when we had stopped beating our wives, or, in Mrs. Bulkin's case, her husband.  However I suspect he knew that that would not pass muster with our affable moderator for the evening, Mr. Russell.  In light of what I have found out, it would seem to be a fair question for Mr. Flink and Mr. Feldman, though, turn about being fair play.

Excessive speed on Queen's Wreath.

This issue is the one that has been the subject of most debate on our community forum.  There are two groups of people involved on this issue, and they actually address different things.  There are those who live at the top of the hill who are glad to see the back of the speed bumps.  There are also those who live on or near Queen's Wreath who are concerned about the sometimes wildly excessive speed of vehicles on that street.  The general consensus is that  speeds have increased since the speed bumps were removed, although to the best of my knowledge and belief there has been no objective check.  The Board refuses to answer my questions on this issue.

With all due respect to the first group, this is not an issue about speed bumps, it is an issue about safety.  I personally do not care how speed is to be controlled -- but it does need to be controlled.  Residents of our HOA may reasonably demand that their directors look out for their safety in our community.

With that in mind, I researched the issue in our Board minutes.  In the minutes of August 20th, 2009, an engineer engaged by the Board attended the Board meeting.  This is an extract from that meeting:

OK, well at least we now know what the priorities were. I don't think this is originally what was said, as the bit about individual drivers was added in the approval of these minutes the following month.  We will never know now, but, as I say, at least we know how the Board's priorities were ordered.

Fast forward now to the Board meeting of  February 18th, 2010, when the issue was voted on:

Speed Humps – Bill Fuchs made a motion the remove the four most easterly speed humps and then stripe bike lanes and start a communication program with speed limits and verbal reminders as well as quarterly mailings as additional reminders.  George Jurrow seconded the motion.  There was further discussion about this motion.  Joe indicated that he would like to see a stronger form of education for the homeowners in regards to the safety for the kids.  George Jurrow mentioned that it is a parental responsibility and not the HOA’s.  It was discussed that communication through a newsletter was a good form of communication without coming across as though they were lecturing parents how to drive.  George explained that bad behavior happens on other streets as well and that there is a human nature aspect that needs to be considered.  George also explained that the motion on the table was strongly suggested in the engineering report that had been received.  George said that it repeats in the report that speed humps are strongly discouraged due to emergency response vehicles.  He said that the there was strong support in the engineering technical report to remove the speed humps.  David George disagreed with George Jurrow.  He did not recall it saying in the report to remove speed humps.  David’s recollection was to add bike lanes along with speed tables.  David mentioned that speed bumps will not hold back emergency response vehicles from getting to a scene.  After the discussion, the motion was passed with four votes in favor and one against.   

Having read the report to which Mr. George refers, I conclude he was the only Board member who actually read it it, or at least remembered it.  Two of the four parties voting for that motion were removed from the Board in January this year.  That leaves Messrs. Flink and Feldman.  Now let's look at the report of the engineer commissioned the Board, Gutierrez Civil Solutions, LLC.  Copies of the full report may be obtained from our community manager or I will send you a copy if you e-mail me.

This extract is from page eight:

OK, if we take out the speed bumps speeds will increase.  Later the engineer discusses how effective "education" is:

And here are the engineer's recommendations:

So, our Board had been told in no uncertain terms that to remove the speed bumps without replacing them with another traffic calming measure will result in increased speeds on Queen's Wreath.  By the way, bike lanes are discussed in the report but not as a traffic calming device.

So, to summarize: Mr. Flink and Mr. Feldman, knew, or should have known, that removing the speed bumps would lead to higher speeds on Queen's Wreath, but they went ahead anyway, AND, have proposed nothing to remedy the situation since AND are defensive when confronted by homeowners at Board meetings.  That's a problem.

And, in addition to decreasing road safety in our community they have also probably exposed us to liability as if anyone is injured on Queens Wreath and litigates the issue, this engineer's report is bound to come up in discovery.

January Board Minutes

Another question that remains unanswered is who is responsible for the shameful and scurrilous additions to the January Board minutes.  The issue is covered in detail in the two preceding blog posts, so I won't rehash them again.  Mr. Flink was the Board President at the time, but that does not mean he was the author of the additions.  Given the mean-spirited nature of the writing I have my own suspicions, but who knows?   Someone needs to man up here, stick his hand in the air and tell us why he felt the need to adjust the minutes as he did.  Someone apparently had enough courage to write the edits, but that courage appears to have disappeared now it is time to claim pride of ownership.

Meet The Candidates

At the April meet the candidates evening, in posing me a question  referring to the banking of cash in the  May 2006 financial statements of Cimarron Hills HOA , Mr. Feldman concluded his presentation by asserting that "the bank failed eight months later".  Which would have been January 2007 by my estimation.

It was clearly Mr. Feldman's intent that his statement suggest that the choice of bank was unwise by alleging that it failed shortly thereafter.

According to the FDIC, the bank in question was merged into Mutual of Omaha Bank at the FDIC's direction on July 25th, 2008, some twenty-six months after the date of the financial statements offered, well after I had left the Board, when Mr. Feldman was Treasurer,and when many other national banks were also turning to the government for assistance.  For the record, no-one lost any of their deposits in that merger, or even access to their funds.

Now, I may choose to attach various adjectives to Mr. Feldman, and he to me, I am sure, however careless and stupid are not among them. So, I have to conclude that Mr. Feldman knew or should have known that his statement was untrue and likely to mislead.  I have twice asked Mr. Feldman to substantiate his assertion.  He has failed to do so.

It's a sad thing to say about your HOA treasurer, but based on this experience I will forever have to question if I am hearing the truth from Mr. Feldman or if he has again chosen to mold the truth to meet his needs.

On to the AGM.....

The original January Board minutes (pre-"edits")

Following are the original January Board minutes before the three remaining members of our Board decided to "edit" them to assuage their egos.  I would have to say that these minutes, before the enhancements provided by the Board, look much more like the professional minutes I have come to expect.

Everyone becomes angry from time to time.  It's human nature.  But what is worth remembering is that, absent the entry annotated in hand by the scribe, the "enhancements" made to the original minutes were not done in the heat of the moment, but in the cold light of day some days or weeks later.  What that tells us is that ego is a huge deal for our remaining Board members.  In fact, I think a reasonable person might conclude that ego is clearly more important than service to our Board.  If you ever wondered why some people seek office, now you know.

As I stated in my previous post, I believe resignations should follow swiftly.  I doubt they will.  Please consider this when you cast your votes for Cimarron Hills Board.

Click on each page or image to view it full size.

The scandal that is our Board Minutes

The minutes of our HOA Board meetings of January and February were recently posted to the Rossmar and Graham website.  To save you the torture of negotiating the R&G site to obtain your own copies I have attached them here.  I have had to upload these as images so to view each page full-size, just click on the image.

In Matthew 7:20 we read: "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them"  These minutes -- and more to the point, the edits provided by the Board -- tell us more about these gentlemen and their ethics than we should ever want to know.  Since I first read these minutes I have been struggling to find a word to describe them.  That word is scandalous.  When I was on the HOA Board we would never have countenanced either writing or publishing such documents.

I was not present at the January Board meeting, although I gather it was quite heated.  Given its proximity to the special election that removed two Board members it is entirely understandable that feelings would run high, both from the floor and the Board.  That does not excuse what has been added to these minutes by the Board (see following).

Today Mr. Mayer posted this on the Cimarron Hills discussion group, and I take him at his word: 

I received a call from Rossmar this morning.  Mr Hanley (President), Mr CogHill (VP), Deanna (Recording Secretary) and Don Russell were all on the phone.

 Mr Hanley said Deanna's Jan/Feb meeting minutes were changed by the board.  Mr Hanley did not feel comfortable in disclosing what the changes.   Mr Hanley did apologize about the inappropriate personal attacks recorded in the minutes.  He said that should never had happened.    Though Mr Hanley said it will be an uncomfortable situation, Rossmar will tell the board changes like the ones directed in Jan/Feb will no longer be allowed. 

In my judgment the January minutes are, as I have said before, tortious.  By amending and propagating the minutes as they did, our Board not only engaged in stroking their petty piques and egos, they subjected our community to potential monetary damages.  Any of the three who partook in this "editing", and/or voted to approve these minutes should promptly resign, and withdraw from any elective office they may happen to be running for.  At the end of the day, the President, who acts as Chariman, has the final responsibility.

The February minutes are less egregious than January, however they still contain expressions of opinion added after the fact that have no place in professional minutes.  I might also add that the minutes are inaccurate and incomplete as they relate to my question about the speed humps -- actually I asked if we had before and after speed tests -- and as they relate to my question about admittance of visitors to open houses.   

Board election candidacy

You will know that I have stated in previous posts that while I have been seriously considering offering myself for election to our HOA Board, I had not absolutely decided.  Reason being that, while on the one hand I plan on being a very long-term resident of Cimarron Hills and care deeply about our community, I am also under no illusion about what the commitment entails. I've done it before. I received a letter today from  part-time CH residents Jerome and Linda Carlson which made up my mind.  I will be a candidate for our Board in the forthcoming election.
The Carlsons, apparently, take umbrage at a section from my Manifesto for Cimarron Hills, which I am reproducing below:

Maintenance of the quality of life and security of our community should be the primary concern of the Board consistent with conservative and sensible financial and operating practices.  This does not strike me as being that hard to grasp, but apparently it is for some.

In our most recent Board meeting I watched a resident who, from what I heard, was rightly quite angry and despairing about the unwillingness of the Board to enforce our CC&Rs.  What I heard about were not minor infractions, so, if I can grasp that enforcing our important CC&Rs (we are not talking about a bin left out overnight here) is essential to maintaining our quality of life, how is it that our Board does not?  I asked Mr. Friedman very directly if he had consulted our HOA attorney on legal remedies.  I did not receive a reply.

Other residents have complained about excessive speed in our community since the Board removed the speed humps.  I asked Mr. Friedman a direct question about measured speeds in our community at the February Board meeting and did not receive a reply.  If we do not know if traffic is faster or slower now, how might we even begin to address the issue of road safety in our community?

I believe I am correct to question the quality of the judgment that is, and has been displayed by our Board members on these and other issues.  If you agree with me, I will appreciate your support in the upcoming Board election.

Expansion of McDowell Sonoran Preserve.

Being lucky enough to live, as we do, on the border of the beautiful McDowell Sonoran Preserve, you may be interested to read that Scottsdale is working to purchase another large chunk of land to add to the preserve:
http://bit.ly/eOPGco
While I may not always appreciate some of the  machinations that went on in the process to bring us the Preserve, I am always glad when I am in it.  It is a great asset to our community.

Board meeting notes of March 18th.

Following is a summary of my notes from last night's Board meeting.  Please feel free to contact me directly with questions or comments, or post them yourself to the comments section.

The meeting opened with Mr. Friedman in the chair.

Mr. Flink read a prepared statement in which he spoke of his high regard for the two Board members removed by ballot earlier this year, his qualifications and experience to hold the office of President and certain health challenges that he has been forced to confront.  He concluded by resigning from the Presidency of CH HOA and nominated Mr. Friedman for the post.  Mr. Friedman was duly elected.

One homeowner complained about lack of HOA action on homes next to hers where the owners are in serious breach of the CC&Rs.  Mr. Russell explained that HOAs are being progressively restrained by legislation and the Courts in terms of enforcement actions they may take.  One suggestion from the floor (Mr. Meyer) was that the community should cancel the electronic gate passes of scofflaw homeowners.  I asked the chair if the Board had asked Scott Carpenter if these cases could be settled by direct litigation.  I did not get a direct reply but I believe enforcement of CC&Rs by litigation is an option open to the Board.
OPINION: I understand that our HOA's rights to enforce its CC&Rs may have been reduced.  Nevertheless, even if there is a cost attached to our HOA enforcing the CC&Rs in a Court, I think they should do so if all other options have been exhausted.  This is a quality of life issue, and one that, if not dealt with, could quickly become unmanageable.

An attempt was made by the Board to establish that no vote had ever been taken to expand the fitness facility.  (To my mind, the issue of whether there was a vote or not is entirely moot.  What enraged the community was the Board's insistence on plowing on like the Battleship Bismark in the face of a torrent of objections from residents.)  This led to several points from the floor and Board responses about the necessity for the Board to obtain community approval for expenditures.  On December 18th 2010 I wrote:

"In terms of the management of our HOA, Bill (Fuchs, the then HOA Prseident) is correct in his assertion that the Board is mandated to run the HOA as it sees fit as an elected Board. Having served on the Board with Bill I must also agree that with him that HOA governance by referendum has the potential to be troublesome unless it is clearly defined. ..... There are ways to solicit homeowner input on an annual basis to assist the Board in getting some feedback from homeowners. An annual survey, printed, or online would be easy to distribute and collate and could give the Board valuable feedback on the desires of its homeowners. This is exactly what the HOA at my Tahoe home does and it works very well – as the Board pays attention to the feedback (and discusses it at the AGM), even if they don’t always agree or act on it."

OPINION: This does not need to be a black and white issue. There is a way for the Board to solicit and consider opinions even if they do not feel bound to agree with them.

A homeowner (Mr. Meyer) raised the issue of danger to the community by fire and asked the Board to consider a Fire Protection Plan.  Mr. Feldman responded that Safeguard Security had reviewed this, and that we had received a visit from Scottsdale Fire which had led to thinning and trimming of underbrush to provide defensible space. 

"Meet the candidates" night  will be on April 11th, I believe at the McDowell Center.

To my mind the highlight of the evening was a discussion pertaining to the replacement of exercise equipment.  Mr. Russell presented his recommendations and bids which fell foul of Mr. Feldman, much to the irritation, I observed, of one homeowner in particular who pointed out that this matter had been going on for some time (months).  Eventually the Board kicked the can down the road, as it were, in a desperate attempt to demonstrate fiscal responsibility.  All would have been well, I believe, had Mr. Feldman not pointed out that (I am paraphrasing) the Board was only three as two other members had been removed, they were only volunteers and they (he in particular) had a great deal of work to do.  Mr. Meyer pointed out from the floor  that the Board had had every opportunity to fill the vacant Board seats either by appointment or special election (I believe Mr. Meyer is correct). This then provoked a rambling and amplified diatribe (I am sorry to call it thus, but that is what it was) from Mr. Feldman that veered off into various topics.  Eventually Mr. Friedman was able to close the meeting and we all went on our merry way, but only after the issue of replacement of the exercises equipment had been deferred for a month, principally, it seems, because Mr. Feldman does not like to mix brands.
OPINION: Agreeing as I do with Mr. Meyer on the Board's opportunity to promptly appoint or elect replacement Board members, which they declined to do, I find Mr. Feldman's protestations of overwork because the Board is short-handed to be the ultimate in chutzpah.  I will also say that, having countenanced the possible spending of significant chunks of our money on gym expansions, monuments, etc.I find it somewhat amusing that now being faced with a fast approaching election some members of the Board are desperately attempting to wrap themselves in the mantle of parsimony.

There was also a discussion on legislative initiatives, which I have excluded from these notes as I wish to deal with them as a longer and separate post.