Board Meeting

July 27, 2009 by
Filed under: *** Residents' Articles *** 

The Riverbend Board met Tuesday, July 21 at the EPM office. I strode into the meeting room a few minutes late but as it turned out it didn’t matter; I was turned away. There was apparently some business being discussed – the lawyer was present – that wasn’t for the ears of mere homeowners. I returned some time later to find two representatives from Growing Concern, our contracted landscaper, in the waiting area. The Board, behind now-closed doors, was keeping them waiting as well. At around 7pm, a full hour past the scheduled start time (and a half-hour late for Growing Concern’s appointment) the lawyer left and we filed in. It’s worth noting that Harrison left at that point, begging off for another appointment. I didn’t see Toni at all. The remaining three Board members were present, as was Janice (EPM). There were no homeowners besides myself.

Discussion began with the folks from Growing Concern.

  • Concerns were expressed about the shrub pruning schedule. The problems apparently went back to June when pruning activities kicked off on the opposite side of the community than is usual. It was pointed out that the weather was a big factor - we had an awful lot of rain in June.
  • Problems with light sensors were noted. Some are obscured, causing the lights to trigger at inappropriate times. They’ll be looked at and corrected.
  • The irrigation system was enabled at the start of the season, as usual. Following complaints and subsequent investigation, Growing Concern found the system shut down. It’s been corrected.
  • The Board suggested to Growing Concern that they contact individual homeowners regarding needed work within their private property boundaries (i.e. not common property). Growing Concern requested permission to use homeowner contact information for this purpose, and the Board agreed to supply it. It’s worth noting Growing Concerns’ terms for this kind of work. They will expect full payment in advance of starting the work. They cited that they cannot afford to chase delinquent payments. Finally, work performed for individuals in this manner (if any) will be carried out by alternate staff so that homeowners will not be able to claim that association fees are being used to benefit individual homeowners. (Ah, the ancient and honored business art of covering one’s ass lives on!)
  • The Board notes that they’ve observed that some homeowners have taken on some cleanup and pruning for themselves – both in common areas and on their own property – and in some cases are leaving their trimmings for Growing Concern to pick up.
  • The Board cautioned Growing Concern about snow removal, citing the need to care for our new plantings by the entrances.
  • The Board will be requesting bids for additional irrigation to be installed to support those new plantings. Current irrigation is manual.
  • One year remains in Growing Concern’s current contract.
  • The Board brought a number of homeowner concerns, as expressed in letters written to the Board, to Growing Concern’s attention. I don’t see the need mention individuals in this forum.

By then Mike (I missed his last name and company), who performed the work on our new entrances, was present. Growing Concern left.

  • The shale content of the soil, worse than anticipated, contributed to time and cost overruns. The company is absorbing the cost and the Association will not be charged.
  • Mike observed that the old work (those wooden ties) had not been set properly at the outset, likely because of the construction difficulties posed by the shale content. The new walls have correct footings as well as at least two buried courses. In some cases the walls have been relocated slightly from the original plan so as to construct them properly.
  • About 80 cubic yards of material was removed as part of this project.
  • There was some discussion of the buried irrigation discovered during the course of the project, and some is still the subject of investigation (working/not working/salvageable).
  • There was some discussion of the need for some additional plantings and/or ground cover. It’s agreed by all that it looks a bit sparse on top. Something will be done, but additional irrigation will also be needed in those areas to support it.
  • Mike found evidence of the water feature that was at the west entrance when the community was built. (Almost no one but me remembers when it was operational, and I didn’t live here at the time.)
  • In consideration of our budget, Janice recommends deferring additional investment at this time.
  • The Board mentioned that they’ve observed kids using the new walls as recreational equipment (skaters, boarders), and they’ve been chased off several times.
  • The Board told Mike that all feedback on the project has been positive. I agree – it looks great and really adds value to the community.

Mike left after being paid, followed by some regular business. Some of that was discussion coming out of letters sent to the Board by homeowners but, again, I see no need to mention individuals in this report.

  • The ballast in the mini-playground has settled some and there was a proposal to fill it. Discussion ensued as to whether or not the settling is normal (it is), whether there’s a legal need to replace or augment it (there isn’t) or whether it’s okay as is for now (it is). No further action will be taken at this time.
  • The evergreen trimming, which takes place every two years, will be due. The proposal to retain the usual company to do it is accepted. It’s noted that their work on our trees has been commended by other experts and their prices have not increased in many years.
  • The Board discussed the performance of the company that maintains our sidewalk lighting (by the name of Caveman?). Lately performance has been sub-par, and the Board is wondering whether the company is losing interest in our business. This matter is flagged for follow-up.
  • The Board discussed sidewalk maintenance. The original estimate was high (yet was about half of the next-higher estimate), but called for much work that Janice felt was unnecessary (nice-to-have rather than needed to limit liability). The revised estimate, while less than the original, wasn’t enough less – it didn’t agree with the revised square footage estimates. This led to some discussion of basic math, which everyone agreed appeared flawed. Janice was granted authorization to go back to the contractor to renegotiate the cost (downward) on behalf of the Board.
  • Janice told the Board that they need to find a solution to making their meetings handicapped-accessible. Meetings are currently held in the EPM office – the second floor with (apparently) no such access. (To me, Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act seems vague about how the Act applies to a business like a property management agency, but I believe that it could reasonably apply to the public meetings of a homeowners’ board. I think it’ll be interesting to see how this plays out. It sounds expensive. Please note that this is just my opinion; I’m not a lawyer and don’t even play one on TV.) Some discussion ensued but no conclusions were reached.
  • The Annual Meeting date was set for November 4, 2009 in the usual place, at the Municipal Complex.

The meeting adjourned.

Please take note that this report is not an official report. I’m merely a homeowner – just like you. I decided one day to take a more active role rather than just complaining. I showed up for the meeting. This report is from my scribbled notes and foggy memory and both are subject to my interpretations.

Nevertheless, unless you show up for yourself, it’s about the best you’re likely to get!

Comments

Tell us what you're thinking...

You must be logged in to post a comment.