When we heard that the La Verne Live Oak board of directors were once again pushing to have a guard house installed at the lower gates, at an estimated cost of $1000.00 per home for the initial assessment, plus $80 - $100 per month additional HOA dues to keep up this guard house, a handful of homeowner’s attended the board meeting to gather more information.
We were told at that meeting in July that there was not an official gate committee formed yet, just a couple of homeowners investigating the situation, at their own expense. A homeowner at the meeting volunteered to be on the committee, and was told he could, and that unofficial-committee would contact him. He never heard from them.
It was asked of the board, by homeowners at the July meeting, that nothing be done to move forward on the guard gates until a poll was taken of all the homeowners behind the gates to see if there was even enough interest in the guard house to pursue this. The board said that they would discuss this request and take a vote amongst themselves. We heard that they agreed to send out an initial poll to all members.
In the meantime, before the August board meeting, some homeowners gathered to come up with some wording and items that they would like to see on the initial poll.
Here is the list of their suggestions:
1. Shall the LVLO HOA install a guard house with a manned 24 hour guard at the south entrance of the LVLO homes, with a camera installed at the north gate which will be controlled by the guard at the south gate, where every car will be approved before entering the complex?
2. Shall the LVLO HOA install a guard building with manned 24 hour guards at the south entrance and also the north entrance of the LVLO homes?
3. Shall the LVLO HOA improve the gates, so that they function correctly, with no adding of guard house and no guards?
4. Shall the LVLO HOA remove the gates, all together?
The reasons this group is against having a 24 hour guard at one or both gates are as follows:
Too costly
Edgewater homeowners already pay 2 association fees, $100 & $96 per month.
There is virtually no crime now behind the existing gates.
The inconvenience to come and go from our neighborhood will be monumental, with lines to get inside the gates extending out on to Esperanza.
This will not raise home values as touted, but may even deter buyers because of the excess HOA dues.
It is not the responsibility of the HOA to increase members’ home values, if so it should be done fairly to all homeowner, even outside the gates.
The guard will have no authority.
This group of homeowners also wanted to request of the board that when this is dropped, to place a moratorium on this issue, not to be brought up again for at least 10 years.
Before the August HOA meeting, the neighbors all received a letter encouraging them to attend this next meeting to let their voices be heard.
The turn out of interested homeowners was large, probably 60 to 70 people. The meeting room was too small to allow all homeowners in to even hear what was taking place in the meeting.
It was requested that there be a special meeting, inviting all homeowners, in a room large enough to accommodate everyone, in the near future and that the discussion be stopped at that time. The members were told by the board president that he was not sure he could do that, that it might not be legal.
Hopefully we will all hear something soon from Haven Management regarding the special meeting. Nadine Gump is their representative for our association.
If the board does not grant its members a special meeting, the members can get together and have their own meeting, in a large room, to discuss this matter.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I find it very concerning that the board would allow any individual home owner to offer any service to the association without first disclosing the name of that home owner to all other association members. I can appreciate that people may want to volunteer for certain small projects like Christmans decorations and the like. However a project of this scale and expense should have every disclosre required by our rules and the laws governing these types of HOAs.
If it turns out that any board member has not followed our rules concerning full disclosure, then they need to be recalled from serving on our board. We should never tolerate any behind the scene deals or planning by our elected board members.
Homeowers must keep in mind that you get what you elect.
This past election had to go three rounds before the election was official. If there is not a quorum (51%)at election date, the required quorum is cut in half each month. This required quorum reduction will continue each month. The last election was determined by about 13% of the homeowners.
If the voters assign their proxy's to the board, the board will use the proxys to re-elect themselves.
The most powerful tool homeowners have in controlling the HOA is through the election process. If the homeowners what to conrol the HOA, they must first control the elections.
The board members that originally approved the installation of the gated community were not re-elected. The guard shack committe chairperson was one of those board members.
Since the entire association, not just the gated homes, voted in the general election these board members were voted off in the two elections that succeeded the gate installation.
There was never a clear and decisive vote count that led up to the final gate decision. Votes were collected and kept secret at the management company's office. The vote time limit was extended at least two additional times. And the final vote counting exercise was not done in a public forum, or at a HOA meeting.
Board members have a obligation to be open with the homeowners, but homeowners have an obligation to be vigilant as well.
Post a Comment