It finally happened - we ticked off owners

It appears that we have ticked off enough owners that they are organizing against the Board.
How did we tick them off?
In my opinion, lack of communication.

Tales of woe for others to learn by.

A member approached the Board to complain about the condition of a traffic island and to ask if they could plant a tree on it. The Board listened, understood the issue and decided to rehab the island completely. We asked the member to chair a committee to check with various contractors and submit ideas. The board, at the same meeting came up with the following goals of any design:

• Aesthetically pleasing
• Minimizes or eliminates erosion
• Provides open areas for minor play and court picnics
• Discourages team sport play
• Does not contain pergolas or gazebos
• Allows for parking of vehicles around the island
• Minimizes tree branches overhanging vehicles parked around island
• Minimal maintenance (pruning) requirements

The committee provided proposals by our next meeting.
Unfortunately, none of the proposals met enough of the goals for the board to approve.

At that meeting, a member in attendance for a different issue provided his input to the proposals. The Board has now heard two extreme suggestions for the island. One to completely forest it the other to make it a playground. The Board was confident that the goals we established was somewhere in the middle and chose not to seek further input from residents but asked the committee to continue working on it.

At the following board meeting, updated proposals from the committee were provided that still didn't meet the goals. Rather then wait, the board came up with a simple design and based on funding, we couldn't complete everything but could move forward.

Per our contractors, the remaining trees on that island would all have to be removed in 2 to 3 years. Most needed removed now. The Board chose to remove all of them (as our rehab plan would work either way) now since funding was available. Our contracts for the island now included:

Remove existing trees, grind stumps
Grind roots, add soil and prep island for additional work
Hydro-seed entire island
Plant two trees (one maple, one crape myrtle)
provide watering for the trees for one year (we have no irrigation system)
Warranty on the trees (comes with the watering)

This is the communication error - We didn't tell the residents what we were doing.

Phase one hit and the residents returned home to find all trees on island removed.
Shock and emotions took over and they demanded all work stop and new plans be drawn up.
They also demanded a special meeting of the board to do this.
Vacations prevented a special meeting (no quorum)
However, The Board attempted to answer questions and said that nothing we had contracted for would prevent future work.

Unfortunately, emotional attachment often prevents simple discussion from taking place. One member (claiming to represent many who were copied on emails) threatened legal action and demanded documents. We have an attorney on the Board. To protect the Boards legal rights, we provided some documents (those legally allowed to have) but others were withheld (they were work product). This inflamed the issue. More emails flew around. In checking on work, I actually spent an hour with these residents who were not listening. They simply wanted to preach. I honestly felt I was in front of a lynch mob.

They did provide a design. See attached.

Keep in mind the Boards goals and that:
We are a town home development
the island is only 60' by 80'
Hardwood trees have a 35-40 foot crown at maturity (and surface roots)
Crape Myrtles have 25 foot crowns at maturity
The spruce trees have surface or shallow roots
The spruce trees grow to a height of 60 to 200' with a 20-25 foot canopy

We have 5 or 6 of the 20 lots showing up at the next board meeting. It will be an interesting one.

However, one member (we suspect the one who threatened legal action) made a complaint with the County. Now the zoning board is looking at the original proffer to see if the clear cutting (regardless that we are replanting or that the trees needed to go) is a violation. If a violation exists, it is a $200 fine and if not remedied within x days (haven't gotten a decision from them yet) an additional $500 is added to the fine.

So, for the lack of initial communication combined with emotional residents, the Boards hands our now tied waiting for a decision from the County. The County may or may not specify the number of trees along with the type of trees.

Unintended consequence - The whole board, including myself, is fed up and does not want to run again. Additionally, we have a group of residents who view the Reserves as one pot of money that can be used to put the island to how they want (vs. Reserves being allocated to specific things)and may very possibly be the next Board.

I'm open to advice but we realize our mistake (lack of communication).
Additionally, our hands are literally tied waiting for the decision from the County.
Mainly wanted to stress to others how important communication is with the membership.

Tim

Tim

It seems the center of the storm is one person and I grudgingly admire him for getting the county involved. He stopped you all dead in your tracks.

You said you believe this to be a communication problem. Well the simple answer is to try and cure that with maybe an Informational Meeting. Lay out the plan, ask for suggestions, etc. Sell them on it. Forget the one person as they are only one person. Lay out your side and let the chips fall.

I personally will not subject myself to such a meeting.

As I said, I felt I was in front of a lynch mob.
They haven't cooled off yet and are still not listening or willing to discuss.
They simply want to preach (at least my perspective) on how ticked off they are (we already understand that).

Tim, thanks for the report. It does help reinforce the importance of communicatons.

I know you work hard for no pay and do not deserve this.

Have any of the opposition stepped up to say she or he will run for the board?

Ouch!!! Thanks for sharing so others can take note and learn.



From what you have stated IMO this is potentially where the mistake was made. On one side it could be lack of communication, but it was also a decision the BOD made. And you know me from the many years. . I tend to argue in favor of having membership participate when their money is going to be spent making large changes.



My opinion one of two things possibly happened to cause this. 1) The upset owners did not feel their concerns were being heard and addresssed in a timely manner, or 2) a BOD member potentially made the mistake of telling an angry owner that it is the BOD's decision on what they could do with the property not the owners. I would have to admit if one of those two items happened to me I also would have potentially complained to the local government. Most people do not have issues with upkeep of a current area, but they absolutely want to be able to have input on large changes they will be paying to implement.



Advice ... have a cocktail and relax for a short while. In the meantime all you can really do is work hard with the County to expedite as quickly as you can. I am also with you regarding the types of trees as you do not want any which will be costly or cause future issues. Does your County have a preferred list of trees and plantings you can reference?

Why is the board surprised that owners are upset by their decision to take unilateral action and ignore the Committee established to come up with a plan? The lack of an agreed upon plan by the Committee resulted in the board bypassing the Committee to "go forward" with their own plan; one which never incorporated removal of the trees.

Janet is right on the money. I don't think the board should be surprised at the reaction. This is not just about lack of communication. The error here is more than just "failure to communicate". EVEN IF the board had communicated, owners would have been upset about removing trees.

Rather than pick up your marbles and stop playing a game that you decided in isolation, with an outcome caused by hubris and insensitivity, why not publicly admit the true character of your action; do the mea culpa and do better next time.

It appears that this board is serving the community well over a longer term and should not get their Hanes in an uproar about an outcome THEY caused and penalize owners who are objecting to the direction that board chose. It is a self-inflicted wound and you now are a ride-along. You have learned a valuable lesson. This short-term violation of trust is singular and reparable if the board demonstrates ownership for the eventual result and asks for forgiveness. Then, show that YOU care by running for re-election.

@Melissa: Not a bash any more than the original poster bashed his own board for failing to communicate. Check your own prejudices before you assume others have bad motives.

The OP was posted a cautionary tale to others. The message was communication. In this case, there was no compelling need to the board to act in "crisis mode". The board took action contrary to the project preference list it gave to the Committee it delegated the job to which called only for "minimal pruning". The board simply took over after the second round of committee proposals was not acceptable.

It was known at that time, per board discussion with other members' input, that this was a potential extreme community issue (from a forest to a playground!). Despite the warning signs, the board, without further input, went ahead with its own agenda and all hell broke loose when members saw the trees were gone! It can only be assumed that there was no motion made and acted upon at the board meeting to take this action.

If any Board wants to go its own way, it certainly has the authority to do so within the expenditure limitation under bylaws. In this case, apparently the board did NOT consult the Committee before going ahead on its own. The resulting uproar is acknowledged by the OP to have been due to its lack of communication (not to mention lack of sensitivity).

My input was to Own Up, Man/Woman UP, Mea Culpa to your Owners and don't blame THEM for your unhappiness with the decision that you (the board) made and refuse to run for re-election. This wound was truly self-inflicted. There is no justification to "victimize" the owners by refusing to play a rough game that you (the board) chose.

The OP is TimB. He is one bad mamma jammer when it comes to HOAs.

It's best to ask questions vs. inserting facts not in evidence.

All plans from the committee also included clear cutting of the island.

As stated earlier, the reason the Board developed their own was because the Committee's were not meeting the requirements outlined by the Board.

Keep in mind that the plan I attached came from the residents not the committee.
The residents plan fails to look at the trees at maturity.
When asked that they please do this, the residents failed to reply (yes they did get our request) concerning the plan.

It's good to see you admit there was an error on your Board's part, Tim, I think most HOA Leaders would not do so. They would hide behind they authority and lawyers.

Wrong again.

The Board, after rejecting the committees proposals for several reasons I will not go into, except that the plans did not meet the key goals (the quantitative ones, not the subjective ones) of the RFP, came up with a simple plan on our own and agreed to it. The Committee was informed and thanked for their time.

It was while the committee was working on plan revisions that the motion was made to survey the residents. That motion failed to pass.


Yep. I can't speak for others but I can speak for myself.
I spend 20 to 30 hours a month on Association business.
I was actually told by this group I should have put in more hours.
Mind you, nobody stepped forward to serve from that group.
Nobody offered to volunteer when the Board asked for help.

When I dedicate that amount of time, absorb the bookkeeping duties so the Association has another $4,200 to spend a year and, since I work overnights, spend the middle of my night working on Association business, one can get a little put off when told your not working hard enough for no pay.


Questions:

Would you rather have an individual serve on the board who has no personal agenda or a group that has personal agendas serve?

Would you rather see those who failed to comply with State laws and the governing documents when they served get back in power or elect those willing to comply with the applicable statutes?

Would you rather see those who view the Reserve funds as one big pot of money to be used for what ever have control of those funds or have those who see the Reserves allocated to specific items control those funds?


What????

Where in the heck did you get that info from?

As I said, the committee was involved and informed 100% of the time.
Motions were made at were adopted or failed at open board meetings.


Personally, I'm not blaming them. I don't agree with their method but I, and others, have often suggested to get the County involved if the Board wasn't listening.

In this case, the Board was listening.
I created a scale model of the site, including trees at maturity, so we can discuss it at the next Board meeting. The members who contacted the Board didn't want to wait. Demanded that the Board meet with them immediately (even though vacation schedules prevented a quorum from being achieved). They were the one's not listening (at least from my perspectives and, based on info I have, based on other members of the Board perspectives as well.)


Please explain how they are victimized.

I honestly don't see it.


Sorry, once the County got involved it doesn't matter what the residents want or what the Board wants. We are now being told what to do by the County.

Too bad that those members didn't think about this unintended consequence.

The Board will likely enter into contracts prior to the meeting with the members simply to avoid the fines. Will this be communicated? Yes, at the meeting where many of those who are attending are from that group. Will it be reported to the whole membership? Yes, at the annual meeting which will be held in October.


Well, that actually depends on who controls the funds doesn't it?

We also have milling and paving scheduled in 3 years. We already borrowed to address erosion. This additional borrowing may very well create the need for a special assessment. Again, an unintended consequence because some couldn't wait and discuss the issue. They are still in their preaching mode.


You are correct. However, this is the end of the year.
We have two board meetings before the next election and our focus needs to be there.

1 of us have served for the past 10 years. 1 has served for the past 7 years. 1 has served for the past 4 years. 1 has served for the past 3 years.

Apathy from the membership combined with lynch mob mentality (at least that is my perspective) with that group has us tired. We have spent far too much time on this issue and will be spending more. Had the committee complied with the RFP, there would have been less issues. Had the Board surveyed the residents, there may have been less issues. Had the Board communicated better, there would have been less issues (but based on available funding, I think we still would have had some).

Well, that's all we can do.

All will go into a defensive stance when challenged (that is human nature).
Many will stay there.
Fewer will get past it and be open for discussion of the issues.

So then the directors will feel better about themselves and not quit their unpaid, zero benefits, positions?

One aspect here surprises me: That the directors wish to quit because some group, inexperienced in HOA matters, said some not nice things. I do not understand why these highly experienced directors do not just hold their heads high, say they did the best they could, make good with the county, and at this point, ignore the dissenters. This will save the current directors energy.

Only one other person appears to be willing to serve on the board. Increasingly my own motto is, "Member Jones, as long as you are not willing to serve on the board, I do not care about your priorities nearly as much as I care about what I understand the HOA's priorities to be."

Ouch, I can't even compliment Tim without taking heat around here.

Carl,

I took it the way you intended it.

Now THAT is a mature plan!

I agree that this statement needs to be said.

I wouldn't place blame on anyone. Just a statement of fact that the issue is now out of the Associations hands. Then move forward.

Thanks for posting Tim. I learned a lot from this one.

If a member wants to plant a tree, let the membership vote on the action, and move forward accordingly.

All of this because of a one tree proposal?

I suppose one could look at it that way.

Financially it puts a strain on the Association.

However, the issue is resolved (regardless if anyone likes it or not).

Update,

We got the site plan.
The county shows 13 trees on that little island.
Placement and species of trees must be per the plan.
We are currently getting bids.

We still do not know about fines. Initially a determination would be made later (i.e. if we moved fast enough, no fines). However, the inspector now calls it a site plan violation vs. a proffer violation. Hence, new protocols come into play and notice must be sent now.

Fines are $200 for initial violation and $500 additional every 10 days that the violation isn't completed up to a maximum of $5,000. We don't know if they will take a signed contract to resolve the violation or if they will insist that they physically need to be planted.

Plus we get to pay attorney fees because the County must send the notice to our Registered agent (who will simply forward the issue to us and charge a fee for that privilege).

The Board is already talking special assessment possibilities to pay for all of this.

John,

Granted we should have done additional research (20/20 hind sight).
The fact that no other previous board did such research is not an excuse either.
Blame goes to all Boards since the development was turned over to the membership.

Is it this Boards fault? Yes, partially.

Based on the fact that none of the trees currently on the plan actually exist on that island (prior to the removal of trees this year), I suspect past Boards failed to check as well. It's simply not something one thinks of.

Realistically, unless one was in the business of construction or development, I doubt anyone would have thought to look.

Again, not passing blame. There is enough to go around to everyone.

Simply pointing out how important communication is.

Also, a clear illustration of unintended consequences of various decisions made by the Board and the membership.

Explain to the owners just like you stated above. It sounds like a good presentation to the owners. You accepted some blame, are not passing judgement on anyone, explained that you are not In the construction or development business, and took responsibility for the communication. You also pointed out that blame goes to all Boards since the development was turned over to the membership.

When a 'volunteer' does not KNOW something then the appropriate expert must be hired.

Y'all wanted to change a previously approved common element.

Should have hired a landscape consultant.

Problem ? What problem ?

Site Plan Violation

One page of the site plan identifies the location and species of trees within the development

Sorry I missed that. You did explain that in a previous post.