Hawaiian Shores Community Area: August 2011

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Hawaiian Shores -- August By Laws Comm recap

Aloha Watchdog readers,

The following is a recap of the discussion at the last By Laws Comm meeting held on August 22, 2011. Please see 'opinion' comment at the end of the page regarding the highlighted entry below.

Agenda Items Discussed:

· Minutes from June 27, 2011 approved by consensus

· Discussion of Park Rules per Board request [See Below]

· Discussion of By Law 10.05 [See Below]

· Discussion of By Law 3.02 and Article 8 deferred until next meeting.

· Definition of Member [See Below]

· Definition of Easement [See Below]

Proposed Recommendations for Board of Directors:

1. Honu Street Recreational Facility “Park Rules” revised 6/2011

a. Recommendation: TITLE: Current Title “Hawaiian Shores Community Association Park Operating Rules’ Change to: ‘Hawaiian Shores Community Association Honu Street Recreational Facility Operating Rules”

b. Recommendation: Rule #3: “All guests will be required to wear wristbands”…[pending input from office]

c. Recommendation: Rule #7: Include ‘motorized recreational vehicles’ to the list.

2. Papio Ocean Park Rules

a. Recommendation: Rule #1: Park Hours: Sunrise to Sunset

b. Recommendation: Rule #2: Pedestrian access only – No vehicles allowed

c. Recommendation: Rule #3: Remove all trash and pet waste.

d. Recommendation: Rule #4: Stay away from Cliff’s edge – Danger!!

e. Recommendation: Rule #5: No illegal activities allowed on property.

i. Recommendation: Rule #6: Loud music and gatherings with 10 or more people must contact office – 965-8140 –If the event is longer than 2 hours the guests must park on side streets.

ii. Recommended Fees:

1. 10-50 Guests: $50.00

2. 50-100 Guests: $100.00

3. Over 100 Guests: Negotiate

f. Recommendation: Rule #7: No riding of skateboards, roller blades, bicycles or motorized recreational vehicles allowed.

g. Recommendation: Rule #8: Not responsible for personal belongings.

h. Recommendation: Rule #9: Anyone may be immediately removed for any conduct that is deemed detrimental to other users or employees.

i. Recommendation: Rule #10: No smoking allowed.

3. By Law # 10.05:

a. Current: Section 10.05. Veto of Assessments. If at any time the Board of Directors either (a) increases the last prior regular annual assessment by more than thirty three percent (33%) or (b) declared any special assessment, the Members, by an affirmative vote of a 2/3rds majority of the Members of the Association present either in person or by absentee ballot, may veto such increase or special assessment at a special or regular meeting duly noticed for that purpose. Unless such a meeting is held within sixty days of the notice of assessment, the assessment as declared by the Board shall be effective as of the date originally announced. A petition by the members for (a) a special meeting to veto any such increase or special assessment, or (b) to have the matter placed on the agenda at the annual membership meeting, must be presented to the Board within fifteen (15) days of the notice of assessment, pursuant to Section 4.03.

b. Motion was made to recommend the following changes [italicized] be made: change meeting held from 60 days to 120 days; petition presented from 15 days to 60 days. The Vote was 3 Yes/1 Abstain.

c. Recommendation: If at any time the Board of Directors either (a) increases the last prior regular annual assessment by more than thirty three percent (33%) or (b) declared any special assessment, the Members, by an affirmative vote of a 2/3rds majority of the Members of the Association present either in person or by absentee ballot, may veto such increase or special assessment at a special or regular meeting duly noticed for that purpose. Unless such a meeting is held within one hundred twenty (120) days of the notice of assessment, the assessment as declared by the Board shall be effective as of the date originally announced. A petition by the members for (a) a special meeting to veto any such increase or special assessment, or (b) to have the matter placed on the agenda at the annual membership meeting, must be presented to the Board within sixty (60) days of the notice of assessment, pursuant to Section 4.03.

4. Definition of ‘Member” – still being researched.

5. Definition of “Easement” – to be provided by office.

Meeting adjourned 710P. Next meeting of the By Laws/Policy Committee Monday, September 26, 2011 at 6P

OPINION: The suggestion is being made for a change to Articles of Incorporation and to By Law 3.02. This change in essence is to change the 'vote' from one vote regardless how many lots owned to one vote for each lot owned. This would change the historical way this Association has counted votes since its inception in the early 1970's. This is also the gateway step to changing the way a vote can be cast to include 'proxy' as the next change . When this was suggested as a follow up possibility the statement was made with nary a pause for breath or thought 'correct, that is likely to be the case.' Here in this country, regardless how many properties you own in any of the 50 states you are only allowed to cast a single [one vote] for President. There is sound reason for such a vote.

While it is natural to defend the ideology that a person who is more vested in a community should have a 'say' in how it is run which equals the responsibility they bear in their investment. Currently, there are approximately 3 individuals who currently attend all Board meetings [most of them directors and must attend] and 1 who consistently attends all meetings who are multiple lot owners. The rest of those who are 'vested' have not proven a sense of informed responsibility -- being at meetings and participating during any of the discussion phases when decisions directly impacting their investment are being forged -- which would garner far more credibility in the minds of fair thinking individuals. If attending the basic meetings is a responsibility they are quick to shirk then why would anyone naturally assume their multiple votes would be 'informed' and in the best interest of the 'Membership' as opposed to using those same votes to promote a special interest, personal agenda, etc. The current 1 vote for all is a level playing field for all. [Those who have 1 lot and who attend meetings changes the dynamic up a little.]

If abuse of power is the ultimate gain -- which would be intensified should 'proxy' voting also be permitted -- then this is the sure way to get there. The question here is this: Will you care enough to come to the next By Laws committee meeting and discuss your thoughts on this matter? Doesn't matter which side of the argument you come down on, your point of view will lend itself a broader discussion. Hope to see you there.

Hawaiian Shores -- August Finance Comm Recap

Aloha Watchdog Readers,

The Finance Committee met on August 18th, 2011 with just quorum plus two observers. That is 5 people from the entire community who is present to participate in the 'financial' decisions being recommended to the Board of Directors which will reach into your bank account one way or another. 5 people including the 3 committee members!!! On to the recap.

The Finance Committee was to consider the budget for the second month in a row. Such considerations as:

Operational Funding
Infrastructure Fund [the fund from which all upgrade/repairs/replacement for roads/water are taken]
Reserve Fun [the fund that handles all other upgrades/repairs/replacement/operational overages]
Develop the Capital Improvement Budget for FY 2012
Schedule next Finance Committee Meeting

Now for what transpired:

Operational Budget was deferred until the committee received the proposed budget from the Director of Ops & Mgt.
Infrastructure Fund [balance in acct 8/18/11 = $294K]:

Decision was agreed to budget $30K-50K for Roads;
$100K for the PER [Water];
$5K for extra Meters;
$5K for Software for Meters;
$1800.00 for annual Licensing for Software.

Reserve Fund [balance in acct 8/18/11 = ~ $184K]

Decision was agreed to budget $75K-$85K for Pool Power filtration upgrade to solar;
Minor Pool maintenance $12.5K [epoxy paint, coping/patch paint]
$50K per year for upgrade/refurbishing to the Community Center [aka Stables]
$2500 for repairs to Maikoiko Street Park.
$10K for painting/repairs to roof of

7 cabana's $3025
BBQ pit area $864
Long House $1921
Pool Bldg $1921 [included in the 'minor repair' budget]
Maint Building. $2291

The meeting was adjourned at 715P. Next meeting of the Finance Committee: Thursday, September 1, 2011 @ 6P, Honu Street Facility.

Please plan to be at the next Finance Committee meeting as the 'operation' budget will be discussed and it is from this budget the annual 'assessment' is decided upon for recommendation to the Board of Directors. It is where we will see the projected costs of such items as 'employee' costs -- with a new 'job description' plan in mind and the clanging sound of the oft repeated castigation of the former Board -- because employee costs were so high -- ringing with deep resonance and noticeable echoes we'll get our first glimpse into the 'management' of the finances for the budget year coming up.

Friday, August 19, 2011

Hawaiian Shores -- August Architect Comm Interim Recap

The Architect Committee met last evening for a 'special' meeting to review their individual work in articulating the changes to CCR's # 1, 3, 7 and 19 to reflect their desired changes to the procedure preferred in Design Review for new construction and land clearing within the community. Also, they needed to meet and 'approve' a request by a member to erect a 'temporary' structure to garage his vehicle.

This was an interesting discussion. Interesting to witness as a non committee member, knowing how these same requests have been handled in the past. Interesting too, to find out that though there is no 'approved' change to the CCR's by membership yet, this member basically appealed to the Architect Committee for permission to put up what amounts to a metal gazebo on his driveway. It will be used not only to shelter his vehicle but to entertain with BBQ's from time to time.

While the act to seek permission is commendable there are some interesting aspects to this that did not enter into the discussion. The current CCR's require a 2 car carport or garage with a driveway from the street to the structure. Now, whether you use the carport/garage to store the two vehicles is up to you so long as they are not vehicles being worked on. Last night the statement was made by the Chair of the committee the member was unable to park both of his vehicles in his two car structure due to inadequate space. One could concede the structure is too small although typically a two car structure has typical dimensions and unless the vehicles are somehow distorted in size due to after factory alterations [height for instance] then the structure should be sufficient. UNLESS of course, like most people, the structure is used for storage! Again, that is fine. Park your car on your property outside the carport/garage. However, it has historically been stated that to add a carport structure that in any way impedes the permitted 2 vehicle structure with a temporary structure is a 'no-no'. Additionally, to 'close in' the carport or garage in a fixed permanent fashion without providing the required 2 car structure with the driveway leading to it is a 'no-no'.

Is this what happened at the meeting? Did they permit a temporary structure to be raised for the expressed purpose of housing a vehicle that impedes access to the 2 car structure? Don't know. Didn't sound like it. Here are a couple of questions: Is a structure 'temporary' when bolted to cement? Is it raised and razed or raised and left standing? Does the County Code define 'temporary'? Does it allow for temporary structures being built for the purpose of residence while building a new residence on the same property and then must be demolished prior to 'final permitting'? The CCR's does require that all government regulations be observed prior to permission from the Arch Committee. Then again, currently, the CCR's actually refer to 'permanent' structures being built on the property and frankly those are usually relative to 'single family' dwelling. If you wanted to put a metal shed in your yard for storage you do not need permission from the Association to do so. Likewise, if you want to erect what amounts to shade and shelter for your vehicle or a BBQ area you do not need permission from the Association. If you need a permit that is between the owner and the county not the Association. The 'big government' mentality of policing individual 'rights' is beginning to creep into the process. Interestingly, while gracious to the member for bringing it to the committee for approval it was obvious they were profoundly lacking direction and though they'd spared no effort in trying to determine where their responsibility was defined within the CCR's or even in compliance with County Code, they could not specifically justify the need to review. They did however go out on a limb of precedence in saying they would provide the requisite two signatures for the application to give the member permission. The Chair was not comfortable being one of those signatures....the voice in the back of his mind was speaking to him wisely.

The man needed no permission to put this up. It is his property. He violates no CCR's. He may be in violation of County Code, but again, that is between he and the building inspector. The Committee, who clearly wants the big government say, should have thanked him for submission but let him know he did not need their permission to do what he wanted to do UNLESS of course, it did impede the carport/garage structure which would prevent his being able to park 2 cars in that structure. It did not sound as though that was the case.

Moving on to the other business of the meeting. You should be aware there is some issue with the rewrite of #3 as it is being proposed to the Board. They are suggesting that the owner with a desire to build a home must submit preliminary renderings for their initial review [suggested change to CCR#1] and #3 is changing to allow the committee 45 days to review those. Moving on to the second 'review' the 'permit review' if the committee fails to COMMENCE a review of the plans within the requisite 45 days the owner may proceed. How is 'commence' going to be interpreted by HSCA down the road? When they receive the copies of the permitted documents and the office staff stamps 'received' on them? When they notify the member as to the date of their review? It is dangerous to use such subjective, even ambiguous, language in legal documents without clearly defining the intent/application/definition.

The Neighbor Notification process is still being pushed forward which is a manifest waste of HSCA assets. Prescribing a mandatory process simply to force the 'opportunity' for neighbors to commune with each other is AGAIN a big government mandate. While they dropped the idea of neighbor input because it clearly inferred the input would have some effect on the 'outcome' or 'decision' of the committee to approve/disapprove, they still require the process. Why? This should be clearly discussed by all members at the Board meeting.

The rest of the rewrite is well done and should be approved easily by the Board with subsequent consensus from members during a vote.

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Hawaiian Shores -- August Board Meeting Recap


WATCHDOG © 2011

Aloha Watchdog Readers,

The meeting started on time and with a full cast of directors. The following was discussed:

Announcements: Ocean Park Blessing rescheduled from August 19th at 9A to August 20th at ? [tba]; Office will be closed on Tuesday, August 23rd because Helco will be doing work and power will be off for part of the day. The office staff will be making their trip to CostCo. Effective this meeting the office will be close monthly the last Tuesday of the month.

Approval of Minutes: Discussion ensued because not all packets were received via mail by all directors. The Minutes were approved as is.
Reports:

Director of Ops Mgt: ~ 126 water meters installed in 16 days working 6 hours per day. 8 Meters unable to install because immediate determination of 'corporation' location could not be done. 3 meters were not installed because 1]Denied access; 2] Cemented area where the meter 'may' go; 3]Area buried further than 3.5 feet below the surface, altered by owner. A large leak was discovered and remedied by owner. Pool furniture approved for purchase. Chicken tracking is effectively being done but chicken eradication is not. Zero chickens removed in the month of July. With great jocularity the majority of the Board listened and responded to the fowl stories as regaled by the Director of Ops/Mgt -- all absent the 'member' who insisted on this being moved to 'priority'. Imagine, two months ago the Board felt this so important [squeaky wheel thing again] they made much ado about it but now that the money has been paid to the staff to try and comply it became a moment of levity for the Board. HOWEVER, let it not escape your attention that the 'president' advised the Dir. of Ops/Mgt she was 'SANCTIONED' to go into someone's private property to remove 'chickens' be they owned or 'feral' so long as owners have been advised in writing they needed to comply with the CCR's. Theft of your property from your property has been SANCTIONED by the president of the Board without nary a single director objecting to that sanction.
Finance Commitee Report:

The Chair of the committee invited anyone with capital improvement suggestions to attend the next Finance Committee meeting. Referencing the pool upgrade, the suggestions were made to not replace the coping but to fix them; to not resurface the pool but to coat it; to paint the bottom a dark color. [Though a question about the pool is on the Survey -- the discussion has been a monthly discussion and as it continues it seems more and more effort is being put into resolving the long standing issues.] A little research on the effect a dark color has on the water temperature of the pool will hopefully be intelligently performed. There is solid debate on the topic. The Chair of the Finance Committee - the original promoter of 'outsourcing' work -- was approved to have a paint bid put in for the fencing, the cabanas and other surfaces needing paint. This cost bid will be discussed at the upcoming Finance Committee Meeting.

Infrastructure Committee Report:

Chief among the topics was the issue of the costs and placement of speed bumps vs speed humps. A signature gathering petition was handed out to those who were inclined to walk them about their community to determine if the majority of the homeowners wanted speed bumps/humps put on their street. Currently the following street names have been tossed in the discussion pool for speed management: Papio, Coastal Parkway, Opae and Anae. Also discussed was the trip made to the Mai iko o iko street park. {Most of us know the street by its name "Maikoiko Street".} The discussion was about the status of the timber in the roofing of the pavillion.

By Laws/Policy:

No meeting due to lack of quorum.

Community Relations Report:

Mostly discussion on Swap Meet/Ocean Park Blessing. The president invited the co-chair to give a report. The Chair was seated 3 seats away.

Architect Commitee Report:

The report mirrors nearly perfectly the recap of that meeting on this blog.

Ocean Park Committee Report:

Discussed under the Community Relations section.

Old Business:

Tenting done on the Stables
Letter to be sent requesting reduction to tax status for the Park TMK[s?] Will be sent after pictures taken at the Ocean Park blessing. Should be effective for the fiscal year 2013.
Solar System bid not yet in for pool filtration power system.
The director who sits on the Board and who speaks fluent Japanese offered and was approved to translate some of the materials in the outgoing mid year [which should be retitled to LATE year packet. As August is only 3 months from the end of the fiscal year and 4 months from the end of the election year] packet from English to Japanese for a fee. The approval was $100.00. [To remain clear of suspicion someone on the Board should have noted --for the record --the Board was in agreement with the obvious conflict of interest. Though the State's Statutes recognizes a motion passing as substantive proof the directors waived concern for conflict sometimes just to maintain the appearances of no cronyism a statement for the record should be noted. Additionally, some of the very individuals who serve on the Board now regularly inquired of the previous boards whether there was a 'bid' solicited from at least 3 companies before simply approving one under discussion. In this case, HSCA has historically used a translation service that would have been able to quickly provided the costs for translation as a comparative bid. None was offered.]
Status of the RFP letters sent and response time allowance.
Status of the Board's decision to replace our current long time Director of Ops/Mgt with someone else for nearly the same price to do half of the work is coming to fruition. Candidates for the position will begin interviewing soon. That cost cutting savings will be manifest to the membership with the financials thereafter.

There was discussion of a Special Meeting later this month. so check the calendar for that schedule. Or back here. Watchdog will try and provide as much notice as possible.

The meeting was adjourned to Executive Session.

Hawaiian Shores -- Community Relations Recap

It's on! It's off! It's discussion; it's a meeting. It's call the Chair to the table to conduct meeting and watch the Chair take notes while the president [who arrived at 0914] conduct the pre-meeting and then continued on to conduct the actual meeting.

So, what, you may ask, was accomplished during the twenty minute committee meeting? [Quorum was reached at 0933]

First, at 0914 when the 'discussion' phase of the meeting began when the president informed the Chair that an email reminder to the various members of the committee might be productive in reminding them of the meeting. -- Of course, maturity and a true sense of commitment would find each committee member using their personal calendar to note the monthly meetings. The meeting was scheduled for the same day each month and the same time of day each month since it's first meeting in May. -- Sadly, besides the co chair and the president [who arrives late to nearly every committee meeting] there are only two 'non committee members' who consistently show up for the purpose of the meeting at the early hour despite the lackadaisical attitude non committee members have grown accustomed to of the committee members.

With a couple of phone calls to try and get at least one more person to attend to round out quorum [one member was out walking her dog; the other at home making leis] by 0933 quorum was finally established and a 'formal' meeting could be called to order. It was done so, but not by the Chair. The following business was discussed:

Ocean Park blessing: Though the Board has STILL NOT formally adopted the name of the park [Papio Ocean Park] and the fact that it is still being referred to as the 'Ocean Park' the blessing of the Park takes place sort of but not absolutely sure on Saturday August 20th. When? Your guess is as good as anyone's at the meeting. Specific time will be forthcoming. There will be pastries, juice, perhaps some shelter from the rain.
Dog Park: More definitive discussion was done. Now we are looking at 'waivers' to be signed, quarterly fees to be paid, [one fee for members; another fee for non members] shot record from Veterinarian and perhaps a certificate that your dog has attended some obedience course. The fee would get you a pass into the park via a possible gate/combination lock security mechanism. The fee would need to be renewed quarterly when the office could verify the updated records reflecting shots, obedience training, change combo on the gate, etc.
Swap Meet report: The event was held with 8 vendors who collectively felt inclined to 'donate' around $35 dollars for their good fortune. [The suggested donation price was $10] The 'feedback'? Interest was shown in having another meet within 2 weeks to 2 months hence. The president suggested twice a year. The Co-Chair acquiesced from her excited suggestion of 2 months to the president's suggestion of a biannual event. No vote was taken, no consensus attempted, just acquiescence.
Pool Membership: This is on the survey
Jazz Concert: The Chair has offered to provide entertainment to raise funds. Tentatively scheduled for November. [During the Board meeting the president suggested those funds could be used for the purchase of 8 lounge chairs for the pool.]

It appears the days of everyone having their binders, their marching orders, their motions all written out for them and designated as to who will move what are all gone. We have several committees each with their own chair and the ONLY committee that does not succumb to the president's usurpation of the chair is the Architect Committee. The chair of the Finance has the next larger control of his meetings but even then he winds up losing it if he is not diligent in staying the course. Sadly, part of leading is delegation and encouraging the committee members to take their responsibility seriously. It is tough for Directors who must serve on a committee because they have multiple volunteer responsibilities but the state requires no less than 2 per committee. HSCA's "Code of Conduct" does address the issue of directors being tardy to meetings and not fulfilling their various responsibilities and while it may be harsh to discuss this - it may serve as a reminder to the directors to lead by example to show up and fulfill their respective functions. When non directors see the leadership of directors it may impress them sufficiently to pony up. Just a thought. With two meetings this month unable to happen due to lack of quorum without extraordinary effort made to scare up some participants it speaks poorly to leadership. But then, it comes back to the Chair of the various committees not being able to conduct their respective committee meetings doesn't it?

The meeting was adjourned at 0953. The next meeting of the Community Relations Committee is Saturday, September 10th at 9A.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Hawaiian Shores --- August Board Meeting Reminder

Aloha Readers,

This Saturday is the next Board meeting. Please look over the Agenda [link provided for you] to find out the topics under discussion. A snippet, the meat of the Agenda, is provided below for your consideration.

If you are interested in any of the topics, would like to speak regarding any or all of the topics please plan to attend. If you share the concerns of some of the members why the Board spent thousands of dollars to 'tent' a building that had been deemed 'unsafe' [not verbatim] by a Board's president -- circa 2005 -- this would be the meeting to inquire as to their plans. If you are one of the members who has expressed a serious concern with the change in the billing for water usage, now each month, to an every 'other' month basis, please plan to attend and ask for the rationale. Some have inquired 'how is this saving me, the member, money? If you are interested in what is on task for upgrade from the Infrastructure Funds [which is specific to 'roads' and 'water system'] then please be there to participate in the discussion.

Now is a great time to jump into the meeting process and begin to watch how your Association and the monies you pay each year will be affected because it is the time of the year for the Budget to be considered. It will begin at the upcoming Finance Committee Meeting but the discussion of the Infrastructure Funds for fiscal year 2011 is part and parcel.

Members are welcome and can participate at the monthly Board meetings.