MINUTES OF THE MONTHLY BOARD MEETING

SECTOR 2A AT SNOHOMISH CASCADE ASSOCIATION

7:00 PM WEDNESDAY  MARCH 9, 2005

 

CALL TO ORDER / APPROVAL OF MINUTES

  1. Tim Rizzo called the meeting to order at 7:08 pm.  Present were board members Tim Rizzo, Amy Key, Steve Yandl, Betty Malowney, John Patterson, Bill Steenis and chairman of the maintenance committee, Bill Malowney.
  2. Steve Yandl informed the group that no corrections had been made to the minutes as presented on the web site and distributed to the group.  He asked to waive a formal reading and there were no objections.  Bill Steenis moved to accept the February minutes, John Patterson seconded and the motion carried 6 – 0.
ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL COMMITTEE ISSUES

  1. Amy Key had several paint color requests that had been sent to our P.O. box.  She passed them along to committee members, Bill and Betty Malowney who will review with chairman Les Ostermeir and get a response to the requesting homeowners.
  2. As far as anyone present at the meeting was aware, the Architectural Control Committee has never received the promised updated letter of approval for the Kaufer’s business which now involves more than two Costco deliveries per month which the original approval from Leavitt was contingent upon.
MAINTENANCE COMMITTEE REPORT

  1. Bill Malowney reported that he had investigated the possibility of using a new rubber mulch material instead of bark mulch to get something closer to permanent.  This would push cost from the current $23 per yard to $165 per yard and the mulch is susceptible to theft.  As a long term investment in the common areas it is worth keeping in mind but the required current investment is simply too steep.
  2. Bill reported that he had reviewed the proposed contract from Skinner landscaping and would recommend that we accept with a few changes, provided Skinner agrees to the changes.  There were some small changes regarding some new areas incorporated into what is considered common areas but the main difference between proposed contract and the existing contract is that the proposed contract is for a 12 month period rather than the 24 month contract we’ve been working with.  Bill suggested we stick with the longer time span but allow Skinner to incorporate a percentage increase (with decided upon limits) for the second 12 months of the contract.
  3. John Patterson raised a number of questions regarding the contract language in specific sections, chiefly those dealing with items that would be considered outside the scope of the basic contract and require added expense on our part.  The language was in fact mostly the same as used in the past contract and Bill was able to explain what the situations would be where we would need to spend extra.  Bill will confirm what is meant by “power spraying of trees” as it would be considered an off contract extra item but otherwise the group appears satisfied with the contract language.
  4. Bill will share the board’s concerns with Skinner, primarily the length, get any adjustments to the proposal and make a recommendation for a vote at the April meeting.
  5. Responding to a question, Bill updated the group on the Starbucks grant request for baseball field / park improvements.  He has the application forms but did not feel he could put together a sufficient proposal prior to the deadline this year (25th of the month) so he planned to shoot for next year.  Several in the group suggested that he attempt a very limited proposal for this year.  Proposing an improvement for an amount much less than the maximum would increase the odds of receiving the grant and even if the proposal wasn’t approved it would provide an opportunity to inquire and learn what it might take to have a successful proposal next year.  Bill agreed to give it a try this year.  Long term the group would like to see decent bleachers and perhaps a dugout area for players or an extension of fence to corral baseballs going out of play.
TREASURER’S REPORTS

  1. Amy Key reported to the group that she has mailed out late notices to the approximately two dozen homeowners who had not paid the annual assessment by March 2.
  2. Amy had earlier provided financial reports to the group as an Excel file with a separate worksheet for each report.  Those worksheets should be considered part of these minutes.
  3. Amy has consulted with Mr. Duncan (CPA who does our annual audit) to verify his requirements for documents and check on some procedural issues.  His position is that Amy, having attended board meetings, can approve payment of invoices without secondary approval so long as someone else is signing the checks that she prints to pay those invoices.  He also suggested that making photocopies of checks and invoices was an unnecessary redundancy.
  4. The reports are now on an accrual basis and since the invoices for 2005 dues were dated in December 2004, very little income will actually be reported in 2005.  Amy will be checking with Mr. Duncan regarding the options for a one time correction to allow showing the income in the year the expenses it offsets occur and spreading it out evenly over 12 months.
  5. Tim Rizzo asked Amy to provide a check reconciliation report with the other reports for us to review at board meetings.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS

  1. Steve Yandl pointed out that we have a request to speed up the decision process on allowed roofing materials because some homeowners are on the verge of needing to replace existing roofing.  The suggestion was made that we take a close look at what was recently approved by Mill Creek and adopt their policy or adopt it with slight modification.  It was decided that Betty Malowney would be the “point person” to put together a committee, review options for roof replacements and, if necessary, prepare an amended CC&R for the membership to vote on and get recorded.  Steve Yandl moved that Betty take on this task, Amy Key seconded and the motion passed 6 – 0.
  2. The home business issue was discussed again.  It was noted that those who don’t have the required approval may not really know what information should be provided in any request top obtain approval.  To that end, a form request sample will be placed in the next newsletter.
  3. It was agreed that Les Ostermeir should write a letter to Lillian Kaufer and demand a response where she details the new scope of activity of her business.  Specifically, the board needs to know the frequency of business related deliveries, the types of vehicles making the deliveries and the times and duration of stay for those deliveries.  There needs to be a deadline required for the response and it needs to be something less than a month.
BUDGET RATIFICATION AND PROXY RESULTS

  1. Of the 222 homeowners who paid by March 1 making them members in good standing and authorized to vote, 162 sent in ballots.
  2. The budget was ratified with 151 yes votes and 11 no votes.
  3. There were 100 proxy awards.  There were 85 given to the board of directors, 6 to Steve Yandl, 4 to Betty Malowney, 2 to John Patterson, 2 to Jen Stout and 1 to Tim Rizzo.
ANNUAL SPRING MEETING

  1. Steve Yandl inquired to make sure all current board members intended on running again in May 2005.  Several expressed an interest in dropping out if other viable candidates express an interest but nobody is planning to quit.
  2. Steve also reported that he would be advertising for new candidates for that election in the next newsletter.  Ballots will be mailed out by the first of May and will need to be received or postmarked at the registered office by the annual meeting on May 11.  Hopefully we’re able to get space at Totem Falls for that meeting.
YARD OF MERIT

  1. Bill Steenis presented an eleven item list acquired from Skinners that has criteria used by the landscaper’s association to evaluate achievement.  Bill suggested that we adopt a similar list of criteria to determine yards of merit.
  2. Some small changes in wording to make a few items clearer were suggested as well as paring the list down to ten criteria by dropping the final overview category.
  3. Bill Malowney will get four or five “Gold Creek 2a yard of merit” signs made up so we can kick the program off once the details are ironed out.
  4. The suggestion was made that it might be more practical to make the awards on a quarterly basis rather than have multiple awards each and every month.  Final decision on frequency of award and the actual number of awards was not made at this meeting.
  5. Steve Yandl will get the updated list from Bill Steenis to place in the newsletter along with a call for volunteers to do the scoring for the program.  Not only should this bring in some needed help to administer the program, it will be a good gauge of the general community enthusiasm for such a contest.  Bill’s concept is that this will be a positive pull to achieve yard maintenance standards that we’ve, so far, been trying to protect with threats of punitive actions.  Actual details can be worked out after we get feedback and volunteers in response to the April newsletter article.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:39 PM