FREE ESPRIT!
👻 FREE Esprit from the EERIE SPIRIT!
THIS IS NOT OFFICIAL ESPRIT HOA COMMUNICATION! ON THE CONTRARY ...
Happy Halloween too, there are many witches to brew ... 😈
On September 17, 2021 a request for Esprit owners' email addresses was submitted to the management company and to this date that list was not received. So our group of concerned homeowners, are creating this blog to be able to communicate with fellow members and residents.
- Question the special assessment of $185 at the next board meeting, it was assessed as a collective punishment and warning to never dare to do another recall.
- Say NO to the restrictive 14 page rule and mounting legal fees!
- HAVE THE BOARD POST THE UNWRITTEN RULE OF THE COLOR PARKING TAGS, that was used to tow cars.
- Vote for transparency!
- Elect at least 1 of the only 24 full time resident owners to the Board!
If you were one of the 38 attendees of the last HOA board meeting on Wednesday 9.22. 2021 you know that 2 board members were appointed who are NOT the ones recommended by the petitioners of the recall. Little was said about them before their appointment, one apparently lives on the premises full time and has bought very recently.
Perhaps 5 minutes into their appointment, these 2 new board members, together with Jeff, the board member appointed this summer and closing on the sale of his condo 2 days after the meeting, with the 3 of them making up the majority of the board, proceeded to be part of the unanimous vote to approve a $185 special assessment.
Just how much thinking did these 5 have to do before unanimously voing or how much following occurred here, once the motion was made? The words “special assessment” were nowhere on the Agenda. There was zero discussion between the motion made and the unanimous approval.
The special assessment, totaling 185x120=22,200 was snuck in between agenda items New Business - Budget, Reserves and Balconies, but was meant as reimbursement for miscellaneous attorneys' fees. The special recall meeting, originally claimed to cost $12,000, later only $5,000 was also stated to be the cause, together with the$7-9000 legal fees already spent on a board member's legal defense in a private matter.
At least one board member knew about the recall petition being canceled by 9/26 yett more legal fees were spent and a mailing was sent out to shame petitioners, who were in fact gave the board a chance to improve by appointing former experienced board members to the vacancies.
Interestingly, a capital improvement, not mentioned in any of the previous meetings' minutes, namely the building of 12 carports at $48,000 didn't require a special assessment, the funds in the reserves would be sufficient to cover the cost, per the unanimous vote of the board. This topic, preceding the special assessment, also received no thoughtful discussion or debating the pros and cons with the new appointees.
Are these board members independent thinkers, are they meeting in spite of the open meeting act between the meetings? At least one executive hearing that we know took place, was not properly noticed, in violation of the CA Civil Code. The open meeting act is designed for the membership to observe the board in action and know who to vote for or not at the next election.
Lastly, the board refused to answer the simplest questions of the homeowners at the open forum, claiming that the 3 minutes were only for comments. Board members don't show their faces in the Zoom meeting, with the exception of one new appointee. The meeting was by the manager, and not the President. Several owners mentioned dissatisfaction of this fact in their comments. The Board disregarded this and continued to be hidden..
Our group of about 20 members are of the opinion that we need to start fresh in February, at the next annual membership meeting and election. Let the members decide through their votes if they are happy with the 2 current board members (Louise Bleier and one of the new appointees) or want to see new volunteer directors, willing to commit to more transparency, more respectful treatment of members and better communication.
Please send your resume if you are willing to run for one of the 3 or 5 open seats when time comes and respond if you wish to join this group in our request for the board's resignation as of the day of the election, allowing the members to express their opinion regarding the past and the future.
This is the letter that I sent to the Esprit HOA board of directors. To date, I have had no response from them or the HOA manager, Cindy Anderson.
ReplyDeleteDear Esprit HOA Board Members,
On July 7, 2021, at approximately 2:00 PM, Cindy Anderson of Maryellen Hill & Associates attempted to have
one of my vehicles removed from the property not once, but twice, even though it was displaying the proper
red permit to allow me to park it under covered parking. Because of this intentional negligence and harassment
on the part of Cindy Anderson it was necessary that I summon the Palm Springs Police Department to prevent
the unlawful removal of my vehicle. Upon arrival the first time Officer Ruiz determined that the Rules and
Regulations of the Esprit HOA did not accurately describe which perking permit was to be used for which
parking spaces. Because of this he ordered the towing company to release my vehicle. An employee of Cindy’s,
a woman named Shelly, was there to authorize the towing of my vehicle. I have a video taken by cell phone
which shows my wife holding up the red permit retrieved from the vehicle and Shelly can be heard on video
saying that “It’s the wrong color”. When I asked her what was the proper color to allow covered parking she
stated “Blue”.
At approximately 5:00 PM on the same day Cindy and Shelly returned to the complex and summoned Dave’s
Towing to again attempt to remove my vehicle. Once again, the police were called and upon arrival Officer
Reynosa determined that my vehicle was properly permitted and legally parked under covered parking. Cindy
admitted to the officer that she did not check the permit herself before authorizing the tow truck to remove
my vehicle. When the officer asked if my vehicle had the proper permit to park under cover, she was forced to
answer that it was parked legally. The officer then instructed the tow company to release my vehicle again.
It is important to note that California HOA law states that an owner, or HOA representative, must give 96
hours’ notice before removing a vehicle from private property. This notice was not given to me by Cindy
Anderson or any of her employees. Cindy knows where I live, what my phone number and email address are,
and could have simply contacted me to discuss this alleged problem. She failed to do so and so failed in her
fiduciary duty as the Esprit HOA manager.
On July 15, 2021, I received notice that I am being accused of parking violations and am to have a Board
Hearing concerning this unjust accusation on July 26, 2021.
Frankly, I have grown tired of this insistent, intentional harassment by the board. I have my suspicions as to
what is motivating Cindy to act in such a hostile, childish manner and I would be happy to discuss those
suspicions with each of you privately.
Please refer to the attached police reports and what each individual police officer had to say about Cindy’s
conduct on that day. Then I would beg you to ask yourself, “What is motivating this woman to single out a
resident owner over such petty, unproductive BS?” I think a few of you know the answer to that question.
I look forward to having the truth of this intentional harassment exposed on July 26th. Please also remember
that should this harassment continue to escalate I shall use all legal remedies available to me to stop it. And, if
successful, it is the Esprit HOA who will foot that bill, not Cindy Anderson.
Sincerely,
Eric L. Barnett
It is clear that the existing board and HOA manager lack basic conflict resolution skill sets. Homeowners should never be treated like a "problem" most conflicts involve a Misunderstanding and or a miscommunication. Basic customer service, would require the a clear restatement of the issues, by said Property manger, that the homeowner presents and what can be done to resolve said conflict and what the property management company and the board legally can and should do, re: the laws.
ReplyDeleteIt feels as if the combative and obstructive behavior to homeowners is more reactionary and therefore ineffective, inefficeint and just plain DRACONIAN. The legal issues that you bring up here are serious and important and should have been resolved, by the board after ready and Police report regarding the illegal towing of the cars. Their support of the property management over homeowners is alarming. CONFLICT RESOLUTION SKILLL COMPLETELY MISSING, UNREASONABLE, and should be resolved without constant increase in HOA assessments and fines. I fear this is not going to be resolved until the Barnetts legal issues are proven and resolved and any increase of cost to HOA Homeowners should not be approve without the full HOA Homeowners consent. The fact that these issues have been going on for so very long speaks volumes about the inability of the previous and current boards lack of responsibilities. The DRACONIAN response's are the problem the lack of conflict resolution by the board neglects and in reality shifts responsibility to the Property management company. It all feels very disruptive to HOMEOWNERS daily lives and financial investment! It is no longer a safe community to live in. This I am sure is very public, this cannot be kept from other and possibly even news reporters should this get out and cost us all dearly. Simple because this board lacks the basic conflict resolution skills. I fear for us all and have watched the board maneuver support of PMC, over homeowners. EVERYONE OF US HOMEOWNERS SHOULD BE IN FAVOR OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION, PRIOR TO SEEK LEGAL REMEDIES AGAINST HOMEOWNERS, it's all so absurd and unnecessary.