The blog administrator is not responsible for any blog articles or comments made by team members or blog readers and may or may not agree with any or all articles or comments made by others. Please click on “Disclaimer” in the left-hand column before proceeding further. Articles and/or comments can be signed or anonymous.
Team membership is by invitation only. Invitations to the Team will be extended based on comments a reader has made to articles in this and the linked Bay Colony Club Condo blog. Click on the "Team Blog" link in the left column for detailed explanation and instructions.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Thursday, December 3, 2009
For a clearer view, click on the link in the left column: "Condo-Warning to Europeans".
Friday, September 11, 2009
Our manager, Joanne, has been ordered by President Slota to begin mandatory random drug testing of our employees.
I would like to know who decided to do this. It is a major policy change which should have been discussed and voted on at a public board meeting. And you have to wonder, is this expensive and time consuming process really an attempt to reduce our rampant drug problem, or just another demeaning harassment of our employees by a couple of directors whose life work seems to be to get rid of our own people and bring in contractors.
And who decided to bring in an outside landscape firm to do trimming at the entrance at Rec 3? How was that outside landscape firm chosen? And was the job put out for bid? Is this not the same company that botched the trimming of the trees (also decided without a board vote)? We've already spent $4,300 with them on two jobs. This is almost 20% of what it would cost on an annual basis to hire a full time replacement for the man we're short on the landscape crew.
I also saw a bid for janitorial service to replace our in-house crew. Maybe I'm going senile, but I don't remember voting to do this. This couldn't be another case of certain members of the BOD going off on their own. And again, who chose the company which submitted the bid?
It seems to me that if some of the board members WANTED to create the appearance of corruption and impropriety they couldn't do a better job than they currently are.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Under the terms of the contract there are two areas of savings. First there is a one-time $128,000 “sign-up” bonus for BCC agreeing to a 10 year contract, and second there is a reduction in the monthly rate per unit over the ten years of the contract. Under the terms of the contract with CCG they are entitled to 25% of both the “sign-up” bonus and 25% of the savings for the next ten years.
As Shakespeare said, “ay, there’s the rub”. The payment to CCG for the “sign-up bonus” is not a problem since it will be paid for out of the bonus itself, but since savings don’t generate cash, all the payments due for savings in the out-years, a total of more than $89,000, will have to come from the quarterly maintenance assessments. To my astonishment, this came as a complete surprise to all the other Board members. You have to wonder, did anyone actually read the contract before it was signed?
Now there are two responsible ways to solve this problem. The first is to take the net “sign-up” bonus of $96,000 ($128,000 minus CCG’s 25% or $32,000) and put it in a protected bank account which cannot be used for any purpose but to pay off the future obligation.
The second, and preferred, strategy is to negotiate a discounted, up-front payment to CCG which would extinguish the debt now. Depending on the discount rate used this could be in the $60,000 to $70,000 range and would assure that future Boards can’t raid the bank account for other purposes.
To be completely clear about this, if the Board spends the $96,000 for current expenses or unbudgeted improvements like updating the rec center bathrooms, future homeowner are on the hook for $89,000 in payments over the next ten years.
I’ve polled my fellow Board members for agreement with one of the two approaches and asked that it be placed on the agenda for the September meeting and have heard nothing, which leads me to believe that the Board wants to keep this under wraps and proceed with business as usual. This is just not acceptable.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Thursday, August 13, 2009
The following quote is from BCC accountant Donna Seidenberg’s every monthly Financial Reports' cover letter produced since December 2008. Underlining has been added for emphasis.
“Management has elected to omit substantially all of the disclosures and the statement of cash flows required by generally accepted accounting principles. If the omitted statement of cash flows and the disclosures were included in the financial statements, they might influence the user’s conclusions about the Association’s financial position, results of operation and cash flows. Accordingly, these financial statements are not designed for those who are not informed about such matters. “
In other words, the BCC Board of Directors has acted to keep BCC owners ignorant about what’s happening to their $2 million+ annual maintenance payments. In doing so, they are violating the generally accepted and required accounting standards and the advice of our accountant.
These Financial Reports are available on the BCC Official web site (see link in left column, go to "Resources" then "Documents"). Hard copies also available for pick up in the BCC office.