Oscoda Villages

[PETR]

0sc0da 0bserver wrote:

No what I'm saying is: if your neighbor runs his snowmobile on his grass all winter long and nothing is done about it and you run your snowmobile on on your lawn and get a notice then you are being treated differently for the same activity

Understood, and I know of multiple incidents where much the same thing has happened. This board appears to have a habbit of treating people different based on whether or not they are friends. The rules themselves don't seem to have much bearing on whether or not you get cited for breaking them. It seems that if the BoD doesn't like you, you will be cited. There looks like a pattern of double standards, and this (along with the constant waste of funds and general abuse of power) needs to stop.

Also, it was brought up that we should have some recourse against rules which are created which are in direct contradition to what's best for the residents. The simple answer is, don't follow them. A rule that discriminates against one person and profits others probably cannot be enforced as it is most likely not legal anyway.

The more they push decent people, the more those people are likely to rebel. It's the same mistake that all dictators make. In this case though, we have the ability to vote them out (or even maybe recall them). This needs to happen soon.

These kind of people are not likely to give up power on their own. It has to be removed from them. There are ways of doing this (recall or voting them out). In the final result, it might actually be better to completely desolve the organization.

[0sc0da 0bserver]

Your real big problem then is ... who will step up to do the enforcement?

You will admit that some of the rules are intended to make the villages better for all, so some will have to be enforced.

If you recall or fire the current enforcement who will you put in their place!

Are you willing to step up and tell your neighbor he can't park his snowmobile on his own lawn?

Just a thought

[Seymour1511]

PETR: Please contact me direct at [e-mail]

I'm on the same track as you.

OscOda Observer: PETR makes some excellent points. Let's just work on removing this board and we'll go from there. If no one steps up to make the required changes, then maybe do away altogehter with this HOA. I've concluded that HOA are abusive in nature and really not in the interests of most homeowners anyway. Common sense needs to be restored here, something that is/has been sorely lacking with governance and actions by this BoD.

[Seymour1511]

PETR: I need hard examples of this BoD discriminating against Homeowners in favor of others. In other words, if they are enforcing rules against some but not others, please provide me with EVIDENCE, not rumor or innuendo.

[Seymour1511]

Common sense = If a snowmobile or snowmobiles are parked and visible in an owner's yard and this in and of itself is not causing anyone a problem, i.e. unsightly, or disturbing the peace, then the rule does not need to be enforced. Furthermore, if someone complains about it, they they better have a DAMN good reason, i.e. justification, for why they're complaining or their complaint is null and void and needs to go in the round file. Its that simple. Come on people ---- Common sense needs to prevail here. This BoD, based on why I've experienced and what I've heard from homeowners fed up is not even close to common sense. For christ's sake what harm is a snowmobile parked in a yard causing anyone?

[Concerned resident]

According to the BOD at the homeowners meeting today, only 2% of the homeowners are having any problems with the current lawn service. The BOD did not take bids when they hired this company. Bids were taken by private citizens and the job description was exact same as in office. One was for $190,000.00 and the current company is getting $254,600.00. The BOD will not take new bids, thus shafting the residents. How do you feel about it?

[Concerned resident]

bids were taken the first time they hired them. this is the second contract they didn't take bids.4287

[Concerned resident]

I have no problem with snowmobiles in the villages only to things to think about. Small trees were run down by snowmobiles in my yard. I was almost run down by a snowmobile while walking my dog so if they go slow and stay away from residents walking its fine with me.

[seymour1511]

Concerned resident wrote:

I have no problem with snowmobiles in the villages only to things to think about. Small trees were run down by snowmobiles in my yard. I was almost run down by a snowmobile while walking my dog so if they go slow and stay away from residents walking its fine with me.

Yes, but parking a snowmobile in one's yard and your allegations that snowmobiles ran down snowmobiles in your yard or that you were almost run down while walking your dog are two completely different things. Snowmobiles are not in and of themselves the problem. There are laws against vandalism, trespassing, reckless driving etc. But no one should have a problem with a snowmobile parked in a yard. The two are totally different issues.

[Village resident]

Theresa Robnolte wrote:

Great!!!!! And I was actually thinking of buying a unit or two there. Thanks for the info!!!!!

Just because a few people (and I mean a few) are unhappy doesn't mean this is a bad place to live. Sure, there are rules but if you purchase a home here and didn't read them and now want to break them, who is the ignorant one? I moved here because of alot of the rules. I didn't want to purchase something only to have the neighborhood turn to trash. I am thankful that my neighbor can't leave her trash all over. Out of over 700 residents, you are always going to have a few people that don't want to abide by the rules that they agreed to. I hope the board has enough sense to ignore the comments of the few troublemakers that just want to cause problems. I think they have a thankless job and are doing a fine job. Thanks.

[Concerned resident]

We have been very happy for 4 years. Then things changed rules are only rules, they can be interpreted differently by some, to benefit one and not others. when the bod breaks their own rules or laws then people should get upset. The bod is not a judge and jury. its only a board . secondly
If you move here just to have rules are you saying that all Michigan is a junk yard if you don't have a neighbor hood assn. some of us have pride and respect for our residents. we don't need a mom to tell us what we should do.

[seymour1511]

Village resident wrote:

<quoted text>
Just because a few people (and I mean a few) are unhappy

Village Resident: Apparently you have no clue how abusive this board has been to good decent homeowners. Another thing, its not enforcement of the rules that at issue, it is how this board has used certain rules to achieve their own selfish ends and how they use the rules to fuel their little ego trips. Its also not about a "few" unhappy homeowners. Its about ALOT of unhappy homeowners. I don't have a problem with common sense approach to enforcement of certain rules that need to be enforced for the good of the majority of the homeowners. However that has largely not been the case but rather a case of an incompetent BoD enforcing their own will and aims to achieve their own ends. That is going to stop! This BoD needs to be replaced. Whether it be referendum or court action, I am committed to seeing it done. The same goes for the two paid staff who apparently have forgotten who they are working for and why! The BoD and the paid office staff are not free to interpret the bylaws and make rules in any manner than what is written in the governing documents and was intended by the drafters. You totally miss the point their Village Resident. Bury your head in the sand some more!

[Just Another Voice]

As regards the office staff, They were hired by and take their direction from the Board. Just a couple of working folks who need jobs.
I'm all for replacement of certain board members. But, you can't replace them if qualified candidates don't run for office. In the last election two new people ran and one of them won while an incumbant, who should not have been, was re-elected. Where were you then?

[Concerned resident]

dear seynour 1151 well at the meeting this weekend it was brought up that the lawn co. is getting for this year $42,000 from what they said he got in 2009 Only some resident got bids for aprox.$60,000 less this didn't seem to mater as the board said they are not legal bids as the didn't get them. they were estimated from the list of duties that are posted in the office. This they refused to even check on. and the contract was for 3 years .with more money each year.this proves they are not working for our best interest

[PETR]

Concerned resident wrote:

dear seynour 1151 well at the meeting this weekend it was brought up that the lawn co. is getting for this year $42,000 from what they said he got in 2009 Only some resident got bids for aprox.$60,000 less this didn't seem to mater as the board said they are not legal bids as the didn't get them. they were estimated from the list of duties that are posted in the office. This they refused to even check on. and the contract was for 3 years .with more money each year.this proves they are not working for our best interest

Seems like the one who judged you as clueless should check the financial statements that are available at the office and do a little homework as you obviously did.

I liked it better when Aspen was in charge and the ACC and the board was used only to settle disagreements between neighbors. Some of the rules now seem to be nit-picky like removing a dead bush without permission.

At the meeting it was announced that the "No Mow List" is now the "No Maintenance List". That means that if you don't want the yard service to cut your grass they also don't have to pick up your leaves or spread fertilizer, which are other jobs. Seems to me that the only thing accomplished was to give the yard service another excuse to not do their job or be selective about who they serve.

[seymour1511]

PETR wrote:

<quoted text>
Seems like the one who judged you as clueless should check the financial statements that are available at the office and do a little homework as you obviously did.
I liked it better when Aspen was in charge and the ACC and the board was used only to settle disagreements between neighbors. Some of the rules now seem to be nit-picky like removing a dead bush without permission.
At the meeting it was announced that the "No Mow List" is now the "No Maintenance List". That means that if you don't want the yard service to cut your grass they also don't have to pick up your leaves or spread fertilizer, which are other jobs. Seems to me that the only thing accomplished was to give the yard service another excuse to not do their job or be selective about who they serve.

PETR: Please contact me direct at [e-mail] also, if you'd like to be notified by email whenever a new response is entered here, adjust your settings.

[seymour1511]

Just Another Voice wrote:

As regards the office staff, They were hired by and take their direction from the Board. Just a couple of working folks who need jobs.
I'm all for replacement of certain board members. But, you can't replace them if qualified candidates don't run for office. In the last election two new people ran and one of them won while an incumbant, who should not have been, was re-elected. Where were you then?

The two paid office staff are very highly paid, in the upper tier for Iosco county / NE Michigan. Information I have is that their wages, salaries & benefits are in excess of $70,000/year. I think this expense is one we, as homeowners, can do without or reduce it substantially. When Aspen ran it, one person handled the entire workload!

[seymour1511]

Just Another Voice wrote:

As regards the office staff, They were hired by and take their direction from the Board. Just a couple of working folks who need jobs.
I'm all for replacement of certain board members. But, you can't replace them if qualified candidates don't run for office. In the last election two new people ran and one of them won while an incumbant, who should not have been, was re-elected. Where were you then?

They may take their direction from the board, but in any case, their wages are too high and we can do without it. I've been in the office and know how much work they actually do there. Furthermore,they both have private offices and there is NO written job description for either of them. Do the homeowners REALLY need this expense? Do the homeowners REALLY need to fund the kind of office building we have? Clearly not!

[seymour1511]

Concerned resident wrote:

dear seynour 1151 well at the meeting this weekend it was brought up that the lawn co. is getting for this year $42,000 from what they said he got in 2009 Only some resident got bids for aprox.$60,000 less this didn't seem to mater as the board said they are not legal bids as the didn't get them. they were estimated from the list of duties that are posted in the office. This they refused to even check on. and the contract was for 3 years .with more money each year.this proves they are not working for our best interest

Interesting. So the Board claims that they never recv'd the "other" lawn care service bids huh? I'd like to know who submitted these other bids and what they have to say about it. The issue over the quality (or lack of) lawn service, the increased expense, the bids and the bids the BoD claims they did not receive should be investigated! The HOA is a non-profit corporation and ALL records (financial or otherwise, even membership rosters) of the HOA must be made available to the members upon request. This is a rule of not only the MI Non profit Corporation Act, but the MI Condominium Act and the Villages of Oscoda Homeowners Assn. bylaws.

[seymour1511]

Concerned resident wrote:

bids were taken the first time they hired them. this is the second contract they didn't take bids.4287

By this, one can only conclude a likelihood of at least a conflict of interest in the bid process and awarding of the lawn service contract. If this alone isn't reason for the members to start asking questions of this board and demanding answers I don't know what is. Seems to me this board thinks they can do whatever the please and to hell with the members. Dictorship? I think so. Time for an investigation. I'll bet this board will obstruct any member who demands to see records and begins questioning board members on their actions or what they know about this matter.