Last Thursday I braved darkness and rain to hear Dan Brown speak about his book "The Boys in the Boat" at Chimacum High School. A friend from L.A. had sent me the book, a non-fiction account of the U.W's men's rowing crew who won gold in the 1936 Berlin Olympics.
When I felt the book in my hand, a NY Times bestseller for two
years, I thought, "Well, maybe... but nowadays I'm not sure I have the patience to slog through a 400 page book. Perhaps a few pages...". I was still measuring the book's thickness between thumb and forefinger when I opened it...
Maybe you're thinking as I did: Hm, competitive rowing... no thanks!. Resist the thought. Take a look... just a few quick peeks.
That's how I started.... skimming paragraphs, looking for something to grab my attention. But once in, I was quickly hooked and kept doubling back savoring the beautiful, compelling prose. My leap-around strategy made it a quick read too: delightful memories of earlier passages had me turning pages avidly looking for more. By the time I saw the notice that the author was speaking, there was no way I was going to miss it!
Much of the backstory is fascinating: details of Northwest and UW's rivalries in the hard-scrabble thirties, the popularity of competitive rowing, Pocock's famed cedar boats, the events in Berlin. But the setting could have been any sport... badminton, horse shoes, ice curling. It's the people themselves that hold you tight... hook, line, and sinker.
Joe Rantz is the central figure and one of the boys in the boat. He was still a teenager when abandoned by his father and step-mother in the depths of the Depression. One day, battered by misfortune, his father quietly took him aside and told him "We can't make it here, Joe... But, Son," he continued, "the thing of it is, Thula wants you to stay here. I'd stay with you but I can't...". .
In a shattering moment of poignancy, he adds, "Look Son, if there's one thing I've figured out about life, it's if you want to be happy, you have to learn how to be happy on your own". Joe watched them drive away forever. His brothers, visible in the car's back oval window, cried "What about Joe?".
Left to fend for himself in their half-built farm house in Sequim, WA, Joe decided at that moment that even with friends "he would never let himself depend on them.. nor on his family, nor anyone else again, for his sense of who he was. He would survive, and he would do it on his own." He was only 14.
He stayed put in the farm house, harvested berries and mushrooms, poached fish, logged, resold liquor purloined from smugglers... and survived on his own. It was only at his older brother Fred's urging a few years later that he finally left Sequim to join Fred and his family in Seattle.
Once there Joe entered the U.W.; worked part time jobs to pay tuition; studied; got married; and, somehow, along the way, found time to earn a place on U.W.'s rowing crew. After returning from the Olympics, he "slowed down" a bit to finish his chemical engineering degree and begin his career. He spent 36 years working at Boeing.
In 2007, the last year of his life, his daughter met the author at their HOA meeting in Redmond. She approached Dan after the meeting and related details of her Dad's life and wondered if he'd like to meet her Dad to hear more.
Intrigued, Dan met with Joe who by this time had entered a hospice.
Dan recalls asking Joe if he could write about his life. "No," , Joe answered to a crestfallen Dan. "But," after a moment's pause, he continued, "you could write about the boat".
The story of the "boat" and what it meant to the crew is the heart of this wonderful narrative. There were nine young men in the crew. Young men from working class families in the middle of the Depression who took time out to do something extraordinary and then kept on living their lives with the same tenacity. Several became engineers; one a gynecologist; others rose to business management ; and one put himself through law school... eventually arguing and winning a case before the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Depression hadn't stopped them. They had held part-time jobs, completed tough college coursework, excelled at the brutally difficult training that is competitive rowing, and now, unfazed by the ominous backdrop of events in Germany, they were going to take the next step. At the Olympics, in Berlin.
The day of the race, the coach announced their strongest rower, Don Hume, was too ill to compete. The others talked it over and told the coach: we're not just nine guys in a boat; we're a crew... he's vital to the rhythm of the boat. ... If you put him in the boat, Coach, we'll pull him across the line... he can just go along for the ride". The coach answered "Go upstairs and get ready.", shouting after them: "And bring Hume along with you!"
Not only was a feverish Hume, sick for weeks, a major setback, they had been living in a poorly heated police barracks with only cold-water showers. Nights brought noise from parading storm troopers; police cadets drilling; military maneuvers rattling through the streets below; and raucous parties in nearby rooms. Then officials assigned them the toughest rowing lane too so they'd battle the wind and be unable to hear the starter's call.
But it was too late to sabotage their mission or dampen their determination. They were nine young men who had bonded. Nine young men who prevailed against the world's best and remained lifelong friends. Strong men who grew even stronger together. They were the "Boys on the Boat".
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Sunday, October 23, 2016
A Tale of "Locker Rooms"
Ah, Hillary's got a glow now. She's put away that racist, sexist, xenophobic, misogynistic, bully of an opponent; schooled him on "preparing to be President"; soared with a vision of American values; and, yes, like "her good friend Michelle", affirmed the nobility of "going high when they go low".
But, of course, this is politics and there is the need to make public an opponent's egregious lapses; to twist and shape every phrase; corral every stray word; and hammer each misstep into the collective consciousness. So naturally her oration gratuitously soars high with a few words about "The Tape".
It's not just locker room crudity, she clarifies for those who haven't seen and heard the tape dozens of times : "It's who he is". The subtext is presumably he's a sexist, predatory evil-doer not to be trusted in office or anywhere else.
But, if we're to weigh what's said behind closed doors, what is the litmus test for fitness. How does crude or sexist or predatory or homicidal get weighed and measured when it's off the cuff. Here's Hillary on her own, unscripted, talking about another "evil-doer":
http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/clinton-assange-wikileaks-drone/2016/10/04/id/751517/
In fairness, "they" are trying to spin this away suggesting that it's totally apocryphal, a pre-schooler's rumor mongering. I wonder... I really wonder.
But, if it haunts you that it might be true, suggesting "Can't we just drone this guy",, ie, Julian Assange, is hardly suggestive of American values.
If she's President, who else will be in her cross-hairs? Which locker room is the scarier?
But, of course, this is politics and there is the need to make public an opponent's egregious lapses; to twist and shape every phrase; corral every stray word; and hammer each misstep into the collective consciousness. So naturally her oration gratuitously soars high with a few words about "The Tape".
It's not just locker room crudity, she clarifies for those who haven't seen and heard the tape dozens of times : "It's who he is". The subtext is presumably he's a sexist, predatory evil-doer not to be trusted in office or anywhere else.
But, if we're to weigh what's said behind closed doors, what is the litmus test for fitness. How does crude or sexist or predatory or homicidal get weighed and measured when it's off the cuff. Here's Hillary on her own, unscripted, talking about another "evil-doer":
http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/clinton-assange-wikileaks-drone/2016/10/04/id/751517/
In fairness, "they" are trying to spin this away suggesting that it's totally apocryphal, a pre-schooler's rumor mongering. I wonder... I really wonder.
But, if it haunts you that it might be true, suggesting "Can't we just drone this guy",, ie, Julian Assange, is hardly suggestive of American values.
If she's President, who else will be in her cross-hairs? Which locker room is the scarier?
Monday, October 17, 2016
Riding the WAVE of competition...
I've had WAVE Broadband, an Internet provider, for years. A bit pricey but not too bad. Then a few months ago it happened: my mental "radar" seemed to be picking up a small increase in the bill .. "Nah", I reasoned. After all, there had been no notice of an increase from WAVE.
Within a few months, it happened again. Again no notice. It nagged at me...I looked up previous bills. Yep, it was higher. I called WAVE. It WAS an increase and "No, we don't always send out notices of increases".
That was annoying. What if it's a billing error in their favor instead of a stealth increase for instance... what am I supposed to do: trust them to catch it? The seeds of discontent had been watered well before I saw a 3 year $19.95 fixed price from Century Link.
I had endured Century Link's slower DSL offering years ago in their past life incarnation as Qwest. Other than despising their nearly unnavigable website, I had managed well even for full-time employment. So I called and switched back to DSL. Take that, WAVE!
My glee was short-lived. How easily I had crossed the threshold into what suddenly felt like a "third world country" as ISP's go. Rickety infrastructure , communication snafu's, and a slo-mo pace. Kinda like quick-sand but slower.
First there was a paperwork blizzard. I filled a folder with Century Link mail: welcomes, contract legalese, service instructions, etc. Duplicates at times too. Then confusion about install dates. Two installers showed up on different days. There was a problem transferring my phone number.
After getting nowhere with an online chat, I picked up the phone. Ah, a friendly voice. I repeated my name, phone, and address multiple times - three to be exact - during the first shuttle session. All transfers were punctuated with long holds. I was regaled with virtues of CenturyLink's latest bundles, including trying to up-sell me on a faster speed.
The outsourced help line was friendly and their English was only barely accented. They chirped pleasantly through canned scripts. I only had to restate the problem a couple of times. After a couple more calls and slightly choppy seas, my phone number had been "ported" to its new home.
Then the real trouble started. During the first six weeks, there were two half hour outages. Not power outages but slowdown's that were evidenced by frozen screens and a cursor "not moving at all". Kinda like the old 300 BPS in the telephone modem dial-up days. You typed a key and were able to stand and walk around the room before the cursor was ready for the next keystroke.
Even with normalcy restored, my daily news feed that usually took under thirty seconds or so routinely took several minutes now. Google mail frequently whined "Something's not right" over slow transfer speeds. I called the "tech" line and it was "deja vu all over again". Their expert told me to re-try unplugging and restarting. Repeatedly.
Bottom line: I'm back with WAVE. They had wised up with an ad for a phone-internet bundle at $29.95 a month for a full year. So I lept for the phone.
Hah! I had successfully played the field. Ain't competition grand...
Within a few months, it happened again. Again no notice. It nagged at me...I looked up previous bills. Yep, it was higher. I called WAVE. It WAS an increase and "No, we don't always send out notices of increases".
That was annoying. What if it's a billing error in their favor instead of a stealth increase for instance... what am I supposed to do: trust them to catch it? The seeds of discontent had been watered well before I saw a 3 year $19.95 fixed price from Century Link.
I had endured Century Link's slower DSL offering years ago in their past life incarnation as Qwest. Other than despising their nearly unnavigable website, I had managed well even for full-time employment. So I called and switched back to DSL. Take that, WAVE!
My glee was short-lived. How easily I had crossed the threshold into what suddenly felt like a "third world country" as ISP's go. Rickety infrastructure , communication snafu's, and a slo-mo pace. Kinda like quick-sand but slower.
First there was a paperwork blizzard. I filled a folder with Century Link mail: welcomes, contract legalese, service instructions, etc. Duplicates at times too. Then confusion about install dates. Two installers showed up on different days. There was a problem transferring my phone number.
After getting nowhere with an online chat, I picked up the phone. Ah, a friendly voice. I repeated my name, phone, and address multiple times - three to be exact - during the first shuttle session. All transfers were punctuated with long holds. I was regaled with virtues of CenturyLink's latest bundles, including trying to up-sell me on a faster speed.
The outsourced help line was friendly and their English was only barely accented. They chirped pleasantly through canned scripts. I only had to restate the problem a couple of times. After a couple more calls and slightly choppy seas, my phone number had been "ported" to its new home.
Then the real trouble started. During the first six weeks, there were two half hour outages. Not power outages but slowdown's that were evidenced by frozen screens and a cursor "not moving at all". Kinda like the old 300 BPS in the telephone modem dial-up days. You typed a key and were able to stand and walk around the room before the cursor was ready for the next keystroke.
Even with normalcy restored, my daily news feed that usually took under thirty seconds or so routinely took several minutes now. Google mail frequently whined "Something's not right" over slow transfer speeds. I called the "tech" line and it was "deja vu all over again". Their expert told me to re-try unplugging and restarting. Repeatedly.
Bottom line: I'm back with WAVE. They had wised up with an ad for a phone-internet bundle at $29.95 a month for a full year. So I lept for the phone.
Hah! I had successfully played the field. Ain't competition grand...
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
The Danger of Clear-Cuts
The Saturday March 26 edition of the Seattle Times reports another disturbing case of trees being
clear-cut. Read the Times story here.
This one didn't happen in the jungles of Brazil; or Oso, WA; or a billionaire's private island... but on a full acre in the heart of Seattle.
One hundred fifty three trees, mostly big-leaf maples, were illegally cut in a West Seattle green belt and slide zone. But of course now there's an enhanced view of Seattle's skyline for a suspiciously near homeowner.
So a "round up the usual suspects" call went out. Alas it appears the "perp" still has a good chance of skating. Even sadder, there is a significantly increased threat of slides and property damage.
As Seattle's forestry manager points in the news article: "Trees provide wildlife habitat, combat air pollution and help stabilize slopes by managing surface water."
After decades of devastating slides and bluff erosion in Seattle and elsewhere, this should be a cautionary tale for every community, including Cape George.
But permits are required in Cape George to cut trees so there must be some level of due diligence, right? Not so much. Recently, Cape George's manager stated he couldn't recall "ever denying a tree cutting request".
On Sunset Blvd for instance, we've seen trees on banks -- both on the waterfront and elsewhere -- cut with impunity. Trees are protected by Cape George covenants but that matters little if cutting them comes without a speed bump from a manager who can't or won't say "no".
Worse, if someone's trees are ruining your damn view, you may be able to coax Cape George's manager, to issue a "hedge" violation. Then you'll likely hear the chains firing up again... See here for details of a recent case on Sunset Blvd.
But back to concerns of the waterfront bluff erosion that's been worsening the last few years. Take a walk on the beach to see what's afoot... or awash. Watch your step. Lots of tree-fall will block your path. Overhead, some scarily leaning trees hang on by a thread.
Has there been any engagement on these issues by Cape George's Board, or the Environmental Committee? What do experts recommend? Are
replacement plantings even recommended when trees are cut? Will a few sprigs of ground cover mitigate the loss of a tree?
Another concerning incident. Not long ago, several mature trees on the hill by the waterfront park were cut down. You'll see them -- or what's left of them -- on Colman Dr. as it climbs past the park. The stumps provide a visual, if very ugly, reminder.
As I recall, there was no mention in the newsletter about why the trees were cut nor any report of a plan to mitigate water runoff on that very steep site. But why wasn't there a plan?
Within a season or so after the trees were cut there was a washout and damage to the park's entry road after a heavy rainstorm. Was this very clear risk of more water runoff and erosion not foreseen? Was the permit just rubber-stamped? Or do "climate deniers" simply claim that cutting trees on the adjacent hillside had no likely impact...
Sadly, it appears there's a corporate agenda in place. "Cut permits" are a joke. Tree-protecting clauses in Cape George's covenants are as well. They are either ignored or subverted to appease the agenda of those who demand views. If this looks like the rant of a conspiracy theorist, see more evidence here and here.
At the very least, the Board should study and proactively inform the community about the risks. Add some recommendations for preserving bluffs in the official documents; publish regular tips in the
newsletter; toughen the permitting process. Schedule or re-schedule a Cape George University talk by a geologist, arborist, etc.
Business as usual isn't sustainable.
A Tribute to Edmond Blau
It's nearly Passover and it reminds me that it's been just over a year, in Jan 2015, that Ed passed away. I'm not religious and know little about Passover. But I feel an affinity for it -- it's suggestive of hope and resilience and safety. And it fits Ed's life.
Some may remember him. He was a sturdy bear of a guy who lived here on Sunset Blvd for almost ten years. After I moved here, I often saw him walking rapidly up the street, always with a hat, and with what seemed like a strong determination to be somewhere or find something. I wondered who he was...
I finally met him in the park one summer. Almost eighty then but certainly not looking frail, he had a backpack and asked if I knew where Beckett Point was.
I pointed down the beach. Inwardly I shuddered. It's about a five mile round trip hike and looked like an obstacle course of fallen trees due to bluff erosion.
He must have sensed my concern and suddenly we started to talk about other things. In a stream of consciousness kind of a way, he mentioned being Dutch. After hearing my Dutch surname, he spoke a little Dutch which I tried to echo to his amusement.
The Dutch it turns out are very sensitive about the pronunciation of their words. Ed explained they caught many German paratroopers dressed in stolen Dutch uniforms during the invasion because of the difficult hard "k" sound that Germans would mangle. They just couldn't get "Scheveningen" right.
I tried to pronounce it. Nope! Ed, with a slight smile , promised not to "turn me in".
He related he and his mother had been in hiding during the war. Not immediately after the invasion though. Most couldn't believe the horror to come. It came slowly at first then accelerated quickly. They endured horrific prejudice and a relentless set of decrees as the noose tightened.
Signs forbidding Jews appeared overnight. Dismissals from jobs, confiscation of homes, cars, and eventually bicycles were next. Obligatory stars had to be worn on clothing. Then came arrests and call-ups for "relocation". Two years after the invasion, it was time to disappear. Ed was nine years old.
An Uncle in the Dutch resistance helped them go underground in the nick of time. Mass deportations had begun. For three years until Canadian tanks rolled into Utrecht, they stayed hidden passing through a dozen or so safe houses in the process.
After the war, they emigrated to Philadelphia. Ed went on to graduate Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Pennsylvania. He won a full scholarship to West Virginia University medical school.
Ed had planned to become a psychiatrist. But he never attended West Virginia. He had lost confidence that he could do well enough. Maybe post-traumatic stress, common to Holocaust survivors, had set in and robbed him of what he wanted so badly.
He went to the West Coast, got an MSW from Berkeley. But, he never became a social worker either. Instead he was a longshoreman in San Francisco and later L.A. for over thirty years. One who read the New York Times on his lunch hour.
After retirement, he fled California, found Port Townsend, and relocated here. He read, walked, worked out at the gym, and gave to others. A top contributor to Habitat For Humanity, he found their efforts inspirational. "It restores my faith in humanity", he told a news reporter.
Then just a few short years ago Ed was diagnosed with Alzheimers. It crept in slowly. He forgot little things. Then one day in a panic, he couldn't remember where he parked his car. Details of his life in hiding and buried pain were now locked away.
But, he continued reading avidly, including the daily New York Times. He continued to walk and work out. A trainer at Evergreen Fitness was impressed with his strength and tough regimen even as his condition worsened. He still loved music. He smiled at jokes.
In a time where so much seems to be going wrong in the world, Ed's story still resonates. It's hard to imagine the constant fear, the enforced stillness, and isolation of his childhood. Yet he didn't emerge embittered or reclusive.
He didn't give in to the disease either. Even as he battled, he remained the cultured, erudite European gentleman who looked for the best in everyone .
I will always remember him as a fighter, a strong "tough guy" with a heart of gold. He was my friend. I miss him.
Some may remember him. He was a sturdy bear of a guy who lived here on Sunset Blvd for almost ten years. After I moved here, I often saw him walking rapidly up the street, always with a hat, and with what seemed like a strong determination to be somewhere or find something. I wondered who he was...
I finally met him in the park one summer. Almost eighty then but certainly not looking frail, he had a backpack and asked if I knew where Beckett Point was.
I pointed down the beach. Inwardly I shuddered. It's about a five mile round trip hike and looked like an obstacle course of fallen trees due to bluff erosion.
He must have sensed my concern and suddenly we started to talk about other things. In a stream of consciousness kind of a way, he mentioned being Dutch. After hearing my Dutch surname, he spoke a little Dutch which I tried to echo to his amusement.
The Dutch it turns out are very sensitive about the pronunciation of their words. Ed explained they caught many German paratroopers dressed in stolen Dutch uniforms during the invasion because of the difficult hard "k" sound that Germans would mangle. They just couldn't get "Scheveningen" right.
I tried to pronounce it. Nope! Ed, with a slight smile , promised not to "turn me in".
He related he and his mother had been in hiding during the war. Not immediately after the invasion though. Most couldn't believe the horror to come. It came slowly at first then accelerated quickly. They endured horrific prejudice and a relentless set of decrees as the noose tightened.
Signs forbidding Jews appeared overnight. Dismissals from jobs, confiscation of homes, cars, and eventually bicycles were next. Obligatory stars had to be worn on clothing. Then came arrests and call-ups for "relocation". Two years after the invasion, it was time to disappear. Ed was nine years old.
An Uncle in the Dutch resistance helped them go underground in the nick of time. Mass deportations had begun. For three years until Canadian tanks rolled into Utrecht, they stayed hidden passing through a dozen or so safe houses in the process.
After the war, they emigrated to Philadelphia. Ed went on to graduate Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Pennsylvania. He won a full scholarship to West Virginia University medical school.
Ed had planned to become a psychiatrist. But he never attended West Virginia. He had lost confidence that he could do well enough. Maybe post-traumatic stress, common to Holocaust survivors, had set in and robbed him of what he wanted so badly.
He went to the West Coast, got an MSW from Berkeley. But, he never became a social worker either. Instead he was a longshoreman in San Francisco and later L.A. for over thirty years. One who read the New York Times on his lunch hour.
After retirement, he fled California, found Port Townsend, and relocated here. He read, walked, worked out at the gym, and gave to others. A top contributor to Habitat For Humanity, he found their efforts inspirational. "It restores my faith in humanity", he told a news reporter.
Then just a few short years ago Ed was diagnosed with Alzheimers. It crept in slowly. He forgot little things. Then one day in a panic, he couldn't remember where he parked his car. Details of his life in hiding and buried pain were now locked away.
But, he continued reading avidly, including the daily New York Times. He continued to walk and work out. A trainer at Evergreen Fitness was impressed with his strength and tough regimen even as his condition worsened. He still loved music. He smiled at jokes.
In a time where so much seems to be going wrong in the world, Ed's story still resonates. It's hard to imagine the constant fear, the enforced stillness, and isolation of his childhood. Yet he didn't emerge embittered or reclusive.
He didn't give in to the disease either. Even as he battled, he remained the cultured, erudite European gentleman who looked for the best in everyone .
I will always remember him as a fighter, a strong "tough guy" with a heart of gold. He was my friend. I miss him.
Thursday, January 14, 2016
Corporations and Cape George
I just finished reading the Cape George Board Meeting Agenda for Jan 14 2016. One item caught my attention:
President Richard Hilfer and the Manager have developed
a list of law firms that specialize in providing service
to homeowner associations and will be developing a request
for proposal letter to assist with selection of a new
attorney for the corporation.
It's still weird to think of Cape George as a corporation. Actually, it is and, for many, the word conjures up a soul-less, arrogant entity concerned only with profit, running roughshod over enemies and shareholders alike, with imperious Boards and CEO's doing virtually anything they damn well feel like.
I guess you can blame it on the media. It's difficult to pick up a newspaper without seeing stories of corporations fined for civil and more often criminal misbehavior; corporate officers under investigation, indicted, dismissed, or retiring suddenly to "spend more time with family"; stockholders defrauded; employees exploited; whistle-blowers abused and unjustly fired.
You might feel that's unlikely to happen here in Cape George. We're a feel-good community. Friendly residents, plenty of volunteerism, lectures, games, cookout's. No need to bother pretty little heads with details of HOA's, CCR's, corporate governance, ad nauseum. No controversy in paradise, right?
But take a peep behind the scenes. As mentioned here and here, this Board has ignored covenants; openly championed a former Board member who was rebuffed by the 2003 Board in her attempt to force a resident's old-growth trees to be clear cut; ignored advice from their recently retired attorney as well as multiple other lawyers; and then recklessly reversed the 2003 Board's ruling.
The Board's tactics -- all very corporate like -- were to dodge the resident's questions, stonewall her requests, deny an appeal, and bank that she would quickly take down the offending "hedge" of old-growth trees. When she asked for relevant archive files, she was told that they were "missing" from the office. Very Nixon-esque.
Meanwhile, let fines are pile up and suggest, as the President did in a newsletter and in a letter to an atty, that the complainants had "offered to bear the cost of removing all the trees". He conveniently omits that the offer was contingent on clear-cutting all of them.
Even the owner's compromise offer to fell a couple of trees and "window and thin" others per the Building Rules was rejected out of hand. Only when the owner felled all but two of her old-growth trees, was the Board's notion of "hedge" justice served. Tellingly, during the massacre, the Cape George manager was seen conferring with the former Board member a block away.
The 2003 Board however had unanimously dismissed a "hedge" complaint against the same trees and cited the lack of "timeliness" and "damage to a member's property" as reasons. They certainly did not dismiss the complaint with "prejudice" to open the door for the current Board's ruling.
Why did previously exempted old-growth trees become fair game? Because, the current President overruled the Cape George atty's advice and declared "trees grow and change" which rendered the 2003 ruling magically invalid. His reversal creates an Alice-in-Wonderland kind of legal whimsy. That's why rogue corporations seem to spend so much time in court. An atty. confessed he was totally "baffled" by the President's remark.
In some murky backroom, the Board also arbitrarily and without notice to the community changed the interpretation of a "hedge" to be as little as "two trees with commingling foliage". To obfuscate when the changeover occurred, the Board President told concerned dissenters that the two-tree-commingling rule had been in effect for "years". Cape George's manager then slipped and reminded him that the new interpretation had been in effect only a few months.
When subsequent letters of protest to the Board's actions were
mailed to the community, the President ratcheted up his response
by drafting a letter to a couple of dissenters. "What status do you have to intervene in a matter between the Board and the owner on Sunset Blvd" the President demanded in his letter. Really? Sixteen residents and others with atty's opinions in hand, had no right to question his corporate wand of authority...
To send out a bullying letter is hardly good corporate governance.
This response from the President was sent only after letters of protest were mailed to most of Cape George and two and half months after the original petition was sent. That speaks for itself.
However, it's typical of the incivility and arrogance of both the
Board president and certainly the manager (undoubtedly at the Board's bidding) who then routinely ignored residents' letters and phone calls during "Tree-Gate". It's not much of a stretch to assume that happens frequently when opinions do not align with corporate agenda. Or more accurately, the current Board's.
One frequent tactic of the current Board is the patronizing deflection: "you don't know the full story" or the President's imperious sarcasm: "You're entitled to your opinions but not your own facts". Of course, as it happens, he can't reveal what the facts were since it's a "legal" matter and only the anointed can hear them. There's the sharp bang of a slamming corporate door again.
The Board's most reliable tactic however is to just ignore letters from fined residents or nuisance communications from dissenters. For instance, a proposal for an amendment to the Building Rules mailed to the Cape George manager wasn't even acknowledged. He's become an agent of the Board and mirrors their incivility when it suits him. I wonder how quickly he hit the email delete button...
The "usual suspects" also routinely fail to engage the community
or provide transparency on a range of issues. Pickleboard-Gate was discussed here for instance. There's not even a brief summary of what went on behind closed doors.
Of course all these secret, weighty matters could be summarized with identifying content redacted. Why not? The residents "in good standing" have a right to know what the Board is doing, when "interpretations" of Building Rules change suddenly; what the Board's atty advised; why a decision was reversed after 12 years; what other trustees thought, or didn't think; or whether all of them simply wielded the rubber-stamp...
Where is it written that a corporation can't act more transparently;
engage residents in choosing a Pickleball court venue or decide how to define a hedge; put divisive issues up for a vote; apprise residents of legal details in broad strokes so they can be informed about what's happening in the community; defend and explain Board actions; allow residents to provide feedback, and rate the quality of their leadership. Even large, ruthless corporations make more of an attempt than they do here. I'm sure residents would pitch in to handle some of the details if the volunteer Board is overworked. I gladly will!
So "corporatism" is alive and well in Cape George. Will that change? Unlikely without more activism by residents here. The good news is that abuses by the current Board President and rubber-stamping trustees can be opposed in court.
If you have been harmed by the Board's actions, please consider a small claims case if nothing else. Email if you like. I'll be glad to share atty's opinions on the tree issue for instance.
Sadly in my opinion, litigation may be the only way to deal with
this Board's intransigence, arrogance, and failure to listen. Consider also running for the Board or encourage someone who will if these issues bother you as much as they do many others.
There's reason for hope. Here're some encouraging signs that changes have happened or may be coming to a HOA near you.
From:
https://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/Homeowner_association#Undemocratic
The AARP has recently voiced concern that homeowners associations pose a risk to the financial welfare of their members. They have proposed that a homeowners "Bill Of Rights" be adopted by all 50 states to protect seniors from rogue Homeowner Associations.
Certain states are pushing for more checks and balances in
homeowner associations. The North Carolina Planned Community Act for example requires a due process hearing to be held before any homeowner may be fined for a covenant violations It also limits the amount of the fines and sets other restrictions.
In California, any rule change made by the board is subject to a majority affirmation by the membership if only 5% of the membership demand a vote. This part of the civil code also ensures that any dissenting individual who seeks a director position must be fully represented to the membership and that all meetings be opened and agenda items publicized in advance.
The Supreme Court of Virginia has ruled that a HOAs power to fine residents is an unconstitutional delegation of police and judicial power.
President Richard Hilfer and the Manager have developed
a list of law firms that specialize in providing service
to homeowner associations and will be developing a request
for proposal letter to assist with selection of a new
attorney for the corporation.
It's still weird to think of Cape George as a corporation. Actually, it is and, for many, the word conjures up a soul-less, arrogant entity concerned only with profit, running roughshod over enemies and shareholders alike, with imperious Boards and CEO's doing virtually anything they damn well feel like.
I guess you can blame it on the media. It's difficult to pick up a newspaper without seeing stories of corporations fined for civil and more often criminal misbehavior; corporate officers under investigation, indicted, dismissed, or retiring suddenly to "spend more time with family"; stockholders defrauded; employees exploited; whistle-blowers abused and unjustly fired.
You might feel that's unlikely to happen here in Cape George. We're a feel-good community. Friendly residents, plenty of volunteerism, lectures, games, cookout's. No need to bother pretty little heads with details of HOA's, CCR's, corporate governance, ad nauseum. No controversy in paradise, right?
But take a peep behind the scenes. As mentioned here and here, this Board has ignored covenants; openly championed a former Board member who was rebuffed by the 2003 Board in her attempt to force a resident's old-growth trees to be clear cut; ignored advice from their recently retired attorney as well as multiple other lawyers; and then recklessly reversed the 2003 Board's ruling.
The Board's tactics -- all very corporate like -- were to dodge the resident's questions, stonewall her requests, deny an appeal, and bank that she would quickly take down the offending "hedge" of old-growth trees. When she asked for relevant archive files, she was told that they were "missing" from the office. Very Nixon-esque.
Meanwhile, let fines are pile up and suggest, as the President did in a newsletter and in a letter to an atty, that the complainants had "offered to bear the cost of removing all the trees". He conveniently omits that the offer was contingent on clear-cutting all of them.
Even the owner's compromise offer to fell a couple of trees and "window and thin" others per the Building Rules was rejected out of hand. Only when the owner felled all but two of her old-growth trees, was the Board's notion of "hedge" justice served. Tellingly, during the massacre, the Cape George manager was seen conferring with the former Board member a block away.
The 2003 Board however had unanimously dismissed a "hedge" complaint against the same trees and cited the lack of "timeliness" and "damage to a member's property" as reasons. They certainly did not dismiss the complaint with "prejudice" to open the door for the current Board's ruling.
Why did previously exempted old-growth trees become fair game? Because, the current President overruled the Cape George atty's advice and declared "trees grow and change" which rendered the 2003 ruling magically invalid. His reversal creates an Alice-in-Wonderland kind of legal whimsy. That's why rogue corporations seem to spend so much time in court. An atty. confessed he was totally "baffled" by the President's remark.
In some murky backroom, the Board also arbitrarily and without notice to the community changed the interpretation of a "hedge" to be as little as "two trees with commingling foliage". To obfuscate when the changeover occurred, the Board President told concerned dissenters that the two-tree-commingling rule had been in effect for "years". Cape George's manager then slipped and reminded him that the new interpretation had been in effect only a few months.
When subsequent letters of protest to the Board's actions were
mailed to the community, the President ratcheted up his response
by drafting a letter to a couple of dissenters. "What status do you have to intervene in a matter between the Board and the owner on Sunset Blvd" the President demanded in his letter. Really? Sixteen residents and others with atty's opinions in hand, had no right to question his corporate wand of authority...
To send out a bullying letter is hardly good corporate governance.
This response from the President was sent only after letters of protest were mailed to most of Cape George and two and half months after the original petition was sent. That speaks for itself.
However, it's typical of the incivility and arrogance of both the
Board president and certainly the manager (undoubtedly at the Board's bidding) who then routinely ignored residents' letters and phone calls during "Tree-Gate". It's not much of a stretch to assume that happens frequently when opinions do not align with corporate agenda. Or more accurately, the current Board's.
One frequent tactic of the current Board is the patronizing deflection: "you don't know the full story" or the President's imperious sarcasm: "You're entitled to your opinions but not your own facts". Of course, as it happens, he can't reveal what the facts were since it's a "legal" matter and only the anointed can hear them. There's the sharp bang of a slamming corporate door again.
The Board's most reliable tactic however is to just ignore letters from fined residents or nuisance communications from dissenters. For instance, a proposal for an amendment to the Building Rules mailed to the Cape George manager wasn't even acknowledged. He's become an agent of the Board and mirrors their incivility when it suits him. I wonder how quickly he hit the email delete button...
The "usual suspects" also routinely fail to engage the community
or provide transparency on a range of issues. Pickleboard-Gate was discussed here for instance. There's not even a brief summary of what went on behind closed doors.
Of course all these secret, weighty matters could be summarized with identifying content redacted. Why not? The residents "in good standing" have a right to know what the Board is doing, when "interpretations" of Building Rules change suddenly; what the Board's atty advised; why a decision was reversed after 12 years; what other trustees thought, or didn't think; or whether all of them simply wielded the rubber-stamp...
Where is it written that a corporation can't act more transparently;
engage residents in choosing a Pickleball court venue or decide how to define a hedge; put divisive issues up for a vote; apprise residents of legal details in broad strokes so they can be informed about what's happening in the community; defend and explain Board actions; allow residents to provide feedback, and rate the quality of their leadership. Even large, ruthless corporations make more of an attempt than they do here. I'm sure residents would pitch in to handle some of the details if the volunteer Board is overworked. I gladly will!
So "corporatism" is alive and well in Cape George. Will that change? Unlikely without more activism by residents here. The good news is that abuses by the current Board President and rubber-stamping trustees can be opposed in court.
If you have been harmed by the Board's actions, please consider a small claims case if nothing else. Email if you like. I'll be glad to share atty's opinions on the tree issue for instance.
Sadly in my opinion, litigation may be the only way to deal with
this Board's intransigence, arrogance, and failure to listen. Consider also running for the Board or encourage someone who will if these issues bother you as much as they do many others.
There's reason for hope. Here're some encouraging signs that changes have happened or may be coming to a HOA near you.
From:
https://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/Homeowner_association#Undemocratic
The AARP has recently voiced concern that homeowners associations pose a risk to the financial welfare of their members. They have proposed that a homeowners "Bill Of Rights" be adopted by all 50 states to protect seniors from rogue Homeowner Associations.
Certain states are pushing for more checks and balances in
homeowner associations. The North Carolina Planned Community Act for example requires a due process hearing to be held before any homeowner may be fined for a covenant violations It also limits the amount of the fines and sets other restrictions.
In California, any rule change made by the board is subject to a majority affirmation by the membership if only 5% of the membership demand a vote. This part of the civil code also ensures that any dissenting individual who seeks a director position must be fully represented to the membership and that all meetings be opened and agenda items publicized in advance.
The Supreme Court of Virginia has ruled that a HOAs power to fine residents is an unconstitutional delegation of police and judicial power.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
They're starting to sprout up... like weeds in summer. The signage for presidential candidates I mean. Ok, I'm guilty... I admit it. I put up two small, discreet "Vote Bernie" stickers of my own.
But the anointment of Hillary is clearly approaching. Kinda like a mudslide after a clear-cut. They're even laying a guilt trip on Sanders for not joining the cheering throngs in this historic moment - the first woman to be a major party candidate.
Guilt evidently has become the new political weapon of choice. Tell me: did the much lampooned Madeleine Albright speech about "a special place in hell for women who don't support Hillary" make a comeback? Silly me... I thought it was still good for a few laughs.
Speaking of guilt trips, Mr. Trump's supporters could just as easily whine about the failure of Republicans to jump on a congratulatory band-wagon for "The Donald". To their immense credit, many haven't. Some even refuse to wave as the band-wagon passes. Maybe, it's the thought of losing again... this time their lunch... if they climb aboard.
I think Mr Sanders' supporters view Clinton in much the same light. Instead of concentrating on issues, she hurled unconscionable smears at Bernie; refused to share a syllable of those little hundred grand honorariums for Wall Street speeches; ran her own private servers in clear violation of policy; voted for war in Iraq over WMD; and now promises a "no fly" zone over Syria... yes sir, she'll show Obama and the rest of the boys 'n girls how it's done. Clearly she's a deep well of "foreign policy experience" and unquestionable trustworthiness. Honest as the day is long.
I think Bernie and his supporters fighting to the last is a good thing for the Party and the country.