September 11, 2017 at 2:13 am #3994
Who Works for Whom? …
By Rana Goodman
Besides falling in love with the model home I purchased and the idea of the “lifestyle” offered in this community, one of the major reasons I wanted to live In SCA was the allure of so many clubs and activities to involve myself in should I chose to. I always told people who asked me about our community that it was impossible to be bored or lonely living here unless one wanted to be.
As the rules have changed over the past few years or so, I have begun to re-evaluate things and look a little deeper into policy and the way our community is being structured now. I’m seeing much that is not fair nor equitable and I must say I don’t like it, I don’t understand it, and it defies all logic to me.
In my opinion we, the homeowners, all own a pro-rata share of the common-interest property in this community. That includes three recreation centers, and any other common areas, however you would think, the way things are these days, we are the surfs of management.
When things fail to make sense, my brain seeks the “why” behind it and I must say I have asked the questions from the source and all I get in return is either blank stares or replies that don’t make sense either.
Here are some of my issues, let’s see what you think, maybe you have a logical answer.
Point 1: Each club must submit their yearly calendar to the Activities Department one year in advance. The Activities Department controls bookings for all rooms in SCA. Example of a conflict: A year ago, past president Carol Rothber,g booked September 8, 2017 for the Entertainment Club to present a show in Freedom Hall. When the Monday e-blast came out recently, the club discovered that the Activities Dept. was presenting a free show on the lawn the same day two hours after ours was to start. When the Activities department was asked why they would double book the same day, Danielle Bartelle said that the club should have checked the Activities Dept. calendar.
It is our belief that, as employees of the association whose job it is to book activities and keep the association calendar, that department should advise any club if there seems to be a cross-over or conflict and suggest that they chose another day. At the time, there would have been no problem taking the day before or after. Letting it go until the last moment cost the club a pretty penny by ending up with residents opting for a free show vs. $15. The club paid entertainers, paid for refreshments and had to “eat the losses when many chose the free show.”
Point 2: At the Community Life Style workshop one of the agenda items revolved around scheduling priorities. The order is as follows;
- The Board of Directors & Committees
- Activities Department
- Service Groups
- Chartered Clubs
- Private Parties/Events
There are approximately 60 chartered clubs having several thousand members combined (Women’s Club, ICCC, Performing Arts, Spotlight having the most). Those residents pay a large amount of the cost of the facilities considering the balance of the residents are assessment paying but generally inactive in the events around the community. So why are over 2,000 residents next to the bottom in priority when it comes to room scheduling? One would think clubs would at least come before the Activities department.
Point 3: Some of us then suggested that the shuttered restaurant space, which is currently being used for the storage of tables and chairs (at the cost of $4,000 per month says the BOD), be opened so that many of us can have a place to congregate. We could meet new friends, have a glass of wine, enjoy our magnificent view even enjoy a happy hour on the weekend while the board decides to lease or not to lease that space. It has been closed 18 months now.
Basically, the response I was given in the Life Style workshop was that they don’t want to take time to clean it up. In other words, Rana, sit down and shut up!
Point 4: This one is a development from another blog today, 9/11/17 where the author wrote about the “overwhelming wonderfulness of our GM”. I’m sorry if that sounded somewhat sarcastic, but the scribe was so very over the top that one would think he was nominating the lady for the Nobel Prize. I’d just like to mention that, in my opinion the reason residents in SCA believe 1/4 of a million dollars plus bonus is far too much is because Ms. Seddon is responsible for three buildings & common elements. By comparison, a city manager is responsible, along with his/her staff for an entire city.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.