Vote for change!

By now, most of you have received your ballot package for the Jan. 27 International Village Board of Directors election, or you should be receiving it soon.

As I stated in my last blog post, the choice couldn't be any clearer in this election. All three incumbent Board members running for reelection (Marvin Tow, Marc Richman and Sandra Best) just voted to raise your maintenance fees by 7 percent (six times the inflation rate) after rejecting any meaningful budget cuts. These same incumbent Board members also back plans for a $1.4 million special assessment based on overpriced contracts for projects that have not been carefully evaluated. And they have consistently refused to consider operational efficiencies and innovative practices to bring spending under control.

It’s clearly time for a change. And fortunately, you have the opportunity to cast your votes for four unit owners who are prepared to deliver that change.

Duv Wolff, Wendy Hernandez and Marcio Jaspan all have strong professional backgrounds and are committed to responsible spending to prevent our property values from plummeting due to the kind of runaway maintenance increases and special assessments we have seen under the current Board.  

Duv Wolff is a small business owner with a talent for minimizing unnecessary expenses, and he wants to reverse the 7 percent maintenance increase.

Wendy Hernandez has worked in the budgeting and purchasing departments of various companies and is experienced in saving money on contracts.

And Marcio Jaspan is an experienced engineer whose expertise will prove invaluable when it comes to evaluating project contracts to ensure we are getting a good deal for our money.

The following chart provides a comparison of the seven candidates on three key issues:

	7% maintenance fee increase	$1.4 million special assessment	Cutting wasteful spending
Duv Wolff	OPPOSE	OPPOSE	SUPPORT
Wendy Hernandez	OPPOSE	OPPOSE	SUPPORT
Marcio Jaspan	OPPOSE	OPPOSE	SUPPORT

Marvin Tow	SUPPORT	SUPPORT	OPPOSE
Marc Richman	SUPPORT	SUPPORT	OPPOSE
Sandra Best	SUPPORT	SUPPORT	OPPOSE

The choice is clear. When it comes to runaway spending, maintenance fee increases and special assessments, enough is enough! Vote for Duv Wolff, Wendy Hernandez and Marcio Jaspan.

  

Mark your ballot and place it inside the envelope labeled “Secret Ballot.” Then place that ballot inside the Ballot Return Envelope and seal it. Print your name, address and unit number, and be sure to sign it or it will not count. (If you own more than one unit, you must repeat this process for each unit.) Then place the proper postage on the envelope and mail it in. Or if you plan to be in International Village on Monday, Jan. 27, you can deliver it in person at the clubhouse main card room (movie room), as long as you arrive before 7 p.m. when the counting begins. You can also have someone (like me) bring your ballot in for you.

You do not need to complete the “Voting Certificate” included in your packet if you are already the designated voting representative on record with the association. (Call the office at 954-484-9106 if you are not sure.) Only fill it out if you need to change the designated voting representative and then place it in the outer envelope. (Do not place it in the “Secret Ballot” envelope.)

Feel free to email me if you have any questions!

Maintenance hike frames election choice

Nothing could more clearly illustrate the stark choice facing unit owners in next month’s Board of Directors election than this past Tuesday’s budget meeting. (See 12/17/13 video HERE.) From the moment the meeting began, it was clear that the current Board majority had no interest in making any meaningful cuts to the budget to avoid saddling unit owners with another significant maintenance fee increase. That big-spending majority includes all three Board members who are running for reelection next month – Board President Marvin Tow, Board Treasurer Marc Richman and Board member Sandy Best.

Despite my pre-meeting challenge to Mr. Tow, Mr. Richman and our property manager to cut the proposed budget before it came before us at the meeting, we were presented with the same exact $3.5 million budget document.

Board member Jerry Mirrow (who sadly has decided not to run for reelection) and I did the best we could to trim the budget by making a series of motions to cut spending on various line items, but virtually all of them were rejected – including Jerry’s motion to cut the litigation budget and my motions to reduce the painting and social activities budgets and stop paying for the Board of Directors President's $1,350-per-year cell phone. The majority’s only concession was to reduce the proposed increase in employee salaries from over 3% to 2% (for a total savings of $10,000) after a number of owners complained they haven’t gotten a raise in years.

But the handwriting on the wall was clear when one Board member emphatically expressed her impatience with the process of going through the two-page budget line by line (which I guess would have meant missing the finale of The Voice). Faced with the Board majority’s obvious rush to get through the meeting, Jerry proposed sending the budget back to management with a directive to reduce overall spending by 4%, but that would have required Mr. Tow and Vice President Collette Goslin to withdraw their original motion to approve the budget, which they refused to do.

The end result is that maintenance fees will go up 7.1%, about six times the current U.S. inflation rate. (See the final approved budget and maintenance fee breakdown HERE.) Beginning in January, the owner of an average one-bedroom unit currently paying $282 in monthly maintenance will pay $302 a month, while the owner of an average two-bedroom unit who is now paying $393 monthly will pay $421 per month in maintenance. This raw deal for unit owners was approved by a 5-2 vote, with Jerry and I voting no.

I believe we owe it to unit owners to be more sensitive about how we spend their money so they don’t have to keep paying more and more to live here.

Fortunately, you will have a chance next month to change the direction of International Village and replace the current Board majority with candidates who are committed to actually saving unit owners’ money by restraining spending. I will be reaching out to these candidates over the next days and weeks to bring you the facts about their ideas and platforms so you can make an informed choice. Stay tuned.

In the meantime, I would like to wish everyone a merry Christmas. If you happen to be in town, our social activities chairman John Henderson is organizing a Christmas party on Sunday, Dec. 22 from 5-9 p.m. in the clubhouse with music, dancing and cake.

One battle is won; the main battle lies ahead!

My hats off once more to the wonderful owners at International Village for again saving the day by responding to my call to protest the $1.4 million special assessment plan that was to be approved on Monday. You didn't let me down. You emailed the Board in droves and showed up in impressive numbers at Monday's Board meeting, and the Board wisely backed down. 

As you recall, I had pledged to make a motion to table (postpone) this outrageously timed plan until after the election. But before I could say the word “table,” our Board Vice President Collette Goslin had beat me to it, and I was reduced to only seconding her motion!! Then, without a word of discussion, the roll was called, and one by one all six Board members present voted “Yes” to table it. It’s something you really have to see to believe, so check out the 12/16/13 video HERE. (The scene comes toward the end of the meeting.)

Why the stunning turnaround only a day after at least one Board member was still strenuously defending the special assessment? It was you! You made your voices heard – logically, forcefully, and yes in some cases quite passionately – and it had an impact. Most of the Board is up for reelection next month, and they apparently don’t want to face that kind of wrath at the ballot box.

But there’s no time to bask in the glow of victory, because the main battle is now upon us. Tonight (Tuesday, Dec. 17 at 7 p.m.), the Board will take up the proposed 2014 budget, which if approved without cuts will result in a 7.4 percent maintenance fee increase for all owners.

I call once more upon our property manager, working with our Board president and Treasurer, to identify a set of cuts before tonight’s meeting to eliminate the need for any maintenance fee increase next year. They are welcome to use my proposed cuts as a template, but by no means should they feel a need to limit their cost-cutting strategies to those areas. Out of a budget of approximately $3.5 million, I am confident in their ability to find the necessary $159,000 in savings. In return, as I stated before, I pledge to support the proposed 4 percent salary increase for employees, because they’ll be earning it by stretching our dollars.

However, if the budget is not reduced 7.4 percent before it comes to us tonight for a vote, I will be forced to make a motion to eliminate the proposed pay raises from the budget – thus saving $30,000 – because I cannot in good conscience support a salary increase at the same time owners are being asked to sacrifice another 7 percent out of their own paychecks to pay for maintenance.

I believe this is a fair solution that rewards employees for being innovative and learning to do more with a little less, while at the same time giving hard-working owners a well-deserved break from ever-rising fees and assessments at International Village.

But it’s up to you to make it happen by speaking up again. Many of you have already written the Board about this, but I encourage you to email them again HERE all the way up to the time of the budget meeting, because you've proven you can make a difference. And show up in force again at tonight's meeting, because you certainly make an impressive crowd.

Ready for another $1.4 million special assessment?

Just in case you thought this past year’s $1.3 million special assessment (and 18.5 percent maintenance increase) wasn't enough, the International Village Board of Directors has a nice Grinch-style surprise for you tomorrow, just in time for Christmas and just weeks before the next Board election: a $1.4 million “Part 2” special assessment (under the vaguely worded agenda item of "Project Re-organization").

Although I warned you about this in a recent blog post, I’m still in shock at the sheer brazenness of it, coming so close to the election and just one day before a budget meeting designed to raise your maintenance fees by 7.4 percent. Obviously, this Board is in a big hurry to PICK your pockets before you hopefully KICK them out of office. But by then, if they get their way, you’ll be in the poorhouse and your foreclosed unit will be available for them to snatch up for a song and flip for megabucks (as our vulture-like immediate past Board president from Quebec was so adept at).

To add insult to injury, the $1.4 million special assessment package we’ll be considering on Monday (Dec. 16 at 7 p.m. in the clubhouse) includes $75,000 for a camera surveillance project despite a recent ruling by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation that forced Board President Marvin Tow’s $150,000 camera scheme to be put on hold. I guess we’re supposed to be grateful that the revised plan calls for only 88 cameras instead of the 286 originally proposed, but it still happens to be illegal.

Other projects on the special assessment list:

• $150,000 for balcony repairs
• $390,000 for building renovations (for those buildings that weren't renovated)
• $300,000 to replace the Nottingham roof
• $200,000 for painting the exteriors of the buildings (which don't appear to need it)
• $80,000 for roadway resealing
• $160,000 for an electronic key building access system (to go along with the maximum-security scheme I discussed in my last blog post).

The entire plan, if approved, will require a special assessment of approximately $1,500 for a one-bedroom unit and $2,000 for a two-bedroom unit. But the Board would have to meet again to structure the special assessment in terms of the number of payments based on whether bank financing can be obtained. 

Our association attorney is still “investigating” whether we “really need” to give the mailed 14-day notice of intent to special assess required under Florida law before an assessment is actually imposed, since the previous Board in September 2012 already approved both Parts 1 and 2 of the special assessment but postponed Part 2 the following week.

There's no question in my mind that such a notice is required, not only because the first notice is now well over a year old and many owners have come and gone since then, but because the plan itself changed. The last four projects listed above weren't even included in the original list approved last year. So if the Board approves the revised list on Monday, I expect the notice of intent to special assess will have to be included in the Board of Directors election ballot package that will be mailed to all unit owners around the end of this month. That will give this Board just enough time to impose the new special assessment before its term expires on Jan. 27, 2014. So now you understand the rush.

It’s the height of arrogance for this Board to take such consequential action just before its term runs out. It amounts to attempting to tie the hands of the next Board before it even takes office. Common sense dictates that this special assessment proposal should be an issue for the campaign as owners make up their minds whom to vote for based on their position on this question. That’s what elections are for. So in the spirit of democracy, I plan to make a motion to table (postpone) this preposterously timed item until after the Jan. 27 election. If you agree with me, please let the Board know by emailing them HERE, and be sure to come to this Monday night’s meeting (and Tuesday night's budget meeting as well). It's time to stand up and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

My alternative budget to avoid a maintenance increase

It has been brought to my attention that a number of unit owners have not yet turned in their budget proxies. It is critical that owners submit their proxies as soon as possible. To avoid a maintenance fee increase of 30 percent or more, you must vote “Yes” to waive reserves and send in your proxy in time for it to be received by the association by the Dec. 17 deadline, which is the date of our budget meeting. Some of you have told me you misplaced your proxy or never received it. No problem. Click HERE to download and print one. Others have asked me for specific instructions on how to complete it, so here goes: 

Fill out the very top part where it asks you for your unit number and building. Leave the line just below that blank; the board secretary will act as proxy and is required by law to cast your proxy form as you filled it out. Just make sure you check "Yes," date it, sign where it says "Signature of voting representative" and print your name below that, and leave everything else blank, including the "Substitution of proxyholder" part at the bottom. (If you have more than one unit, fill out as many proxies as you have units.) 

You can bring the proxy to the office in person, fax it or scan and email it. You could also mail it in, but considering that the proxy must be received by Dec. 17, it might be safer to use one of the other methods.

To email it, just scan the completed form and send it as a PDF or jpeg attachment to admin@internvillage.com and include the word “Proxy" in the subject line.

To fax it, send it to 954-486-5677.

MY BUDGET PROPOSAL

As for the budget itself, I have taken the time to review the proposed 2014 budget, with some help from a fellow unit owner, in advance of our Dec. 17 budget meeting, and I am now confident we can cut the $159,000 needed in savings to avoid a 7.4 percent maintenance increase. 

First off, let me state that our employees are greatly appreciated for their hard work and dedicated

service to International Village, but I cannot in good conscience support the proposed 4 percent salary increase at the same time the budget is asking already struggling owners to pay 7 percent more in maintenance (which happens to be about seven times the current rate of inflation). Let’s keep in mind that our employees are already going to get a substantial increase in health insurance benefits as a result of Obamacare mandates, which will require us to spend an extra $16,000 in health benefits next year. That’s the equivalent of a raise in my book. So why would we add another $30,000 salary increase on top of that, just because it represents the same 4 percent raise that was given last year? In this economy, how many of us can expect an automatic 4 percent raise every year? Salary increases and bonuses have their place, but they should be tied to performance using defined benchmarks such as, say, success in balancing the budget without raising fees. Here's the deal: I pledge to support this proposed 4 percent salary increase for all employees if our property manager presents the Board with a budget that doesn't include a maintenance increase at our budget meeting this coming Tuesday. Of course, this will require coming up with the $159,000 in savings I mentioned earlier. To make this task a little easier, I took the liberty of identifying some savings in the budget myself, and have come up with the following proposed cuts, which add up to exactly the amount of savings we need. 

1. Legal fees – Save $25,000 by engaging in less unnecessary litigation, which often seems driven by Board members’ personal animosities.

2. Computer expenses – Why are we budgeting $15,000 for such a tiny operation? Save $7,500.

3. Office equipment and supplies – Again, for such a small office, the proposed $15,400 sounds exorbitant. Save $8,000 by shopping at Walmart.

4. “Other expenses” – This very vague line item is budgeted at $10,000. Unless we can get a better definition of at least what general category of expenses we are talking about here, I would eliminate this item altogether.

5. Signage – Why is $2,500 budgeted for signage when less than $200 was spent in 2013? Save $2,300.

6. Cell phones – There is no justification for spending $1,350 for the Board of Directors president’s cell phone when all other Board members pay for their own. I have no problem letting the three other individuals with association-paid cell phones keep them since they are employees and need them for their jobs, but there are cell phone plans for $50 a month – less than half of what we’re paying now. Save $3,600. 

7. Cable – Eliminate premium channels like Showtime (trash time). I don’t know how much this will save, but let’s say $35,000 (about 10 percent of the annual price of the contract).

8. There appears to be some redundancy in the budget. We have an air conditioning contract, a landscape contract and a pest control contract, which are costing us a total of $66,540. But in a separate part of the budget, a total of $60,000 is set aside in maintenance costs for air conditioning, landscaping and pest control. Why are we paying twice for the same things? We don’t seem to be getting our money’s worth on these contracts. Let’s rebid them to make sure our contractors do more so we don’t have to do so much. Save $30,000.

9. Copier lease – Why are we spending $4,500 a year on this? Wouldn't it be cheaper to buy a copier? Dump this expensive leased copier. Save $2,000. 

10. Water and Sewer – At $600,000, this is the single biggest line item, but maybe we could get some of it back. There has been talk of enforcing the Village’s ban on washers in units, but also of the impracticality of forcing owners with “grandfathered-in” washers to remove them. But we could turn this negative into a positive by simply acknowledging that they exist and charging these owners a fee based on their estimated increased water usage. Recover $5,000.

11. Open the clubhouse one hour later every day, at 8 a.m. instead of 7 a.m. According to our property manager, only between 3 and 10 people a day use the clubhouse between 7 and 8 a.m. anyway. This would save about $4,700.

12. Paint – Let’s cut the $6,000 budget for this item in half by stopping the practice of repainting the walkways every year. We could easily get away with painting them less often and just giving them a good sweeping. But if the paint is fading faster than it should, we need to switch paints. Save $3,000.

13. Social activities – I believe this should be mainly a volunteer initiative. In fact, this past year, volunteer owners organized several successful and very well attended parties that didn't cost the association anything. Save $4,500.   

14. Maintenance and janitorial supplies – $78,000 seems like a lot. Let’s try to make do with $65,000. Save $13,000. 
15. Gym – We just replaced all the gym equipment. So why is the budget $3,000 higher than last year's approved budget? Save $3,000.
16. Tennis and racquetball courts – Why are we spending $3,000 on these two items? Save $2,000.

There you have it. I don’t believe I have exhausted all the potential savings in the budget, but just doing the 16 items above will avoid the threatened maintenance fee increase. Let's hope our property manager and Board take heed. And be sure to attend our budget hearing this coming Tuesday, Dec. 17 at 7 p.m. in the clubhouse (as well as our regular meeting scheduled for the day before on Monday, Dec. 16 at 7 p.m.).

SECURITY SCAM

In other news, the Safety & Security Committee held its first meeting last week. (See it HERE by scrolling down the page to "Safety & Security Committee.") The committee, which was established last month by Board of Directors President Marvin Tow, had been billed as a way to solicit ideas from owners on addressing safety concerns in the Village. But the first hour or so of the meeting was devoted to a slick sales presentation by two representatives from a local security firm, who pitched several unsolicited big-ticket items including front entrance locks and a telephone entry system for each residential building, a new electronic key access system and, of course, a camera surveillance system – none of which they provided price estimates for, saying they were under strict orders by someone on the Board (the president?) not to discuss costs.

Some cynics had suspected that this committee was just designed as another vehicle for our Board president to once again push his favorite pet project (despite a recent ruling by the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation that forced his $150,000 camera scheme to be put on hold). What they probably didn't see coming was an even more ambitious maximum-security plan to convert International Village into a virtual prison.

ART FESTIVAL

On a lighter note, International Village will be hosting its own mini version of Art Basel this weekend, with an Art Festival to be held this Saturday, Dec. 14 from 3 to 6 p.m. at the fountain in the “French Quarter” of the Village. Bring your art works to sell and share, bask in the beauty of this perfect gathering place, and meet and network with your neighbors while enjoying some free cake courtesy of our social activities chairman John Henderson. Musicians are welcome.

International Village budget package and election notice

By now, all unit owners should have received two important pieces of mail from International Village: the 2014 budget package and the notice of the Board of Directors election to be decided on Monday, Jan. 27, 2014.

First, the budget package: As I have stated previously in my blog, I disagree with some of the spending contained in the proposed $3.5 million operating budget (including $1,350 for our Board of Directors president's cell phone), and I look forward to proposing a number of cuts to bring spending down because I don't support raising maintenance another 7 percent after this past year's nearly 20 percent increase.

As for the election package, those of you planning to run for the Board of Directors must submit the enclosed Notice of Candidacy to the office by Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2013. Candidates also should submit a bio no later than Monday, Dec. 23, 2013. Ballots will then be mailed out to unit owners including the names of all the candidates as well as a number of proposed changes to our condo docs, some of which were discussed at our last Board meeting on Nov. 18. (See 11/18/13 meeting video.)

There was also discussion last month of holding a special meeting in the very near future to revisit "Part II" of last year's special assessment, which the previous Board voted to postpone in September 2012 after approving the "Part I" special assessment of $1.3 million, which was collected over four months from October 2012 to January 2013. The idea of a meeting to impose another $1.4 million special assessment just before an election is insane, and I hope it doesn't happen.

In another action last month, the Board voted to ask our association attorney to prepare a petition to the Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) requesting a declaratory statement to determine the legality of installing a camera surveillance system in International Village before proceeding any further with the idea. But instead of asking for a decision on the proposed system, the Board voted 6-1 (with me dissenting) to inquire about the propriety of the camera system that was installed in the Zurich building a few years ago by a committee of Zurich unit owners. A DBPR official I spoke to after the meeting told me in no uncertain terms that the petition will be denied because the agency won't issue declaratory statements on actions that have already taken place (as made clear in Finding #11 of this recent DBPR ruling). So before we spend $3,000 in legal fees so our association attorney can prepare a worthless petition, I hope the Board will reconsider its move.

Finally, the new Safety & Security Committee, which was created to discuss safety issues after the proposed camera system hit its DBPR roadblock, will hold its first meeting this Wednesday, Dec. 4 at 7 p.m. in the clubhouse small card room. If you're not too busy, I encourage you to try to make it. 

Another 7 percent maintenance increase?

How do you feel about paying an extra 7.4 percent in maintenance fees next year? If the proposed $3.5 million operating budget our property manager just submitted to the Board of Directors this past week is approved without changes, that’s exactly what you can look forward to (not including any potential special assessments for various "priority" projects already under discussion).

Under the plan, the owner of an average one-bedroom unit currently paying $282 monthly maintenance would pay $303 a month, while the owner of an average two-bedroom unit who is now paying $393 monthly would pay $422 per month in maintenance. The Board will take up the 2014 budget at a hearing set for Tuesday, Dec. 17 at 7 p.m. in the clubhouse.

If you feel a 7.4 percent increase is too much after this past year's nearly 20 percent maintenance hike and large special assessment, I encourage you to carefully review the budget to help the Board identify potential savings. Share your recommendations with us BY EMAIL ahead of time and in person at the budget hearing. Remember, this proposed budget is not the last word, nor is it one I personally would have produced. I would prefer to see more cost savings, resulting in less financial burden to unit owners.

To give a brief overview, the proposed budget calls for spending $159,000 more next year than this year. The biggest increases come in the categories of insurance, cable, employee salaries, plumbing maintenance, air conditioning, and employee health care costs due to Obamacare. In his budget cover letter, our property manager defends the higher spending by citing cost of living increases and the aging of the property. These may be valid points, but it is interesting to note that the Inverrary Association (our master property association) has managed to produce a 2014 budget that calls for no increase in maintenance from its member associations. If they can tighten their belt in tough economic times to live within their means, why can't we do the same at a time when many owners are still struggling financially? For example, the association is projected to spend $5,400 next year on cell phone service for four individuals – amounting to $1,350 per phone. One of these four individuals is our Board of Directors president, Marvin Tow. Since Board members are volunteers, and the rest of the Board pays for its own cell phones, I fail to see how this expense is justified.

In other news, unit owners with ideas for improving security at International Village are being invited to join a new Safety & Security Committee to recommend safety-related initiatives for the community. Mr. Tow announced the committee's creation last Monday at a special meeting (see 11/11/13 meeting video) that began gathering owner feedback on safety in the wake of a recent Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation ruling that has halted plans for a massive camera surveillance system. If you would like to join the committee, send an email to assistant@internvillage.com including your name, building and unit number. In the meantime, our association attorney is recommending that the association seek a declaratory statement from the DBPR regarding the legality of a camera system in International Village before proceeding any further with the idea. (See his opinion letter HERE.)

Finally, the Board will set a date for the upcoming Board of Directors election at our meeting this Monday, Nov. 18, at 7 p.m. in the clubhouse. The election will take place in January, so if you're thinking about running, it'll soon be time throw your hat in the ring. The election also may be an opportunity for owners to consider changes to our condo docs and rules and regulations. (See our Declaration of Condo here, our Rules & Regulations here and our Bylaws here.) Board members will discuss some possible amendments to place on the ballot at this Monday's meeting. If you have ideas of your own in this regard, please come to the meeting and share them, or CONTACT US NOW by email.

Camera system proposal placed on pause

You did it – again! 

After a good number of you emailed or called Board members to oppose a proposed $150,000 camera surveillance system, the idea has been placed on hold. A special meeting this Monday, Nov. 11, originally scheduled for the purpose of discussing and voting on the project, has been re-purposed as an open discussion forum "for the Board of Directors and all attending unit owners to discuss the safety, security, and quality of life challenges facing our community," according to Board of Directors President Marvin Tow. (See his letter to unit owners.)
 

I applaud the decision to hit the “pause” button on this huge overreach of a project, which would have called for the installation of nearly 300 cameras in a community of just over 800 units, at a cost of over $500 per camera and a potential special assessment of about $220 per unit owner. Not only was the project ill-conceived, but as I have reported in my blog, approving the project without first allowing owners to vote on it would have been a violation of Florida law regarding “material alterations.” (See my post about the issue HERE.) 

I like the idea of a town hall style meeting for owners to share their concerns and recommendations on the general topic of security, and I encourage all owners to attend this Monday’s meeting, which will begin at 7 p.m. in the clubhouse. Now that the threat of a massive camera surveillance system being forced down our throats is out of the way (at least for now), this meeting will be a good opportunity for owners and Board members to calmly and intelligently discuss the issues of safety and security.

Camera meeting postponed – again!

For the second time, a planned special meeting to consider a proposed $150,000 camera surveillance system has been postponed. International Village Board of Directors President and chief camera project proponent Marvin Tow decided to reschedule the meeting from Nov. 4 to Nov. 11 after two Board members whose votes he was counting on informed him they would not be able to attend on the 4th. The meeting had originally been scheduled for Oct. 14, but that date was scrapped after many of you complained about the rush to hold a meeting at a time when three Board members were out of town.

Hopefully, this delay will allow more returning snowbirds and other seasonal occupants to attend. The Monday, Nov. 11 meeting will begin at 7 p.m. in the clubhouse. As I mentioned in my last e-mail/blog post, at the request of many of you I am preparing a petition to challenge the $150,000 camera project if the Board unwisely decides to approve it without putting the issue to a vote of unit owners as required by Florida law and affirmed in a recent ruling of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation.

I must say I am surprised by Mr. Tow's latest mass e-mail to owners attacking me (which he failed to copy me on), in which he so strenuously objects to the idea of letting owners vote on the camera issue, since he has repeatedly and emphatically claimed that his views on cameras represent the opinion of the overwhelming majority of unit owners. I would have thought that he would welcome the opportunity to prove his case with a referendum on the project, especially since it won't cost us anything if we combine it with our upcoming Board of Directors election in January.

If you would like to sign the petition demanding a vote on cameras, let me know, or meet me at the Halloween costume party/potluck dinner this Saturday, Nov. 2, from 5 to 9 p.m. in the clubhouse, as I will have copies of the petition with me. I will be wearing a privateer’s hat to signify my dislike for Big Brother-style schemes to invade our privacy with cameras galore which, speaking of Halloween, I find rather creepy.

But most of all, come to the party this Saturday to have fun with your neighbors. Our social activities committee chairman John Henderson has been working hard to organize this event for everybody’s enjoyment, so plan on being there and having a good time!

Cameras? Let the people decide!

For weeks, proponents of a $150,000 project to install almost 300 "security" cameras throughout International Village have declined to consider the option of letting the owners decide by putting the issue to a vote.

Now they may be forced to do so.

Earlier this month, an arbitrator with the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) – the agency that regulates condos – ruled that the installation of cameras by a condo association constitutes a "material alteration," which under Florida law requires the approval of unit owners.

The ruling was in response to a petition by a group of owners of the West Coast Vista Condo Association near Tampa, who complained that their association’s Board of Directors had failed to get owners' approval before installing cameras in the condo's pool area. The arbitrator sided with the petitioners, rejecting the Board’s argument that the cameras were an emergency "security" measure, since they don't actually prevent incidents from happening (the deterrent effect being purely speculative). The association has been ordered to schedule a vote on the cameras and – if the owners decide not to approve them – to remove them within 30 days after the vote.

I have been in touch with the lead petitioner in this case, and he's eager to offer his assistance to ensure that proper procedure is followed in our case. He also informed me that the DBPR was so helpful in guiding him through the process that he didn't even have to spend any money hiring an attorney. On the other hand, the West Coast Vista Association spent about $1,800 in attorney fees in its unsuccessful attempt to defend its actions.

We don't have to make the same mistake, needlessly wasting $150,000 on a camera system we would later have to remove, along with associated litigation expenses. We can handle this the right way by simply agreeing to hold a vote. This will cost us nothing if we combine it with the mailing of ballots for our upcoming Board of Directors election in January (thus saving about $500 in additional mailing expenses). Let the owners decide if they want a massive surveillance system paid for by either a $200-per-unit special assessment or a permanent increase in maintenance fees – which would be on top of another potential special assessment to pay for about $1 million in various other "priority projects" discussed at our last Board meeting, in which the Board ironically approved new procedures for the installation of personal security cameras by individual owners in front of their units. (See the 10/21/13 VIDEO.)

A special Board of Directors meeting to discuss and vote on the $150,000 camera proposal has been scheduled for next Monday, Nov. 4, at 7 p.m. in the clubhouse. I, with the support of many like-minded unit owners, am putting the International Village Condominium Association and Board of Directors on notice that if the proposed camera installation project is approved without the required vote of unit owners, we will file a petition with the DBPR and the Florida ombudsman for arbitration to challenge the illegal move.

Please encourage all members of the Board of Directors to do the right thing. E-mail them HERE now to let them know how you feel, and be sure to attend our Nov. 4 meeting to make your voices heard. When enough of you have complained in the past, it's made a difference. Here's your opportunity to turn things around once again!

Thank you.

Camera meeting postponed!

You complained, they listened. The special meeting to consider a $150,000 surveillance camera system, originally scheduled for tonight (Monday, Oct. 14) has been postponed until Nov. 4 after a majority of Board members agreed that the rush to hold a meeting while three Board members were out of town was unjustified.

Thanks for all your emails to Board members. Apparently, when enough of you complain, you get results. But the battle isn't over, so keep up the pressure, continue emailing Board members HERE, and be sure to show up at the Nov. 4 meeting, as well as our regular Board meeting coming up next Monday, Oct. 21.

Thanks again!!

You really want a $200 special assessment for cameras?

Some Board of Directors members think you’re rich. They claim to speak not only for themselves but for all International Village owners when they say that you wouldn’t mind paying a $200 special assessment to install 26 “security” cameras in each of the Village’s 11 residential buildings, at a total cost of about $150,000. They say you want these cameras now, privacy be damned, and you’re ready to write a check today to get them.

Big Brother could be coming to your building.

Does this sound like you? I didn’t think so. But that isn’t stopping certain Board members from convincing themselves that their views are those of all unit owners, because they surround themselves by the echo chamber that is their small clique of well-to-do friends. To them, you don’t exist. They haven’t seen the many emails you’ve sent me telling me how strongly you oppose this project because you don’t want Big Brother watching you all the time, because cameras have proven ineffective in the clubhouse, and most of all, because you simply CANNOT afford another special assessment.

This Monday, you have a chance to let them know you exist.

International Village Board of Directors President Marvin Tow, an enthusiastic advocate for cameras everywhere, is calling a special meeting of the Board of Directors on Monday, Oct. 14 at 7 p.m. in the clubhouse to consider his $150,000 proposal, even though at least three out of seven Board members will be out of town and able to participate only by phone. In doing so, he’s ignoring calls from other Board members to at least first consider a demonstration project to prove they can work in the clubhouse – or in the Zurich building where cameras were installed at building owners’ expense a few years ago – before going whole-hog on this massive project.

Bottom line, we can't afford this. According to our property manager, there isn't enough money left in the fund from the last special assessment in 2012-13 to pay for this project and still have enough emergency reserves left over. That's why another special assessment is being proposed. In fact, even if the Board were to approve the project on Monday, another meeting would have to be held to actually pay for it. Because Florida law requires condo associations to mail all unit owners a notice of intent to special assess at least 14 days before a meeting approving a special assessment. So add the $500 cost of the mass mailing to the cost of the project. Yes, you'd be picking up the tab for both of course.

That’s why you need to show up and speak up at Monday's meeting, and start emailing Board members before the meeting HERE to let them know how you feel. Otherwise you will continue not to exist for them... Except when it comes to making you cough up another $200 in special assessment money.

How about a camera demonstration project?

You could soon be on candid camera, but you won't be smiling about what it costs you. 

Last week, a compliant Projects Committee endorsed a $150,000-plus management proposal to install between 26 and 32 "security" cameras in each of International Village's 11 residential buildings, for a total of about 300 cameras. How would it be funded? With a special assessment, costing about $200 per unit, broken up into three or four monthly payments. (See 9/17/13 Projects Committee meeting video here.) 

But before our property manager brings this massive NSA-style surveillance scheme to the Board of Directors for a vote, I'd like to propose an alternative inspired by our recent decision regarding speed humps. Back in June, the Board shot down a plan to install 24 speed humps throughout the Village, opting instead for a "demonstration project" to put in just four in order to test their effectiveness. We could do the same thing with cameras, but unlike the speed hump test run (which thanks to a recent change order will cost upwards of $6,500), the camera pilot project wouldn't cost us anything because we already have cameras in the clubhouse – only they apparently haven't yet ever been put to the test. As I reported in my last blog post, equipment has disappeared from the clubhouse gym without ever being recovered, despite the presence of cameras in the gym room and throughout the clubhouse, a full-time guard monitoring the cameras at the front desk and a visitor sign-in log. So before we consider expanding the camera system to our residential buildings, I think we owe it to owners to show what good they're doing where they already exist. Otherwise, it'll be money down the drain at best, and a huge unnecessary invasion of privacy at worst. 

My proposal is simple: Give management 120 days to prove they can make cameras work in the clubhouse before they bring their surveillance system special assessment plan to the Board. The proof should be in the form of a report detailing all incidents of theft, property damage or other violations that take place during those four months and whether cameras helped nab the culprits. That way, we'll at least have something solid to base our vote on. 

Speaking of special assessments, our 2012-13 special assessment fund is now down to only about $175,000 following our most recent Board meeting last week (see 9/16/13 Board of Directors meeting video here), in which we OK'd more than $35,000 in spending, the bulk of which will come out of that rapidly diminishing fund. 

The Board approved the following items:  

• Up to $16,000 to replace four old air conditioning ducts in the clubhouse. The actual price may be lower, depending on the bids we get. 

• A $7,780 contract with Todd Knapp Inc. to stabilize the clubhouse pool pump room ceiling. The repairs will correct a problem existing since 2009, when the City of Lauderhill posted an "Unsafe Structure" violation notice on the pump room door because of the ceiling.  

• A $5,200 clubhouse roof change order with Todd Knapp Inc. for the removal of old protruding stucco finish around the perimeter of the roof to prevent water infiltration, and the replacement of affected shingles. 

• A $3,000 contract, also with Todd Knapp Inc. to reinforce the delaminating Grenoble building façade facing the Orleans using galvanized steel tapcons. 

• A $2,655 speed hump change order with Atlantic Southern Paving and Sealcoating for additional asphalt to meet city code requirements, bringing the project's total cost to $6,580 – or $1,645 per speed hump. That sounded pretty steep for a speed bump to me, so I voted against it, just as I voted no on the original project when it first came up on June 10.  

• A $4,000 contract with S&S Inventive Technologies to replace the Orleans trash compactor, using operating funds. 

Special assessment for cameras?

The International Village Board of Directors will hold its regular monthly meeting tonight (Monday, Sept. 16 at 7 p.m.), but the Board meeting may just be a warm-up act for what could be the week’s main attraction on Tuesday at 6 p.m. when the Projects Committee meets to discuss a proposed $100,000-plus special assessment to install 26 security cameras in each of the association's 11 residential buildings.

Proponents of the idea – which could translate into a $150 special assessment hit per unit owner – say cameras are needed to catch people in the act of dumping garbage in front of laundry rooms, stealing mail packages from people’s front doors and various other violations. Opponents counter that it’s a violation of privacy, reminiscent of a maximum-security prison, and an unnecessarily burdensome expense at a time when many owners are still recovering from the last special assessment and other big projects on the horizon are threatening to wipe out our rapidly dwindling 2012-13 special assessment fund. Critics also question cameras’ effectiveness, noting that a set of dumbbells recently disappeared from the clubhouse gym despite the presence of cameras in the gym room and throughout the clubhouse. Even advocates of security cameras in every building are balking at the high price tag, saying a surveillance system could be installed for a fraction of the proposed cost, either by finding a more reasonable vendor or by forgoing the Quantico Prison model in favor of a more modest system with fewer cameras. 

Regardless of the cost, it might instructive to first examine the outcome of the Zurich building’s experiment with cameras before making any decisions on this issue. In June 2009, a committee of Zurich owners won the Board of Directors’ approval to install surveillance cameras in that building at their own expense. What were the results of that effort? 

It’s also worth noting the ironic fact that this issue is coming up only a few short months after the owners of a Bordeaux unit were refused permission to install a security camera in front of their door at their own expense. Does this mean that cameras are good if they’re paid for by a special assessment, but bad if they don’t cost us anything? Where’s the logic?

New tenant screening process and pre-Labor Day party

International Village has automated its rental and purchase application process. From now on, instead of filling out an approximately 20-page printed application, prospective renters and buyers will be directed to a website where they must complete the application online. The new system, which was approved by the Board of Directors at last week’s meeting, will streamline the process and reduce the Sales and Lease Committee’s workload by eliminating the need to hound applicants for any missing information, as the automated system will not accept incomplete applications.  

Tenant Evaluation, the company International Village has been using for years to conduct applicant background checks, will provide the service at no extra charge. International Village will continue paying the company $45 per application out of the $100 processing fee the association collects from applicants. The Sales and Lease Committee, chaired by Board member Frances Mesirow, will continue performing the job of approving or disapproving applicants.

Another benefit of the new system may be a reduction in the number of people who lie about their income in order to qualify to lease or own a unit -- a very frequently voiced concern among owners. As a deterrent to providing false income data, the Board adopted my suggestion of requiring applicants to authorize the association to obtain their most recent tax return from the IRS as part of the application process.

In other action last week, the Board retroactively approved the following emergency projects that came up during our summer break: $14,800 for a new clubhouse air conditioning system, $3,250 to stop a leak in the outdoor pool, and $5,900 to replace 15 feet of storm drain between Heidelberg and Edelweiss to prevent the seawall from collapsing due to a sinkhole that formed during the recent heavy rains. (See the Aug. 19 meeting video here.)

Finally, International Village owners and residents are invited to a pre-Labor Day potluck party this coming Sunday, Sept. 1 from 5-10 p.m. in the clubhouse, featuring a live band and dancing. Bring a dish or barbecue items and come out and meet your neighbors as we say goodbye to the summer!