September 2011 Recorded Town Hall Meeting
This audio is in its entirety, un-redacted, in order to preserve the full context of the meeting in everything that was asked, how it was asked, and how certain board members responded (incorrectly more often than not); and how the attorney present responded just the same (often incorrectly and giving bad advice to the board).
The audio is an hour and 29 minutes long...
This discussion specifically about the garbage cans carries on from about 3 min to 12 min 22 seconds...then the attorney begins a short rationalization in order to justify the need for an amendment because of how the CC&R is currently written regarding the waste receptacles.
Same homeowner continued with her reasoning on the garbage can issue to 14 min 05 seconds.
Another homeowner than spoke up at 15 min and 30 sec regarding the sidewalks and street tree issue. He felt that what the board proposed in their introduction letter to the members in anticipation of this meeting. Addressing interpretation, he said there is no need for interpretation when the CC&Rs clearly states that the homeowner "shall" vs. the HOA "is". Tony Roos then at 18 min offered to give their (the Board) interpretation is what they want to accomplish. Premising the response that they are a "volunteer board," the infamous excuse for when they are questioned why they are doing things wrong.
19 min and 5 seconds, Tony Roos, according to him, as long as he has been on the board, it was determined that the HOA would be responsible for the street trees, planter strips, and sidewalks on Foothills Drive. He went on to describe a completely inaccurate scenario of assuming a homeowner would sue the HOA for not fixing the sidewalks damaged by street trees, so they just assumed this responsibly though it does not state it has in the CC&Rs. They just took it upon themselves to assume this and call it a common improvement when the street trees and sidewalks along Foothills are NOT common improvements of the association.
22 min 15 sec Christopher Tingey then reads Section 7.1 commenting that all street trees on each Lot shall be the responsibility of the HOA. However, the HOA Board of Directors, then and now, simply disagrees with that writing and does't want to be responsible for what the CC&Rs so clearly states.
23 min 45 sec Christopher admits again that street trees on each Lot is what the CC&Rs states and what the HOA is responsible, but that is not what they want; hence the amendment to change the language to fit the current misinterpretation of the past to present Board of Directors.
Then at 25 min and 10 seconds, Christopher makes a gross statement about our CC&Rs being a private contract that supersedes any laws, regulations or ordinances of the City of Newberg. That, homeowners, if simply not true. No private party contract, especially when the City of Newberg is NOT even a part of that contract, can supersede city laws and ordinances. Period.
AT 26 min another homeowner spoke up about the homeowners that do not use Foothills Drive, whey does everyone have to pay for it. It only benefits those living on Foothills Drive and no one else. Tony Roos responds at 28 min that Foothills is the gateway entrance to the association. He was ignored. So basically that was the reasoning why the board form the beginning assumed that everything on Foothills would be the HOAs responsibility, to include the street trees and sidewalks, though the CC&Rs state clearly otherwise. Again, they do not care and never cared what the CC&Rs state, they just wanted to do things their way.
At 29 min and 35 sec, Christopher Tingey stated quite clearly that it does not matter what the board's interpretation of the CC&Rs are, right or wrong, since they decided to (incorrect) assume the responsibility for everything on Foothills Drive, just because it was the primary entrance to the association, that is what he is recommending to the Board just continue to do what they are doing.
At 30 min and 15 sec, Christopher Tingey tries to quote the Oregon Planned Community Act on the % required to make an amendment to the CC&Rs as 30%, when it is NOT. It is 75%, the same % annotated in the CC&Rs for any amendment to be made and perfected.
31 min and 7 sec, Tony Roos then defines for a homeowner that what they want to modify with the amendment is to take care of the street trees and sidewalk damage caused by trees along Foothills Drive only.
33 min and 10 sec a homeowner asked what happened to the $13,000 reserves that they acquired by "jacking our dues up," and Tony Roos explained it when to trimming and pruning the trees, repairing sidewalks, and SW landscape strip due to irrigation issues. All of these items are NOT common improvements of the HOA according to Section 7.1 of the CC&Rs. This violates the Oregon Planned Community Act on what funds in the reserve fund goes for.
36 min into the 40 mins is a homeowner who was on and off the board describing the problem of each new board having a new and different interpretation of the CC&Rs, and that is the problem; and she mentioned why the HOA hired a management company to begin with was due to a former secretary stealing money, writing checks and depositing it into their own personal accounts. Now this is all costing us more money.
42 min 55 sec a homeowner speaks up about the required 75% vote of homeowners to pass the special amendment the board is proposing. He makes a point that given the people present and who has spoken, the board does not have the support to make a motion to vote on putting the amendment forward before the homeowners to even vote upon knowing full well that they will not meet the 75% vote of homeowners.
49 min Tony Roos calls for a straw poll of those present on approving the motion to move forward with the expense of doing the amendment changes. At 51 min and 15 sec Tony Roos realizes they will not get the 75% needed. Admitted again at 52 min 45 sec.
53 min 40 sec Christopher Tingey proceeds to answer a homeowners question about if the HOA did go to court over the fact that they have not been following what the CC&Rs state and have only been consistent in their incorrect interpretation, then would't they be okay. Christopher answers as follows that in court all bets are off. Conversation then got off track a bit...back on track, he talked about if the Board did follow the CC&Rs, assessments would go through the roof if the HOA took care of all trees on each Lot, and the Board does not want to do it. He would feel comfortable going into court and arguing this, but the judge could come back and say the plain language of the document says trees on each lot, and he would say "you're right judge."
56 min a board member speaks about the past confrontations between homeowners and even towards board members, so they hired a management company, the present being the second company. The board members want to feel safe in their homes.
1hr Tony Roos argues that the street trees do benefit every home value in the association, but it does not.
1 hr 2 minutes Christopher Tingey tries to explain what CC&Rs are, and evens stated they are "the law of the land," which is INCORRECT. Only the US Constitution is the "law of the land." His further description on who gives and receives the covenants is incorrect. The CC&Rs come from the Declarant, not a homeowner to another homeowner. He disagreed with my reading of a recent Oregon Appellate Court ruling without even citing a single case. Deflection is not proof of an argument. In effect he did not even address the underlining point that CC&Rs are discretionary.
1 hr 5 min, a homeowner asked if we could get rid of the association, the attorney said we would need more than 75% to do that, but was not sure, would have to look it up. People dismissed this question by scoffing and joking about how the neighborhood would look without it. (With it it looks no better or worse than if we were without it)
1 hr 6 min the attorney talks about why we have pockets of homes within the association that are NOT included within the association due to the developers failure to annex them into the association.
1 hr 8 min, homeowner noted that our community looks no better or worse, or different than any other community around here. Response was each has its own HOA and they are run differently.
1 hr 16 min attorney basically admits that the best way to go to avoid court and being told by a judge to do it the way it should have been done in the beginning is to do it the way it should have been from the start.
1 hr 19 min Tony Roos wants to support amendments, but not waste association money and time if they are not even going to get 75% votes. He recounted how each meeting the attendance is nil to none, so based on the historical lack of support, they will not get the 75% required vote to pass the amendment to change the CC&Rs Section 7.1 and the others identified.
1 hr 25 min Tony asked, in failure to pass special assessment, what do they do next?
1 hr 25 min 50 sec, Christopher Tingey said the Board can do a resolution to interpret the documents and admits the resolution is not enforceable if it is contradictory to the documents. Here is where the status quo was mentioned and agreed to continue moving forward since the resolution would contradict the documents, "who knows if a court would uphold it...so."
1 hr 27 min 40 sec a board member asks if they just vote to continue to do the status quo, motion put forth, no discussion, voted and passed. (This motion and vote was conveniently not annotated on the meeting minutes for this meeting)
