Saturday, January 31, 2009




A TIDBIT

The candidates for the nine Director positions are as follows.

Richard Hansen, Virginia Martin, Annita White , Don Halback , Eddie Montalva, Joe Long, Jose Guerra, Martha Nell Dodson, Don Pelletier, Bill Gagan, Ed McBride, Tom Bergsma, Ted Burns, Shirley Ritten, Mary Steffensen, Pat Burke, and Robert Wilson.
Read more on this article...

Friday, January 30, 2009




JANUARY SUGGESTIONS We would love your suggestion that will improve our Village. Suggestions may be viewed by those visiting. We will renew the display each month. Anonymous are welcomed. So throw one in the box.
Read more on this article...

Wednesday, January 28, 2009


WATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT

The Board is debating on whether to continue with Berry Pools maintaining control of our pool and spas water chemistry. It’s who you talk to as to whether it has been worth the expense. Although the water has not turned cloudy and green as many times as before, there have been some new problems with body hair loss and garment color change.

Our last Board thought this service might serve better and lessen the many complaints. Management seemed unable to master the pool operation, especially in the water chemistry area. This was taken out of their hands with using this system that monitors and adjusts automatically.

When this service was originally presented I got the impression that if the water system had any problem; Berry Pools would see to it immediately. They instead appear to rely on our Village to identify chemical or mechanical problems and wait to be contacted.

Management initially said that this system would save our Village 30% towards the chemical costs. That has never been shown to have happened.

At first I thought this was a good idea since having unknowable pool operators being trained by management with questionable experience. Now after seeing we have some of the same problems with a few new ones, I have grown somewhat reluctant.

What we will receive for $17,940 a year.
1. Our Village gets to use 4 controllers, 2 power base chlorinators, and 3 suction feeders that will regulate the chemicals in the water for both pools and each spa. This equipment will be owned and maintained solely by Berry Pools.
2. This system should have a “call out alarm conditions” to 4 pager numbers or e-mail addresses. If it does Berry Pool’s contract says it still depends upon on verbal notification from the customer of mechanical or chemical problems.
3. The monthly fee apparently does not include chemicals used and the Village will have to pay market price for them. That seems to mean our Village pays full retail price and not wholesale.
4. Berry Pools makes the decision on how frequently they need to visit our Village for the proper operation of their equipment. They are supposed to keep the chemical feeders filled.
5. The BP contract makes our Village agree to let them add 18% finance charge if Aramark pays our bill late.
6. Berry Pools will receive chemical data at two hours intervals for 30 days so LIV may have a copy at month’s end.
That’s pretty much it.

Overall we get the use of their equipment to keep the chemicals in our water stabilized and recorded. If called, they will fix or adjust any problem with said equipment at no charge, unless it was cause from property negligence, vandalism, pool draining, faulty electric, inadequate circulations, or an Act of God. This does not include such things as our pumps, heaters, filters, and everything else. This for only $17,940 a year plus market price for their chemicals.

What’s interesting is this $17,940 Berry Pools receives as a service charge, is more than what Aramark has paid any previous pool operator to maintain the entire operation of the facilities. Add in the current pool operator's wages and you are well over $30,000 a year.

Aramark’s contract says they are to provide us with personnel and management to
1. Check and maintain pool water quality-pH and chlorine.
2. Check water temperature of spas and indoor and adjust as needed keep Berry Pools and
3. Check and adjust the pool equipment.

If the Board decides to spend this extra $17,940 a year to do management’s job for them, shouldn’t our Village get reimbursed? If our Board elects to do away with Berry Pools, shouldn't we demand that management and their staff perform to their contractual duties?

This was approved to apparently help a bad situation and get this pool monkey off the backs of management and the old Board at the cost of the owners. It would be interesting to compare last year’s chemical cost to that of three years ago.
Should we keep them?



Read more on this article...

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

January 21, 2009 COFFEE W/ DIRECTORS

Pledge of Allegiance

VP Young reading from the suggestion box

SC 85 asked about cluster mail boxes with the numbers corresponding to the lots. Director Burke commented that there is also a possibility of a rural route for our Village. Director Hansen commented on our current problems. Someone from the audience mentioned there was a certified post office person that resides in our park. An owner complained about all the problems she has gone through and said please don’t change a thing or it will be all messed up again.

Lot 288 commented on the non participation of our management with helping with the Time Warner installation. Director Burke was quick to say management didn’t receive a copy of the contract until nine days ago and then asked if the construction plans was done as it requested in the TW contract. She asked if Director Dodson had followed up with this since she was handling the contract. Director Dodson said she only helped to negotiate the contract and nothing beyond that except take calls. Director Dodson also said she put a copy of the contract on our GM’s desk personally. The GM denies ever receiving one. The GM did interrupt to say he verbally gave the layout of the Village to the TW engineer. He inferred that he did get all the location of the lines flagged. He mentioned that it was not in his contract to do that. He said he worked with them day and night. Director Dodson said she had a problem when our GM had told owners he had nothing to do with TW and if you have a problem her. She expects management to address problem calls. She also said once policy is approved, management is suppose to follow up with it and that has not happened. There was a back and forth about what Aramark’s contract with this and questions of who is responsible for the follow through with a TW situation.. Our GM gave our owners a history lesson of how he many times went outside the scope of the contract to do things. He took twenty minutes talking about how he has helped doing this and that. He then yelled at Jim Peterson for saying something which started this back and forth verbage.
Lot 28 thanked Director Dodson for her effort with TW and wanted people to look at this positively. He said things should be more documented. He said if this is done it would make people more accountable.
Lot ? Asked when TW is going to connect the TV in the exercise room. Answer was it is to be the last connection.
Lot 380 said that certain Board members are supposed to represent owners and not Aramark. It was asked for the ones doing this to quit it.
Lot 333 said their trailer was taken on a different day than scheduled and the appliances that were to be removed, wasn’t. The GM gave the permission to remove the trailer on a weekend after the office supposedly told the owner it had wait until Monday. The owner said he had rescheduled the appliance removal and cleanup for Monday. Owner also had a complaint about a neighbor using his electricity from his outdoor box when they stayed.
Lot R Owner said please consider some new park benches around the Village. Bud Sherry said you buy them and I’ll put them together. One Owner who I didn’t get his name said he would donate one.
Lot 171 said he had concerns about TW installations not being completed with various other questions. Director Dodson answered the questions one at a time.
Lot 617 had a problem with TW finding him as a customer in their system. The Rep. said that until they are completely done and does a final system test, it will not show up as an acct.
There was a short discussion about reclaimed water.
From the audience a man asked if the Board is keeping up with the various lawsuits and if so, how?
Lot 597 asks a question about having the State take over our swing bridge. Still working towards it was the short version answer.
Lot ? Someone asked about a parking lot for the boat trailers. The reply was that is a previous issue if ever done, has to have enough room for all 1024 lots.
There were questions about running for the Board and using teleconferencing.
Lot 853 told everyone to go to the Bridge Board meetings.
Lot 249 made a comment about the President’s statements in January’s newsletter saying they were one way communications, negative, selective, expressing a personal agenda, and seemed to be straight out of this blog.
Lot 28 asked if the manager Les Heier was related in any way to our GM. Our GM said no.
Lot? Someone made the comment to have someone working at the activity office 8 hrs a day.
Lot 525 thanked Annita White at the activity office for being so friendly to everyone. She has moved to another job.
Lot 120 complained that new $20 bills used in our laundry’s coin machine doesn’t work.
Lot 679 announce the Blood mobile will be here Feb. 10th from 8am-12
Annita White thanked everyone and explained her future job as a music director.
It was announced that on the 28th at 7pm Hello Dolly speaker forum will be held.

Work Shop
Agenda about LIV’s contribution towards paying half of a certified survey to reroute the intercostals waterway costing approximately $2000 was made. This was discussed at length.
Agenda for bench sites was made.
Agenda for three new Board Meeting microphones
Director Steffensen wishes to have on the agenda I believe the Revenue and expense projections for our legal and major improvement fund.
GM said he obtained a consultant by the name of Bob Hendricks from a company called Zebra International to layout our pool facility problems. It was asked how much will he cost. The GM didn’t know.
Director Hansen wanted on the agenda to talk about having various committees such as finance, Insurance, building and grounds.
Director Hansen wanted Aramark’s contract to have more clarification on management’s responsibility towards utilities. He also wanted to keep to a one year contract.
There was a question about a counter suit against Arroyo Cable for the removal of their equipment.
Director Peterson wanted on the agenda to talk about ways to make our Restaurant and Rental dept. from losing so much money or possibly eliminating both of them. Director Burke’s reply was ambiguous but definitely argumentative toward him when she wanted to include all the amenities.
Director Hansen wanted the Berry Pool contract on the agenda. The cost is now up to $1495 a month plus supplies.



Read more on this article...

Thursday, January 22, 2009

THE MANAGER’S REPORT

Below we have the general manager’s fire hydrant report taken from our Village Newsletter for January. It seems to read that change orders and one of three bids supposedly reviewed for this fire hydrant relocation were approved by the Board before this work was ever started. It implies that Director Dodson voided the check to pay the contractor because she had misunderstood this.

(Manager’s report)
The Fire Hydrant is complete. Landscaped around it. Did excavation and meets standards of fire plugs. Larry continued to give history of how he had received three bids, the Board voted for the $6,000 bid, which was the low bid. The bid was for moving the fire plug and adding a new plug valve. Bid was made on what bidder could see. If something comes up that is unforeseen then that has to be added. To meet standards of fireplugs, risers had to be ordered and labor was additional. That was an additional$1,000 (labor included). So a check was made for $7,000 which Dir. Young signed without question and then the check was sent to Dir. Dodson who voided the check because the Board had only voted on paying $6,000, the original price. Now GM is asking for the Board’s approval to pay for the extra materials and labor to bring the fire plug up to standard.

This summation appears dissimilar in the way this chain of events actually unfolded and left out some important elements which should be mentioned. The following is a more accurate synopsis.
During our 9/4/2008 rescheduled Regular Board meeting, Director McBride said he thought there may be a safety issue on a recent relocation of a fire hydrant. He also asked why this fire hydrant was out of commission for 10 months when it only had to be relocated across the street from its old spot. It was decided to discuss this further at the next Board Workshop.

Due to the lawsuit, this next Workshop didn’t happen until 10/15/2008 where Director McBride reiterated his concerns about the hydrant height and relocation cost. Our GM explained that the Port Isabel’s Fire Marshall didn’t have a problem with the hydrant, but this being out of his jurisdiction; he of course wouldn’t approve it. The GM said many of Port Isabel’s fire hydrants are as low as this one. The only action our GM wanted to do about this was to dig around it some more. Director McBride insisted that our Village is paying for a correct installation, not an improper one. The GM said he did not see how he would be able to get this contractor back in without information about the required Fire Department’s height standards in which to prove to him that he improperly installed it.

At first this seemed to make a lot of sense until the minutes for the June 28th, 2006 Regular Board Meeting revealed that our GM reported “#12. Fire Hydrants at Sea Cottages have been brought to the Fire Departments required height.” One would think if he knew then the requirements, should not he know them now? If one of the GM’s responsibilities is to oversee work done in our Village, should he not have known this hydrant was not at its proper height immediately and made the contractor aware to do it right?

At the 10/22/2008 Board meeting Director McBride provided the national and local fire hydrant height requirements off the internet, with pictures. The GM seemed to ignore this to say he had just talked to the contractor and he is coming out to correct this situation at no charge to LIV what-so-ever.

(Manager’s report)
Dir. Dodson said that the Board had been told at the last board meeting that the company would honor the $6,000 amount. Then she was presented with a check in the amount of $7,000 for signature ($1,000 more) so she voided the check in the interest of the resort.

After the fire hydrant was finally installed correctly, the contractor’s check was made out by the management staff and apparently delivered to Directors Young and Dodson by mistake for signatures. It had two invoices with one thought to showing the exact opposite of what our GM had stated. Director Dodson voided this check to insure it was not paid until she, the Board, and owners had an explanation.
This explanation came at the following 11/19/2008 Director’s meeting when our GM gave everyone in attendance a long lesson about how contractors only bid on what they see and their use of change orders. He said there was a change order to raise this fire hydrant to its proper height and this of course added to the cost.


To my knowledge, this was the first time change orders have ever been mentioned in a Board meeting. He made no endeavor to explain his previous proclamation that the contractor was to do this at no charge.

(Manager’s report)
Now GM is asking for the Board's approval to pay for the extra materials and labor to bring the fire plug up to standard. Dir.
McBride reported that the company had overcharged. South Padre Island company charges under $4,000. He said that if Larry had asked for people who do this in the Port Isabel, South Padre Island area, it would have been for a considerable less amount of money. Larry replied that the 6" valve was moved across the street and the Board did approve the bid.


Or did they?
The only mention in the minutes about this hydrant was found on November 21st, 2007. Armando said “Water leak at Lot 27. Fixed. Fire hydrant not working.” That’s it.
If our previous Board did approve this $6000 open end bid to put in a new valve and relocate this fire hydrant, they would have made a motion and given an approval for such at a scheduled board meeting. Without question this would have been recorded in the minutes.
To this date, there is no other record found in the minutes to indicate three bids were ever reviewed as our GM claims, much less having one bid receiving a motion for approval. To my knowledge no previous LIV Boards have ever approved an open ended bid without the maximum amount of overage at least being specified.


(Manager’s report)
Dir. McBride mentioned that he could not find a motion on item anywhere in the minutes.
Dir. Hansen commented, as a follow up, that he was unable to find a bid. Could GM provide before this board. Pres. Sullivan requested that Sec. Mulch provide minutes that will show that $6,000 was approved by Board.

Wouldn’t owner’s best interests be served with the assurance that this expenditure had a Board approval? Should we be fools in believing it was approved but nobody knows just exactly when or where, along with it somehow was not recorded in the minutes? Directors on the Board have requested documentation showing when it was approved. Are they going to be ignored?
Owners are also deserving of a very good explanation as to why our GM so clearly said in a board meeting right to their faces that there would be no charge to LIV what so ever while quietly slapping our Village with a $1000 invoice and having to eventually force feed us with this ridiculous change order story after this money took notice, check stopped, and required some answers?

Are owners once again being told one thing only to find out it’s another? Is this to become a permanent reoccurring theme within our Village? Is this happening because accountability cannot be effectively enforced?
This summer six of our Board members had tried to promote accountability and were frequently taunted by a small group of owners with moans, verbal abuses, heckling, smear tactics, and let's not forget an invalid director recall. It was topped off by these currently pending lawsuits against these same directors which have all but tied their hands on enforcing what little management accountability there was.

Which brings me to this last concern? If management wanted our Village to pay $1000 for work which ended up being negotiated for 35% less, why wasn’t it negotiated from the start? Is this the procedure for all Village transactions? This makes one wonder just how wisely our Village money is really being spent and if the Village’s best interest are being served?

A person cannot help but feel that they’ve been hosed about this hydrant relocation venture?

When is all this crap going to end and management accountability really begin?

Read more on this article...

Wednesday, January 14, 2009


A TIDBIT

Good news!
The new Hayward WGX1048E VGB drain covers have been installed for the indoor pool and hot tubs. I hope our management has figured out what
to install for the second level of entrapment protection for the pool. The hot tubs may need the second also.

WHAT YOU SHOULD DO TO BECOME COMPLIANT
• On all drains, install a NEW ASME/ANSI A112.19.8 performance standard anti-vortex or anti-entrapment cover (currently being developed)
• On all pools or spas that have single drains that are not unblockable OR two main drains measuring less than 36” apart (three-feet from center to center ) per pump must have at least one additional level of entrapment protection (See above)




Read more on this article...
TIME WARNER MEETING

We had our Time Warner sales rep. here Tuesday answering questions. He started out on the wrong foot by being an hour late. He didn’t have any bundling prices to hand out because there seems to be none since we already have the $49.99 Standard Service (Basic and Expanded Basic Service) being taken out of our condo fees at under $11. Don’t take this wrong because as you can see our Standard Service being paid in our condo fees is so low, any item at its price below which makes up a bundle still appears lower that their packaged bundle special prices for this area.


Services

Analog Cable Packages Cost Per Month
Basic Service $22.00
Standard Service (Basic and Expanded Basic Service) $49.99
It is my understanding that this is what we pay in our condo fees

Digital Cable Package (HD) Cost Per Month
Standard Service, Digital Basic, 48 CD-Quality Music
Choice Channels, Free on Demand, access to Video On
Demand, access to Pay-Per-View & the On-Screen
Interactive Program Guide
$51.99
This was said to be available to us for $15 a month.

The rest below seems to be the price for what you want to add.
Digital Premium Services Cost Per Month
Digital HBO Multiplex (15 screens)* $14.99
Digital Cinemax Multiplex (12 screens) $9.99
Digital Showtime Multiplex (14 screens)* $14.99
Digital TMC Multiplex (4 screens) $9.99
Digital Starz! Multiplex (10 screens)¨ $12.95
Double Feature -Choice of 2 Premiums $24.99
(Excludes Cinemax and TMC together)
Movie Mogul (All Premiums) $39.99
*Includes screens of HDTV, which require High Definition
Receiver, available from Time Warner Cable
¨Starz! On Demand not yet available

Below is the site to show what programs you get for what package or service


http://www.timewarnercable.com/MediaLibrary/4/53/Content%20Management/Products%20And%20Services/documents/RGV%20FINAL.pdf


Digital Services Cost Per Month
Navigator (Includes on-screen guide, Music Choice) $4.00
Digital Cable $6.99
Movie Service $6.99
Mas Canales $6.99
Sports Service $6.99
High Definition Service* $6.99
Sports/HD* Package $11.99
Family Choice $12.99
All Access TV Tier (Includes Movie Service, Sports Service
and HD* Service)
$17.99
Digital Video Recorder Service (DVR) $9.99
High Definition DVR Recorder Service (HD DVR)* $9.99
Digital Additional Outlet Fee $1.50
*Includes screens of HDTV, which require High Definition
Receiver, available from Time Warner Cable

Video On Demand Cost
Premiums On Demand* $6.95
New Releases $4.99 each
New Releases in HD $5.99 each
Library Title $1.99 each & up
Adult Programming $11.99 each & up
*Must subscribe to matching premium multiplex to receive
Premiums On Demand

Equipment Cost Per Month
Addressable Receiver $7.68
Non-addressable Converter $.55
Remote $.31
CableCard $2.99

High-Speed Online Services Cost Per Month
High-Speed Online Service $44.99
Wireless Home Networking* $9.99
Road Runner Turbo (Add-on)* $9.95
*Price is additional to regular High Speed Online monthly rate.

Digital Home Phone Services Cost Per Month
Unlimited local and long distance throughout Texas, across the U.S.,
Canada, Puerto Rico and most U.S. territories; Caller ID, Call Waiting, Call
Waiting ID and Call Forwarding
Digital Home Phone Service $44.99
Digital In State Phone Texas $39.99
Digital Local Phone $34.99
Digital Home Phone Service Voice Mail $3.95
Unpublished Phone Number $5.50
International OnePrice Calling Plan* (Add-On) $19.95
*International OnePrice Calling plan is available to customers who
subscribe to any Digital Phone calling plan and Digital Cable
and/or Road Runner High Speed Online. Up to 1,000 minutes
allowed per month on calling Plan to over 100 countries.

Service Protection Plan Cost Per Month
Total Home SPP (Video/HSD/Digital Home Phone) $4.95

Installation One-time Charge
Video Installation $39.99
High Speed Online Installation $39.99
Digital Phone Installation $39.99
Truck Roll $39.99
Installation of Unwired Homes (New Unwired Homes) $59.99
Port Number Fee $20.00
Activate and certify existing wired outlet – same trip $15.99
Additional Outlet (at install) $19.99
Additional Outlet (separate trip) $39.99
Addressable Change of Service $1.99
Transfer within serviceable area $19.99
Wireless Home Networking Installation $49.99
Additional Computer Wireless Home Networking
Installation
$49.99
Wall Fish $49.99

Fees One-time Charge
Field Collection Fee $15.00
NSF Fee $30.00
PPV Movie or Event Convenience Fee $5.00
Late Payment Fee (30 days) $2.95
Late Payment Fee (45 days) additional $2.00
Early Equipment Return Fee $15.00
In Person Transaction Fee $2.00
Call Center Payment Fee $2.00

Unreturned Equipment Fees One-time Charge
Non-Addressable Converter $100.00
Addressable Analog Converter $200.00
Digital Receiver $200.00
DVR-Enabled Receiver $350.00
HD DVR-Enabled Receiver $450.00
High Definition Receiver $450.00
Remote Control $20.00
Cable Modem $100.00
Phone Modem $200.00
CableCARDTM $100.00
Wireless USB Adapter/NIC Card $35.00
Dongle $50.00
USB Cord/Ethernet Card/Component Wires $50.00
Modem’s Power Pack $15.00




Read more on this article...

Thursday, January 08, 2009

HOT TUB RUB



For three weeks I’ve wanted to use the outdoor hot tub. As a precaution on Christmas Eve I tested the water before using it and was glad I did. I found the PH level way too low and didn't risk it. On New Year’s Eve I was back only to right away notice the outdoor hot tub water was starting to turn green. The water was not hot, read zero on chlorine/bromine with a PH reading off the scale low. I tested the indoor hot tub and found both the chlorine/bromine and PH levels also off the scale high. I didn’t dare use either. Yesterday I once again tried the outdoor hot tub and guess what? It again read zero on chlorine/bromine with the PH level way too low. The indoor hot tub read high but usable. A Village couple who said they had lost their body hair using the pool and hot tubs asked me to test the indoor pool. I did and it tested OK.
I find it alarming that we pay over a thousand dollars a month for Berry Pool to do our management’s job to keep what I experience these last three weeks from happening. I noticed one of the drain covers totally missing in the outdoor hot tub along one broken in each the indoor hot tub and pool. We were told by our GM the pool facility was in Federal Law compliance to the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act. Obviously it is not. With these drain covers broken and missing, we aren’t even in the easy compliance of the Texas state codes. To make things worse there seems to be no one here who you can really address this problem to? These years of consistent pool problems make management appear inept to solve anything and the answer I get from a senior director is that’s why we have insurance.

Texas Administrative Code

TITLE 25
HEALTH SERVICES
PART 1
DEPARTMENT OF STATE HEALTH SERVICES
CHAPTER 265
GENERAL SANITATION
SUBCHAPTER L
STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC POOLS AND SPAS
RULE §265.190
Suction Outlets and Return Inlets at Post-10/01/99 and Pre-10/01/99 Pools and Spas

(a) Suction outlets for post-10/01/99 and pre-10/01/99 pools and spas. Any suction outlet system for a post-10/01/99 or pre-10/01/99 pool or spa circulation or filtration system, booster system, automatic cleaning system, solar system, water feature, etc., must be designed to protect against a suction entrapment, evisceration or hair entrapment/entanglement hazard and must comply with this section. Drain covers and grates do not need to be flush with the floor. For the purpose of this section, skimmers are not considered to be suction outlets.
(b) Closure of post-10/01/99 and pre-10/01/99 pools and spas if the suction outlet is defective. If the owner or operator of a post-10/01/99 or pre-10/01/99 pool or spa knows or should have known in the exercise of ordinary care that a cover or grate of a suction outlet (including a vacuum outlet) is missing, broken, or loose, the pool or spa must be closed immediately and the pump(s) must be shut off. The pool or spa must remain closed until a proper repair or replacement has been accomplished. The pool or spa shall not be opened unless all covers or grates are securely installed according to subsection (c)(5) of this section and subsection (g) of this section. Suction outlets must have cover(s) complying with subsection (c)(1) of this section or grate(s) complying with subsection (c)(2) of this section, as well as covers for vacuum outlets complying with subsection (g) of this section.



This situation needs to be addressed before someone becomes ill or injured. The Federal Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act and as this Texas state code above call for closure of the pools and hot tubs until the time that they are in compliance. This seems to be a poor position to put our Village in for someone who might be looking to sue somebody.



Read more on this article...