MHA Management Committee Minutes 7-25-05

Management Committee Meeting, July 25, 2005.

Approval of minutes from 6/27

1. Resident Manager's report.
2. Property Manager's report/ Grievance procedure/ update on city fix-ups (see back page) /confidentiality agreement
3. Discussion of grievance protocol/
5. Budget re-approvals/recommendations - Mark and Paul
Considerations: a 3% raise for maintenance person to keep up with inflation?
Observations: The net operation income belongs to the MHA; given that,
We require Thistle to be successful/
Strategic reserves for the MHA for things like adequate signage?
6. Procedures for new park applicants reviewed (see below)
7. Schedule of summer quarterly meeting? Coordinate with updates on infrastructure? See site committee report.

Committee Reports:
Site/infrastructure committee report - Bill Windsor or Mark Reeder/
Management committee Report -
Finance committee report - Silvia

Old Business
What is the status on insurance? Will be important for CU project?
Insurance/volunteer issue: Waiver only needed? What are the requirements for liability insurance for MHA-member volunteers who do such things as mow MHA common-area lawns, irrigate, fertilize, and weed same... and tend flowers? Does MHA have a need to formally monitor, track and orchestrate such activities? How do visitors they know when they are on MHA property and how do they know when they move to City of Boulder property in the form of the Goose Creek Greenway ? Are dogs allowed ? There is little signage, and little enforcement. Has a resident been given a response to his letter of May 6? MHA executive board is supposed to review.

The property manager doesn’t think we can get insurance to cover volunteers working in the Park. Can’t get direct workers compensation and there is liability but these claims would send the premiums sky-high.

A formal meeting needs to be scheduled with the resident whose home 'does not exist on the map' to explain what is what.

New Business
Next meetings - Jonathan gone Aug 8? (small meeting) Aug. 22 (big meeting)

Application Process, clarified:
To clarify the application process, these are the steps to apply to live in the Park: 1) go to Hast & Company at 525 Canyon Blvd. for a background check. There is a $30 fee. Once Hast notifies the applicant that they have been cleared through the background check, then 2) the applicant must get an application from Thistle Community Housing at 1845 Folsom Street in Boulder (no fee). 3)Thistle will process the application and let the interested party know if are eligible for the home they're interested in and explain the rent tier and resale process.
questions about the process, email or call Barbara Navin at
303-443-0007 ext. 103.

back to top

Jonathan called the meeting to order at 6:15pm

Jonathan handed out copies of the old minutes from the June Meeting.
Alex Moved that the minutes from the old meeting be approved
Mark seconded, passed

Julie Morris gave her Management Report:

Resident Manager Report - July 2005
back to top

Five warning notices were sent to residents regarding parking violations. Four have complied and one is due to be towed August 8th. Also one resident who requested an extension is due to be towed today.

There are 17 units that are still in violation of the clean-up letter that went out June 21, 2005. The second letters will be sent this week.

Three sewer cleanouts were completed.

Six noise complaints have been received. The police were called on three, we talked to two residents and one incident resolved without confrontation.

Four letters were sent to residents - two concerning noise complaints, one for multiple occupancy without approval, and one for dog violation.

Three incidents of vandalism were reported. On 7/13-7/14 the street lights in Pole Park were broken and the covers thrown around ditch area. Also a car windshield was broken. A resident reported items on her porch designated for pickup, were taken by another resident and thrown in the dumpster. Also some of the birdhouses on stumps were thrown in the dumpster. The police were called by the resident. Also a report of an egg thrown at a home.

Parking signs for 14,15,16 are now installed.

One outside faucet was reported broken, and was repaired by Enzo.

Roger repaired asphalt areas on Folsom and Mapleton areas. We also have one more serious breakup on Folsom and Roger missed one area across from 26, which he has promised to do within a couple of weeks.

A reisdent has requested some tree trimming. Enzo & Julie looked at the area, and Enzo will complete this task if it is OK. Enzo and Julie removed tree in #179, which had already been approved.

Notes to mow grass have been placed on a few residents' doors.

submitted by Julie Morris, 7/25/05

Manager Question and Answer period followed:
back to top
Julie mentioned there are lot of dry yards, do we want to ask people to water. Gene said that we should ask them to be mowed if the grass gets high.
Julie mentioned that there were 5 instances of vandalism in the Park. The police were called on some of the instances but not all. Loretta explained that the more often the police are called, Mapleton will have a higher rating with them and they will come more often.
Jonathan asked Julie if she felt there was anything outstanding that needs to be talked about.
Julie answered that a resident had been given a notice to move her car. She then asked, “Should we give the resident another month on her car.”

Mark made the suggestion that the woman with the car be given another month if she will move the car in front of her house out of the parking place next door.

Loretta, suggested that we send a letter to residents to ask them if they have impaired mobility instead of finding out who they are and sending them letters about the coming infrastructure.

Jonathan made the suggestion that we get the information on disabilities for specific purpose of the infrastructure upgrade.

A question for the resident manager was posed and answered thus: The site committee needs to know who in the park has impaired mobility: Can MHA do a survey of residents with impaired mobility, those who cannot walk with groceries etc, to be used to configure rides once a week from Special Transit during the upcoming infrastructure process?" Answer – both Thistle and Hast & Company said that this could not be done because it was in violation of the Fair Housing Act.
Solution: a notice was going to be put in the Newsletter that any one who was disabled should request to be on a list of people who needed transportion

Ok on John Hollin’s tree trimming. OK'ed by Loretta and the Management committee.

The Resident Manager was then excused from the meeting.

Financials/Property Manager's Report:

Loretta explained that the payroll problem of the budget has been fixed for this month.

We are under budget in many areas. Savings for the month, maintenance and repairs were under by $4,000 to $6,000 for the year. Lots of areas where we are under budget. Administration is $3,000 under budget. Payroll is the only area that is over budget for the year, $500.

The money owed to MHA on insurance will be paid in August.

Collections on people in arrears.
back to top
One homeowner had a deposit on hand which was more than her outstanding balance. Question: do we put it as a payment or leave it as a deposit? She assumes we will use it as a payment, but we haven’t done it yet. The Property Manager thought it was good deal that she had the deposit on hand and that she had to get her act together to bring her account balance down. The Property Manager thinks that it is a good incentive for her to keep making payments and not use the deposit as a fall back position, as long as the past due rent is getting paid down.

Jonathan made a motion that we continue with the resident’s payment plan. Gene seconded. The measure passed.

One person who owes an extremely high amount is making arrangements to speak with The Property Manager. One person has paid off. Another person in a bad situation owes over $1000.00. She and her husband were on a welfare system that had money going into a card for Wells Fargo and it paid her debts. She doesn’t know the pin number so that she can’t access the number.

Barbara from Thistle noted that there is a form the resident can use can use - A request from a resident for maintenance and help. Julie said there are two programs one for maintenance and one for energy. Mark said there is a program through HHS for help in renovation of homes.

Update on City fixups:
back to top
Some of the work has been done halfheartedly; some not done at all. We need another letter to Douglas Sullivan to reiterate what items need to be repaired. Mark made the point that we may want to wait on the letter until we get the variances for the infrastructure. Paul made the point that we should document what is going on. Roger made the point that after we get what we need from the city on infrastructure then we can point out these other issues.

some of the issues: Update on unfinished City work: the watering system for 'power pole island' is still inoperable, the crack in the driveway on home #141 has been shoddily repaired (some sort of caulk was spread in the crack instead of the driveway being replaced), and a promised gate at the back of his house has not yet been installed (to stop people from walking from Goose Creek plaza into the park) and trees in his lot that the city put in have already died, no gate between the bike path and the park has been installed yet. Ideally we would like to have control of operating the watering system - it is so frustrating that the city has some sophisticated system in place that is broken - we would like them to get it working and then let us control it.

Bill Windsor reminded everyone that Leslie Ewy from Drexell made the point that the watering for the Goose Creek was on an MHA tap. It was supposed to be phased to a city tap. Loretta will follow up with Douglas.

Confidentiality Agreement
back to top
The Property Manager made 15 copies and we will sign them now and she will get copies back to us. MHA will have to get copies to other committee members. MHA and TCH members all signed the document and gave it back to The Property Manager.

The Property Manager printed out the grievance procedure that is on her computer. The Property Manager thinks we may need to make a few modifications to this document.

Issue is over notifications and warnings to a resident who received a warning for parking on the sidewalk and for improper signage. The resident requested a hearing with her attorney present. According to rules and regulations, a resident has the option to meet with her peers to have her say. The present grievance procedure makes it possible that every warning gets a hearing and is therefore unwieldily.

A discussion was had about how any resident's grievance would first be addressed by the management committee, using the current example of a resident who has received a warning notice about parking on the sidewalk. The property manager or witnesses are not expected to be at any meeting at first, just the management committtee. The hearing, to be scheduled at 'the next available management committee meeting', would take 15 minutes, going to 30 minutes if necessary. The management committee should be the first to hear any issues and would verify with witnesses, later, the truth of what the resident holds true, and decide what to do, based on all the facts.

Paul pointed out that the grievance procedure really takes place after the resident has aired their concerns with the management committee.

Roger noted that the grievance procedure reflects a desire to solve problems and listen to complaints. Can we amend it?

Silvia noted that the idea was to allow the resident to make his or her complaint without confronting anyone. Then the management Committee can gather information and make a decision.

Jonathan asked “Do we want to amend the grievance procedure?” Jonathan then moved that we add the language suggested by Loretta to the Grievance Procedure. (add the language from the Grievance procedure) Gene seconded. Passed unanimously.

The Property Manager will add the new language to the procedure.

Roger then made the suggestion that we may need to look at the procedure to see if it is what we really want. Paul made the suggestion that we have two procedures - one for residents and one between the MHA and TCH.

The Property Manager will look at the procedure and rewrite it as a Resident Grievance Procedure.

Mark seconded Paul’s suggestion that we draft two documents and The Property Manager will do the rewrites.

Park Budget

Jonathan explained to everyone present that the MHA held an Executive Board meeting to discuss the budget. We brought ourselves up to speed. We made these observations. Reinforce the principle that the MHA approves the budget and that we want TCH to be successful. Want to be able to review the budget. Another thought we had was to give a raise to the maintenance worker to keep up with inflation.

Paul questioned where reimbursement for equity investment came from.

Roger answered that TCH had money involved to make the deal work. They made an investment in equity of $1000 per home. Their total costs were greater than that. TCH put up more money for the closing costs and to make the deal happen. The city kicked in $21,000 from the closing to pay for TCH’s costs, that left $22,000 that TCH needs in payment from the income of the Park.

There are certain principles that the MHA and TCH agree to. There are certain operating principles within the budget as well. TCH and MHA agree in principle to fund TCH. Principle that the MHA does have control of the Cash flow with approval from TCH and the bank.

MHA has to approve the budget by Monday, August 15th. We can send a general statement of approval of the budget and the principles behind the budget.

Bill gave update on Infrastructure:
back to top
Still needed are tech documents approval which is is based on variance approval. We have five variances that we are looking for in order to get our tech docs approved. Most of the variances have to deal with the work the city did. We have been submitting variance requests but they keep being disapproved by the Planning Department without any reasons. HHS agrees that the variances should be done and they agreed to walk with Planning. They came back with suggestions which TCH engineers are using, but also requesting that engineers talk to engineers in Planning to see what we need.

Costs proposal for doing the infrastructure on the south side.

Do we have enough money to do all of the south side and how do we address it if we don’t have enough money. Tim Kane from the construction company is looking for the numbers. Two paths of approval from the city and seeing what we can get for our dollars.

If the city disapproves any of the variances, we can live with the additional costs or we need to get noisy with the city, city council, city manager.

Bill wants buy in from the MHA as to the way the Park infrastructure will be done.

Paul moved to approve the phasing process for the Park Infrastructure - south side of the park firsts. Jonathan seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

Other Park business

Meeting adjourned at 9:45
Respectfully submitted

Mark Reeder, Acting Secretary

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••