The speed hump on Vercelli is a prototype. Before we start installing them everywhere we need to hear from you on what you think of this one. Your input is important for the Security Committee and the Board to make decisions on reducing speeding.
I am sure some people will find the current speed hump wimpy, while others will find it to be too aggressive or in the wrong spot. Let us know what you think. We won’t have any money to add any more speed humps until next year. So we’ll watch the blog and look for constructive comments before we add more.
In general the Board of directors will give more consideration to known residents who use Vercelli than anonymous posters.
Pat Pope
I lived in the community longer than most. I purchased in July 2001. I don’t see the need for speed bumps in general. And yes, I have small children.
Having said that, I don’t object if the majority of the residents on a particular street agree to have one installed. This means, everyone on the street must be approached and given a chance to vote yes or no. I do not trust the vocal minority who claim to speak for us all or for the “greater good”. At which point, once an agreement is reached, ONLY the street residents affected by the change should be assessed.
Why should you increase my association dues to, among other things, install speed bumps I don’t want, on a street I don’t live on or travel? Furthermore, why should this come out of association funds?
What offends me is when other residents think they are doing me a favor by protecting me and my children. Seriously, how condescending is that; to have another individual tell me they know what is best for family, me, and my way of life?
I’m sorry to see the board caved in and agreed to pay for the speed bumps on Vercelli. Congrats to the loud and confrontational homeowners (you know who you are) who pushed and pushed until they got their way and had us all assessed."
Thank you for replying to the blog. Many of the things you pointed out are absolutely true.
I was appointed to the Board to fill a vacancy. The old Board followed the bylaws in making that appointment. I have a very demanding job and I declined when I was given the chance in previous years. I have tried since my appointment to work in the interest of the whole community.
Neil was appointed to the Board to fill Shahla’s position when she moved away. The Board gave plenty of notice that we were filling the vacant spot. Two people said they would run for the position. Neil was the only person that gave a presentation to the Board or put a resume on line. It should not have been a surprise that Neil was appointed to fill the vacancy.
David Sobel, Gigi McGregor, and Debby Montero all were elected by the HOA to the Board
Next summer we will have an election for four seats on the Board. S&S will have reduced voting power. We will give every candidate an opportunity to post a resume on our web site and address the Association the month before the election. The top three vote getters will receive two year terms. The forth place person will get a one year term.
The Board of Directors is like a city council or the congress. Since most folks do not have the time or interest to deal with streets, pools, budget, security services, rule enforcement, etc. The Board has the power and the duty to make decisions in those areas. There are very strict limits placed on the Board’s powers and authority by state law, the CC&Rs, and bylaws. It is assumed that the Board will act in the best interest of the HOA. If the HOA feels that the Board is not acting in the interest of the community as whole they can recall the Board, or elect new officers at the next election.
I recognize that some of the people that come to the HOA meetings have tried to shout down people with opposing views. I try to give everyone a chance to speak, and no one a chance to dominate the meeting. Sometimes that is hard. I also have noted that one anonymous poster has tried to look like a group of people to get speed bumps on his street. I also have heard from many parents that the cars going down our hills are way too fast. I personally have spent a lot of time trying to find alternative ways to reduce speeding. The Security Committee has been working very hard on the speeding issue as well. I do appreciate the comments made by you and by Javier over time, on various issues facing our community. The anonymous poster has made it clear that he feels that speeding is the only issue worth dealing with in the community.
So here we are. We put in one speed hump on Vercelli after almost every neighbor between Ravenna and Torino signed a petition. That’s a pretty remarkable achievement, since most people in our community would rather not be involved. I posted the blog notice on speed humps to see what people think. We’ll also be doing a survey in the first part of the year to see what our residents think about a number of issues. The last survey we took showed speeding to be a concern of many, many residents. We are not going to install 10 or 20 more speed humps until we have an idea of what the members think.
It is very clear to me that, just like in the big world of politics & government, we cannot please everyone. We are doing the best we can.
Personally, I like to hear opposing points of view before the Board makes decisions, and yes, if you really feel motivated run for the Board next summer. Get your friends with similar views to run too. 2008 will only be about half over after the next election. A new Board new Board member can change the direction we are going.
Thanks,
Pat Pope"
I live on Vercelli and got not one single notification of the contemplation or installation of the speed bumps. If I were asked I would say that I thought the prior Board had asked to lower the old bump as it currently destroys the undercarriage no matter how slowly you try to navigate over it.
I request that the Board remove the bump immediately. There's no use for it and besides, who did the makeshift job on the bump anyways. It's all crooked and the paint isn't even neat, so it makes the street look like rundown & seedy.
I hate to complain because the Board is basically volunteering personal time to make the community a better place and we should generally be grateful because we benefit from their efforts.
However this whole speed bump thing, I just had to respectfully express my two thumbs down vote on the Vercelli speed bump."
Instead of going immediately to extremes, why not try installing a few less costly reminders, such as colors street signs that read "Slow Down - Children at Play."
One of our wonderful neighbors puts out orange cones when the kids are out playing, it is much more affordable, asthetic, and grabs the attention of drivers that are on our street.
My vote is a definite "NO" on the speed bumps on Sorrento Lane and I definitely agree with the last writer that ALL neighbors should be able to cast a vote on whether or not a bump is installed on their street."
Speed bumps are great control devices when used effectively and in the right setting, but it appears we implemented something without an adequate process review and communication prior to taking action. It's my hope that this Board will soon learn from issues like this one and take corrective action to ensure a more robust vetting process in the future.
I agree, the conversation has been around since the early days of the association...and yes the prior administration apparently didn't do much (per some remarks), but in a community where externalities affect others it is important that we establish processes to ensure vocal minorities don't subject the masses to their will without a fair and reasonable review process. Moving to an expensive solution irrespective of other homeowners thoughts is not the way to manage a community.
As an individual who lives on Vercelli (only a few doors West of the speed hump) I certainly received no letter and/or petition advising and/or requesting my opinion of the install of the speed bump. This is an externality affect that doesn't bode well for a community--decisions made downstream affect upstream personnel without upstream personnel's input.
To be fair, I am not entirely opposed to the speed hump. Occasionally I have witnessed cars speeding by and yes people in a rush don't always pay attention to the signs. And of course the folks at or near the bottom of the hill get it worst, with gravity and all. Although the speed hump has appeared to slow the traffic down at that location, it would be inappropriate to conclude that we therefore need to install more speed bumps and at closer frequencies (per prior recommendations--collect the data to ensure an effective control mitigated a ture issue).
From this implementation what is troubling is the process by which the hump was installed. As mentioned by others: Those who front as if they are doing everyone a favor only to short-circuit the process of democratic rule by implementing actions that may not be supported by a number of residents greater than a small percentage of people truly are doing the community a disservice.
Some of the feedback on the blog discussed not knowing or having no idea of the speed bump. To be sure, I have attended more than a few HOA meetings and have conversed with the Board from time to time. I learned about the installation of the speed hump just prior to its install by attending the prior HOA Meeting. It was a quiet discussion wherein I asked to see the plans for the entire community as some members of the Board had concluded that we needed a plethora of speed bumps located on just about every street (this occurred after the meeting as the agenda item was not that detailed to be taken up during the meeting).
Given the prior recommendations on alternate methods to verify and reduce the speeding issue (see prior blogs) and given the current budget shortfall (dues increases were planned at the same time multiple speed bumps were being identified for install) it is astounding to have discovered that the install was going to happen without any action on the prior recommendations. As it turns out this was not the first time that decisions were made in closed quarters and then sprung on the residents without forewarning or with minimal notice (you may recall the $100K desire to transfer funds from the reserve account to pay for FOB access devices & wiring for the gates as another recent activity that received a strong outcry from the residents).
So what are the takeaways:
1.Finish the prototype speed hump: Paint it correctly so it can be seen and place a sign up (when traveling East) indication “Speed Hump”.
2.Freeze any / all new installs until a notification process can be implemented that ensures all necessary actions are taken prior to the final solution.
3.Scan the current drawings (grounds maps) and post them on-line for all to see / verify install intentions.
4.Verify funds are available for the install of any humps prior to installing.
5.Communicate, Communicate, Communicate—
-Ensure the residents know of the process for their inputs and that they’re not just chatting (i.e.—appoint someone to review the data and to submit a report for consideration with homeowner input)
-Understand the cost elements (surprisingly we’ve never heard anything about the cost per unit~Is it $1000 or $2000 & how many are we thinking about installing…10 – 15?),and
-Ensure the timing of the decision making process is known by the residents.
Let’s follow a process that the majority of homeowners can support even if they disagree with the outcome.
Phillip Minton"