Members were not notified but there was a special meeting held at the HOA attorneys office. The meeting was open to the owners but owners were not notified, only Board members. In interest of transparency (because there is an EXTREME lack thereof) as this was an open meeting and owners were not afforded the opportunity to attend the audio recording will be posted ASAP to follow. (you too will be able to witness the hostility, personal biases, aggressively talking over people to control the narrative in their favor, etc.) Go to a meeting with attorney to act as a mediator to “bring the temperature down a little” and KEN STILL CAN’T refrain from raising his self proclaimed “LOUD” Voice at people (AUDIO RECORDING OF MEETING)
Summary of the meeting, Ken Jameson, Patty Jameson, Judy Jones, and Tyler Sobkowich are operating a biased board and decided to take advantage of financial hardship that I (Jamie Owens) incurred during the covid situation and after to where I had gotten behind on paying the annual dues. ( I am no longer past due as this was paid up before they even brought this up to use against me)
They praised at the meeting how they would never take advantage or demand money, even to the extent they tell people to hold off on payments until people are back on their feet. Yet when they want to use monetary hardship to their advantage, THEY WILL. They also did not raise any issue at that time of me being past due, or again this year in 2023 of being past due and “re elected” for another year as vice president. Only when it suits their needs and agenda did they raise this as an issue. This type of behavior should not be tolerated.
The only loophole they could find in the RCW to remove a Director from the board WITHOUT the members voting on removing the director that the MEMBERS voted in, was one that stated if the director is not fit for the position(being in current status is one of the conditions). So just as they have been petty all along, they continue down the petty road and stoop to that level out of some mere disagreements and differing opinions.
So because I was “Past due” at the time I was elected to my position in 2022 (THAT NOBODY CHECKED OR CARED ABOUT THEN) Now it matters and was the ONLY way they could get me removed from the Board. (Stu McWilliam voted AGAINST but since they have a nice little gang of 4, one persons vote doesn’t matter) But DON’T WORRY. This ain’t over! I am still an owner and CURRENTLY current on Dues, SO SEE YOU AT THE ELECTION!! AND EVERY MEETING (BOARD, AGM, and SPECIAL) From here on out. People don’t like controlling dictatorships and would much rather have a unbiased, properly functioning board.
They are also trying to control the narrative by controlling any methods you THE OWNERS get spoon fed updates that are carefully crafted to fit their agenda, they want control of the website and any method they can get their hands on. Now do they have control of the facebook page? The answer is NO, and they shouldn’t! Nor should they have full unlimited control to censor and drive the narrative the way they want it. The methods of communications should be held OUTSIDE of the board ( just as the facebook page is ) and just as the website will STAY now that I am no longer on the board.
The website was purchased by me, on my account, with HOA funds. I provided at MY COST of TIME and hosting/server costs for the past 2 years. I will be keeping website as a means of OPEN communication and interaction among community members just as the facebook page is in its current state. They can consider the $67.50 paid for the domain name a wash for my time and services they scammed out of me the last 2 years. There is no right to a domain name just because you have said company name. ANYONE can register a domain name that a company could “want” that does not give them specific rights to said domain name.
Their option will likely be purchase a new domain name and WASTE HOA funds to pay some place to design/host/etc. (more wasteful spending that will be pushed under the rug, its unnecessary when its already FREE).
3 Comments
Odd seems there is some kind of requiremtn that the membership be notified of this kind of meeting at least 14 days.
There is alwo this RCW
RCW 64.90.520
Officers and board members—Removal.
(1) Unit owners present in person, by proxy, or by absentee ballot at any meeting of the unit owners at which a quorum is present may remove any board member and any officer elected by the unit owners, with or without cause, if the number of votes in favor of removal cast by unit owners entitled to vote for election of the board member or officer proposed to be removed is at least the lesser of (a) a majority of the votes in the association held by such unit owners or (b) two-thirds of the votes cast by such unit owners at the meeting, but:
(i) A board member appointed by the declarant may not be removed by a unit owner vote during any period of declarant control;
(ii) A board member appointed under RCW 64.90.420(3) may be removed only by the person that appointed that member; and
(iii) The unit owners may not consider whether to remove a board member or officer at a meeting of the unit owners unless that subject was listed in the notice of the meeting.
(2) At any meeting at which a vote to remove a board member or officer is to be taken, the board member or officer being considered for removal must have a reasonable opportunity to speak before the vote.
(3) At any meeting at which a board member or officer is removed, the unit owners entitled to vote for the board member or officer may immediately elect a successor board member or officer consistent with this chapter.
(4) The board may, without a unit owner vote, remove from the board a board member or officer elected by the unit owners if (a) the board member or officer is delinquent in the payment of assessments more than sixty days and (b) the board member or officer has not cured the delinquency within thirty days after receiving notice of the board’s intent to remove the board member or officer. Unless provided otherwise by the governing documents, the board may remove an officer elected by the board at any time, with or without cause. The removal must be recorded in the minutes of the next board meeting.
[ 2018 c 277 § 325.]
The board did what? Just exposed the association to a possible law suit?
As Tyler said like a smart ass via phone: “All we had to do was get along” (Instead you all band together to pull the petty card)
Time to buckle up cause it looks like its time for some legal action.
Yeah… Smells a little fishy around here and I don’t think its the Bay