ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
See the scary future of Edgewater finances -> CLICK HERE
The Edgewater Land Dispute -> CLICK HERE
Document Rewrite History: Democracy and Vigilance Triumphing Over Authoritarianism -> CLICK HERE
Contact us with comments and suggestions for stories at: EdgewaterLife@att.net
100 species of animals sighted at Edgewater -> CLICK HERE
Edgewater Photos -> CLICK HERE
Is Peter a Soviet Spy? Find out the answer to this and other questions. -> CLICK HERE
NAVIGATE THIS SITE:
All Photos taken at Edgewater
This site is NOT the official site of Edgewater of Branford, Inc.
P.S. There is no such thing!
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (early September 2013):
EDGEWATER’s LAND DISPUTE
Roughly speaking, under Connecticut “adverse possession” laws, a neighbor can go to court to claim your land if for 15 years they use it without your objection and without your use or maintenance of it. The possession must be adverse, open, and continuous for 15 years.
We are very grateful for the actions the previous 2007-9 Board took to protect Edgewater property. It rediscovered that Edgewater owned ~13,000 square feet of land behind those fences. (It is about 1/3 acre, the size of the foot-print of A-building plus 6 garage buildings). That Board had the area properly surveyed, sent notices (approved by the Association attorney and that Board unanimously - see written proof at Edgewater Land Dispute) to those neighbors using our property. That Board started cutting the grass, had the fire marshal confirm the Rice Road Drive was an emergency access road, re-installed our emergency evacuation gate and carefully signed out the issue to the current Board when it left office. In doing so, that Board was working to protected Edgewater’s rights to that property.
>
The current Board has repeatedly tried to blame the last Board for the land dispute. The problem was actually the result of several past Boards neglecting to enforce our property rights along that property line. Rather than ignore the potential problem, the 2007-09 Board worked to fix it.
Ironically, some members of the current Board were on those previous Boards, which for several years apparently made no effort to enforce Edgewater’s property rights, and so strengthened any claims our neighbors could have had. The current Board has also tried to make political hay with a 4-year-old, demonstrably-false, libelous letter in which those wanting to claim your Edgewater land attacked Peter Gloor personally. (e.g. An honorable Edgewater Owner took responsibility in writing for some of the actions the letter accused Peter of - see a copy of his letter at the following link below for his letter.) For more, see Edgewater Land Dispute
NAVIGATE THIS SITE:
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (early October 2013):
EDGEWATER’s DOCUMENTS
The Board's Fourth Draft of the Documents were adopted October 2013. Despite prior Board concessions, the Documents still contain several intrusive Board powers over Owners. However, this time our "opposition" fell 1-2 votes short in voting them down. I think some Owners just got weary of the repeated meetings and votes.
We can be proud of what we previously achieved by: 1) carefully reading the proposed Documents, 2) petitioning for changes, and 3) previously twice voting down the Board's proposed Documents. With each rejection of their Documents, the Board agreed to make additional Owner-protecting changes (though sadly not all) that the majority of Owners had petitioned for a year ago. Below are the main things we achieved.
Many thanks to everyone that contributed to holding out against the new intrusive powers that the Board proposed we give them. We accomplished alot ...
WHAT WE ACCOMPLISHED BY SPEAKING UP:
1. The Board initially proposed to have the new power to change the Bylaws at will ... After our petition, the change was made to continue to require a majority Owner vote to amend the Bylaws.
2. The Board initially proposed to have the new power to change the Rules at will ... After our petition and first "NO" vote, the change was made to continue to require a majority of Owners vote to amend the Bylaws.
3. The Board initially proposed having the new power to fine owner $50/day ... After the petition, they dropped this to $25/day, still way to high. We proposed $25/week with a $400 per year cap.
4. The Board initially proposed that that they have the new power to spend any Edgewater funds, (sometimes amounting to $250,000 in reserves) ... After our petition, the change was made to make Board gain majority Owner approval for improvement exceeding $10,000.
5. The Board initially proposed that for instance a 2(for)-22(against) vote against their annual Budget would still pass the Budget ... After our petition and two "NO" votes, the change was made to require a majority vote to pass a budget.
6. The Board's Documents removed privacy yard from the LCE category which makes it for the exclusive use of your Unit's residents .. After our two "NO" votes, privacy yards were returned back to your exclusive use.
7. The Board wanted to require garage owners to park one car in their garage all the time ... After the petition and two "NO" votes they still (for some crazy reason) require garage owners to clear enough room in their garages to park there if they have to.
8. The Board wanted annual chimney and dryer vent cleaning with each owner submitting a receipt to the Board yearly ... After the petition and two "NO" votes, they reduced this to every 5-year inspection/cleaning. This still conforms with exceedingly careful industry standards.
9. There were some factual fixes to problems that Peter Gloor caught that assigned porches, sheds to the wrong Units, etc.
The Board did however refuse to budge on giving up intrusive new power to levy $25/day fines indefinitely. The majority of Unit Owners petitioned against this power. Wednesday, the Board made verbal promises that power would never be abused, but we shall see. Members of this Board have tried to do so even when our Documents did not authorize it. They also rejected out-of-hand the common sense good business practices we proposed ... like routinely sending financial statements to Owners, getting multiple bids for projects over $10,000 etc. Very sad. Hopefully a future, a more reasonable Board will be willing to make these fixes.
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (late October 2013):
EDGEWATER 2013 ANNUAL MEETING - Some observations
Peter Gloor asked the Board to explain why, in violation of our Bylaws, the Board had failed to put aside $61,000 over the past three years. Instead over the past three years, they increased monthly fees by 14%, increased annual routine spending by 80% and saved less than $600 for future projects. That is based on their own numbers. This failure to put away savings for future projects must eventually cost each Owner over $1300 in future increased fees and special assessments.
The Board gave no answer but instead tried to attack Peter Gloor’s record. Let’s examine that record. Through the hard work of Peter’s Board, monthly fees were less, expenses were nearly one half less, and over 2007-09 over $251,000 paid off the prior Board’s Debt and was put toward future projects. That frugal spending led directly to those savings which has saved each owner $3000 in fees and assessments. The property looked much better then too.
Several Owners pointed out that the Board has failed to supply us with annual financial statements since 2010. The Board promised to send all Owners the annual financial statements for 2011 and 2012 shortly and the 2013 financial statement by next February. The Board was also asked why they have allowed the property, particularly the driveways to deteriorate.
The history of the Land Dispute was reviewed. Peter Gloor pointed out that contrary to lies spread about him, his Board, with the advice of an attorney and by unanimous vote of his Board sent letters to the neighbors to defend the land. Since Peter had presented the Board with documentation of this (see Land Dispute page), they could, of course not object to his statement. The Board’s attorney confirmed that Peter had acted responsibly in the land dispute.
One last observation. For the last four Owner Meetings, the Board has found it necessary to bring an attorney to defend their actions. We have all had to pay for that. Never before in Edgewater history has a Board found it necessary to bring their attorney to Owner Meetings.
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (October 2014):
VOTE (OR PROXY) TO SAVE YOURSELF $4000 IN UNNECESSARY FEES
Dear Edgewater Neighbor:
I recommend that you vote down the budget that includes the paving project and the $4000 additional charges you will have to pay in addition to your monthly fees. (If you can’t attend Monday, use your proxy to vote NO.) Here’s why …
1.The prior Board, which I served on, negotiated bids for replacement of all the paving for about $100,000 (from different reputable contractors – The Association has more than enough money in the bank now to pay for this.). Why does the current Board want charge us each $4000 and spend almost all of Association savings to pay ALMOST THREE TIMES MORE ($275,000) for the same project? (My Board decided to start the roofing project rather than this paving project.)
2. This current Board has increased spending for the routine operation of the property 78% while inflation increased only 8% (and our property and unit-resale values deteriorated badly). They have spent $191,000 per year (2011-14, excludes expenses covered by insurance). The prior Board spent an average of $107,000 per year (2006-09). If this Board had kept spending increases to the level of inflation, the Association would have an extra $288,000 in the bank (that’s $6400 per Unit Owner), so no special assessment would be necessary for many years, if ever. (see details over)
IF YOU, LIKE ME, OPPOSE HANDING AN ADDITIONAL $4000 (ON TOP OF YOUR OVER-$4000-PER-YEAR MONTHLY FEES) TO A BOARD THAT HAS ENGAGED IN FOUR YEARS OF UNRESTRAINED SPENDING OF OUR MONEY:
- VOTE DOWN THE BUDGET WITH ITS $4000 EXTRA CHARGE TO YOU AT NEXT MONDAY’s MEETING, AND…
- BE SURE TO WITHHOLD YOUR PROXY FROM THE BOARD AND GIVE IT TO SOMEONE THAT YOU TRUST TO VOTE AGAINST THE BUDGET (If you already gave your proxy to the Board and want to vote to save yourself $4000, you can contact me to learn how to reverse your proxy.)
Peter Gloor (Edgewater president 2006-9) Unit A9; 203-481-4108; gloor@att.net
EDGEWATER SPENDING ON YEARLY ROUTINE OPERATION OF THE PROPERTY (excludes special projects authorized by separate owner vote or paid for with insurance claims/chargebacks):
Prior Board2006$109,196] These figures include 17 underground watermain
2007$103,021] repairs done properly with about 800ft of copper pipe,
2008$109,575] repairing a tree-crushed garage, a 35% insurance premium
2009$108,928} increase, 4 completely new roofs, multiple tree plantings, etc.
Current Board 2010Not included since this was the year of the roofing-painting project
2011$205,194]
2012$181,490] Calculated exactly as above numbers for routine operation of the
2013$193,378] property (excludes any transfer to savings, or expenses covered
2014$182,000] by insurance, chargebacks, etc.)
NOTES:
2006-09 numbers were released by that prior Board every January with updates several times each year
2011-13 finally released by current Board in 2014, after multiple requests over three years
2014 number is an annualized estimate based on Board numbers, subtracting off expenses reimbursed by insurance and chargebacks and including the estimated December insurance premium.
More Details:
•This Board has increased monthly fees 17%in five years, while inflation went up 8-10%. Nonetheless, because of uncontrolled spending, Association net assets (money in the bank minus liabilities and including savings for future projects) have decreased about $100,00. The prior Board with 17% less monthly fees increased the Association net assets $390,000 over four years (from a $165,000 debt left to it by some members of the current Board). Without these savings the Board that I led amassed (from those lower monthly fees), the roofing project would have cost every Unit Owner about $3800 more.
•Property Deterioration: The garbage gate has gone unrepaired for six months giving everyone a great view of the dumpsters. The privacy fences look terrible even after the Board’s attempted repairs. Dozens of healthy, mature trees have been destroyed and not a single one replaced. The beach fence and plantings were replaced with a cheap-looking fence without plantings, eliminating all privacy from the road. It is obvious why our Unit resale values are falling. Watermain breaks have been repaired with one-foot of plastic pipe, which will mean more costly breaks for years to come…
•In 2010 the Board failed to contribute 12% of Owner fees to the Capital Reserve for future projects, in violation of our Bylaws. In 2011, the Board took $16,860 out of our Capital Reserve without an Owner vote, another violation of our Bylaws. Did they fine themselves $25 per day for these violations hat are now costing us so much? Their fines through this month would total over $50,000.
•The last big project overseen by our current president-treasurer disregarded a 24-4 Owner vote and had a $80,000 cost overrun, which was not disclosed to Owners for years, until we all had to pay two more special assessments to cover it.
•For years I have been predicting in written notices to Owners that this Board’s massive increase in spending would result in underfunding of our Capital Reserve and large special assessments. I wish I had been wrong.
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (Nov 2014):
THE ANNUAL OWNER MEETING
THANK GOODNESS FOR THE OWNERS WHO REJECTED THE FIRST THREE DOCUMENT PROPOSALS THIS BOARD ASKED US TO PASS (2012-13). Without the Document changes we insisted upon, the Board could have easily passed their proposed $438,000 budget. Instead, facing certain defeat of their budget under the Bylaws we required them to adopt, the Board came to the meeting having cut their proposed spending by $275,000 ($6400 per Unit Owner) - that is a cut of two-thirds of their original budget. (BTW: This last-minute proposed budget change from that sent with the Notice of Meeting is a violation of state law & our Documents)
To review:
-
1)If this Board had kept spending increases to inflation rates, Edgewater would have an additional $288,000 in the bank, saving each Owner $6400 in future fees. Without this Board’s increase in spending, we would need no special assessments for many years, if ever.
-
2)This Board originally tried to get us to approve $275,000 for a paving project, even though the prior Board had a written bid for about one-half this price (and asphalt prices have dropped significantly since then).
Humorous anecdote: At the meeting the Board repeatedly said that the Board members we voted on had one-year terms. They had to admit they were wrong after an Owner read back to them the Documents they spent tens of thousands of our dollars on. In the end they acknowledged that they were wrong and all terms are now two years.
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (January 2015):
THE SIGN BANDIT STRIKES AGAIN
Gotta love our freedom of speech! Who is this persistent First Amendment advocate?
Too bad some jack-booted friend of the Board keeps tearing down the signs!
In December, a cordial letter was sent to the Board asking them to explain in writing their documented doubling in spending of Owners’ money, their repeated violations of our Bylaws, and their allowing Board members to profit form their position at the expense of all other Owners. As of February 2, after a second request, the Board has still not sent the requested reply. See the letter - click here.
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (March 5, 2015): THE BIG DECEPTION
THE BOARD’s THIRD OVERPRICED PAVING PROJECT
WHY DID THE BOARD PUT a price of $169,000 on the ballot, when if you read carefully the project is really $269,000 - Because they plan to spend an extra $100,000 from our savings - that’s $2200 we will each need to pay when the next project (like painting) is needed.
WHY DOES THIS BOARD ALWAYS WANT TO DOUBLE OWNER OUT-OF-POCKET COSTS?
In October 2014, the Board proposed a $275,000 paving project.
In January 2015, the Board proposed a $269,000 paving project.
At that time, the Board was holding a paving bid for $145,000. (click here to see it)
On February 9, 2015, I faxed the Board this roughly $130,000 ALTERNATIVE bid that I obtained.
(click here to see it) THAT IS HALF THE BOARD’s PROPOSED COST AND WOULD SAVE EACH
OWNER $3000.
YET THE BOARD IS NOW ASKING US FOR THE THIRD TIME TO APPROVE A $269,000 ($6000 PER UNIT OWNER) PROJECT, WHEN IT COULD EASILY BE DONE AT HALF THE PRICE.
The $130,000 bid I obtained and faxed the Property Management a month ago meets or exceeds the Board’s specifications for the project and is from a very reputable contractor. Why is the Board ignoring it? Why don’t they at least use it to negotiate down the costs of their favored contractor?
Had this Board kept its spending down to that of the last Board’s (plus inflation), the Association would have nearly $400,000 in the bank and might never need another special assessment. (click here)
A “NO” vote next Monday would send a message to all future Boards to do their best to spend every Owner’s money wisely. It’s not that difficult. (I got half-price bid by putting in less than one hour of work.)
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (August 2015):
THE SIGN BANDIT STRIKES AGAIN
Gotta love our freedom of speech! Who is this persistent First Amendment advocate?
Too bad some jack-booted friend of the Board keeps tearing down the signs!
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (November 2015):
OVER 5 YEARS BOARD ROBS EACH OWNER OF $7300 THROUGH WASTEFUL SPENDING ON ROUTINE CARE OF PROPERTY:
IN EDGEWATER NEWS (October 2015):
THE SIGN BANDIT STRIKES YET AGAIN
