Minutes - ECIA Governing Board

ECIA Board Meeting Agenda

Monday December 16, 2019

Open Meeting / 5:00 pm Railroad Room

Call to Order – Meeting called to order at 5:01 pm

Roll Call / Declaration of Quorum

  • In attendance, Nancy Sulzberg, President, Melicent D’Amore, Vice President, Sal Monaco, Treasurer, Carol Sanguinetti, Secretary, David Sorkin and George Rutter
  • Staff in attendance, Julie Navarro, Michael Rogers, Jessica Collins, and Rachel Turnbough

Announcements - Recorded Meeting – amend agenda, add 3 motions to agenda, add Covenant Compliance Report and add approval of November Board Working Session minutes

            Sulzberg Motion to approve agenda, Second by Rutter, 6 in approval, no opposed

Approval of Agenda

Variance Requests * - ready by George Rutter

  • 13 Encantado Loop, variance to have just under 7000 sq ft wood post and wire fence enclosure
    • Rutter motion to approve, Second by D’Amore, 6 in favor, no opposed

Consent Agenda Items - 5 minutes

  1. Approval of the October 21, 2019 Board Working Session Notes
  2. Approval of the October 24, 2019 Board Meeting Minutes
  3. Acceptance of the October Finance Report and November Finance Report
  4. Acceptance of the October/November/December General Manager’s Report
  5. Approval of variance for 12 Moya Loop
  6. Approval of variance for 4 Verano Place
  7. Approval of variance for 3 Enebro Place
  8. Approval of variance for 27 Quedo Road

Motion to accept consent agenda by Rutter, Second by Sorkin, 6 in favor, no opposed

New Business

Motions - 10 minutes

  1. Motion to accept the VISTAS Style Guide which details the parameters for writing articles for the newsletter.
    1. Moved by D’Amore, Second by Monaco, 6 in favor, no opposed
  2. Motion to accept the resignations of Todd Handy, Bernardo Monserrat and David McDonald.
    1. Moved by Sulzberg, Second by Sorkin, 6 in favor, no opposed
  3. Confirm electronic motion to appoint Sal Monaco and George Rutter to the ECIA Board of Directors
    1. Moved by Sulzberg, Second by D’Amore, 4 in favor, 2 abstained, no opposed
  4. Motion to accept the recommended 2020 Budget for Recurring Operation Expenses including a 2020 annual assessment of $550 and the following : operating expenses of $1,277,293, transfer to Replacement Reserve Fund of $228,084, capital expenditures of $118,836 for a total of $1,624,213.
    1. Moved by Monaco, Second by Sanguinetti, 6 in favor, no opposed
  5. Motion to transfer 2019 remaining available budget to Reserve & adjust 2019 Operating budget to $0
    1. Moved by Monaco, Second by Sanguinetti, 6 in favor, no opposed
  6. Motion to transfer and fund Capital Reserve fund for 2020 to $118,836
    1. Moved by Monaco, Second by D’Amore, 6 in favor, no opposed
  7. Motion to approve the Procedure of Environmental Management, the Requests for Materials Use Approval, Appendix A and the Pre-Approved List of Materials and Supplies documents as approved by the EESC.
    1. Moved by Sulzberg, Second by Monaco, 6 in favor, no opposed
  8. Confirm electronic motion completed to approve Draft 1 of the proposed ECIA Sixth Amended Bylaws for legal review by ECIA counsel.
    1. Moved by Sulzberg, Second by Sorkin, 6 in favor, no opposed
  9. Motion to share Bylaws “redline” version of draft ll with the members of the association
    1. Moved by Sulzberg, Second by Sorkin, 6 in favor, no opposed
  10. Motion move $12,000 from Operating to Reserve
    1. Withdrawn, Motion 11 supersedes this motion
  11. Motion to approve increase 2019 R&R budget by $1,018,266
    1. Moved by Monaco, Second by Rutter, 6 in favor, no opposed
  12. Motion to remove Elm Tree
    1. Moved by Sorkin, Second by D’Amore, 6 in favor, no opposed
  13. Motion to accept Bonn Macy's resignation from Information Committee
    1. Moved by D’Amore, Second by Rutter, 6 in favor, no opposed
  14. Motion to accept IntraWorks Proposal
    1. Moved by Sorkin, Second by Rutter, 6 in favor, no opposed
  15. Motion to approve staff paid holidays
    1. Moved by Sulzberg, Second by Monaco, 6 in favor, no opposed
  16. Motion for Record Retention
    1. Moved by Sulzberg, Second by Sanguinetti, 6 in favor, no opposed
  17. Motion to authorize website task force
    1. Moved by Sulzberg, Second by Monaco, 6 in favor, no opposed
  18. Motion to authorize Public Safety task force
    1. Moved by Sulzberg, Second by Sorkin, 6 in favor, no opposed
  19. Motion to approve contract with Casa de Suenos Construction to build family changing room. AMEND SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY FINANCE COMMITTEE
    1. Moved by Monaco, Second by Rutter, 6 in favor, no opposed
  20. Motion to approve contract with ExerPlay Inc for pool shade structures. AMEND SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY FINANCE COMMITTEE
    1. Moved by Monaco, Second by Rutter, 6 in favor, no opposed
  21. Motion to approve contract with Poolside Design and Construction for mechanical room remodel. AMEND SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY FINANCE COMMITTEE
    1. Moved by Sal Monaco, Second by George Rutter, 6 in favor, no opposed

Open Forum for General Issues - 45 minutes

Note the change in agenda order and time limits.

George Rutter – Since we are going to revert back to Robert’s Rules of Order and try to maintain some semblance of order and happiness in our meetings, we want to recognize that everyone’s time is important. What we ask is, when the chair recognizes you, please stand up to state your name and then keep your comments to about two minutes. The rest of you, we ask that you listen and not chime in except the Board. Once that speaker is done, please raise your hand and wait for the President to recognize you. Keep your comments to about two, three minutes, if you can, and that way everyone has the opportunity to speak and we have a productive meeting. That is our goal. Thank you.

  • Bette Knight, 53 Cerrado Loop – This evening I would like to address a couple of the Governing Documents. One of the Governing Documents and the guideline that goes along with that. I will read from the Amended and Restated Protective Covenants and Building Restrictions for Eldorado at Santa Fe. The first statement states that “This document is for the express purposes of protecting the natural beauty of the community of Eldorado at Santa Fe. Providing an attractive rural setting for residential neighborhoods and homesites and preserving property values. This restated declaration seeks to maintain the unique natural character of the community for all who acquire property therein, while encouraging individual expression consistent with the historical traditions of the region. This Restated Declaration assumes that, by virtue of their purchase of property”, meaning our purchases of property as well, “in the Eldorado community, all such property owners are motivated by these unique qualities of its natural environment and agree, for and among themselves, that these qualities must be preserved for all present and future residents.” And along with that Governing Document that goes along with that are the Guidelines for Protecting the Covenants. Tonight I know that you accepted a variance from the Architectural Committee on a property that has asked for a fence, wire and post, that would exceed the 4,000 square feet, and George related to that. On Section 10.3.1, “The total area enclosed by all fences and/or walls on an individual lot shall not exceed 4,000 square feet.” What the Board has made a decision this evening to have an individual lot exceed that from 4,000 to 6,990 feet, which is setting a precedence for this community for anyone to build a fence, enclose their whole property. I understand this is for a dog, or dogs, that homeowners own. And to have fencing of any type, no matter if it’s hidden or not hidde, on our properties I feel as an owner that the Board is not looking at it’s fiduciary responsibility in going over the 4,000 square feet to the extent of almost 7,000 square feet. I wanted to speak to that this evening. Again, I knew the motion was being brought up tonight. I didn’t know when the forum was. I appreciate you listening to me as a member and I plead that as the Board looks at variances that come to them from the Architectural Committee, which is an excellent committee here, that you take that seriously into consideration to that extent of having a fence of any type on our properties here goes against the Stated and Amended and Protective Covenants that the Board is asked to go by. Thank you for listening to me.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Mark is there any response to that?
    • Mark Young – Yes, in the Architectural Committee a number of members were concerned about setting a precedence. There’s been a longstanding feeling, especially with the Architectural Committee, that wood and wire fences kind of disappear on a lot and they’ve tried to get the Board to approve a larger amount for certain wood and wire fences where they’re almost invisible. For this person it still requires a variance. That’s why they took the extra measure of having all the neighbors notified and a response in writing. In a usual case we only ask the two closest neighbors and they got 5. The people across the arroyo as well. I don’t think we’ve ever approved such a large fence but of the unique lot and it’s behind the house kind of sitting down towards the greenbelt and it’s almost invisible from Encantado Road, excuse me Encantado Loop, and it does sort of weave in and out of trees and bushes and because the neighbors were okay with it and because it would sit behind the house because most of it is facing the green belt and there really isn’t any high visibility to any of the neighbors. It is for dogs and they were concerned about an invisible fence and that’s why the neighborhood approval. But it is something that has in the last go around of guidelines to try to get the fence size larger because they’re almost invisible and the cedar slab or coyote fence should still be limited to 4,000 square feet. But the post and wire fence almost always disappears into the landscape.
    • Carol Sanguinetti – So I guess I have a question about that. So is someone going to validate that the fencing that goes up is the type that it is supposed to be?
    • Mark Young – Yes, when there is a project they notify us when it is done or I’m constantly driving around and I would see if say for instance they put up a coyote fence instead.
    • Sal Monaco – Mark, I understand your point would be that the Architecture Committee did not feel a precedent because we are requiring the neighbors to state their agreement. Is that the piece that makes it not a precedent?
    • Mark Young – Yes, it is a wood post and wire fence and is almost invisible in the landscape weaving in and out of trees, a lot of it is hidden and seeing the way the site was it’s down behind the house going down towards the greenbelt and is not a siding fence. And kind of the neighbor thing is that we do rarely but because of the precedence we thought it was proof to have the neighbors sign off on it and make sure it doesn’t come back to bite us.
    • Sal Monaco – So is it fair to say that if someone comes forward and says, you know, I want 4,000 plus another 2,000 square foot in the future, it wouldn’t just automatically be approved because it’s done on a case by case situation?
    • Mark Young – Absoluetly. It would have to go to the Committee and even with the guideline or revision they would still have to ask for a larger. The guidelines would read differently for the wood post and wire fences because they are so much less visually intrusive.
    • Melicent D’Amore – And to be fair I was at that meeting, as the liason, and they did talk about precedence but he also mentioned the fact that it would be done on a one to one basis if anyone else came forward and it was just because of the circumstances of it being such a low profile fence. If somebody wanted to put up stucco fence that would be different.
    • Mark Young – We had a woman about 5 years ago who wanted to enclose their entire lot, 40,000 square feet. We’ve had some pretty wacky stuff. When I first saw this I thought, “oh boy!” and after seeing the site and it was much more palatable. We have refused people who wanted to do very large enclosures.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Bette you had your hand. Did you want to speak?
    • Bette Knight – I was just wondering why if when things are looked at like this, is it considered that an invisible fence might be appropriate to keep our natural beauty and the atmosphere that is designated in our Governing Documents? I know many people out here have dogs but there are places where you can exercise your dog, along our roads, our hike/bike paths to get exercise. We’ve allowed animals out here as far as fencing, just to allow our dogs to run or animals in some way I find it interesting that that’s considered part of what the Board would agree to on a variance when there are alternatives. We have a wonderful dog park here as I understand. Like I said we have hike/bike paths, and so forth. When the next neighbors move in, again it has set a precedence for someone to fence further and I understand this situation it is not visible. I do understand that but again to go 3,000 square feet over what our governing documents say is questionable as far as what I’m bringing to you tonight. Thank you again for listening.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Just curious, do you live near this particular piece of property?
    • Bette Knight – I do not.
    • Mark Young – It is also a safe place to contain children.
    • Bette Knight – It’s circumstantial I understand that.
    • Mark Young – It’s not just dogs but children. For large dog areas I do recommend they put up an invisible fence. She specifically asked for the variance as one of the justifications due to small children being involved.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – I understand the precedence has been set but I also feel very strongly that both the Architectural Committee, Mark and this Board, if the similar issue ever came up we would look at it as a unique situation and not say well we did this so we have to. There is no have to here. So, I hear what you are saying.
    • Bette Knight – Thank you for listening.
    • Shiela Sullivan – I have a question, I wondered if there was any provision for dismantling the extra 3,000 feet if the property is sold?
    • Nancy Sulzberg – That’s a good question.
    • Mark Young – As far as the front area, the 2000’s there’s a wall and that’s not feasible. The back area at time could be detached and the stipulations in these situations, we’ve felt it wasn’t needed because of the wire fence and it kind of blends into the trees. It wasn’t something they thought was really obnoxious and should be resolved before the sale.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Thank you. Was there another question?
    • Mike Rogers – You know, Nancy, our fence was I think from what Fred Raznik has told me, ours is 6,000 square feet. Believe me it’s way too big! From what Fred said, I think, ours was the first one that got the okay and ours is coyote fence.
    • Mark Young – Yeah but yours blends into a lot of trees.
    • Mike Rogers – Well yeah that’s the thing is there’s a lot of trees. But the thing is you don’t know from any angle you’re looking at it that it’s 6,000 square feet. It’s just interesting.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – I do think even if you don’t see it, you do have to keep in mind how far away from our covenants do we want to keep stepping. So again, I think it’s just something that we all as Board members, as committee members, as community members need to remind ourselves. Are there any more comments on this? If not, the second person is Jean Crawford. Didn’t I just see you on Saturday?
  • Jean Crawford, 10 Enebro Rd – Good evening President Nancy and Directors, HOAMCO staff. One of my first requests would be, could you confirm that on those pool canopys, with the canteliever supports, the supports will be inside the poolwall?
    • Mike Rogers – Yes.
  • Jean Crawford – Ok that’s code, good. And with the budget when we were going over it on Saturday, some of it was just wasn’t quite as easy; you’ve adopted the budget but it’s a document going out to the community, would you consider punching it up a little bit? Some suggestions, and I always go “oh in the past we had”, so the budget you’ll have 2020 then another line item and then you jump to the 2019. So in the old days we used to have budget years and variance. So, for instance, the Vistas is $12,000 more than the old but we don’t have a variance column. But you’re looking at budget one year, budget over there and then the headers, expenses start down here at the bottom and you have to flip the page, so this is going out to the community, there’s spelling errors and I think, you know, it would be a better impression for the whole community if it was punched up a little bit.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Can I suggest then, if you’d like to see that then you come up with a format, send it to the chair of the Finance Committee and they can take a look at it in the committee and see if it helps people read it easier and be more clear on what the goals are, etc. Would you do that?
    • Jean Crawford – I think I’d like to put Nolan on the spot. This document is different than the old days. Did you find this concise when you had to track down capital that was on another page from the header.
    • Nolan Zismann – The only issue is at the presentation. For example, for a page that has a common group, could have that same heading on the same page, which in this case is not.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – I think that form was actually formatted in it’s last effort by Todd?
    • Sal Monaco – I’m not sure about that.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Ok, because I know he did want to clean it up, as it were, make it easier. So, Jean if you have a format you’ve seen used in the past that has been helpful, the chair of the Finance Committee is Dan Drobnis. Feel free to send him a format and ask.
    • Jean Crawford – Dan created the budgets through probably a decades worth of time and they were very easy to read and legible and concise. This is the presentation that is going out to the community and there’s multiple misspellings and I think anybody who has a little bit of experience with Excel would want to make this a hair better.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Okay. And I’m going to go back to you again. I’m going to always try to turn it back to you. If you get in touch with Dan and let him know what you’re thoughts are, point out the errors, I’m sure he doesn’t want misspellings to go out or a format that isn’t readily available and easy for the majority of our community to read and I will leave that to you.
    • Jean Crawford – It represents you more than me. So I can contact Dan.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – That’s where we… It does represent the Board, we represent you, so let’s not go there. If you don’t want to do this we can get the Finance Committee to come up with a different format but it might not be what it is you’re looking for.
    • Sal Monaco – Nolan is here and he is a member of the Finance Committee and I’m sure Nolan would be willing to bring the issue of format up, right?
    • Nolan Zismann – I can certainly redo the format as you suggested as well as the spelling but to answer you other question, Jean, the format that the budget is in now has been very useful and we had 7 reviews of the budget before the final one. And that format was very useful in analyzing and deliberating on what the budget should be.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – I just want to be clear that Nolan, it is not just you cleaning it up it is the committee. There are other members of the committee who may have other ideas that are more helpful and it all needs to be incorporated. Just because we did it one way then, we use what was best from then and try to improve it always going forward. So, if the Finance Committee would like to review it, that would be great but I’d like to get input from as many people as possible.
    • Audience Member – I’ve never seen the budget, I am not someone who seeks out budgets very often. I’m sort of a budget avoider. But I’m also an Excel teacher. I’m an instructor and I teach Excel and I’m not offering to do anything here but what I am trying to say here is I really thank you for bringing this up because I think the presentation is so important and I’m glad that it worked for you. I mean I’m really glad that you found a format that worked well for the job you need to do on the Finance Committee but I think that maybe isn’t what the community needs to see and I think it’s really important that we all be able to easily understand what the Finance Committee has done. So I thank you for bringing that up and I support what she is saying.
    • Jean Crawford – Dan does a delightful budget but it’s not like the old days and you just can’t read easily what was and then you go to the new fresh.
    • Sal Monaco – I can tell you Jean as chair of the Finance Committee that this was certainly appealing to the committee. This is the same format we’ve used for the last couple years. What I think I heard you say maybe is that in addition to 2020 and 2019 budget you’d like a variance so you don’t have to kind of eyeball it. You would like to know what the variance is?
    • Jean Crawford – In the old days we had that.
    • Sal Monaco – Yeah, I understand that and I think there’s so much we go over that what you’ll find is I think it was also done for compactness. I understand that a column for variance would not be hard to do.
  • Jean Crawford – Also on my list, I know we like to keep it to the time, the 3 minutes.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Yes, keep to the time.
  • Jean Crawford – You are creating a Public Safety Task Force and it has a lot to do with wildland fires. There’s a lot of concern in this community that we have our great conservation area and greenbelts. We are a rare community to have this volume of property. So, within our community we have a great individual named Courtney White who was involved with Quivira Coalition and Range Land. We also, last Saturday and on Earth Day brought in Yan Veelam (sp?), we also have EcoTone Land in town and he’s always out here giving of his time plus working for Conservation Committee about how you preserve the soils. So when I was chair of Facilities and Grounds, some 10 years ago, we were concerned; we were always getting complaints you are losing so much vegetation up here that the property itself is about 67-68 years old when the ranch house was going up. So the trees were aging out and we used to have nice pines and they’ve worn out. So for us looking at this and seeing the mowing that you didn’t have any volunteer trees anymore, they were mowed over. You just look across the street and see what natural looks like you see what we have and frequently there has been disruption. Before some of your time, in the last 10 years, there was piles of rock and it was pushed over kind of near the old soccer fields. So there’s concern about keeping things natural/native without doing more mowing and it also spreads the goathead plant and that’s been a huge problem out here and it ruins the playarea. So the goatheads stick right to the tires and it’s amazing how much it spreads up and down the hike/bike trails and into the play areas.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Well thank you. Fire has become my torch. We’ve spoken with the Fire Chief. If you read Better Eldorado, there’s a 4 page article about fire. I absolutely moved here because of the beauty and the environment and certainly don’t want to lose that but I don’t want to be so unrealistic as to think, “oh well we’ve never had a fire here; we never will have a fire here.” That is why we are starting this Public Safety Task Force to include the Conservation Committee, to include fire fighters from here, from the county. There’s a wildlife team that is specificly targeted to working with communities like ours and what kinds of things can the community do to prepare to mitigate against fire. There is absolutely no intention of this Board going out and hiring someone to go and mow the greenbelt down. We would have to do a lot of work and that is not our intention. That being said, we are also aware of the risk of fire. We have dry grasses, we have high winds, we don’t have the tall trees where it can jump but we are very, very much in a situation where we want to be ready. We want to be prepared and we may have to think things differently. All in its due time. Nothing is going to happen without community involvement.
    • Jean Crawford – Good. I was married to the Fire Chief here. He still lives here, he’s still my husband so I understand the pager will go off at 4 in the morning because somebody’s ashes had gotten into a tree and what not so we do have an environment we want to protect but we also want to protect it for the natural qualities and the plants and animals as well.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Well, a person said to me, “What good” – I didn’t say it I’m just repeating it – “What good is the environment if your house is burned down?” and there’s a point you have to think we do have to think about it. It’s not going to happen tomorrow, hopefully. We do have to think about the change –
    • Jean Crawford – There’s a new fear in the air that what a lot of us are hearing. Sensibility needs to come into play and we’re all happy.
    • Nancy Sulzberg – Absolutely. Any other comments on fire? It is going to be a hot issue. With that we are going to close the open forum.


Old Business - 15 minutes

  • Community Open Forum Discussions
    • Developed during a time when there were issues that needed to be discussed outside a Board Meeting. Looked at the process and it was decided that format does not meet the needs of the community. Open up to community if they would like to do other informal meetings. No discussion and no motion it will just no longer be listed in the Vistas.
  • Boys and Girls Club
    • Project run here with the SFPS, kids from 8-18. Examining how this program would impact Eldorado. B&GC can work with the school but it is different when the children are using our amenities. The Stables would be thrilled to have the kids out!
  • Website Task Force
    • In January revamping the website so it is easier to use, ADA Compliant. Eliminate the public from seeing the sensitive information that is currently on the website. Please let us know what you do like to see and what you don’t like to see on the website. An electronic survey will be sent out for everyone to respond to and give feedback. Cybersecurity will be addressed.
  • Public Safety Task Force
    • Interfacing with the different committees and other people within the community. Water district job to trim around the hydrants – not happening. Coordinate with different entities and see how we can work together to prevent fire and maintain the environment. Would like to see a crime report for Eldorado; sheriffs coming into the community with their lights on. Eldorado Neighborhood Watch has a contact with the Sheriff’s department. Eldorado Fire Department beat the county fire department and it is a well oiled machine we have out here. When looking at guidelines there are things that are not being done; e.g. the fire hydrants. Steve King is the contact at the Water Department – do a flush every year; this is different than an inspection. County has all records about hydrant inspections and maintenance.

Reports- 45 minutes

  • Architecture Committee – Melicent D’Amore for George Rutter
    • Items on agenda were reviewed and approved. Presentation by Shiela about the Dark Skies. Next meeting is Tuesday, December 17.
  • Conservation Committee – Nancy Sulzberg for Carol Sanguinetti
    • Met with committee and discussed fire. Are aware of our interest. Gave names of fire ecologists to contact and review. Last year a successful garden fair
  • Election Committee – Nancy Sulzberg
    • Election forms are all on website, March 2 is deadline to get petition in with all signatures. Currently the whole board has been appointed, none elected. Be good for people to elect their leaders
  • Environmental Stewardship Committee – Carol Sanguinetti
    • Remove elm tree and use approved cleaning and other supplies
  • Facilities & Grounds Committee – David Sorkin
    • Very well attended. Looking into holding folks and systems accountable so we can see what is working and what is not. Been given permission to access software to make these changes. See when things are being put into system. It will track maintenance and let us know when things need to be replaced and when they should be completed. Make sure we are doing what the folks want us to do.
  • Finance Committee – Sal Monaco
    • Met on the 10th. Drafted budget motions for the Board; also drafted the Budget letter. Letter is easier to digest than the budget. Outlines spending, projects and reserves. Maintenance drives the R&R – need affective maintenance so everyting is done in a timely manner. Would like to have 5 years of R&R funds available. This enabled us to work on the pool, water distribution system at CC, pool and stables. Get back to full 5 years by 2022 – this is why assessment was raised.
  • Information Committee – Melicent D’Amore
    • December 5 – no quorum. Vistas deadline was discussed. Sandra Vreeland is doing great with the Vistas layout. Bonn Macy resigned earlier that day due to work interferences. If anyone is interested in joining the Information Committee, please contact. Next meeting is January 13, 2020. Style Guide was put on the website to encourage residents to write and submit their articles.
  • Road Committee – Melicent D’Amore
    • Trying to obtain GIS Softward System to assist with 2020 goals on roads. In-depth presentation by Road Committee Chair. Next meeting is January 8 at 5:30 pm. Planning on addressing stable road issue and get their input and feedback on that. Will be doing twice a year road survey; this did take place but was too recent and will find out more in January.
  • Stable Committee – George Rutter
    • Stable Committee met wit Board and went over financials, goals, projects, ideas, etc. Have strict guidelines and push hard to follow them. They pay for most of the expenses there. Excited to work with children and have more childrens programs down there.
  • Bylaws Review Ad-hoc Committee – Nancy Sulzberg
    • Has moved into next phase. Red line will be on the website. Want members of the community to give feedback and read through them. Discussion will be at the forum. Will be part of election that ends May 1.

January 9 – called a meeting with all committee chair people. Want to make it so everything works better together. Have committees do presentations. Need more volunteers and get more people drawn in.

Adjournment – meeting adjourned at 6:48 pm

            Motion to adjourn by George Rutter, Second by Sal Monaco, 6 in favor.

*Variances will be reviewed and if approved, the Consent Agenda will be amended to include the approvals.