Community Development issues

Subject: Re: Community Development issues

Ms Crespo,

I find your comments interesting, especially in light of the fact that It is the Shorehaven Board that has always insisted on documenting everything in writing and in fulfilling our commitments.  The Shorehaven Board has maintained an independent and sponsor free gated community for more than twenty years.

If you note, in the past when the Shorehaven Board has received an inquiry or concern from any HPS Condo Board member, they have received a prompt and courteous reply.

The Shorehaven Board has fulfilled its obligations under the Stipulation of Settlement(June 16, 2009).  

Unfortunately some of the other Boards, including the HPS Condo 4 Board,  that are party to that agreement, including the HPS Condo 4 Board,  have failed to fulfill their obligations under the same agreement.  Ms. Crespo, your BOARD OF MANAGERS ,The HPS Condo 4 Board, has failed to remit the Jan2009 -April 2009 proportionate share of Gatehouse expenses attributable to them.  Some other HPS  entities have also failed to honor their agreement.

Despite violation of our agreement and the  this lack of cooperation exhibited by the some of the HPS condo Boards, the Shorehaven Board remains responsive to the day to day operational needs of the Shorehaven community and when brought ot our attention by competent authority, we address the needs of the HPS communities as well.

The sole Recent communication written by TCM on behalf of some of the HPS Boards appears to demand that the Stipulation of Settlement agreement of June 16, 2009 be cancelled or modified and includes a request for information that exceeds the requirements of that agreement.

Since several HPS entities have chosen  not to fulfill their financial obligations the Shorehaven Board has reluctantly had no choice but to refer this Stipulation of Settlement Gatehouse expense budget matter to our attorney.   A complaint has been filed.  All Shorehaven Gatehouse Budgetary related matters will now be resolved either in Court or by negotiations between our respective attorneys.

As concerns Beechwood constructing an amenity, they are certainly free to construct a tennis court on HPS Condo 3 or HPS Condo 4 property and we would not dream of infringing upon their right to do so.  However, no one has the right to build or make modifications on any Shorehaven owned and managed property without our express written permission.

The Shorehaven “Sunset Cove” Park is exclusively Shorehaven Property, at least until such time as the entire planned 1058 unit community is completed AND the Shorehaven Homeowners Association Board of Directors is activated. 

 However HPS homeowners do enjoy an easement to utilize the park.  

You should be aware that none of the HPS entities have ever contributed a single dollar towards park maintenance and upkeep.

Finally as dismayed as you may be with the state of affairs in Shorehaven, your best hope at amicably resolving the conflicts you perceive, whether real or imagined, is by fulfilling your current obligations and civilly discussing (via email) any other concerns you may have with the Shorehaven Board.   The general feelings of the Shorehaven populace is that HPS Condo residents are unwanted intruders and most Shorehaven residents revile the manner in which HPS Condo residents treat Shorehaven and its residents.  The Shorehaven Board does not share that view and hopes to reach an accord with the HPS Condo and HOA communities which can only be achieved by both sides fulfilling its obligations under our current by written agreements (2nd Settlement Agreement June 27, 2002 and the Stipulation of Settlement June 16, 2009.

The Shorehaven Board finds your assertion that you have helped our community by purchasing a home from Beechwood to be an irrational argument, one barely worth repeating, much less giving credence to the assertion by addressing it.

Have a pleasant evening.

Robert L. Wheeler III

On Jun 1, 2010, at 7:28 PM, YAJAIRA CRESPO wrote:

It is my understanding as a Board Member that we have yet to receive the contract for Cambridge and any other pertinent documents related to security....without which we can't set rules.  Is there something to hid?  We are all paying Cambridge for "security services".  Most of us are not satified as they appear to be at your becking call......
Save the excuses for someone who is not knowledgeable in real estate management.  I've been doing it for 15 years and know BS when I see/hear it. 
My sole purpose in sending these emails is to have a paper trial regarding all of the incidences that are occuring in this private gated community.  With all that I've accumulated, I'd say that I'm a credible witness with supporting documentation.  Believe me when I say, I will assist this community in thriving into the best private gated community in the Bronx!!!  It has great potential but your ego and the egos of you fellow Board Members are too big to allow the thrive.  I didn't help you and your fellow Shorehaven residents increase your equity to sit back now and wait while my home market value plummets.....because we are the reason why your Shorehaven neighbors all refinanced and took out H.E.L.O.C. so be courteous and let me get my money's worth.  You all made out like fat rats AND you know I'm telling the truth.
I'm really disgusted by the negative impact of your actions.  You need to remember that you are hurting US (your fellow neighbors).  The community is suffering at your hands.  Not Beechwood.  The stop work order only means that their money stays in the bank collecting interest.  Think about that!!!
Yajaira   Sent from my G1 Phone
On Jun 1, 2010 6:29 PM, "Robert L Wheeler III" <robertlwheeler3@aol.com> wrote:

Ms Crespo,

You are not alone, everyone residing in the greater Shorehaven/HPS community paid good money for their home within a gated community.  However no one signed away their constitutional rights and the mandates of existing NYS law must be followed.  

Personal opinions aside, The smoking of marijuana in a public place is  a NYS Penal Law violations punishable by a fine issued based upon the personal observation a law enforcement officer within his/her geographical area of employment.  That is the prevailing NYS law and it is applicable in the youths smoking marijuana incident that you have brought to the Shorehaven Boards attention.

As concerns dog walking in the complex, the Shorehaven Board has been apprised of the ongoing conflict among those that own dogs.

It seems that by some HPS Condo dog owners on Beacon Lane refusing to clean up after their pets when the dogs relieve themselves in front of homes along Sunset Blvd, some of the Sunset Blvd home owners displeased by this HPS homeowner conduct, are retaliating in kind.

The Shorehaven Board disapproves of this type of conduct.

Unfortunately, due to differences in the rules and regulations between Shorehaven and the HPS Condo’s, addressing the situation through fine issuance is problematic. 

Cambridge Security personnel are currently empowered to issue fines to Shorehaven residents failing to pick up after their dogs, upon Shorehaven property only.  The HPS Condo Boards have not empowered Cambridge Security to take similar measures for violators committing similar offenses on HPS Condo property or against HPS Condo offenders, however.

The Shorehaven Board has articulated this discrepancy in the rules and regulations of the various Condo entities and Beechwood several times, and suggested that the HPS Condo rules and regulations be amended to correct this oversight, yet the discrepancy remains unaddressed.

Robert L Wheeler III

On Jun 1, 2010, at 6:00 PM, YAJAIRA CRESPO wrote:

I also want to add that my next door neighbor had words with a Shorehaven resident that allowed his dog to defacate on his lawn and refused to pick up the poop.
I pray to God that I never witness such an act because the outcome would not be just verbal exchanges..................that is so very disrespectful.  My lawn is decorated & we put treatments on our lawn.  I don't want to ever have an exchange of words with any of the Shorehaven residents.  I'm not patient when it comes to downright arrogance!! 
Yajaira   Sent from my G1 Phone
On Jun 1, 2010 5:52 PM, "YAJAIRA CRESPO" <jadeli.management@gmail.com> wrote:

Furthermore, they need to smoke their pot in their own homes.  If security would have come to investigate, they would have personally witnessed the illegal act. 
If your Board was truly concerned, it would have asked security to get the names and addresses of the teens so that the parents are addresses according.  In my personal opinion, they should be arrested!!!  I didn't pay all this money for my home within a gated, private community to have teens smoking pot in a playground that I use for my kids recreational use. 

Yajaira   Sent from my G1 Phone

>
> On Jun 1, 2010 5:40 PM, "Robert L Wheeler III" <robertlwheeler3@aol.com> wrote:
>

> Ms. Crespo,
>
> As the Shorehaven Board has advised before, the issue of smoking Marijuana in a "p...

> The Shorehaven Board determined long ago that gentle persuasion was preferable to unneeded confron...

>
> On Jun 1, 2010, at 5:18 PM, YAJAIRA CRESPO wrote:
>
> Good Evening,
>
My husband told me that at around...