By Marsh Creek standards, it was an unusually earnest back-and-forth between the Board of Directors and anxious homeowners (onsite estimates of 30-100) drawn by word of a planned un-manning the Mizell Guard station overnight.
In the end, the Board punted.
The directors voted to approve a new contract with RAMCO, a new security provider that in fact began off-contract December 1st.
RAMCO will soon start installing new high-tech security cameras and scanners at both Marsh Creek gates. The vote also approved new gate technology costing $52,000. The Board’s decision retains, for now, the presence of an overnight guard at the Mizell Gate, a concession to many homeowners attending who voiced fears their community would become newly vulnerable to burglars without an overnight Mizell guard.
“We did a calculation and keeping a guard (at Mizell) would cost $9 a month”, said homeowner John Brinson. “I’d be willing to pay that. Having a guard at the gate makes us feel a bit more secure … even if they are playing games on their computer”.
The Board is facing a money crunch, struggling to amass enough cash reserves to fund new road repaving in four years. And eliminating the overnight Mizell guard was a step to filling that budget hole without triggering a community-wide vote.
“We need two-thirds of the community to agree to exceed the budget limit”, said Finance Committee Chairman Ken Gentile, referring to HOA rules governing increases in dues. He indicated that community apathy would make that goal a struggle.
“We can’t even get an AGM (Annual General Meeting) quorum”, chimed in Board Secretary and former President, John Hutson. “The Board has to make a decision and I believe the Board made the absolute right decision”.
Board member, Kathy Sharpless, also seemed to chide the board’s critics “for not reading what the Board sends or attending meetings”.
In response, homeowner Michelle Grobner wondered why the Board had not sent out a tailored survey to the community explaining the options and costs for the Mizell Gate and asking homeowner to approve a choice.
“You’re changing our community”, she complained.
Board president, Brian Foy, conceded that “the Board needs to do a better job communicating”.
Attending the meeting was a RAMCO representative.
Arthur (last name garbled during the Zoom audio) described the new technology his company will bring to Marsh Creek’s Mizell entrance:
The ability to install a “virtual gate” that will connect the Mizell visitor gate to the Main Gate from 11pm-7am.
“Vehicle pulls up, clicks a button, the Main Gate guard talks to the driver, scans the driver license, and opens the gate”.
The technology will also allow a homeowner, he said, to send a “quick access” code to visitors and contractors which they can display to a scanner for immediate entrance.
Turning to homeowner concerns of intruders sneaking past an unmanned gate at night, Arthur, the RAMCO rep, said his company will install 11-12 cameras that will “cover every bit of that area” around Mizell and be motion sensitive.
However, homeowner concern continued.
New board member Frank Merenda expressed doubt that the assembled homeowners constituted “a representative body”. But soon, President Brian Foy sensed the need for a tactical retreat. He called for a vote approving the new security company contract and its technology, while not eliminating the manned guard at the Mizell station.
For now.
As the meeting closed, Foy asked homeowners to reach out to their friends who might live in unmanned gated communities and get their appraisals of technology in place of a human presence at their gates.
“You will be surprised”.
In the meantime, he said, “we have to go back and figure out the impact on our budget”.
For more background, click here.
Sent: Wed, Dec 21, 2022 1:33 pm
Subject: Re: Message from Marsh Creek Owners Association, Inc. – MCOA – E-Bulletin – December 20th, 2022 – [#XN370084] Detail of Mizell Road Gate Closings
published by MCOA Board
Subject: Message from Marsh Creek Owners Association, Inc. – MCOA – E-Bulletin – December 20th, 2022 – [#XN370084]
The most published information, that I can see, ever, on the topic. A tad too far after the fact. With detail such as this, an opportunity was missed of having an active campaign months earlier, i.e. emails, planned info meetings/sessions for the community, et al.
A major redefining Community event such as this, requires relentless public awareness and information flow to spark interest and debate.
.
A Board can get incestuous, and, because, in many hours, the topic is well discussed and acted on this in the small group, they are very convinced and very excited their hard work will be readily apparent and understood to the population. With weak communication this does not happen when Technology products and the basic fabric of the known community is changed; In this case what constitutes a Gated Community. The comment of “Nay Sayers” was off base; The people in attendance were there to understand the elements of an important plan with weak communication on content, and, as a result, were saying “Stop”
The MCOA and May Management Bulletins as shown, or, the “just read the meeting minutes” attitude is not enough with something of this magnitude.
This is probably a good plan over time, but, I believe needs some adjustment.
The idea of the night time closing of the gate, with maybe 4 to 6 weeks of manned personnel, as the trial period is not, in my opinion, a valid trial with the amount of expensive equipment and operating process with the main gate.
Add the kiosk and the job requirements of the main gate night staff ( the personnel will have to be a cut above of what we have today), the manned back gate should remain better than 6 months, in my opinion, with open feed back on progress to the community in a much improved communication plan.
I don’t believe a short term “10% Cap” issue, given today’s inflation impacts, is not an unreasonable risk the board can initiate without a major community vote as long as it is communicated to the population prior to initiating the plan.
Thank you for your consideration.
Thanks as always for timely coverage and reporting.
It’s important to note that the “guard” at the gate has very limited ability to prevent an unauthorized person from entering the community because he/she cannot leave the guardhouse. The proposed cameras would alert the manned gate to contact the roving patrol car which is all a guard could do.
Given our historic experience of almost non-existent crime the proposed arrangement for eliminating the Mizell guard from 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM appears reasonable and worth testing.