Docstoc

Yard Maintenence in Rental Agreement

Document Sample
Yard Maintenence in Rental Agreement Powered By Docstoc
					Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Please select the description below that most closely reflects your view of the
island - either now or where you would like it to be in the future. Please feel
                                                      Response        Response
Answer Options
                                                       Percent          Count
Unincorporated County land subject only to                  11.1%               24
A recreational community with limited regulation, and       57.4%               124
A residential community with regulations that mirror        8.8%                19
A gated private community with rules and regulations,       24.5%               53
An exclusive retirement community with strict               1.9%                 4
Other (please specify)                                                          29
                                                 answered question                    216
                                                   skipped question                    25

                                                        Other
Number        Response Date                             (please
                                                        specify)
          1                 Oct 21, 2009 12:16 AM       we could also agree with the fourth statement.
          2                 Oct 21, 2009 12:32 AM       I do not want the island to act as a homeowners association. I feel m
          3                  Oct 21, 2009 2:54 AM       I first choice is somewhere between the 2nd and fourth choice, but no
          4                  Oct 21, 2009 4:01 PM       Water such as the RO system and the monies to maintain it, fire wate
          5                  Oct 21, 2009 6:31 PM       Tough choice. Went with gated community relating the 'gate' as the
          6                  Oct 21, 2009 9:48 PM       We would combine items #3 & 4 -- in the future we'd like to see Hat
          7                  Oct 22, 2009 8:43 PM       let's keep Hat Island PRIVATE - family members, family friends when
          8                  Oct 23, 2009 7:19 PM       recreational property with minimal goverening.
          9                  Oct 25, 2009 7:56 PM       We would like to see the opportunity to allow the properties to be ren
         10                 Oct 25, 2009 10:19 PM       option 5 would be impossible to implement.
         11                  Oct 27, 2009 3:49 AM       I would actually go between the "recreational" piece and "residential"
         12                  Oct 27, 2009 4:51 AM       However, since only property owners and their visitors are allowed on
         13                  Oct 27, 2009 5:12 AM       It is not gated but is private only due to the fact that there isn't any "
         14                  Oct 27, 2009 8:03 PM       need law enforcement
         15                  Oct 31, 2009 3:48 PM       Unfortunately, I believe there are a limited number of owners that com
         16                  Nov 14, 2009 7:09 PM       A primary concern for me is the protection of property boundaries.
         17                 Nov 16, 2009 11:30 PM       A Private recreational community with limited regulation yet maintains
         18                  Nov 25, 2009 3:24 AM       Whatever I might like, our Association only has authority to regulate c
         19                  Nov 29, 2009 3:40 AM       As much as we realize the need for rules, we strongly disagree with th
         20                  Nov 29, 2009 6:26 PM       These seem to be a limiting among these attibutes, to the point that m
         21                  Dec 13, 2009 5:33 PM       we are "unique", let's keep it that way.It has been working for 45+ ye
         22                  Dec 13, 2009 9:56 PM       I'd like to be able to have the freedom to rent my vacation property w
         23                  Dec 14, 2009 6:17 AM       Less governance is typically better
         24                  Dec 20, 2009 7:23 PM       One of the best parts of Hat Is. is that it is a private island. A real co
         25                  Dec 22, 2009 5:09 PM       I have been on Hat for over 50 years. There are getting to be too ma
         26                  Dec 27, 2009 1:39 AM       A private residential/recreational community with such regulation as r
         27                  Dec 29, 2009 1:36 AM       I view this answer, and my choice, as the closest to current island reg
         28                  Dec 29, 2009 5:00 AM       2-1A private residential/recreational community with such regulation a
         29                  Dec 29, 2009 4:44 PM       I'd like to see the Island continue to be family friendly with the least a
                                  Please select the description below that most closely reflects your
                                view of the island - either now or where you would like it to be in the
                                future. Please feel free to expand on that view in the comments box.


                                             70.0%
                                             60.0%
                                             50.0%
                                             40.0%
                                             30.0%
                                             20.0%
                                             10.0%
                                              0.0%
                 A recreational community with limitedto Washington State any other residential by a board and where
                       A residential An exclusive retirement community then only to ensure the health and
                              A gatedland subject only regulation, and with strict regulations regarding guests,
                                       private community with rules and regulations, determined
             Unincorporated Countycommunity with regulations that mirror and Snohmish Countyneighborhood inchildren, etc.
                                    determined safety no owners governmentwhere a priority of majority owners rights
                                    regulations by a vote of directors and
                                                 with of "local" community,
                                                            Snohomish County
                              necessary the majorityboard of theand residentswith neceessary aprotectingvote of the community
                                                               from the abuses of others




wners association. I feel my lot(s) should be treated just as any property is unincorporated Snohomish County.
 d and fourth choice, but not the 3rd choice.
 ies to maintain it, fire water lines are alreaduy installed in all the divisions at the south end, no roads are needed for fire trucks or similar, fe
y relating the 'gate' as the physical distance from the mainland. Some of the restrictions from a retirement may apply such as guests and ch
 future we'd like to see Hat Island be more like other private residential communities with strong CC & R's. The "gated" part is all the water
mbers, family friends when property owners are on island

ow the properties to be rented and the island marketed as a vacation place for public. this could strictly be managed by Hat Island manage

nal" piece and "residential" piece. I don't look at the island as a retirement place, because I am in my 30s and have a small child. We woul
heir visitors are allowed on the island, it already is a bit of a gated community.
e fact that there isn't any "public" land on the island. I would never live in a real gated community..guards and all!

  number of owners that complain about everything and decisions are made that effect everyone because of a few individuals that having no
 of property boundaries.
 ed regulation yet maintains order and establishes responsible fiscal, health and safety standards for the community at large.
  has authority to regulate common areas and common facilities and I think the Board and Management are doing a good job at that and sh
we strongly disagree with the manager of the island's manner of presenting things to us all. ie the kids climbing on the bluff. It was so cond
attibutes, to the point that many contain a desireable atribute; but, there needs to be one that closely describes the appointments of our 200
as been working for 45+ years and most everybody is happy not being harrassed by rules & regs, we go to Hat to get away from "Big Broth
 ent my vacation property without the limitations of having to have the renters pay user fees (anything additional above and beyond monthly

 a private island. A real community of people that work together to protect its unique qualities. I especially like the rusticness of the island.
 e are getting to be too many rules or proposed rules that penalize everybody for the irresponsible actions of a few
 y with such regulation as required for health and safety. Use of and access to common areas and amenities and upkeep and appearence of
closest to current island regulation: more than health and safety but less than a gated community with extensive rules.
unity with such regulation as required for health and safety, use of and access to common areas and amenities and upkeep and appearance
mily friendly with the least amount of rules as possible. I'd like to see an attitude created that promotes neighbors looking out for neighbors
d for fire trucks or similar, ferry service for individuals without boat access and the monies to maintain it. The rules, regulations etc. are gett
 apply such as guests and children special rules.
"gated" part is all the water around us!


aged by Hat Island management and would bring in outside dollars. Continuing to rely on inside (property owners exclusively) revenue is b

have a small child. We wouldn't even be on the island if it were "an exclusive retirement community..."




w individuals that having nothing better to do than complain.


g a good job at that and should keep doing the same! Thanx!
on the bluff. It was so condensending and inappropriate for him to make those comments in the article. There are other examples. We are
the appointments of our 2006 statement of values.
to get away from "Big Brother"
 above and beyond monthly rent for the use of roads / services). As an owner I pay for those fees annually already.

 the rusticness of the island.

 upkeep and appearence of common areas and personal property.

and upkeep and appearance of common area and personal property.
 rs looking out for neighbors.
es, regulations etc. are getting completely out of hand. People that need those types of rules and regulations should live on a lake over on




ers exclusively) revenue is becoming financially burdensome for many.




are other examples. We are afraid to even have guests for fear we cannot possibly tell them all the rules. We just need to keep things as si
ould live on a lake over on the mainland.




st need to keep things as simple as possible and look for the good in the residents and not always the bad.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Through a series of community meetings in 2006 a statment of island mission and values was created. Those va
statement of purpose for the HIC and help to provide a framework within which board members make decisions
                                                                              Moderately
Answer Options                                     Don't agree Mildly agree
                                                                                 agree
Preserve island safety and security                              5               21               70
Preserve the island's environmental character                    7               28               78
Enhance owner's quality of life                                 19               57               64
Preserve and protect the real and intangible values of           5               40               76
Preserve and protect the real and intangible values of          16               51               73
Accomplish community objectives in a fiscally                   12               15               57
Other (please specify)
                                                                                                                       answer
                                                                                                                         skipp

                                                         Other
Number        Response Date                              (please
                                                         specify)
          1                   Oct 20, 2009 9:50 PM       The special interest group have it their way and do not consider all Is
          2                  Oct 21, 2009 12:00 AM       I'm not aware of the statement stated above and for this reason I am
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 3:59 PM       I'd prefer that the mission be to protect the Environment. The charac
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 4:01 PM       Not all but the majoruty of the places on this Island are Summer plac
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 6:31 PM       Looking at this relative to where preservation of safety and security is
          6                  Oct 22, 2009 10:12 PM       Stop under age drivers of any type of motorized transportation.
          7                   Oct 25, 2009 4:31 PM       Enhance owner's quality of life. Preserve and protect the real and inta
          8                   Oct 25, 2009 7:56 PM       Again, marketing Hat Island and bringing in outside revenue will allow
          9                   Oct 27, 2009 3:49 AM       Is there a board or governing body of some sort that ensures new bu
         10                   Oct 31, 2009 3:48 PM       I don't have them or remember then so I am unable to comment.
         11                    Nov 2, 2009 4:29 PM       Statements are confusing. Not sure what you're looking for here.
         12                  Nov 16, 2009 11:30 PM       The community should not be responsible for "enhancing" owners' qu
         13                   Nov 25, 2009 3:24 AM       Whatever we believe, we can't make regulations that affect property
         14                   Nov 29, 2009 3:40 AM       This question is a little confusing to me. The mandate for HIC action
         15                   Nov 29, 2009 6:19 PM       We are not clear what you mean by inviromental character, beacuse t
         16                   Dec 1, 2009 10:26 PM       1. While there seems to have been no major security breach on the is
         17                   Dec 13, 2009 5:33 PM       we don't need to "go overboard" and we don't need to over regulate
         18                   Dec 20, 2009 7:23 PM       By checking "strongly agree" I mean that I want to retain the feel of t
         19                   Dec 27, 2009 1:39 AM       All things in moderation.
         20                   Dec 29, 2009 5:00 AM       All things in moderation.
         21                   Dec 29, 2009 4:44 PM       Some of these questions are hard to answer because there is not des
                                                                                        Through a series of community meetings in 200
                                                                                         mission and values was created. Those values
values was created. Those values also guide a
ard members make decisions. Please indicate the
              Strongly       Rating       Response
                agree       Average          Count
                                                                                  Preserve and protect the real and intangible
                     115             3.40              211
                                                                                      values of owners' personal property
                     100             3.27              213
                     69              2.88              209
                     89              3.19              210
                     69              2.93              209                                     Enhance owner's quality of life
                     125             3.41              209
                                                       21
                           answered question                 213
                             skipped question                 28                           Preserve island safety and security




 ir way and do not consider all Islanders.
 d above and for this reason I am unable to give any comments.
ect the Environment. The character will naturally change (and its changing mostly for the better) based on the activities of the owners, part
   on this Island are Summer places and it has always been the owners responsibility to protect their own places at least in the 53 years I've
 ervation of safety and security is the overarching objective and the rest are the goals to get there.
   motorized transportation.
 rve and protect the real and intangible values of owners' personal property. COMMENT: Neither of these are the Board's business.
 ging in outside revenue will allow for much more enhanced services and increase the overall value and net worth of the island..
 f some sort that ensures new building stays within the confines of environmental rules? There are 2 new homes going up in F that appear t
  so I am unable to comment.
what you're looking for here.
 sible for "enhancing" owners' quality of life. That's too broad and accepting a bit much of "the impossible".
  regulations that affect property rights, so none of these value questions really make sense
me. The mandate for HIC action to me is to preserve the safety and secruity , environmental character , community property which in turn p
 nviromental character, beacuse there are radical invormentals on the island.
o major security breach on the island, there really is nothing that I know of that has been put in place for security or protection from intrude
  we don't need to over regulate
 that I want to retain the feel of the island as it is now. NOT to build mega-homes that use up our resources or to develop tracts of homes f


 answer because there is not description of to what extent the board can go to achieve these measures
f community meetings in 2006 a statment of island
 s was created. Those values also guide a stateme




 al and intangible
onal property



er's quality of life




fety and security

                       2.60   2.80   3.00      3.20      3.40      3.60




 the activities of the owners, particularly the building activity. As we have more density and higher propoerty values we need different rules
aces at least in the 53 years I've been coming here and my Mother's 82 years of coming here. There never ever has been any HIC protectio


re the Board's business.
 worth of the island..
 omes going up in F that appear to have done what they wanted, regardless of the impact on the island: 1 clear cut the entire bluff, includin




mmunity property which in turn protects all property owners, and fiscal matters .An owners quality of life and experience at the Island is str

ecurity or protection from intruders on Hat Island. In fact, access to outsiders has actually become easier. Outsiders need to be stopped fro

es or to develop tracts of homes for sale like a suburb. We do need reliable services, utilities, etc. though
alues we need different rules, levels and methods of enforcement, etc. We need to evolve, not preserve the past.
 has been any HIC protection for cabins and /or property in the southern Island divisoins anyway, ever !




 cut the entire bluff, including a Madrona tree, and the other butted their foundation clear up to the edge of the bluff. It makes me very ske




xperience at the Island is stricty their responsiblity again, some look for the good, others only see the bad and that it is always someone els

iders need to be stopped from getting on the ferry, just as they are sent away in our marina. 2. Wa State has new laws regarding protectin
bluff. It makes me very skeptical that anyone is overseeing this type of issue.




hat it is always someone elses fault that THEIR experience is not what they want it to be.

new laws regarding protecting the bluffs and environment. The island needs to find a way to enforce those laws. One person has almost sin
. One person has almost single handed destroyed the beauty and character of the island, along with jeapardizing the bluffs and homes of is
g the bluffs and homes of islanders.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Please add any additional thoughts you have which describe
your view of the island's image and vision for the future
                                                     Response
Answer Options
                                                        Count
                                                          49
                              answered question                 49
                                skipped question               192

                                                   Response
Number        Response Date
                                                   Text
          1                Oct 20, 2009 9:50 PM    I believe that the Island is heading to be more commericail
          2                Oct 20, 2009 9:54 PM    A community that values the whole. Its members see themselves are
          3               Oct 20, 2009 11:13 PM    There are so many rules now that it more and more like living in Dow
          4               Oct 21, 2009 12:00 AM    A high end residential island.
          5                Oct 21, 2009 2:54 AM    I feel the only way to protect what we love about the island is to som
          6                Oct 21, 2009 3:18 AM    lower the yearly assessments
          7                Oct 21, 2009 3:59 PM    Fiscal responsibiliy means pro-active investment, not minimal cost.
          8                Oct 21, 2009 4:01 PM    The Island's image is exactly what it should be. It's a privately owned
          9                Oct 21, 2009 6:31 PM    Might take some time to revisit the original University study of the isla
         10                Oct 21, 2009 9:48 PM    We believe the island is changing, and changing for the better. We d
         11               Oct 21, 2009 10:26 PM    Have the island purse getting some of our land tax back to run the isl
         12                Oct 22, 2009 5:30 AM    I believe the vision needs to include making sure the balance of island
         13               Oct 22, 2009 10:00 AM    It's all about balance...growth and change are inevitable, but they sho
         14                Oct 22, 2009 4:48 PM    A true recreational/vacation/seasonal/retirement community
         15                Oct 22, 2009 6:58 PM    keeping the island Family Friendly (it's not a retirement community), o
         16               Oct 22, 2009 10:12 PM    see above
         17                Oct 23, 2009 7:19 PM    unfortunately the island is changing towards those who only have mo
         18               Oct 24, 2009 12:05 AM    A place for fun and responsible steward ship
         19               Oct 24, 2009 12:30 PM    A place to get away that is not common to the main land. I like the le
         20                Oct 25, 2009 2:29 AM    too many rules & regulations!!!
         21                Oct 25, 2009 3:01 PM    We need tp be much more circumspect in thinking up and adopting n
         22                Oct 25, 2009 4:31 PM    Self governed with minimal rules & regulations. A place of refuge from
         23               Oct 25, 2009 10:19 PM    There seem to be vastly disparate views about what is important to v
         24               Oct 25, 2009 10:33 PM    I would like to see some commercial services i.e. a restaurant with co
         25                Oct 27, 2009 3:49 AM    It appears to be shifting to a younger group. By that I mean not only
         26                Oct 27, 2009 8:03 PM    enforcement of Island regulations and penalties for infractions primar
         27                Oct 27, 2009 8:57 PM    I feel the island is attempting to regulate to many issues on the island
         28                Oct 30, 2009 9:21 PM    A 7-11 store
         29                Oct 31, 2009 3:22 PM    I boat over & feel harrassed that if I am not out by 5:00 pm I am cha
         30                Oct 31, 2009 3:48 PM    Get rid of the junk cars in the marina as much as possible. Do not allo
         31                Oct 31, 2009 9:41 PM    keep it slow! moterate growth and development,like it as a small area
         32                 Nov 3, 2009 4:04 AM    Our biggest disapointment has been the clear cutting which ahs finally
         33                Nov 14, 2009 7:09 PM    The Island now has a unique, wonderful character that I would not lik
         34               Nov 16, 2009 11:30 PM    So much has changed since 2006. Our perspectives have changed alo
         35               Nov 16, 2009 11:40 PM    We believe that we should continue to make improvements on the jew
         36                Nov 25, 2009 2:59 AM    Safe, secure, unique liefstyle and investment
37   Nov 25, 2009 3:24 AM   I think we should have a vision of making the common areas and ame
38   Nov 29, 2009 3:05 AM   PRIVATE LIMITED ACESS
39   Nov 29, 2009 3:40 AM   I hope there is never a store. Go to Guemmes or Lummi if you want
40   Nov 29, 2009 6:19 PM   WE invision a Hat Island that maintains its unique character of a place
41   Nov 29, 2009 6:26 PM   I believe strongly that we, as an Ilsand comminity we all need to striv
42   Dec 1, 2009 10:26 PM   The island no longer feels private. There are people all summer walk
43   Dec 13, 2009 5:33 PM   KEEP IT SIMPLEUse the income to keep up the facilities and pay the e
44   Dec 21, 2009 3:29 PM   The Island has always been safe, it is not a unsafe place. It is zon
45   Dec 22, 2009 5:09 PM   seems that policy and rules are more and more dictated by older, ofte
46   Dec 24, 2009 8:36 PM   Have very nice bathrooms and showerst near the marina
47   Dec 27, 2009 1:39 AM   There is a delicate balance between the protection of rights of the pro
48   Dec 29, 2009 5:00 AM   There is a delicate balance between the protection of rights of the pro
49   Dec 29, 2009 4:44 PM   I think the Board should figure out ways to represent "all" community
  be more commericail
ts members see themselves are part of that whole, not as a member of one interest group, neighborhood or faction.
more and more like living in Downtown Seattle. There is very little room for imagination and freedom for our children to learn the real hazar

e love about the island is to somehow prevent it from being completely developed. I would hate to see the island with more than 400 home

 nvestment, not minimal cost.
should be. It's a privately owned Island by a multitude of people who enjoy it. It's somewhat still primitive the way we like it and that's the
riginal University study of the island done in the 70's to see what may or may not be relevant today. With the given natural and economicall
d changing for the better. We don't want to keep it as it's always been...
 f our land tax back to run the island.
making sure the balance of island residents' rights are maintained. It seems as though there are more and more problems related to the isl
 ange are inevitable, but they should always take into account the owners desires, the rich history, and the "character" of the island.
/retirement community
s not a retirement community), owners & guests only (no renters or unsupervised large guest groups) is how I would like to see the island,

owards those who only have money/own bsuinesses/wealthy through high assessments, etc. It should be a recreational property that does

on to the main land. I like the least amount of goverment possible, otherwise it gets to political and than why have it.

ct in thinking up and adopting new rules. When I bought a house on the island 10 uears ago, there were terrible problems, many of which
 gulations. A place of refuge from a growing federal government. An example of what can be not a mirror of what is.
 ws about what is important to various groups of people on the island (full timers, weekenders, access lots only) that a coherent vision is tric
services i.e. a restaurant with cocktail lounge available in the marina area.
 group. By that I mean not only young families, but more teenagers that appear to be guests. I have witnessed some very neglectful acts
d penalties for infractions primary importance
late to many issues on the island such as helmet laws, ATV's, ages of children riding ATV's. The island should certaily comment on these iss

am not out by 5:00 pm I am charged an over night fee. I agree and understand the rules. However if I am late by 15-20 min. I feel that is u
  as much as possible. Do not allow boat storage. It gets worse every year.
evelopment,like it as a small area. not big city like.
the clear cutting which ahs finally stoppped. Hopefully we can control this in the future and worrk together as a community. We are very ple
rful character that I would not like to see substantially changed.
ur perspectives have changed along with the economic stability of members of the community. We cannot depend on the financial stability
 o make improvements on the jewel of the island. The golf course.
king the common areas and amenities safe and pleasant to use for everyone, and not take all the risks, liabilities of a municipality by trying

 Guemmes or Lummi if you want to have that experience.I don't want the island to have an 'image' except to those of us who love it. It is g
ns its unique character of a place to live, visit for weekends or extended periods of time. Do not let the island surcome to development gree
nd comminity we all need to strive to abide by the principals which we fromed in 2006. Let's establish how this works before we move beyo
here are people all summer walking our beaches that are not even guests such as Puget Sound Yacht Club members or vacation renters. Th
 ep up the facilities and pay the employees.Don't waste money on lawyers and B.S. law suits such as the issue with the rentals.
 is not a unsafe place. It is zoned residential property, all the lots. Not just the lots there are homes on. Board Memebrs, and officers do
  and more dictated by older, often retired owners that have a definate adjenda. They often are summer residents (full time) with more time
 rst near the marina
 he protection of rights of the property owner and the protection of the common interests of all property owners. Strive for that balance. Li
 he protection of rights of the property owner and the protection of the common interests of all property owners. Strive for that balance. Li
ays to represent "all" community members and their values even though a small percentage is vocal, that voice still doesn't represent the m
dren to learn the real hazards of the natural world. And don't make rules you can't enforce.

d with more than 400 homes.


 ay we like it and that's the way we want it left. If people want all the super modern conveniences as the mainland buy in Mukilteo, Edmond
ven natural and economically practical restraints, what is the ultimate character of the island. Twenty years ago I would have said that we w


e problems related to the islanders themselves being "selfish" and not acknowledging that actions taken on personal property may (and likel
 acter" of the island.

would like to see the island, also please get all the lots with huge log piles burned up & cleaned up in a timely manner

eational property that does not cater to those of wealth.




 e problems, many of which have been solved. But there was also a feeling of freedom from a lot of the regulations that we live with on the

 that a coherent vision is tricky to come to consensus on.

d some very neglectful acts in the past year with these teenagers: speeding 4-wheelers on the beaches, racing cars up the hill from the Mar

ertaily comment on these issues but DOES NOT need enforcement powers over these issues. Residents need to communicate and not just a

by 15-20 min. I feel that is unreasonable.


community. We are very pleased in the changes the past few years.

end on the financial stability of majority holders or their willingness to pay their assessments. We must proceed with caution, prepare for le
s of a municipality by trying to regulate other things. The job of the board and the website should be to remind people of existing laws and

ose of us who love it. It is going to be over loved as it is and the vision I have for the future is that we dont ruin it for my children and gran
 rcome to development greed or radical enviromentalists opinions. Maintain a safe and respectfull environment for each to enjoyin there own
works before we move beyond. (we're talking rules and regulations here, only)
bers or vacation renters. There has been much destruction of the natural environment and it is piled up all over as a huge fire hazard. Citie
 ith the rentals.
d Memebrs, and officers do not own all the lots and cannot govern all the lots only their own lots. A hat Island officer turned me into to
 s (full time) with more time available to make their opinions known. The rest of us are trying to enjoy the island with our families while our

 Strive for that balance. Likewise, there is a balance to be found between the interests and viewpoints of the permanent or seasonally per
 Strive for that balance. Likewise, there is a balance to be found between the interests and viewpoints of the permanent or seasonally per
still doesn't represent the majority of how folks use their properties. A lot of the property on the Island has been used for families that som
nd buy in Mukilteo, Edmonds, Camano Island, Whidbey island, Gig Harbor. Leave our little Hat Island the way it is except as I earlier stated
I would have said that we were there, same ten years ago and same today. Maybe change is something that we just have to accept and m


onal property may (and likely do) affect the properties around them. The island is a micro-ecosystem and we need to establish a culture of




ons that we live with on the mainland. I miss that.




cars up the hill from the Marina, and downright rude behavior. It makes me sad, because now I look with skepticism at anyone whom I don

 communicate and not just ask the Island representatives to regulate issues for them.




 with caution, prepare for leaner times and have a plan of action ready to implement in order to prevent financial disaster. What we have t
 people of existing laws and regs of the State and County and encourage and support compliance with those laws

n it for my children and grandchildren by having too many houses, cars, dogs, and no fun left.
or each to enjoyin there own way.

 as a huge fire hazard. Cities and Counties have regulations regarding enforcement for garbage, weed and fire hazard control in which indiv

d officer turned me into to a GOV, agency for sand removed from the marina. The sand was delivered to my lot or lots by a cont
 with our families while our kids are still around. The concerns about "liability"are getting out of hand, that's what insurance is for.

 ermanent or seasonally permanent island resident whose home is the primary residence and the recreational owner whose island home is t
 ermanent or seasonally permanent island resident and the recreational owner whose island home is a secondary residence and for whom u
en used for families that sometimes hand down their places to next gernerations. Most of those folks stay private and don't get involved in t
 is except as I earlier stated for the water. That's all we want.
we just have to accept and make the best of it. Getting past the politics, the island gets better every year thanks to a small group of people


 ed to establish a culture of understanding this in the community.




 cism at anyone whom I don't recognize, especially if they have teens with them. This is not to say all teens are bad -- this is just my perce




al disaster. What we have today is no guarantee for tomorrow. We were so close to financial ruin just months ago. A lesson should have b
hazard control in which individuals are fined if they do not correct the problems they have created for their neighbors. If still no response, th

o my lot or lots by a contractor hired by Hat Isalnd . So in reality HI will be brought into the case to defend itself from itself.For abou
at insurance is for.

wner whose island home is the secondary residence and for whom recreational use for self, extended family and friends is primary. Both are
y residence and for whom use for self, extended family and friends is primary. Both are important and fundamental to the character of the
 e and don't get involved in the politics. I think they should still be represented even though they don't speak out. Families are what create
s to a small group of people who seem to be very good at what they do.




 bad -- this is just my perception. We all come to the island for some R & R and to find some peace. The feeling has changed in the past c




go. A lesson should have been learned.
hbors. If still no response, the problem is handled by the city/county and the owner is charged.

nd itself from itself.For about 70 yards of sand dumped mostly in HIROW. I have not informed the gov agency yet HI delivered the sand to


friends is primary. Both are important and fundamental to the character of the island. Again, a delicate balance is important in all policies
ntal to the character of the island. Again, a delicate balance is important in all policies pursuant to use and financial structure.
t. Families are what created this island. I've seen over the years the "retirement" folks influencing a different face to the island. That's OK
g has changed in the past couple of years. How can you fix this? i really don't know. With growth, there is bound to be change.
yet HI delivered the sand to my property. HI also delivered sand to many other HI property owners. SoHI should do their part to mitigat


e is important in all policies purseant to use and financial structure.
ncial structure.
ace to the island. That's OK but to form policies and rules that are not familiy considered may not be good.
und to be change.
uld do their part to mitigate this matter.HI is a quiet and nice place. The gold course is very nice and fun to play. HI does not need more
lay. HI does not need more power to control more stuff, it only creates more bad feelings and stress and its very negative press.I am not
ry negative press.I am not saying allow purple paint , junk
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

A number of the proposed updates to the by-laws were made to align
language of the by-laws with the language of the Articles of Incorporation
                                                   Response        Response
Answer Options
                                                     Percent         Count
I didn't support the Articles changes so don't want the       19.9%              33
I agree that the language of the by-laws needs to be          78.3%              130
I like conflicting documents                                  1.8%                3
Other (please specify)                                                           29
                                                   answered question                   166
                                                     skipped question                   75

                                                          Other
Number        Response Date                               (please
                                                          specify)
          1                   Oct 20, 2009 10:00 PM       Yes, a number were, but some weren't.
          2                   Oct 20, 2009 10:05 PM       did not support language changing island access to prohibit family me
          3                   Oct 20, 2009 11:14 PM       I am concerned about the level of control given to the board.
          4                    Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM       I did not vote on the articles. I also did not agree with all the change
          5                    Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM       Leave things alone and the Attorney's out of it !
          6                    Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM       The island passed the $10,000 limit & you changed it to $25,000. we
          7                    Oct 21, 2009 6:22 PM       Articles of incorporation did not need to be changed. They are just a
          8                   Oct 22, 2009 10:16 AM       More appropriately, I'm "OK" with conflicting documents and believe t
          9                    Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM       Just a bunch of busy work. No meaningful changes. There should be
         10                    Oct 23, 2009 4:47 PM       These statements are all absurb and unreasonable!
         11                    Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM       I didn't voted nay on the Articles of Incorpation!!
         12                   Oct 25, 2009 10:35 PM       This question is seriously flawed. I agree with both A and B.
         13                   Oct 25, 2009 10:45 PM       Not familiar enough with the changes to comment.
         14                   Oct 25, 2009 11:28 PM       No Opinion didn't vote
         15                    Oct 26, 2009 6:08 PM       Too many issues lumped into one vote.
         16                    Oct 27, 2009 3:57 AM       I am sad to hear they were defeated.
         17                    Oct 27, 2009 8:16 PM       need to seperate changes , too much on one ballot
         18                    Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM       Do right by the people
         19                    Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM       One persons housekeeping changes is another persons changing the
         20                    Oct 31, 2009 8:51 PM       Too new to the island to have an opinion on this.
         21                    Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM       There should have been an opportunity to vote for specific changes --
         22                    Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM       Perhaps changes on both the by-laws and the Articles need to be add
         23                    Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM       Articles and Bylaws should not be inconsistent with the covenants and
         24                    Nov 29, 2009 3:57 AM       Who wrote this question ? # 3 question , come on!!
         25                    Nov 29, 2009 6:53 PM       In order to keep things smooth we need to do a little house keeping f
         26                     Dec 3, 2009 4:40 AM       I don't know enough about this.
         27                    Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM       The changes were doing "way more" than "aligning language". Who a
         28                    Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM       The language of the by-law changes goes further than loose terms of
         29                    Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM       I agree the by-laws and Articles should align. I think the problem is t
                     A number of the proposed updates to the by-laws were made to
                                                align             I didn't support the Articles
                                                                         changes so don't want the By-
                                                                         law docs updated to reflect the
                                                                         language in the Articles


                                                                         I agree that the language of
                                                                         the by-laws needs to be
                                                                         consistent with the language of
                                                                         the Articles


                                                                         I like conflicting documents




 ccess to prohibit family members beyond depedents and want island to take whatever necessary measures stay within actual budget and p
given to the board.
 t agree with all the changes in the by-laws.

changed it to $25,000. we want to have a say in that kind of expense
 changed. They are just a general statement of purpose. B ylaws reflect specific needs aand day-to-day operation of island affairs. These
ng documents and believe that changes should be managed on a case-by-case basis.
 changes. There should be another way to update the language in the documents withouut having all of us have to read pages and pages w


 ith both A and B.




ther persons changing the rules of the game.

vote for specific changes -- not enmass. We live in a private community on Camano. When changes are suggestged, we have the opportun
the Articles need to be addressed
ent with the covenants and both currently are inconsistent which makes govenance difficult

 do a little house keeping from time to time. And stick with the values we have all come to know as "Paradice".

"aligning language". Who are you trying to kid?They did not pass because WE CAN READ!I don't appreciate that attempt to "pull the woool
urther than loose terms of the Articles. I view it as an intentional expansion of powers.
 n. I think the problem is that this change was made within limited time period that most folks didn't understand what was happening until
 within actual budget and protect cash reserves




ion of island affairs. These need to be crutinized by and voted on by all members as changes are made or pro[osed.

e to read pages and pages with no material changes.




stged, we have the opportunity to vote on each change separatgely. Perhaps, Hat Island Board bit off more than the community could chew




 attempt to "pull the woool over our eyes". Did we really need to waste all the effort and $$$ to do something unnecessary?

d what was happening until it was done. This again is a problem of communtication with property owners. I think the community meetings
n the community could chew in one bite.




nnecessary?

nk the community meetings have shown not to be an effective source for communicating to owners. I think most folks have internet now a
st folks have internet now and would support investment of webcasts of those meetings with back-up of meeting minutes through the Veiw
g minutes through the Veiwpoint.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article I, Section 4 was proposed as an addition to the By-Laws by our
attorney. It states "Where these Bylaws conflict with the Revised Code (of
                                                     Response      Response
Answer Options
                                                      Percent        Count
I agree with this addition                               80.7%              146
I don't want this statement added                        19.3%              35
Other (please specify)                                                      18
                                             answered question                    181
                                               skipped question                    60

                                                     Other
Number        Response Date                          (please
                                                     specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:51 PM   For the reason you end this question with-this is change is not needed
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM   Leave things alone.
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM   that's the law even if we don't have the statment
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 5:46 PM   Do not know what's in the Revised Code of WA.
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 6:22 PM   Not necessary to include that statement. State law supercedes all loc
          6                   Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM   Even though I agree with the above statement, contract law being my
          7                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM   Pointless. If the RCWs prevail whether the language is added or not
          8                   Oct 23, 2009 4:47 PM   Not until the change in the By-Laws are voted on by the community.
          9                   Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM   It sounds too complicated
         10                   Oct 25, 2009 3:19 PM   The statement is probably unnecessary, but it does no harm.
         11                  Oct 25, 2009 11:28 PM   No opinion
         12                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM   we call this a no brainer
         13                    Nov 2, 2009 4:52 PM   Sounds like it's not really necessary.
         14                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM   since rcw's prevail, this statement is completely unessessary
         15                   Dec 1, 2009 10:44 PM   It really does not matter whether this language is in our Bylaws, the R
         16                    Dec 8, 2009 9:07 PM   Then does it matter?
         17                   Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM   When and if it ever becomes an issue or concern, then DEAL WITH IT
         18                   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM   If the RCW's always prevail, then the language is not really need.
                       Article I, Section 4 was proposed as an addition to the B




                                                                            I agree with this addition


                                                                            I don't want this statement
                                                                            added




 his is change is not needed, an RCW always prevails over City or County codes.




State law supercedes all local rules as a matter of fact.
ment, contract law being my background, some of us still remember trusting our attorney in the 60’s that inserted a one liner in the agreeme
  language is added or not - what is the point?
 ted on by the community.

 t it does no harm.




etely unessessary
uage is in our Bylaws, the RCW's do prevail.

oncern, then DEAL WITH IT. Why are we so concerned with expensive lawyers NOW?
uage is not really need.
d a one liner in the agreement with the now PSYC that got perpetual use in perpetuity of the marina when the intention was for us to have
ntention was for us to have the ability to disinvite them from marina usage at our convenience.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article II, Section 3 in the proposed updates clarified the one vote per
member privilege, regardless of the number of lots owned, to include
                                                      Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                        Percent        Count
I agree with this clarification                                 87.2%              163
I disagree with this clarification (please explain below)       12.8%              24
Other (please specify)                                                             33
                                                     answered question                   187
                                                       skipped question                   54

                                                            Other
Number        Response Date                                 (please
                                                            specify)
          1                    Oct 20, 2009 10:02 PM        I also believe that property owned by multiple parties should be allow
          2                     Oct 21, 2009 3:59 PM        Absolutely essential.
          3                     Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM        Leave everything alone. Personally if I spent the money to buy 200 lo
          4                     Oct 21, 2009 4:13 PM        So why does Matt have 30 votes?
          5                     Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM        You made commitments before adding this.HONOR YOUR COMMITTM
          6                     Oct 21, 2009 6:22 PM        The original intent was one vote per lot.
          7                     Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM        Even though understanding the difference from the old statement to t
          8                     Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM        This is clearly an attempt to make it harder for someone to "work the
          9                     Oct 22, 2009 7:33 PM        This is not a member privilege, this is a personal financial obligation,
         10                    Oct 25, 2009 10:31 PM        Multiple votes up to a certain number (TBD).
         11                    Oct 25, 2009 10:35 PM        I'm not Matt S, but I think the island screwed him by attempting to ra
         12                     Oct 27, 2009 3:57 AM        This is SO important; we don't need a monarchy on the island becaus
         13                     Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM        power to the people
         14                     Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM        I think that a number greater than 1 should be allowed. I think that n
         15                    Oct 31, 2009 10:07 PM        SHOULD BE A BALANCE OF VOTES TO LET MULTI PROP ONERS HAVE
         16                      Nov 2, 2009 4:52 PM        No idea what you're talking about. Need more information to answer
         17                     Nov 2, 2009 10:29 PM        we need to preserve the legal status of LLC and family trusts as separ
         18                      Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM        I agree with this in pricipal, but how would the board PROVE controlli
         19                     Nov 12, 2009 8:27 PM        I believe it should be by % of ownership. ieone vote per lot.
         20                    Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM         It is my opinion that a limit must be established for furture purchases
         21                     Nov 20, 2009 4:00 PM        Why has the island never added a by law change that limits the numb
         22                    Nov 25, 2009 2:54 AM         1 vote per lot owned is fair
         23                    Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM         I think the more assessments you pay, the more votes you should ha
         24                      Dec 3, 2009 4:40 AM        I think some compromise between a single vote and many votes for f
         25                      Dec 8, 2009 7:02 PM        This is a very important clarification.
         26                      Dec 8, 2009 7:59 PM        if they are paying property taxes, assessments then they should have
         27                     Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM        % of votes should be based upon% of ownership up to a maximum li
         28                     Dec 20, 2009 7:29 PM        Regardless of name or LLC obviously there should be only 1 vote per
         29                     Dec 21, 2009 3:29 PM        If an someone has controlling interest in a lot this implies there are m
         30                     Dec 28, 2009 7:48 AM        controlling interest judgement is subjective
         31                     Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM        This was NOT a clarification, but clearly an expansion and change.
         32                     Dec 29, 2009 2:03 AM        I have been an attorney for over 25 years but had to read this a coup
         33                     Dec 31, 2009 9:17 AM        I think we have two votes max, regardless of the number of lots owne
                            Article II, Section 3 in the proposed updates clarified the one vote
                            per member privilege, regardless of the number of lots owned, to
                          include ownership or controlling interest in the property by the same
                                        individual but under different names or LLC's.



                                                                                    I agree with this clarification



                                                                                    I disagree with this clarification
                                                                                    (please explain below)




 ple parties should be allowed only one vote per property.

nt the money to buy 200 lots I would want the 200 votes, I paid for them.

.HONOR YOUR COMMITTMENTS. iF YOU KEEP MESSING WITH MATT THE TRIBE MAY OWN ALOT OF HAT IS.

from the old statement to the new statement, it was tough to understand.
  for someone to "work the system" and go against the intent of the bylaws in the first place. It would be good to get legal advice on this if
rsonal financial obligation, and should be controlled by voting power.

ed him by attempting to railroad through amendments that were aimed specifically a him. If you will do that to him, what will you do to oth
archy on the island because 1 person owns the majority of the island!

d be allowed. I think that number should be at least 2, but not greater than 5.
  MULTI PROP ONERS HAVE SAY IN FUTURE BUT WITH OUT THE CHANCE THAT THEY CAN CONTROL A ISSUE BY HAVING TO MANY PROP
 ore information to answer
C and family trusts as separate owners - and separate owners should be treated equally.
  the board PROVE controlling interest.
eone vote per lot.
 shed for furture purchases so we are not so vulnerable to the whim of one inidividual who controls a majority of lots.
 hange that limits the number of lots any one person can own?

 more votes you should have because matters affect you more
 vote and many votes for folks who own a multiple lots is appropriate.

ents then they should have a vote for each lot they pay for.
nership up to a maximum limit of 5% of the total votes available; based upon 1 vote per lot/full annual dues paying property(I don't know if
  should be only 1 vote per owner to prevent an owners of a large block of lots from having an unfair advantage
 lot this implies there are multiple owners. They should have a voice too.

 expansion and change.
but had to read this a couple of times to understand it. Its not a priviliege, is it? Its a rule and my understanding is that it has always been
 of the number of lots owned.
to get legal advice on this if possible to make sure we can put this issue to rest once and for all.


him, what will you do to others? You lost my trust with that move.




BY HAVING TO MANY PROPS. MAYBE A MAXIUM OF OR ON A % TO BE ADDRESED




ing property(I don't know if the "access only lots" pay the same annual dues, but if they do, they should get 1 vote per lot also)




ng is that it has always been the rule. Is the clarification meant to be as to ownership in LLC's and other entitites?
ote per lot also)
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article II, Section 4 of the proposed By-Laws updated the definition of family
to mean owners and their legal dependents, removing the reference to
                                                    Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                     Percent          Count
I agree with this proposed update                          89.6%              164
I disagree with this proposed update (please explain       10.4%              19
Other (please specify)                                                        25
                                                  answered question                 183
                                                    skipped question                 58

                                                       Other
Number        Response Date                            (please
                                                       specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:02 PM     One person may own a property, but their spouse may also own one
          2                  Oct 20, 2009 10:05 PM     leave language as originally written
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM     http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Family - defines family a
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM     The Island has been fine for 100 years and you people are trying to m
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM     Even though understanding the difference from the old statement to t
          6                   Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM     I'm curious why "family" doens't include parents, siblings and/or gran
          7                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM     What is the point of the distinction? Does some new priviledge get gr
          8                   Oct 23, 2009 4:47 PM     Define 'legal dependents'. I cannot agree until I receive a clear defina
          9                   Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM     It sounds ok--I think
         10                   Oct 25, 2009 4:59 PM     I do not understand this question.
         11                  Oct 25, 2009 10:35 PM     Your definition of family should be irrelevant to the use of private pro
         12                   Oct 27, 2009 3:57 AM     I was actually quite impressed with this one, as it reflects the open at
         13                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM     regardless of number of owners of a lot, there should only be a single
         14                   Oct 31, 2009 6:42 AM     A lot of my family are not blod relatives but people who assisted me w
         15                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM     I don't think we need to deal with this crap. The government is bad e
         16                    Nov 2, 2009 4:52 PM     Another question out of context. No idea how to answer
         17                  Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM      In the case of multiple owners for one property, how would this impa
         18                  Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM      The whole reference to family is irrelevant
         19                  Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM      The original intent was "family" - and family has many legal/non legal
         20                   Dec 8, 2009 10:29 PM     This change does not allow our non-dependent children use of our pro
         21                   Dec 9, 2009 11:46 PM     aleave it to mean owners and their legal dependents. (Clean and clea
         22                   Dec 27, 2009 1:42 AM     Fam;ily should include husband, wife, children, grandchildren even if n
         23                   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM     The definition, as previously stated and newly updated, is unduly rest
         24                   Dec 29, 2009 2:03 AM     If this update is to expand definition in include "families" where there
         25                   Dec 29, 2009 5:03 AM     Family should include husband/wife/children/grandchildren even if no
                        Article II, Section 4 of the proposed By-Laws updated the definition
                                       of family to mean owners and their legal




                                                                                  I agree with this proposed
                                                                                  update
                                                                                  I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                  update (please explain below)




spouse may also own one property.

ry/Family - defines family as:1 : a group of individuals living under one roof and usually under one head : household2 a : a group of person
 you people are trying to make it like Bellevue, leave things alone.
from the old statement to the new statement, it was tough to understand.
rents, siblings and/or grandchildren? It might help to understand what the intent of this rule is, as it seems overly restrictive to me.
some new priviledge get granted to my under 18 year old kids?
until I receive a clear defination


nt to the use of private proprty.
e, as it reflects the open attitude of the Board.
 ere should only be a single cost
t people who assisted me while growing up. When I build something on Hat Island one day, i would like to share the Island life with them a
 . The government is bad enough. Decide who you want to be able to be listed as owners and forget about defining what a family is.
ow to answer
perty, how would this impact the community and its assets? Should any stipulation be added to cover this circumstance?

y has many legal/non legal definitions!
dent children use of our property and facilities except as guests.
ependents. (Clean and clear.)
ren, grandchildren even if not legal dependent.
wly updated, is unduly restrictive.
ude "families" where there may not be a marriage, then I am for it. But "legal dependents" typically means someone dependent on his/her
 n/grandchildren even if not legal dependents.
 hold2 a : a group of persons of common ancestry : clan b : a people or group of peoples regarded as deriving from a common stock : race3


 rly restrictive to me.




e the Island life with them and let them go on their own during their weekend/s if they chose to.
 ing what a family is.




meone dependent on his/her parent for support as opposed to a grown, self sufficent child. Was that the intent here?
om a common stock : race3 a : a group of people united by certain convictions or a common affiliation : fellowship b : the staff of a high off
hip b : the staff of a high official (as the President) ect...
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article II, Section 7 has to do with suspension of island privileges. Currently
privileges can be suspended for non-payment of assessments. The proposed
                                                       Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                        Percent         Count
I agree with this proposed update                            72.5%              137
I disagree with this proposed update (please explain)        27.5%              52
Other (please specify)                                                          41
                                                  answered question                   189
                                                    skipped question                   52

                                                        Other
Number        Response Date                             (please
                                                        specify)
          1                   Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM      I do not think you should be barred form accessing your property "if a
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM      If I don't pay my water bill on the mainland is the city going to keep m
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM      FINES SHOULD NOT BE A REASON FOR SUSPENSION
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM      Good. It reminds property owners that they are responsible for their
          5                   Oct 22, 2009 3:34 AM      suspensions for violations by renters and guests should be more spec
          6                   Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM      I think this makes sense, but wonder how it can be enforced? It seem
          7                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM      How are we going to enforce it? Is there some list with pictures on th
          8                   Oct 22, 2009 7:12 PM      I can't agree until I know the process for resolving violations & fines.
          9                   Oct 22, 2009 9:56 PM      what fines are we talking about?
         10                   Oct 24, 2009 7:49 PM      This is essential.
         11                   Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM      Explain Island Privileges please?
         12                   Oct 25, 2009 3:19 PM      Renters and guest's violations can be handled via legal action. Yes, th
         13                   Oct 25, 2009 4:59 PM      Enforcement needs to be clarified and supported.
         14                  Oct 25, 2009 10:35 PM      You have never defined Island Privileges. You cannot impinge upon a
         15                  Oct 25, 2009 10:45 PM      As someone succinctly stated "I don't get my access to municipal prop
         16                   Oct 27, 2009 3:57 AM      It's all about being responsible for what we all own. The same would
         17                   Oct 27, 2009 5:03 AM      How will any of this be enforced-I mean fines for violations by renters
         18                   Oct 27, 2009 5:21 AM      after a reasonable time has lasped..
         19                   Oct 27, 2009 9:21 PM      I dont feel the Island should be implementing a fine system. I feel if
         20                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM      I am not my brothers keepers, do I pay there mortgage too?
         21                   Oct 29, 2009 8:33 PM      who will control the fines? and set what they are for?
         22                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM      Are renters and guests on the island really that big of a problem?????
         23                   Oct 31, 2009 8:51 PM      Even in town if you can not pay your electic bill, they do not throw yo
         24                  Oct 31, 2009 10:07 PM      but just use common sense, case history fequency ect
         25                   Nov 2, 2009 10:29 PM      Utilities are fine. 'violations' are not without sufficient due process. als
         26                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM      the board does not have the authority to levy fines
         27                  Nov 15, 2009 1:55 AM       This must be done fairly...no matter how many lots you have.
         28                  Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM       Owners should know specifically, in writing, what the "rules" are and
         29                  Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM       You don't own the island and can't keep us from our property
         30                  Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM       This would be a terrible mistake for the island because, if enforced, it
         31                  Nov 29, 2009 3:23 AM       P.U.D. ?
         32                  Nov 29, 2009 3:57 AM       The owner should accept the responsibility of the guests or renters. T
         33                    Dec 3, 2009 4:40 AM      Not sure on this. I think each situation should be looked at to see wh
34   Dec 7, 2009 11:26 PM    ??? who would enforce/police this???
35    Dec 9, 2009 5:38 PM    There should be a minimum threshold (e.g., $250) prior to suspension
36   Dec 9, 2009 11:46 PM    It should also identify who and how it will be implemented.
37   Dec 20, 2009 7:29 PM    Vague. How far in arrears will payments be before privileges are susp
38   Dec 21, 2009 3:29 PM    If all assessments are paid then the island privileges should not be su
39   Dec 28, 2009 7:48 AM    too controlling
40   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM    What ARE island privileges? Is access to the ferry or marina included?
41   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM    This could cause law suits which even though the Island may be in th
42               30-Dec-09   Permanent residents should not have their water turned off or access
                              Article II, Section 7 has to do with suspension of island privile




                                                                                       I agree with this proposed
                                                                                       update
                                                                                       I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                       update (please explain)




ccessing your property "if access is a privilege" if you are in errors on your assessment until such time, your property is foreclosed.
d is the city going to keep me from driving on the city street or similar, I don't think so.

 y are responsible for their renters and guests whether they like it or not.
uests should be more specific and less broad
 t can be enforced? It seems as though the only real power of the island dealing with rule-breakers is financial. Who issues the fines, and w
 ome list with pictures on the ferry so we don;t let them on it? Do we turn away their boat if they drive inot the marina? Do we unhook the
esolving violations & fines. How much time are owners given to make things right before priviliges are suspended? I would agree if the proc




 led via legal action. Yes, that makes it harder to do.

 ou cannot impinge upon a home owners use of their private property.
my access to municipal properties curtailed if I fail to pay a traffic or my property taxes. Why should Hat Island be any different?"
e all own. The same would be done in a primary residence.
nes for violations by renters and guests? the property owner is responsible for the assessments and utilities. What kind of violations?

 ng a fine system. I feel if back assessments, dues or bills are owed to the community and NOT paid then forecloser on the properties shou
ere mortgage too?

 that big of a problem????????
 c bill, they do not throw you out of your home!

t sufficient due process. also constitutes a potential taking of property by not allowing access to marina, ferry, etc.

many lots you have.
 , what the "rules" are and what the "fines" are based on and of course the amount of each fine and how it is to be paid and deadlines. Als
  from our property
and because, if enforced, it will generate expensive lawsuits. The covenants do not give the power to impose fines and penalties and if the

 of the guests or renters. This seems to me to be so complicated to enforces and a management nightmare.
ould be looked at to see what is best.
., $250) prior to suspension of island priviledges; it's too expensive for the Community to enforce for a $10 non-payment.
be implemented.
e before privileges are suspended? I'm not against the principal of the article tho. Fines are necessary at times. How will suspensions be e
privileges should not be suspended

e ferry or marina included? If so, restricting access to private property would be asking for a costly lawsuit that the island would lose. Clarifi
gh the Island may be in the right would still costs in attorney fees. This is not the time to spend more money on frivilous lawsuits. Everyon
 water turned off or access to the island suspended. The homeowners association should put a lien on their property for fines and paymen
perty is foreclosed.




 Who issues the fines, and why? This I'm sure is scary for a lot of people.
marina? Do we unhook their boat from a bouy if they tie up? If no enforcement process - then it is all just words.
d? I would agree if the process for resolution was clarified and was fair & equal for everyone.




be any different?"

hat kind of violations?

oser on the properties should be initiated.




be paid and deadlines. Also the consequence of non payment and the degree of the penalty. The community must have an opportunity t

es and penalties and if the RCW's give us such power, it's only over fines for improper use of common property. Also, cutting off a utility fo
. How will suspensions be enforced?


the island would lose. Clarification is needed and access allowed to private property specifically called out.
 n frivilous lawsuits. Everyone should pay their part. There has to be another way to encourage people to pay. This is a hard one.
operty for fines and payment
must have an opportunity to review and respond to these "rules and fines". This too open-ended. What's the "rest of the story?"

 Also, cutting off a utility for anything other than non-payment of the utility could cause huge liability for the Association, e.g. if someone's
This is a hard one.
rest of the story?"

sociation, e.g. if someone's pipes freeze.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article II, Section 8 has to do with where rental restrictions are spelled out in
our governing docs and who has the authority to establish them. The
                                                      Response        Response
Answer Options
                                                        Percent         Count
I agree with the updates as written, giving the board         13.8%              26
I believe rental rules should be spelled out in the By-       62.2%              117
I believe rental rules should be established by the           4.8%                9
I don't believe rentals should be restricted on Hat           19.1%              36
Other (please specify)                                                           29
                                                    answered question                  188
                                                      skipped question                  53

                                                          Other
Number        Response Date                               (please
                                                          specify)
          1                    Oct 20, 2009 11:33 PM      Choice 2 obviates any future boards from making rediculous rules
          2                     Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM      Hat Island does not pay the property tax on my property . Absolutely
          3                     Oct 21, 2009 4:13 PM      The language here is confusing to me. I can't express an opinion on
          4                     Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM      i HAVE HAD MY CABIN FOR 25 YEARS. YOU CAN'T RESTRICT ME FOR
          5                     Oct 21, 2009 5:46 PM      Do not want weekend rentals with loud parties.
          6                    Oct 21, 2009 10:37 PM      What is CC &R's
          7                     Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM      The board should not be allowed to control this issue outright. I've h
          8                     Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM      Too hard to enforce. Encourages people to just do it without the Boa
          9                     Oct 22, 2009 7:12 PM      I don't want renters on the island---for security reasons. The island is
         10                     Oct 24, 2009 7:49 PM      Ours is a small island. Allowing weekend rentals in one division "spills
         11                     Oct 25, 2009 4:59 PM      There should never be a non owner related paid occupoancy on Hat I
         12                     Oct 25, 2009 8:11 PM      We absolutely believe that rentals should be allowed and even encour
         13                    Oct 25, 2009 10:35 PM      I think rental rules are not supported by the CCRs.
         14                     Oct 27, 2009 3:57 AM      We need to have a form of structure with rentals. I don't want to thin
         15                     Oct 27, 2009 8:16 PM      There shold be no rentals on the Island!!
         16                     Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM      why the need to control? renters are people too. In tough economic t
         17                     Oct 31, 2009 6:42 AM      I'm still a little confused on why the Island can make money on their
         18                     Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM      There is a balance between one person renting our there home on a d
         19                      Nov 2, 2009 9:50 PM      I am wary of future board members who may want to remove restrict
         20                      Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM      commericial use of the lots is already addressed in the ccrs
         21                    Nov 15, 2009 1:55 AM       What if I need to rent my home in a flat market...I want the ability to
         22                    Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM       ISLAND WIDE!
         23                    Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM       Stay out of private property rights!
         24                    Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM       And any current restrictions are not valid. Restrictions on rentals are
         25                     Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM      You want to change the "rules of the game" after the game has starte
         26                     Dec 27, 2009 1:42 AM      Rules and charges OK but not of the nature or at the level that effecti
         27                     Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM      Given our recent lose in court on this issue, I believe some reasonable
         28                     Dec 29, 2009 2:03 AM      The board should have the authoriity to establish and enforce adminis
         29                     Dec 29, 2009 5:03 AM      Rules aNd changes OK but not of a nature or at a level that effectively
                                                                        I agree
                                   Article II, Section 8 has to do with where with the updates
                                                                           as written, giving the
                                                                           board authority to establish
                                                                           rental rules as they deem
                                                                           fit


                                                                           I believe rental rules
                                                                           should be spelled out in
                                                                           the By-Laws which the
                                                                           community has voted on
                                                                           and apply island wide


                                                                           I believe rental rules
                                                                           should be established by
                                                                           the CC&R's and apply
                                                                           differently depending on
                                                                           the desires of owners of
                                                                           each division


making rediculous rules
n my property . Absolutely the board should not have any jurisdiction whatsoever at any time whatsoever, period.
an't express an opinion on what I don't fully understand. historically, there have been a few rental homes on teh island and it's not been a
U CAN'T RESTRICT ME FORM RENTING. I PLAN TO RENT MY PLACE NEXT SUMMER. I'M NOW RETIRED AND NEED THE MONEY TO PAY YO


  this issue outright. I've heard a desire to rent out community owned property to non-island residents, and this is absolutely not OK with m
o just do it without the Board knowing. If we can't enforce it - we shouldn't make it a rule.
urity reasons. The island is so small that what is allowed in one division affects us all!
 entals in one division "spills over" traffic, etc. to other areas of the community. Rental restrictions should be island-wide.
d paid occupoancy on Hat Island ever. The HIC does not have the security aparatus to protect the private the HIC Owners.
 e allowed and even encouraged; that the property is owned by the individual. Again, if there was a requirement that island rentals would b

 entals. I don't want to think that "just anyone" can rent on the island. I want to preserve our family feeling as much as possible.

 e too. In tough economic times when you cant sell, renting should be an option. Dont fear choices
 can make money on their rental apartment yet nobody else is allowed to do such a thing...I'm certain there would be more building and fisc
nting our there home on a direct one to one person and the problems that occurred a few years ago with home owners contracted with an a
may want to remove restrictions, so do not want to give indiscriminate authority to the board on the issue.
essed in the ccrs
 arket...I want the ability to do what's best for my personal situation. Not by the restrictive adgenda of others.


Restrictions on rentals are invalid unless CC&R's are amended so the question does not pose any legal options.
 " after the game has started.Didn't we loose this law suit already?None of these 4 choices express my opinion. This is a "tricky issue". Why
e or at the level that effectively porvide restrictions so severe that they become prohibitive. Rentals can keep some home owner from econo
, I believe some reasonable rental rules, applied island wide, should be established by community vote. I also believe less restriction is in or
tablish and enforce administrative rules regarding rentals, (registration, etc)
 or at a level that effectively provide restrictions so severe that they become prohibitions. Rentals can keep some home owners from econom
h island and it's not been a problem - this has only become an issue in recent years.
 ED THE MONEY TO PAY YOU FOLKS AND TAXES. I HAVE RENTED IN THE PAST. IF YOU BLOCK ME FROM DOING SO OR AND MONIES TO


 is absolutely not OK with me. The island should vote on issues of island use, and there is no reason to have an exception to this for rental




t that island rentals would be 'managed' by Hat island and processes were in place to create a more welcoming environment for outside dol

much as possible.


uld be more building and fiscal support for the island if people could subsidize their second home with rental income.
owners contracted with an agency to rent various homes.




This is a "tricky issue". Why is it a big deal? Has it really been abused? Has somebody been seriously hurt?
 me home owner from economic stress and even default. Reasonable fees could be an island income source.
elieve less restriction is in order to head off further lawsuits. Based on the summary judgement, our counsel errored in not recommending so

e home owners from economic stress and even default. Reasonable fees could be an island income source.
NG SO OR AND MONIES TO BE PAID TO THE ISLAND. i WILL SEE YOU IN COURT


 exception to this for rental restrictions.




environment for outside dollars/revenue, then we could create more jobs, bring in more revenue, and make island ownership more affordab




red in not recommending some type of mediation or settlement prior to review by the court. A costly and now binding error.
nd ownership more affordable.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article IV, Section 1 of the proposed updates would allow the board the
flexibility to wait until the next election to replace a board member if
                                                         Response    Response
Answer Options
                                                          Percent        Count
I agree with this proposed update                            77.1%              145
I disagree with this proposed update (please explain)        22.9%              43
Other (please specify)                                                          27
                                                  answered question                   188
                                                    skipped question                   53

                                                        Other
Number        Response Date                             (please
                                                        specify)
          1                   Oct 21, 2009 3:59 PM      No less than 6 - one member leaving , we can wait. 2 leaving must b
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM      I could care less one way or the other.
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 4:13 PM      You could have tie votes - what then?
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM      This is interesting as the defined quota can decrease by default. I th
          5                  Oct 21, 2009 10:37 PM      Don't want 6 and a tie situration
          6                   Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM      I think there should be a term limit, i.e., "Until the next election, or w
          7                  Oct 22, 2009 10:16 AM      Should always be 7.
          8                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM      Have no opinion. Is it some sort of hardship to keep it at 7? What's
          9                   Oct 22, 2009 4:56 PM      We believe an appointment for a vacancy should be done in a timely
         10                   Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM      7 is a fair # to have to make decisions concerning island owners rules
         11                   Oct 27, 2009 5:03 AM      I'm torn on this. I feel only 5 members could get so burned out, they
         12                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM      A special election should be called if there are enough signatures
         13                   Oct 29, 2009 8:33 PM      board whould not have the ability to replace a board member, space
         14                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM      I think the board should be allow to choose a replacement to serve a
         15                  Oct 31, 2009 10:07 PM      for aq maxium of 90 days
         16                    Nov 2, 2009 4:52 PM      Why can't the board appoint members like City Councils do?
         17                    Nov 3, 2009 5:49 PM      This can potentualy create a lopsided board
         18                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM      I believe the board always should have an odd number of members
         19                   Nov 15, 2009 1:55 AM      If someone leaves I would like to see a community vote in process to
         20                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM      This could be years off. Perhaps a stipulation of 60 days prior to the
         21                   Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM      Monopoly at work!
         22                   Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM      Consistency and stability is important
         23                   Dec 7, 2009 11:26 PM      what happens in a tie vote if only 6 board members?
         24                   Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM      I thought you said the changes were just "aligning language".I saw th
         25                   Dec 14, 2009 6:39 AM      An even numbered board can be a very difficult situation . The memb
         26                   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM      I believe 5 members is too few and those few could be easily swayed
         27                   Dec 30, 2009 4:18 AM      There should be a special election to replace board members
                                               Article IV, Section 1 of the propos




                                                                                     I agree with this proposed
                                                                                     update


                                                                                     I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                     update (please explain)




can wait. 2 leaving must be dealt with and could indicate other problems.


  decrease by default. I think that it makes sense given the make-up of the available population resources, but still has a defined minimum

Until the next election, or within 6 months, whichever is sooner".

 ip to keep it at 7? What's the big deal?
  hould be done in a timely manner.
cerning island owners rules & regulations.
uld get so burned out, they may not function well. I think in the past, the board has appointed someone to fulfill the position. Is that not h
are enough signatures
 e a board member, space would remain vacant unitl election,
e a replacement to serve a period not to exceed one year.

 City Councils do?

odd number of members
mmunity vote in process to select the next member. I don't like the idea of someone appointing a friend or family member. I Think there sho
tion of 60 days prior to the elections. the board could "eliminate" a board member and prompt more control over votes favorable to the dem




aligning language".I saw the changes as "re-writing th4e Constitution"!
ficult situation . The members of the island should have full representation on the board.
 ew could be easily swayed.
ce board members
still has a defined minimum number with a tie vote.




l the position. Is that not happening any longer?




y member. I Think there should always be 7 board members.
er votes favorable to the demands of those in "control." We want open minded, clear thinking, unbiased, or coerced actions by each board
rced actions by each board member.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article IV, Section 4 of the proposed updates clarifies that a board member
who attends a meeting electronically is deemed to be present and can
                                                      Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                       Percent         Count
I agree with this proposed update                          87.7%              164
I disagree with this proposed update (please explain       12.3%              23
Other (please specify)                                                        33
                                                  answered question                 187
                                                    skipped question                 54

                                                       Other
Number        Response Date                            (please
                                                       specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:05 PM     active, regular, community presence by a board member is the best r
          2                  Oct 20, 2009 10:43 PM     There is no substitue for being present
          3                  Oct 21, 2009 12:30 AM     0kay if "electronically" includes via telephone.
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM     Again, I could care less.
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM     daa
          6                  Oct 22, 2009 10:16 AM     Might be nice to limit the # of meetings attended electronically. Put a
          7                  Oct 22, 2009 10:38 PM     If the person is not there they are not there.If their in Az everything t
          8                   Oct 24, 2009 9:52 PM     Electronic presence is fine with a limit on the number of times per yea
          9                   Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM     what does electronically mean?
         10                   Oct 25, 2009 3:19 PM     Insert "telephonically" in place of "e;ectronically".
         11                   Oct 25, 2009 4:59 PM     However the aparatus for electronic attendance should be enhanced.
         12                  Oct 25, 2009 10:45 PM     Being a board member implies some responsibilities. Attending meet
         13                   Oct 26, 2009 6:08 PM     What specifically does this mean? Email updates? Live chat?
         14                   Oct 27, 2009 5:03 AM     Geez...gt with the new century. I sure hope everyone agrees on this
         15                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM     It is an island, is this video link?
         16                   Oct 29, 2009 7:55 PM     It seems that the member wouldn't be able to fully participate in discu
         17                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM     For only 1 or 2 meetings per year. Otherwise, that person is removed
         18                   Oct 31, 2009 8:51 PM     Board members made a committment to be physically present.
         19                  Oct 31, 2009 10:07 PM     can not be a habbit or every month issue ? so many time a yr or eme
         20                    Nov 2, 2009 4:52 PM     Should have to be there
         21                    Nov 3, 2009 5:49 PM     The board member does not have the ability to be totaly involved elec
         22                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM     Skype could be used. It's free and the member is "visually and verba
         23                   Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM     Define "electronically"
         24                   Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM     I would agree to your language above, but the actual amendment is m
         25                   Dec 7, 2009 11:26 PM     however there should be a limit of 6 electronic participations in a year
         26                   Dec 8, 2009 11:59 PM     Electronic participation should be the exception and not the norm. Th
         27                   Dec 9, 2009 11:46 PM     Too many misunderstandings could lose intent.Also the voice and man
         28                   Dec 10, 2009 3:52 PM     I feel members should be present as a group, unless there's a special
         29                   Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM     If your gonna serve, BE THERE! Find a way!Hat is unique, REMEMBER
         30                   Dec 28, 2009 7:48 AM     face to face discussion needed
         31                   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM     We should investigate opening up the meeting electronically to all com
         32                   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM     I also agree that members should get the same opportunity to partici
         33                   Dec 30, 2009 4:18 AM     Members should be limited to 2 or 3 electronic per year
                           Article IV, Section 4 of the proposed updates clarifies that a board
                             member who attends a meeting electronically is deemed to be
                            present and can participate in the meeting as if he or she were
                                                     personally present.




                                                                                        I agree with this proposed
                                                                                        update


                                                                                        I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                        update (please explain below)




board member is the best respresentation




 ended electronically. Put another way, no one should "attend" all meetings electronically, but some, say less than half, makes sense.
e.If their in Az everything they hear is Hear -say or gossip,you have to be there summer and winter to really know what is happening.
he number of times per year this can happen. Majority of "presence" at board meetings should be at the meeting


ance should be enhanced. Further said enhancement should allow for Memeber Electronic Attendance as well.
nsibilities. Attending meetings is one. Absentee voting is OK.
dates? Live chat?
e everyone agrees on this one!

e to fully participate in discussions this way, and so wouldn't be an informed voter.
se, that person is removed from the full process.
e physically present.
 so many time a yr or emergency

ty to be totaly involved electronicly
mber is "visually and verbally" present. The member communicating in this manner should have safeguards build in so that he/she is recog

 the actual amendment is much more vague and could include pre-meeting emails, etc., not just conference calls.
onic participations in a year per board member. Its important that community members personally see or interact with the board members.
ption and not the norm. That's the responsibility of being a board member----physical attendance.
tent.Also the voice and mannerisms of board members cannot be fully identified.
up, unless there's a special curcumstance reguiring a member to participate electronically.
y!Hat is unique, REMEMBER? It has it's tranportation difficulties indeed. OVERCOME, find a ride. There are hundreds of boats at the Port of

ting electronically to all community members.
same opportunity to participate in meetings electronically. With todays technology it would be easy to webcast a meeting and it would enco
onic per year
 an half, makes sense.
ow what is happening.




d in so that he/she is recognized, has the floor and a fair opportunity to participate and be heard.


ct with the board members.




 eds of boats at the Port of Everett marina.If you want to be a snow bird and fly south for the winter then don't be a board member, or, org


a meeting and it would encourage participation.
be a board member, or, orgonize the meetings based upon the members ability to attend.Shall we say, "you can't have your cake and eat it
n't have your cake and eat it too".
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article 4, Section 5 deals with the limit of six consecutive years a board
members may serve. The proposed update simply clarifies that the six year
                                                       Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                        Percent         Count
I agree with this proposed update                           95.3%              181
I disagree with this proposed update (please explain)       4.7%                9
Other (please specify)                                                          9
                                                  answered question                  190
                                                    skipped question                  51

                                                        Other
Number        Response Date                             (please
                                                        specify)
          1                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM      I don't care.
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 4:13 PM      They shouldn't run for that third term. What if they were appointed o
          3                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM      Busy work. Lots of effort for some weird possible scenario. maybe p
          4                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM      keep it simple
          5                   Oct 29, 2009 8:33 PM      would not need to be addressed if board cannot appoint a replacemen
          6                   Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM      In the above situation, the "initial" time is "by appointment" NOT elec
          7                   Dec 9, 2009 11:46 PM      Also coordinate with Article 5 Section 1
          8                   Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM      Term Limits are for politicians.Why the hell are we getting so damn p
          9                   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM      I think term limit should be two years.
                                           Article 4, Section 5 deals with the limit




                                                                                     I agree with this proposed
                                                                                     update
                                                                                     I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                     update (please explain)




at if they were appointed only one month into a two year term? They'd end up serving almost 8 years.
ossible scenario. maybe people should just relax and not be so dang particular about the rule.

annot appoint a replacement.
"by appointment" NOT election. Their individual term would really begin when/if they are ELECTED = appointed vs. elected

 are we getting so damn political? Can't we get away from politics and governing and just enjoy our sweet little piece of tranquility?
piece of tranquility?
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article V, Section 2 of the proposed By-Laws reduces quorums for special
meetings from 25% to 15% of the membership and increases the number of
                                                   Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                     Percent        Count
I agree with this proposed update                            76.0%              139
I disagree with this proposed update (please explain)        24.0%              44
Other (please specify)                                                          30
                                                  answered question                   183
                                                    skipped question                   58

                                                        Other
Number        Response Date                             (please
                                                        specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:43 PM      to low of a threshold for special meeting.
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM      I don't care.
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 4:13 PM      No opinion
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM      KEEP IT AT 25%. MEETINGS ARE ON THE ISLAND. HOME OWNERS C
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM      I disagree with this only in content and not in intent. I believe that th
          6                   Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM      I like the time changes, not the quorum change.
          7                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM      Trivial change. How often does this really matter?
          8                   Oct 22, 2009 9:09 PM      prefer the 25% quorum
          9                   Oct 23, 2009 7:40 PM      bringing members up to speed with communication is essential and re
         10                   Oct 26, 2009 6:08 PM      Would this mean voting in changes? Then no.
         11                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM      has there ever been 25%?
         12                   Oct 29, 2009 8:33 PM      there should be at least 25%for a change
         13                    Nov 2, 2009 4:52 PM      Disagree with first part re quorum, agree with second part on number
         14                    Nov 3, 2009 1:22 AM      We don't understand this question. Sorry.
         15                  Nov 14, 2009 12:39 AM      keep the 25% of the membership
         16                   Nov 14, 2009 7:38 PM      15% gives too much control to special interest groups.
         17                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM      For our "snowbirds" could we set up a Skype opportunity for those un
         18                   Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM      More of the same!
         19                   Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM      What is wrong with the original?
         20                   Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM      It also makes it easier to change things with less votes and this shoul
         21                  Nov 30, 2009 12:27 AM      not sure who this benefits. Seems more like a special enterst play.
         22                   Dec 1, 2009 10:44 PM      This seems like trouble to me. Why fix this if it is not broken? Has th
         23                    Dec 8, 2009 9:56 PM      Leave at 25%
         24                   Dec 8, 2009 11:59 PM      Quorums should remain at 25%
         25                   Dec 9, 2009 11:46 PM      Suggestion: Keep the Quorums both at 25%.
         26                   Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM      Blah, Blah,Blah!
         27                   Dec 20, 2009 7:29 PM      15% is too low a number
         28                   Dec 21, 2009 3:29 PM      A quorum of 25% is good and should stay that way
         29                   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM      Too many changes for a single vote, these need to be broken out. I a
         30                   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM      I like the idea of extending the notification of meetings. I don't like th
                            Article V, Section 2 of the proposed By-Laws reduces quorums for
                               special meetings from 25% to 15% of the membership and
                                increases the number of days minimum (from 10 to 14) an




                                                                                      I agree with this proposed
                                                                                      update
                                                                                      I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                      update (please explain)




 ISLAND. HOME OWNERS COULD THEN CONTROLL THE OUTCOME
  in intent. I believe that the $10,000 limit is still appropriate even in the current cost of doing business. See #11 and #14 for associated co




unication is essential and responding to their concerns




with second part on number of days.




pe opportunity for those unable to attend but who want the information first hand and have the ability to express their opinion and be heard


 h less votes and this should be disclosed to members. We already have difficulty staying within our Charters and this would just increase th
ke a special enterst play.
s if it is not broken? Has there been a reason to change this?




 need to be broken out. I agree with the date changes, however I would oppose the reduced quorums.
 of meetings. I don't like the idea of reducing the quorums to 15%. This gives too much control to too small of a group.
1 and #14 for associated comments.




s their opinion and be heard, even my phone. If can allow it for the board members, can we allow it for the community?


d this would just increase that.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article V, Section 3 standarizes quorums at 15% and removes from this
section of the By-Laws the $10,000 spending limit on board authority. (A
                                                   Response      Response
Answer Options
                                                    Percent         Count
I agree with this proposed update                       52.5%              96
I disagree with this proposed update                    47.5%              87
Other (please specify)                                                     28
                                            answered question                   183
                                              skipped question                   58

                                                    Other
Number        Response Date                         (please
                                                    specify)
          1                  Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM   I agree with the 15% quorums but would like to the spending limit at
          2                  Oct 21, 2009 4:13 PM   I realize expenses are oing up, but please don't spend my money with
          3                  Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM   THIS IS THE BIG ISSUE. BOARD WANTS TO SPEND MORE THAT $10k
          4                  Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM   The 15% level is ok but does beg the question of what about special
          5                  Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM   Again, I don't like the change to lowering the quorum. The spending
          6                 Oct 22, 2009 10:16 AM   $10K is plenty to my eye.
          7                  Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM   Why do we need to do this? Is there a problem we are trying to solve
          8                  Oct 22, 2009 7:33 PM   because of the odgers incident several years ago, where the board fo
          9                  Oct 22, 2009 9:56 PM   I do aree with changing the limit
         10                  Oct 25, 2009 4:59 PM   Quorum % and Spending Limit Authority are two seperate issues and
         11                 Oct 25, 2009 11:28 PM   10,000 is plenty
         12                  Oct 29, 2009 8:33 PM   think the quorum should stay at 25% and the limit 10,000
         13                  Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM   I think the quorum levels are too low and decisions are being made b
         14                  Oct 31, 2009 8:51 PM   Unsure on this one?
         15                 Oct 31, 2009 10:07 PM   plan ahead
         16                  Nov 1, 2009 10:46 PM   The limit for spending should stay at $10k
         17                   Nov 2, 2009 4:52 PM   Again, two items - agree with increased spending, disagree with 15%
         18                 Nov 14, 2009 12:39 AM   keep the quorum at 25%
         19                  Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM   Because irresponsible spending has been demonstrated in the past. T
         20                  Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM   Please!
         21                  Dec 1, 2009 10:44 PM   I disagree with the quorum percentage, but agree with the $25,000
         22                   Dec 7, 2009 5:11 PM   I would like the spending limit to stay at $10,000.
         23                  Dec 8, 2009 10:29 PM   Agree with the 15% quorum but not the raise in the amount of the sp
         24                  Dec 8, 2009 11:59 PM   This gives too much authority with too few members approval.
         25                  Dec 20, 2009 7:29 PM   15% is too low. Okay with removing the $10,000 spending limit
         26                  Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM   I disagree with the quorum size and feel the $10K limit is appropriate
         27                  Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM   I think in todays economy a spending limit should not be "increased".
         28                  Dec 30, 2009 4:18 AM   should stay at $10,000
                             Article V, Section 3 standarizes quorums at 15% and removes
                            from this section of the By-Laws the $10,000 spending limit on
                           board authority. (A spending limit of $25,000 is re-established in
                                                   Article VI, section 4)




                                                                                I agree with this proposed
                                                                                update
                                                                                I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                update




 ke to the spending limit at $10,000.
don't spend my money without letting me know.
O SPEND MORE THAT $10k BRING IT TO THE OWNERS. COST CONTROLL IS A BIG ISSUE IN OUR LIVES NOW. WE MUST HAVE A SAY.
tion of what about special interest groups that try to get around membership voting rights.
he quorum. The spending limit increase is reasonable.

 blem we are trying to solve?
rs ago, where the board found a way to pay him with 2 separate amounts for under $10,000. I think keeping it at 10,000. would make it ha

re two seperate issues and should be reworded as such.

 he limit 10,000
decisions are being made by a limited number of property owners.




ending, disagree with 15% quorum

emonstrated in the past. The board should not have the power to more than double our spending without community approval. Our level

t agree with the $25,000

ise in the amount of the spending limit
 members approval.
10,000 spending limit
e $10K limit is appropriate given the increased focus our budget is receiving.
should not be "increased". Some recent decisions for expenditures are questionable in todays economic environment.
WE MUST HAVE A SAY.




at 10,000. would make it harder for board members to manipulate rules and $.




munity approval. Our level of trust in this area has been tested and has caused great concern!
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article V, Section 4 of the proposed updates would allow for electronic
notification (i.e. email) to the Trustees for regular and special meetings in
                                                       Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                        Percent         Count
I agree with this proposed update                        99.5%              183
I disagree with this proposed update                     0.5%                1
Other (please specify)                                                       9
                                             answered question                    184
                                               skipped question                    57

                                                     Other
Number        Response Date                          (please
                                                     specify)
          1                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM   Fine.
          2                  Oct 22, 2009 10:16 AM   Would be nice to require a response of "received and noted" however
          3                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM   Trivial busy work change. We need to be more flexible with the detai
          4                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM   I agree with this as long as the trustees agree in writing to e-mail not
          5                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM   Computers don't ALWAYS function as our needs dictate. There should
          6                   Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM   Technology is fabulous when it works!
          7                   Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM   I agree on the email notice, but this new proposed Article also elimina
          8                   Dec 8, 2009 11:59 PM   This should also apply to regular members for both regular and specia
          9                   Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM   Whatever!Do we really need a by-law change to get permission to do
                                     Article V, Section 4 of the proposed updates w




                                                                                  I agree with this proposed
                                                                                  update
                                                                                  I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                  update




ceived and noted" however, to assure actual notification. Some folks check e-mail more regularly than others, and back up plans should go
more flexible with the details and not be so dang hung up over the rules. If you're doing it already - just keep doing it.
 ree in writing to e-mail notification
needs dictate. There should be a "fail safe" factor built in or an allowance for agreement to the method by each board member.

roposed Article also eliminates the "specific prupose" requirement which I think should be disclosed to voters and provides an important saf
for both regular and special meetings.
ge to get permission to do this. COME ON MAN!
nd back up plans should go into affect if no response.


board member.

d provides an important safeguard
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VI, Section 1 of the proposed updates incorporates into the definition
of the powers and duties of trustees the mandate to: preserve the island's
                                                    Response        Response
Answer Options
                                                      Percent         Count
I agree with the proposed updated definition                79.5%              147
I disagree with the proposed updated definition             20.5%              38
Other (please specify)                                                         37
                                                  answered question                  185
                                                    skipped question                  56

                                                       Other
Number        Response Date                            (please
                                                       specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:05 PM     mission statement is enough as powers subject to interpretation
          2                  Oct 20, 2009 11:33 PM     It is logically impossible to do all that intangible stuff without interferi
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM     Everyone's view of the above-mentioned mandates varies and I do no
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 3:07 PM     This seems to broad and vague. What does each of the encompass? T
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 3:13 PM     possibly too broad and easy to manipulate and bend for "special inter
          6                   Oct 21, 2009 3:59 PM     Change "environmental character" to "environmental health"
          7                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM     Undecided at this time.
          8                   Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM     i DON'T NEED A BOASRD TO ENHANCE MY QUALITY OF LIFE. IT IS A
          9                   Oct 21, 2009 6:22 PM     How will this section be carried out?
         10                  Oct 21, 2009 11:29 PM     It is my own opinion what and how MY quality of life is enhanced or p
         11                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM     Why do we need to do this? Just anddign language for language sake
         12                   Oct 22, 2009 9:56 PM     How can they do that. Do you want to become Snohomish County
         13                   Oct 23, 2009 3:02 AM     Enhance Owner's Quality of Life is too vague.
         14                   Oct 23, 2009 4:47 PM     What does 'enhance owners' quality of life' really mean? I do not bele
         15                   Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM     I would like explainations & difinitions to each and every mandate list
         16                   Oct 25, 2009 3:19 PM     I disagree with the word "mandate". These should be goals that shou
         17                   Oct 25, 2009 4:59 PM     This porion"enhance owners' quality of life; and preserve and protect
         18                  Oct 25, 2009 10:35 PM     Sounds great, but it vastly increases the scope of the HOA's concerns
         19                  Oct 25, 2009 10:45 PM     Too vague. Could become a slippery slope allowing trustees to make
         20                   Oct 26, 2009 6:08 PM     Too broad of a statement. Allows for too much interpretation.
         21                   Oct 26, 2009 9:34 PM     I don't totally disagree... however, I think it lays too much responsibli
         22                   Oct 27, 2009 9:21 PM     In what way is "preserve" meant? Enforcement powers? Fines? Plea
         23                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM     just dont let it go to your head
         24                   Oct 29, 2009 7:55 PM     I don't think it's necessary to add "enhance owners' quality of life." Th
         25                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM     The concept is fine, the implementation is the concern. We have a few
         26                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM     too vague, would give the board undefined authority (a nanny govern
         27                   Nov 14, 2009 7:38 PM     As modified by my previous answers.
         28                  Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM      Does this mean that the Board can determine just what would "encha
         29                  Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM      Just additional verbage to control owners!
         30                  Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM      Powers and duties are very different from mission and values
         31                  Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM      This is inappropriate because you can't expand the purpose and powe
         32                  Nov 29, 2009 3:57 AM      I said earlier that I disagree with the 'enhance owners quality of life' b
         33                   Dec 8, 2009 10:29 PM     Don't agree with the vague statement of "enhance owner's quality of
34   Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM   How much did we have to pay some lawyer to "scrutinize our verbage
35   Dec 14, 2009 6:39 AM   I don not believe that it should be the duty of the Trustees to enhanc
36   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM   These statements to 'preserve and protect' are too vague to legally st
37   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM   This statement is too vague. The definition leaves an undefinable des
                              Article VI, Section 1 of the proposed updates incorporates into the
                                definition of the powers and duties of trustees the mandate to:
                              preserve the island's safety, security and environmental character;
                                                     enhance owners' qualit



                                                                                      I agree with the proposed
                                                                                      updated definition


                                                                                      I disagree with the proposed
                                                                                      updated definition (please
                                                                                      explain)




bject to interpretation
gible stuff without interfering with individual rights.
 andates varies and I do not feel it should be the islands responsibility to regulate them.
s each of the encompass? To open for interpretation.
 and bend for "special interests" actions, such as "enhance owners' quality of life"
ronmental health"

 QUALITY OF LIFE. IT IS AN OVERREACH BIG BROTHER

ality of life is enhanced or preserved, its not up to a trestee to tell me...
language for language sake. No real point.
ome Snohomish County

 really mean? I do not beleive this is the power and duty of the trustees!
ach and every mandate listed above.
e should be goals that should be pursued without changing the normal restrictions on Board actions.
  and preserve and protect the real and intangible values of the island owners' personal (and community) properties" is not the HIC's busine
ope of the HOA's concerns way beyond those in the original CCRs. This would require an affirmative vote by a majority of lot owners (not ju
 allowing trustees to make too many decisions in favor of too few (select) property owners.
 uch interpretation.
t lays too much responsiblity on the HIC board.
ment powers? Fines? Please elaborate in which way preserve will be used.

e owners' quality of life." That's subjective.
the concern. We have a few people that are trying to make changes or complain about activities that are relatively small in the big picture.
  authority (a nanny government) and could leave it vulnerable to lawsuits

 ne just what would "enchance owners' quality of life" and implement those changes for the community? Their perspective of "quality of life

mission and values
 and the purpose and power of an Association by the Bylaws, only by amending the Covenants. So this only makes the board's job more co
 nce owners quality of life' because one persons idea of protection may strongly be different than mine. I prefer to be in charge of enhancin
enhance owner's quality of life. Based on whose standard? To what extent?
r to "scrutinize our verbage"?We have better things to spend our money on.
 of the Trustees to enhance the quality of life for any owner, that should be left up to the owner and his vote.
 are too vague to legally stand. I see no reason to include the community mission and values in the by-laws.
n leaves an undefinable description of to what measures the trustees have the control to mandate these ideas. It's too objective. Also there
 ties" is not the HIC's business. The HIC Board is responsible for community property not personal property. Further the quality of my life is
majority of lot owners (not just a majority of a quorum). We'll see you in court...




ely small in the big picture.


perspective of "quality of life" may be entirely different from the majority of owners'. I.e. do we need a one-time, dated display of banners


 kes the board's job more confusing.
  to be in charge of enhancing my own and it doesn't need to be anyone elses responsibility
It's too objective. Also there needs to be language added that the trustees will have the mandate according to the approval of the majority
her the quality of my life is not the Board's concern.




e, dated display of banners to annouce a festival that not all members support? Do we really need propane ne the island? Do we need a c
he approval of the majority of property owners.
the island? Do we need a community center, or a larger duck pond to further water the fairways? Do we really need an expensive redo of
y need an expensive redo of the shelte/barbeque that would rust away from salt haze and weather, or a water fountain in the duck pond. Th
ountain in the duck pond. There has to be protection from overspending to enhance the "quality of life" from the limited perspective of a fe
e limited perspective of a few.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VI, Section 4 adds to the board's responsibilities: establishment of
enforcement procedures; creation of annual budget for membership approval;
                                                       Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                        Percent         Count
I agree with these additions and changes                    57.6%              106
I dsiagree with the additions and changes(please            42.4%              78
Other (please specify)                                                         39
                                                   answered question                 184
                                                     skipped question                 57

                                                        Other
Number        Response Date                             (please
                                                        specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:05 PM      agree except for spending authority limit revision
          2                  Oct 20, 2009 10:43 PM      OK at 10,000
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM      Keep the spending limit at $10,000
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM      Should be voted on for more money if need be at the time it is neede
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM      WE WANT THE SAY SO ON ANYTHING ABOVE $10K
          6                   Oct 21, 2009 5:46 PM      Keep the 10,000
          7                   Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM      See item #10 please.
          8                   Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM      I think the "establishment of enforcement procedures" is the deal kille
          9                  Oct 22, 2009 10:16 AM      Again, $10K is plenty.
         10                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM      Doesn't the Baord already do all this?
         11                   Oct 24, 2009 9:52 PM      NO
         12                   Oct 25, 2009 3:19 PM      I agree with everythiung except "establish enforcement procedures".
         13                   Oct 25, 2009 4:59 PM      These are three seperate issues and should be seperated.
         14                  Oct 25, 2009 10:35 PM      I don't trust the board with enforcement procedures that they are see
         15                  Oct 25, 2009 10:45 PM      I disagree with the "enforcement" part.
         16                  Oct 25, 2009 11:28 PM      We think that we should keep the spending level at 10,000
         17                   Oct 27, 2009 4:40 AM      Disagree
         18                   Oct 27, 2009 8:16 PM      you need to seperate art.VI and V
         19                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM      is there badges available for the enforcement officer
         20                   Oct 29, 2009 7:55 PM      too much money without approval
         21                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM      I have a problem with some of the enforcement issues the board may
         22                   Oct 31, 2009 8:51 PM      I think $25,000 is too high.
         23                   Nov 1, 2009 10:46 PM      I don't agree with increasing the board spending limit to $25k.
         24                    Nov 3, 2009 1:22 AM      Disagree with the $25,000. spending limit. Keep the $10,000. limit.
         25                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM      the spending limit should be left at 10,000
         26                   Nov 14, 2009 7:38 PM      I am a little unsure of this answer. While we should make the Board'
         27                   Nov 15, 2009 1:55 AM      This appears to be two different issues. Because of that I have to vot
         28                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM      $25,00 is beyond the income/budgeting facgtor of this community. If
         29                   Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM      Establishment of enforcement procedures...
         30                   Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM      1. $10,000 is the appropriate limit given our budget2. You can't give
         31                   Nov 29, 2009 3:12 AM      I agree with everything other than the spending authority change.
         32                   Nov 29, 2009 3:57 AM      what does establishment of enforecement procedures mean?
         33                   Dec 8, 2009 10:29 PM      Why the jump from $10,000 to $25,000. Understand inflation but this
34   Dec 10, 2009 3:52 PM   I feel there should always be a public accounting statement, prior to s
35   Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM   "establishment of enforcement procedures"To me this means the boa
36   Dec 28, 2009 7:48 AM   must have more spending accountabilitynot less
37   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM   As stated above, there is already unease with the $10K limit and how
38   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM   I don't think the spending authority of the board should change to $2
39   Dec 30, 2009 4:18 AM              10000
                                Article VI, Section 4 adds to the board's responsibilities:
                             establishment of enforcement procedures; creation of annual
                           budget for membership approval; limits the spending authority of
                                    the board to $25,000 (it was previously $10,000)




                                                                                  I agree with these additions
                                                                                  and changes
                                                                                  I dsiagree with the additions
                                                                                  and changes(please explain)




d be at the time it is needed by all community lot owners/members.




procedures" is the deal killer here. Why not simply specify what the enforcement procedures are in the bylaws?




 enforcement procedures". These should be put to a community vote.
d be seperated.
 ocedures that they are seeking.

g level at 10,000




ment issues the board may consider. Particularily the ongoing discussions about 4 wheelers and the banning of them from the island and be

nding limit to $25k.
Keep the $10,000. limit.

we should make the Board's job as easy as possible, the spending authority at $25k seems high.
cause of that I have to vote no based on the spending limit increase that is proposed at $25k.
cgtor of this community. If we had two and a half times the income available--maybe--but we don't.

ur budget2. You can't give additional powers (here powers of enforcement procedures) by amending the by-laws3. I'm cool with the membe
nding authority change.
 procedures mean?
nderstand inflation but this is a large amount of money.
unting statement, prior to spending, as well as providing a regular budget statement, as often as possible.
"To me this means the board wants to hire a SHERIFF for $$25,000 per year without our input.

ith the $10K limit and how it is managed by the board.
board should change to $25,000. Enforcement procedures should be voted on my all propertie owners.
them from the island and beaches.




s3. I'm cool with the membership approval of the budget
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VI, Section 6 proposed an addition which gives the board the authority
to establish payment terms for assessments and fees. This is done regularly
                                                    Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                     Percent         Count
I agree with this addition                                 94.1%              174
I disagree with this addition (please explain)             5.9%               11
Other (please specify)                                                        15
                                                 answered question                  185
                                                   skipped question                  56

                                                       Other
Number        Response Date                            (please
                                                       specify)
          1                    Oct 20, 2009 10:51 PM   Gives them the ability to treat property owners differently. I like you-y
          2                     Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM   I would agree to this as long as the payment terms are fair to the ow
          3                     Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM   Doesn't need to be in the By-Laws. Keep the Attorney's out of it.
          4                     Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM   WITH THIS THE BOARD COULD GO THE OTHER WAY AND CHANGE T
          5                    Oct 22, 2009 10:16 AM   PLEASE follow standard procedures in this regard (i.e. - a "real" effort
          6                     Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM   ...just keep doing it...
          7                     Oct 23, 2009 4:47 PM   This may give the Board too much authority.
          8                     Oct 23, 2009 7:40 PM   offer a water only assessment and reduction of fees when access is n
          9                    Oct 25, 2009 10:31 PM   As long as it is consistent.
         10                     Oct 27, 2009 9:21 PM   I feel the terms or limits need to be voted on by the membership so i
         11                     Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM   lets work with the people
         12                     Nov 1, 2009 10:46 PM   Payment terms should be uniform among all owners.
         13                     Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM   If it's already being done.. why do we need to add it to the by-laws?
         14                     Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM   "the attorney felt"Is he a HIC member?
         15                     Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM   I like the idea of establishing payment terms to help folks. Giving the
                                         Article VI, Section 6 proposed an addition which gi




                                                                                       I agree with this addition


                                                                                       I disagree with this addition
                                                                                       (please explain)




ners differently. I like you-you have 1 year to catch up. I don't like you-pay up in 30 days or else.
 nt terms are fair to the owners who have paid in full. Example - add interest onto any unpaid balance if not already added.
he Attorney's out of it.
 THER WAY AND CHANGE TO ONE PAYMENT FOR EXAMPLE
 regard (i.e. - a "real" effort towards payment, not just a token gesture.


 n of fees when access is not offered.

on by the membership so it is uniform throughout the Island members.


d to add it to the by-laws?

ms to help folks. Giving the board the authority to establish "term" could go the other way and force people into a difficult position. Such as
a difficult position. Such as "call a note due" with consequences such as place a lien on property, add fines, etc. This too needs to be mor
. This too needs to be more specific.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VI, Section 7 authorizes the board to appoint members of the
Architectural Control Committee and to hear and act on appeals to their
                                                     Response      Response
Answer Options
                                                      Percent        Count
I agree with this addition                                 86.3%              157
I disagree with this addition (Please explain)             13.7%              25
Other (please specify)                                                        22
                                                 answered question                  182
                                                   skipped question                  59

                                                      Other
Number        Response Date                           (please
                                                      specify)
          1                   Oct 20, 2009 10:00 PM   This should be voted on.
          2                    Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM   Leave it alone.
          3                    Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM   ...just keep doing it...
          4                    Oct 22, 2009 7:12 PM   i am concerned about how much control this committee would have-
          5                    Oct 25, 2009 4:59 PM   With this change in language there should be a method or language t
          6                    Oct 27, 2009 9:21 PM   undecided
          7                    Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM   If its being done, why the question, I would question advise from an a
          8                    Oct 29, 2009 8:33 PM   this is not being done--this in error and contray to our ccr
          9                    Oct 31, 2009 8:51 PM   I think members of the Architectural Control Committee should be vot
         10                     Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM   I thought this was covered by other documents
         11                   Nov 14, 2009 12:39 AM   Architectural Committee has been worthless and should be built up an
         12                    Nov 14, 2009 7:38 PM   The appeal process is always a problem in associations because, gene
         13                    Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM   BUT, How does a board remain totally unbiased in appointing commit
         14                   Nov 17, 2009 10:57 PM   There should be no archictural committee. Make rules that specify res
         15                    Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM   Appeals should be heard independently
         16                    Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM   Appeal for whose activities - the board's or the Architectural Control c
         17                    Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM   But note that hearing the appeals and evidence and ruling on that cou
         18                    Nov 29, 2009 3:23 AM   COMMITTE NOT NECESSARY
         19                    Dec 7, 2009 11:26 PM   when did the ACC come under control of the board? My understandin
         20                    Dec 10, 2009 3:52 PM   I trust if qualified people express an interest to serve, that they will h
         21                    Dec 13, 2009 6:08 PM   It aint broke now!
         22                    Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM   Shouldn't members of the Architectural Control Commitee be voted on
                                                             Article VI




                                                                                     I agree with this addition


                                                                                     I disagree with this addition
                                                                                     (Please explain)




is committee would have- are there written guidelines? I would agree with this if I knew what things would be affected.
be a method or language that requires any ACC decision be made public prior to execution. Division N?

d question advise from an attorney
ntray to our ccr
ol Committee should be voted in.

s and should be built up and empowered or abolished.
associations because, generally, you are appealing to the same people that imposed the penalty. You should spell out the process in your ru
ased in appointing committee members that may not be supportive of the board's philosophy. Doubt anyone would be appointed who was
Make rules that specify restrictions, let homeowners abide by them.

 the Architectural Control committee?
ence and ruling on that could be very time consuming for board members

he board? My understanding was It used to be - when a ACC member was no longer able to particicpate, that indiviual or remaining memb
st to serve, that they will have an opportunity to do so and that there would be a public record of the names.

ntrol Commitee be voted on the same way a board member is? If the board appoints members to the committee this could be seen as thos
ell out the process in your rules and regulations.
ould be appointed who was contrary to the board's stance.




indiviual or remaining members apponted a successor. Appeals did go to the HIC board.


e this could be seen as those members being influenced by the board.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VII, Section 1 adds the duty to appoint committee chairs to the duties
of the President
                                                    Response        Response
Answer Options
                                                     Percent          Count
I agree with this addition                                 83.9%              151
I disagree with this addition (olease explain)             16.1%              29
Other (please specify)                                                        22
                                                 answered question                  180
                                                   skipped question                  61

                                                       Other
Number        Response Date                            (please
                                                       specify)
          1                    Oct 20, 2009 10:00 PM   Should be voted
          2                    Oct 20, 2009 10:43 PM   Should be done bu Board Vote and approval
          3                     Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM   Leave it alone.
          4                     Oct 21, 2009 6:22 PM   Presidential appointments should be considered as temporary until ra
          5                     Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM   The committee chair should be elected by the committee to prevent b
          6                     Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM   Busy work. Just do it.
          7                     Oct 22, 2009 7:12 PM   I think the Board should agree/majority vote-not just one person.
          8                     Oct 22, 2009 9:56 PM   I don't think I understand. Is the President still responsible?
          9                     Oct 25, 2009 8:11 PM   I don't know what this means
         10                     Oct 26, 2009 6:08 PM   Not clear on what this means.
         11                     Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM   Associations are always filled with power trippers, let the committees
         12                     Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM   The board should appoint committee chairs.
         13                     Oct 31, 2009 8:51 PM   I think the president already has too much control
         14                      Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM   chairs should be elected by the committee
         15                    Nov 15, 2009 1:55 AM    I don't understand this statement.
         16                    Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM    Once a committe is established, the members of that committee shou
         17                    Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM    Committe Chair appointments should come from the board or executi
         18                    Nov 29, 2009 3:57 AM    The president has a big enough job. could it be the VP's duty?
         19                     Dec 10, 2009 3:52 PM   My feelings are the same as stated in number 16, above.
         20                     Dec 20, 2009 7:29 PM   Shouldn't this be done by the board as a whole?
         21                     Dec 28, 2009 7:48 AM   should be board
         22                     Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM   I see no reason to vest this power solely within the President's duties
                          Article VII, Section 1 adds the duty to appoint committee chairs to
                                               the duties of the President




                                                                                     I agree with this addition


                                                                                     I disagree with this addition
                                                                                     (olease explain)




 ered as temporary until ratified by the board.
the committee to prevent bias from the Board President.

te-not just one person.
 still responsible?


ippers, let the committees select the chair




ers of that committee should have the right to select their own chairperson. Too much control is placed on the President by selecting a like
 from the board or executive committee
 it be the VP's duty?
ber 16, above.


ithin the President's duties. How are the chairs appointed now? I feel a nomination and vote by the whole board would be more democratic
President by selecting a like-thinking chair that could steer the committee toward the wishes of the president..




 would be more democratic and transparent.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

To be consistent with state laws governing HOA's, Article VII, Section 4 adds
the requirement of an annual audit of Association books unless waived.
                                                    Response        Response
Answer Options
                                                     Percent          Count
I agree with this addition                                 93.6%              176
I disagree with this addition (Please explain)             6.4%               12
Other (please specify)                                                        16
                                                 answered question                  188
                                                   skipped question                  53

                                                       Other
Number        Response Date                            (please
                                                       specify)
          1                    Oct 20, 2009 10:51 PM   I assume the audit would be performed by an outside or 3rd party to
          2                    Oct 20, 2009 10:57 PM   Audits are a waste of funds
          3                     Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM   Waived should be a decision by simple majority of the owners and no
          4                     Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM   Leave it alone.
          5                     Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM   YOU MUST DO IT EVEN IF WE DON'T ADD THIS REQUIREMENT
          6                     Oct 21, 2009 5:46 PM   Waived by "who"
          7                     Oct 21, 2009 6:22 PM   How can it be waived? Why would it be waived?
          8                     Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM   Am thinking that the thought here was to allow an opinion audit relat
          9                     Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM   catch the problems early
         10                    Oct 31, 2009 10:07 PM   what is the cost to do and what level of a audit
         11                      Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM   if it is already required by state law, why is the addition needed? This
         12                    Nov 16, 2009 5:32 AM    Do Washington State laws really require that HOA accounting records
         13                    Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM    Waived by whom? The board? The manager? or the Community? It
         14                     Dec 10, 2009 3:52 PM   I feel an annual audit should be done.
         15                     Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM   Steps for waiving the audit need to be spelled out and disclosed as pa
         16                     Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM   I think and annual audit should be done every two years
                                  To be consistent with state laws governing HOA's, Article VII,
                                 Section 4 adds the requirement of an annual audit of Association
                                                       books unless waived.




                                                                                       I agree with this addition


                                                                                       I disagree with this addition
                                                                                       (Please explain)




 an outside or 3rd party to avoid conflict of interests.

ority of the owners and not by the board if not already required and if so then I agree.

 THIS REQUIREMENT


allow an opinion audit relative to a certified audit from time to time to save cost.


 the addition needed? This requirement could have been added to the corporate bylaws before the name change
at HOA accounting records be audited by a Public CPA every year? I find this hard to believe, but if this really is required, I do agree with th
ger? or the Community? It should be stated.

led out and disclosed as part of this vote.
ery two years
required, I do agree with this addition.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VII, Section 6 allows anyone on the board except the President to hold
two offices concurrently
                                                    Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                     Percent         Count
I agree with this update                                 71.5%              128
I disagree with this update (plese explain)              28.5%              51
Other (please specify)                                                      28
                                              answered question                   179
                                                skipped question                   62

                                                     Other
Number        Response Date                          (please
                                                     specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:43 PM   CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
          2                  Oct 20, 2009 10:51 PM   Possible conflict of interest
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM   I agree only if there is a need for one person to hold two offices conc
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM   I don't care.
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 5:46 PM   Is this currently the norm?
          6                   Oct 21, 2009 7:49 PM   This would violate rules of separation of powers and agreements at a
          7                   Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM   What is the purpose of this? I think it gives too much power to any o
          8                  Oct 22, 2009 10:16 AM   If needed, sure, but better to divide and conquer, always!
          9                   Oct 22, 2009 3:27 PM   Whatever. You're wearing me down. Just a trivial change.
         10                   Oct 22, 2009 9:56 PM   Why
         11                   Oct 23, 2009 4:47 PM   Need further clarification, or an example. This is a vague statement.
         12                   Oct 24, 2009 7:49 PM   In our experience this is not normal practice in HOAs. Division of labo
         13                  Oct 25, 2009 10:45 PM   Too much power in too few hands.
         14                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM   if you want it, you got it
         15                  Oct 31, 2009 10:07 PM   only if no one else runs
         16                  Nov 14, 2009 12:39 AM   One person, one office
         17                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM   Perhaps to cover the resignation of a board member for 60 to 90 days
         18                   Nov 25, 2009 3:06 AM   Decision "ownership" and democracy start with involvement of individ
         19                   Dec 7, 2009 11:26 PM   one member, two offices one vote?
         20                    Dec 8, 2009 9:56 PM   One position, one vote
         21                   Dec 8, 2009 11:59 PM   One person, one office!
         22                   Dec 9, 2009 11:46 PM   We are a large enough community to find and elect qualified people
         23                   Dec 10, 2009 3:52 PM   If necessary, until someone can fill the position.
         24                  Dec 13, 2009 10:24 PM   Are there not enough folks interested in serving that causes office vac
         25                   Dec 20, 2009 7:29 PM   Not sure how to vote here. Isn't two offices for one person too much
         26                   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM   I don't agree with the concentration of power. I rarely goes in these t
         27                   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM   Ok for two offices to be held by one member until a permanent one c
         28                   Dec 30, 2009 4:18 AM   conflicts?
                                Article VII, Section 6 allows anyone on the board except the
                                          President to hold two offices concurrently




                                                                                     I agree with this update


                                                                                     I disagree with this update
                                                                                     (plese explain)




on to hold two offices concurrently.


 wers and agreements at arm’s length.
 s too much power to any one person. Perhaps if there was a time limit associated with the concurrency it might be more palpable (ie. in an
onquer, always!
  a trivial change.

 This is a vague statement.
 e in HOAs. Division of labor is best.




d member for 60 to 90 days, but not for a full term.
 with involvement of individuals at all levels!




and elect qualified people

 rving that causes office vacancies currently? I would think one office would be enough to keep someone busy and would allow/restrict them
  s for one person too much to do effectively?
wer. I rarely goes in these types of organizations.
 er until a permanent one can be voted on by the community
 be more palpable (ie. in an emergency).




nd would allow/restrict them to focus their energies on one set of issues.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VIII, Section 1(a) of the proposed updates would require the board
and community to annually review the island's budget and annual assessment
                                                    Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                     Percent         Count
I agree with these updates                                84.2%             155
I disagree with these updates (please explain)            15.8%             29
Other (please specify)                                                      17
                                                 answered question                184
                                                   skipped question                57

                                                      Other
Number        Response Date                           (please
                                                      specify)
          1                   Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM    The assessment level has has to swing both ways up or down not jus
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM    Should ba a majority vote of property/community owners.
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 4:13 PM    The Community, like any household, needs to live within their means,
          4                   Oct 22, 2009 4:56 PM    Separate the budget process from any dues increase.
          5                   Oct 22, 2009 7:12 PM    I don't like the idea of the assessment changing yearly with undefined
          6                   Oct 25, 2009 3:19 PM    This means that the only way I can disagree with the annual assessm
          7                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM    only budget what you got, not get what you want budget. keep it sim
          8                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM    I continue to have a problem with the board increasing the assessmen
          9                   Nov 1, 2009 10:46 PM    Majority vote by who - community or the board?
         10                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM    most owners would not follow the budget process.
         11                  Nov 14, 2009 12:39 AM    Majority votes should be required.
         12                   Nov 14, 2009 7:38 PM    As to what constitutes a majority,do the C,C and R's agree with RCW?
         13                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM    It's the "Majority" percentage here that concerns me. This has to foll
         14                   Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM    I agree with most of this change, except the floating assessment to fi
         15                   Dec 8, 2009 10:29 PM    Allows the budget to determine the assessment amount without limit.
         16                   Dec 28, 2009 7:48 AM    owners need to know amount of annual dues over longer term
         17                   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM    Should be approved by majority vote
                                  Article VIII, Section 1(a) of the proposed updates would require
                                          the board and community to annually review the i




                                                                                     I agree with these updates


                                                                                     I disagree with these updates
                                                                                     (please explain)




h ways up or down not just up.
munity owners.
 to live within their means, not decide how much they want and then tell us what the number is.

nging yearly with undefined limits.
 e with the annual assessment amount is to reject the entire budget.
u want budget. keep it simple and affordable
 d increasing the assessment amounts and the costs for riding the Holiday, but the marina rates have changed very little in the last 20-30 ye




 C and R's agree with RCW? Do the By Laws agree with both?
ncerns me. This has to follow the "total" owner count and not some rigged meeting with 15% there and then voting by show of hands or so
he floating assessment to fit budget idea. I like fixed and I think other seniors do too.
ment amount without limit.
 es over longer term
ery little in the last 20-30 years. The greatest expense we have on the island relates to the marina and the cost of providing boat slips. Thos




oting by show of hands or something like that.
of providing boat slips. Those using it should pay a fair market price, not one subsidized by the entire island.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VIII, Section 1(b) gives the board the authority to determine when the
multiple owners user fee applies
                                                     Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                       Percent        Count
I agree with this proposed update                           70.5%              122
I disagree with this proposed update (please explain)       29.5%              51
Other (please specify)                                                         36
                                                  answered question                  173
                                                    skipped question                  68

                                                        Other
Number        Response Date                             (please
                                                        specify)
          1                  Oct 21, 2009 12:30 AM      do not understand what the multiple owners user fee is.
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 3:07 PM      I don't understand what this means
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM      Board is trying to gain to much authority. leave things alone.
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 4:13 PM      As long as it is not arbitrary and capricious
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 6:22 PM      What are multiple owners?
          6                   Oct 22, 2009 3:34 AM      What is a multiple ownersu user fee and when does it typically apply?
          7                   Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM      Why can't the by-laws spell this out?
          8                   Oct 22, 2009 7:12 PM      I don't understand what this fee is? Can't agree until I know more abo
          9                   Oct 24, 2009 8:00 PM      MULTIPLE OWNERS SHOULD BE TREATED NO DIFFERENTLY THAN 1
         10                   Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM      You mean that a person who owns lets say 3 properties would be cha
         11                   Oct 25, 2009 8:11 PM      I agree as stated but disagree that there should be any such thing as
         12                  Oct 25, 2009 10:31 PM      If a property is legally held by multiple owners then there should not
         13                  Oct 25, 2009 10:35 PM      This is not a proper user fee, this is an arbitrary extra annual assessm
         14                  Oct 25, 2009 11:28 PM      I think it should be the same for everyone so why should the board d
         15                   Oct 27, 2009 3:57 AM      ... as long as it is fair and just.
         16                   Oct 27, 2009 5:03 AM      I don't understand what the 'multiple owners user fees' are. If the de
         17                   Oct 27, 2009 8:16 PM      do not know what that means
         18                   Oct 27, 2009 9:21 PM      undecided
         19                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM      there should not be multiple owner fees period. multiple owners will j
         20                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM      I think the island rules should be spelled out and made clear and not
         21                   Oct 31, 2009 7:02 PM      Should be spelled out in the by-laws...
         22                  Oct 31, 2009 10:07 PM      new or grandfathered in make a difference
         23                   Nov 1, 2009 10:46 PM      I don't know what this means.
         24                    Nov 3, 2009 1:22 AM      We don't understand the term "multiple owners". "Multiple Owners" o
         25                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM      does the board anticipate all the multiple owners of a single property
         26                   Nov 12, 2009 8:27 PM      Should be voted on by the community.
         27                   Nov 15, 2009 1:55 AM      There should be written guidlines. No persons should be able to deter
         28                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM      It either applies based on the bylaws or it does not. Why should the
         29                   Nov 20, 2009 4:00 PM      by laws should clearly state when and what constitutes multiple owne
         30                   Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM      Poorly written with no explanation
         31                   Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM      I'm not opposed to Board authority here, but to date there has been c
         32                   Dec 7, 2009 11:26 PM      how does board know when there are multiple owners?
         33                   Dec 27, 2009 1:42 AM      This should be clearly spelled out in documents
34   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM I don't agree witht fee, the premise on which it's based or with the bo
35   Dec 29, 2009 5:03 AM This should be clearly spelled out in document.
36   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM should be voted on by majority vote
                          Article VIII, Section 1(b) gives the board the authority to determine
                                        when the multiple owners user fee applies




                                                                                    I agree with this proposed
                                                                                    update
                                                                                    I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                    update (please explain)




rs user fee is.

eave things alone.


 hen does it typically apply?

 gree until I know more about it.
 NO DIFFERENTLY THAN 1 OWNER PROPERTIES
  3 properties would be charged 3 times user fees? or does that mean if one single property is owned by 2 or more people they ALL pay the
hould be any such thing as multiple owners fees; perhaps raising the number may be appropriate to insure that there are not corporately ow
ners then there should not be a User Fee.
 trary extra annual assessmet. Calling it by the wrong name is misleading and does not justify it.
so why should the board decide who has to pay multiple owners users fee

 rs user fees' are. If the deed has more than one owner, is it a multiple owner?


 riod. multiple owners will just convert ownership to an llc. Is this an issue worth continuing? really
ut and made clear and not allow the board to make unilateral decisions which then can be backed up with fines and restrictions of use.




wners". "Multiple Owners" of what?
 wners of a single property to be on the island at the same time? why should extra fees be required?

ons should be able to determine or have athority over user fees. If it is written everyone knows the rules.
does not. Why should the board make variable decisions here or there? Where is the black and white of the rules and the amounts charged
t constitutes multiple owners, not a board vote.

 ut to date there has been confusion by the Board on calling things "user fees" which are actually assessments and vice versa.
 iple owners?
ch it's based or with the boards authority to determine its use.
ore people they ALL pay the fees? please explain
 there are not corporately owned lots.




and restrictions of use.




es and the amounts charged?


nd vice versa.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VII, Section 1(c) clarifies allowance of proxy votes and adds payment
of special assessments in quarterly installments
                                                       Response      Response
Answer Options
                                                        Percent        Count
I agree with these proposed updates                       95.0%              172
I disagree with these proposed updates (please            5.0%                9
Other (please specify)                                                        9
                                                 answered question                 181
                                                   skipped question                 60

                                                      Other
Number        Response Date                           (please
                                                      specify)
          1                   Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM    Only if intrest applies!
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM    Quarterly installments are nice, yes. The special assessments is gettin
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 5:46 PM    Why not split these two items?
          4                   Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM    WHAT does that mean??
          5                   Oct 27, 2009 9:21 PM    I feel interest needs to be charged whenever possible.
          6                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM    Limit the number of proxy held by any individual
          7                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM    Not sure what is says, so won't comment.
          8                   Nov 15, 2009 1:55 AM    Two different issues. I cannot vote yes unless these are seperate and
          9                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM    This appears to be two separagte issues. What do proxy votes have t
                           Article VII, Section 1(c) clarifies allowance of proxy votes and adds
                                 payment of special assessments in quarterly installments




                                                                                    I agree with these proposed
                                                                                    updates


                                                                                    I disagree with these proposed
                                                                                    updates (please explain)




pecial assessments is getting way out of hand especially for the people on the south end of the Island that do not use the Golf Course, nor t




ess these are seperate and there is more information provided on each issue.
What do proxy votes have to do with assessment payments?
t use the Golf Course, nor the Marina, nor anything else on top of the Island other than water, period. Give it a rest !!!
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VIII, Section 2 gives the board more ability to be flexibile in payment
terms, interest rates and timing of foreclosures on delinquencies by removing
                                                      Response         Response
Answer Options
                                                        Percent          Count
I agree with this proposed update                           70.0%              126
I disagree with this proposed update (plese explain)        30.0%              54
Other (please specify)                                                         35
                                                  answered question                  180
                                                    skipped question                  61

                                                       Other
Number        Response Date                            (please
                                                       specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:43 PM     Time frames provide a check and balance
          2                  Oct 20, 2009 10:51 PM     Again-could show favortism towards one and not others.
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 1:14 AM     There has to be set time frames to keep the board from unfairly decid
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM     I would need to read more specific details on the exact wording of thi
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM     WE HELP OUR NEIGHBORS NOT FORCE THEM OUT
          6                   Oct 21, 2009 5:46 PM     All members should be treated equally.
          7                   Oct 21, 2009 6:22 PM     Please explain why the change is necessary.
          8                   Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM     I'd like to see time limits enforced. We must strike a balance betwee
          9                  Oct 22, 2009 10:16 AM     Set standards and apply them, for all!
         10                   Oct 22, 2009 7:12 PM     I think the interest rate, payments, etc. should be equally applied to e
         11                   Oct 23, 2009 4:47 PM     This gives the Board too much authority.
         12                   Oct 25, 2009 2:59 AM     what are the specific time frames & rates in the by-laws now?
         13                   Oct 25, 2009 8:11 PM     Agree however, it must be clearly spelled out so that there is not ineq
         14                  Oct 25, 2009 11:28 PM     Shouls be standard
         15                   Oct 27, 2009 3:57 AM     ... as long as fair and just.
         16                   Oct 27, 2009 8:16 PM     should be the same for everybody all the time and documented. Could
         17                   Oct 27, 2009 9:21 PM     If we are going to be flexible to our members the perameters need to
         18                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM     work with the people
         19                   Oct 29, 2009 8:33 PM     the by-laws were voted on and should be adhered to unless revoted
         20                   Oct 31, 2009 3:07 AM     A specific time frame is important because it can be equally applied. W
         21                   Oct 31, 2009 4:11 PM     I think terms should be spelled out and not be allowed to change from
         22                   Nov 1, 2009 10:46 PM     There should be consistency for all owners.
         23                    Nov 2, 2009 4:23 PM     need more info on pros and cons
         24                    Nov 2, 2009 4:52 PM     may allow for favoritism?
         25                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM     I would agree with this only if the board were restricted to being mor
         26                   Nov 15, 2009 1:55 AM     Every resident must be treated exactly the same when it comes to all
         27                   Nov 17, 2009 1:16 AM     You mean the Board could charge someone 5% and another person 8
         28                   Nov 20, 2009 4:00 PM     should be the same for everyone
         29                   Nov 25, 2009 4:07 AM     This is a good use of the Board's authority and flexibility - working to
         30                   Dec 10, 2009 3:52 PM     Timely efforts should be made to address delinquencies, with a proce
         31                   Dec 27, 2009 1:42 AM     this should be already spelled out in documents so that it is consisten
         32                   Dec 28, 2009 7:45 PM     The flip side of 'flexible' is inconsistency. Based on past history, I don'
         33                   Dec 29, 2009 5:03 AM     This should be already spelled out in documents so that it is consisten
34   Dec 29, 2009 5:42 PM should again be specific and be voted on by the community
35   Dec 30, 2009 4:18 AM We need specific guidelines that apply to everyone. This eliminates co
                            Article VIII, Section 2 gives the board more ability to be flexibile in
                                payment terms, interest rates and timing of foreclosures on
                            delinquencies by removing specific time frames and rates from the
                                                           By-Laws.




                                                                                            I agree with this proposed
                                                                                            update
                                                                                            I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                            update (plese explain)




nd not others.
e board from unfairly deciding anything and abuse.
on the exact wording of this subject, something doesn't look or sound right.




 st strike a balance between "giving people a chance" and putting the rest of the good-standing residents at risk.

ould be equally applied to everyone

n the by-laws now?
 ut so that there is not inequity or disparate treatment (favoritism) in its application.


me and documented. Could get personal
ers the perameters need to be uniform and in writing. The Island budget should not suffer because members are unable to pay their bills.

adhered to unless revoted
 it can be equally applied. We worry that the board would set themselves up for contention and lawsuits accusing them of favoritism.
  be allowed to change from one person to the other.




ere restricted to being more lenient than the time frames and rates
 same when it comes to all of the issues above. Set up guidlines and follow them.
e 5% and another person 8%. The board can favor someone and eliminate another. Where is the equity in that?

 and flexibility - working to get the assessments paid in whatever way makes sense.
delinquencies, with a process aplicable to all
ments so that it is consistently applied and not subject to interpretqation or varied application. Board members should not be subject to pre
ased on past history, I don't see this working to the communities advantage.
ments so that it is consistently applied and not subject to interpretation or varied application. Board members should not be subject to press
y the community
veryone. This eliminates conflicts or favoritism
re unable to pay their bills. A case by case basis where it is not open to the public may promote favoritism, bias, or discrimination.


g them of favoritism.




should not be subject to pressure.

hould not be subject to pressure.
, or discrimination.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Article VIII, Section 3 allows interest to be charged on late special
assessments and defines how long the association must wait to take action to
                                                      Response        Response
Answer Options
                                                       Percent          Count
I agree with this proposed update                           89.1%              163
I disagree with this proposed update (please explain)       10.9%              20
Other (please specify)                                                         15
                                                  answered question                  183
                                                    skipped question                  58

                                                        Other
Number        Response Date                             (please
                                                        specify)
          1                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM      Totally 110% disagree !!!You people and your special assessments ar
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 5:37 PM      AMERICA IS IN TROUBLE FOR MAY YEARS TO COME. "SO LET'S PILE
          3                   Oct 22, 2009 5:49 AM      I'm not sure, but it seems like this one conflicts with the one above.
          4                   Oct 23, 2009 4:47 PM      Too vague.
          5                   Oct 28, 2009 2:42 PM      no brainer
          6                    Nov 2, 2009 4:23 PM      need more info on pros and cons
          7                    Nov 4, 2009 1:05 AM      state law already covers this
          8                   Nov 14, 2009 7:38 PM      I don't understand this. A lien should always cloud a title until paid.
          9                   Nov 15, 2009 1:55 AM      Since most people are paying their special assessments quarterly I be
         10                   Nov 25, 2009 2:47 AM      Law should be followed. You can't just make it up
         11                   Dec 1, 2009 10:44 PM      In todays environment, this has no meaning at all. Most foreclosured
         12                   Dec 7, 2009 11:26 PM      how is the interest rate decided?
         13                   Dec 9, 2009 11:46 PM      What amount of interest and a need for the owner to make agreemen
         14                   Dec 20, 2009 7:29 PM      Are the special assessments deemed delinquent at the end of the yea
         15                   Dec 28, 2009 7:48 AM      need fexibility for each case
                               Article VIII, Section 3 allows interest to be charged on late special
                                              assessments and defines how long the




                                                                                   I agree with this proposed
                                                                                   update
                                                                                   I disagree with this proposed
                                                                                   update (please explain)




our special assessments are out of control. STOP already with special assessments, we want to go to the Island like we have been for 80 ye
 TO COME. "SO LET'S PILE ON TO GET THE ISLANDS FAIR SHAER OF THE SPOILS AND DRIVE MORE AMERICANS WAY FROM THEIR DREA
flicts with the one above.




ys cloud a title until paid.
 assessments quarterly I belive that an additionl 90 days would be more appropriate.

g at all. Most foreclosured properties are selling for much less than the mortgage. Our assessments need to be able to be collected by oth

e owner to make agreements or testimony of payment with authorized community personnel.
quent at the end of the year? In that case I agree
like we have been for 80 years, relax and enjoy ourselves if you want Bellevue or San Diego or Hollywood then move there. This is a small
NS WAY FROM THEIR DREAMS. THE WORLD HAS CHANGED FOREVER NAD WE ARE DOING THE SAME OLD CRAP....




 able to be collected by other means such as liens on property off the island or other assets such as jobs. I agree with this, but it needs to
move there. This is a small Island with Summer cabins on it. It's not Del Webbs Island !!!




ee with this, but it needs to have greater reach.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Which of the following statements most closely describe your view of what
the island's approach to financial management should be.
                                                   Response      Response
Answer Options
                                                    Percent         Count
Manage in a way that creates a luxury community with         0.5%               1
Manage as cheaply as possibe, not building reserves          3.7%               7
Manage in a fiscally balanced way that anticipates and       79.4%             150
Manage in a way that creates a 1st class community           18.5%             35
Other (please specify)                                                         28
                                                  answered question                  189
                                                    skipped question                  52

                                                         Other
Number        Response Date                              (please
                                                         specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:12 PM       statements appear to include bias for employee raises. financial man
          2                  Oct 20, 2009 10:54 PM       I would have marked the second box had the "motivates and rewards
          3                  Oct 21, 2009 12:32 AM       would also consider number 3.
          4                  Oct 21, 2009 12:56 AM       "motivates and rewards employees" is vague
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM       The Island for most, not everybody but most, is a Summer place to re
          6                   Oct 21, 2009 4:15 PM       To compare Island employees compensation with that of peopel on te
          7                   Oct 21, 2009 5:42 PM       THIS QUESTION WOULD NOT PASS MUSTER IN ANY NATIONAL SURV
          8                   Oct 22, 2009 5:09 PM       We should elct and applaud board members and hire island employee
          9                   Oct 22, 2009 7:37 PM       except the phase "motivates and rewards employees" That phrase ha
         10                   Oct 23, 2009 4:48 PM       These are absurd questions.
         11                   Oct 24, 2009 9:55 PM       We dont need to be a "1st Class" or "luxury community". Its not wha
         12                   Oct 25, 2009 9:17 PM       Options 2-4 are acceptable, EXCEPT, that each comes with the requir
         13                   Oct 26, 2009 7:57 PM       My opinion will fluxuate with the economy. I want a more conservativ
         14                   Oct 27, 2009 5:06 AM       As the economic times better, I may select a different answer.
         15                   Oct 28, 2009 2:45 PM       no snobs
         16                   Oct 31, 2009 4:18 PM       You only describe assessments. What is not mentioned is equitable bi
         17                  Oct 31, 2009 10:30 PM       take care of the empoyees that deserve it but becareful not to turn it
         18                    Nov 2, 2009 4:59 PM       In recession, board should hold the line on spending like the people h
         19                   Nov 15, 2009 2:00 AM       For the moment...we should manage as cheaply as possible and build
         20                   Nov 29, 2009 3:44 AM       Although my instinct is to go with the second suggestion, which is con
         21                   Nov 29, 2009 7:24 PM       I belive that a balance of these two more closely reflects what the ma
         22                   Dec 8, 2009 10:32 PM       We can maybe think about creating a 1st class community when econ
         23                   Dec 9, 2009 11:50 PM       Clarify the breakout of authority to the community.
         24                   Dec 20, 2009 7:30 PM       Mostly a #2 with a little bit of #3 (equipment and common areas)
         25                   Dec 27, 2009 1:50 AM       Also include the future development of common infrastructure and rec
         26                   Dec 29, 2009 2:07 AM       I checked both boxes because I think the answer is somehere in betw
         27                   Dec 29, 2009 5:12 AM       4-1Also include the future development of common infrastructure and
         28                   Dec 29, 2009 5:52 PM       This is directly related to economic evironment. This could change fro
                          Which of the following statements most closely describe your view
                          of what the island's approach to financial management should be.


                                                  90.0%
                                                  80.0%
                                                  70.0%
                                                  60.0%
                                                  50.0%
                                                  40.0%
                                                  30.0%
                                                  20.0%
                                                  10.0%
                                                   0.0%
        Manage as cheaplywaypossibe, notway1st class community with strong reserves, pay increases, quality andand
             in a way that as that luxury building anticipates and prevents problems, creates services, motivates
               Manage a fiscally balanced a that reserves highly developed infrastructure, plentiful reserves equipment,
    Manage Manage inin a creates a createscommunity with a and deferring maintenance, ample reserves,infrastructure
               impecablymaintained common infrastructure possible regardless the extentmotivated professional staff
                    well maintained commonareas and as and andand a highly the and necessary professional
                          improvments, etc. areas and equipment a highly trained consequences
     services, rewards employees and builds for as long facilitiesservices only toof trained and attentiveto keep up with
                                                          staff
                                         demands of island growth and to properly mainta




 oyee raises. financial management should perform necessary island maintenance, improvements within budget and give employee raises o
 he "motivates and rewards employees" hadn't been included in the statement.


 st, is a Summer place to relax. For most of us it isn't a second place to spend a fortune on as if we have deep pockets such as Bill Gates. It
on with that of peopel on teh mainland is ludicrous. You have to count the fiscal value of all their "perks".
ER IN ANY NATIONAL SURVEY. bOTTOM LINE IS THE COMMUNITY HAS A RESPONSIBLITY TO DELIVER THE SERVICES AT THE LOWEST C
 s and hire island employees who know how to apply sound fiscal techniques (in other words "sharpen their pencils"), Hat Island in not a lux
employees" That phrase has nothing to do with the communities financial statement.

y community". Its not what the island is. And it would certainly eliminate a lot of families
each comes with the requirement to build reserves, infrastructures, services, etc. on the financial backs of property owners alone. It is time
  I want a more conservative approach now but after the economy recovers, I would want the 3rd option.
 a different answer.

t mentioned is equitable billing of services. Again the marina rates are completely inadequate for the amount of money spent on it.
but becareful not to turn it into a goverment type of job that pays on how long instead of what they do everday. keep it a layed back place
 spending like the people have had to do and spend only what's necessary for safety and security. Maintain levels of pay for employees. In t
eaply as possible and build reserves. Maintenance is always a required part of a budget and a fiscally balanced operation.
nd suggestion, which is conservative, yet progressive, I question the portion: "motivates and rewards employees"? I think in keeping with th
losely reflects what the majority of owners would strive for.
lass community when economic conditions improve.

ent and common areas)
mmon infrastructure and recreational amenities.
 nswer is somehere in between these two choices.
 common infrastructure and recreational amenities.
ment. This could change from year to year
and give employee raises or bonuses when cash flow through assessments supports.




ockets such as Bill Gates. It is a SUMMER place for our kids and grandkids to be able to sit on the beach and fish and play in the sand. Som

 RVICES AT THE LOWEST COST TO THE HOME OWNERS POSSIBLE. WE HAVE ALL TAKEN BIG HITS THIS LAST YEAR AND MANY LOOK PER
cils"), Hat Island in not a luxury resort nor a residential neighborhood, but rather a recreational haven.




rty owners alone. It is time we bring in outside revenues! Continuing the way we have is akin to owning a store but only allowing family m




money spent on it.
 keep it a layed back place that familys can affort, not belview type like the POE was trying to build
s of pay for employees. In these challenging times, they are lucky to be employed.

"? I think in keeping with the nature of the rest of that statement it would better state something to the effect, "experienced and profession
h and play in the sand. Some folks are trying to make this the Puget Sound Paradise as if we were in the Florida Keys somewhere. Before lo

YEAR AND MANY LOOK PERMANENT. HIC HAS TO CUT COSTS PUT PROGRAMS ON HOLD OR YOU WILL HAVE ALOT MORE FORECLOSURE




e but only allowing family members and employees to shop there. We are slowly going broke.




"experienced and professional staff will receive annual merit pay increases based on performance and current economic trends." The first st
Keys somewhere. Before long the scenario will come up as it did years ago about building a bridge from the mainland to the Island. That w

ALOT MORE FORECLOSURES




conomic trends." The first statement says to defer pay increases for as long as possible. The third statement simply describes staff as "highl
inland to the Island. That would pretty much destroy the entire Island.




ply describes staff as "highly trained and motivated professional," and the fourth as "highly trained and attentive professional staff." I think
e professional staff." I think this particular point should either be separate or consistent between the four. Since the second choice is likely to
the second choice is likely to be the most popular, I think it it should not include how staff will be "motivated and rewarded", as it does not
d rewarded", as it does not define what's expected, how we plan to do this, or when, why and how.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

The majority of the community in our last survey indicated a preference for
user fees over assessments to fund the costs of certain island services such as
                                                    Response        Response
Answer Options
                                                      Percent         Count
Assessments should be high enough that we don't               7.6%               13
User fees, with the exception of Hat Express, should          52.3%              90
User fees, including those for Hat Express, should be         26.7%              46
User fees for individual services should be set high          7.6%               13
User fees should be set high enough to cover the costs        7.0%               12
Other (please specify)                                                           37
                                                 answered question                    172
                                                   skipped question                    69

                                                         Other
Number        Response Date                              (please
                                                         specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 9:59 PM        Everyone benefits (at least indirectly) from the services, even if they d
          2                 Oct 20, 2009 10:07 PM        User fees, with the exception of the Hat Express, should be set high e
          3                 Oct 20, 2009 11:17 PM        I feel everyone that owns property should have to pay assessments to
          4                  Oct 21, 2009 3:59 PM        To clarify - assessed funds means regular assessments. We still shou
          5                  Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM        Exactly. If you use it you pay for it. I don't use the golf course, I don'
          6                  Oct 21, 2009 4:15 PM        If the ferry is subsidized I think the marina should be too.
          7                  Oct 23, 2009 9:23 PM        User fees should be set at a minimal rate for all individual services, in
          8                 Oct 24, 2009 12:30 AM        Assessments should be high enough to keep user fees low so people
          9                  Oct 24, 2009 9:55 PM        User fees should be high enough to cover the majority of expenses fo
         10                  Oct 25, 2009 9:17 PM        Additional revenues from the public (more seats filled on the ferry, go
         11                 Oct 25, 2009 11:35 PM        These must reflect actul costs with no added expenses in other words
         12                  Oct 27, 2009 1:09 AM        I do not agree with any of the above. There should be a combination
         13                  Oct 27, 2009 3:59 AM        I'm torn on this one. I go between the one I chose and the bottom o
         14                  Oct 27, 2009 9:24 PM        I think this should be tracked and then the information about the serv
         15                  Oct 28, 2009 2:45 PM        There neds to be a balance, like 50/50 or 60/40 if user fees are to hig
         16                  Oct 28, 2009 6:28 PM        Until we figure a way to reduce the number of lots that can be owned
         17                  Oct 31, 2009 3:13 AM        The users fee should not pay for the purchase of the Hat Express or o
         18                  Oct 31, 2009 4:18 PM        This is not a totally cut and dry question. First and foremost, the Hat
         19                  Oct 31, 2009 7:05 PM        there should be user fees and subsidies for both the golfcourse and th
         20                  Oct 31, 2009 9:54 PM        I don't agree with user fees
         21                 Oct 31, 2009 10:30 PM        what a balance act, afordable for familys to use without going in the h
         22                  Nov 1, 2009 10:48 PM        It's appropriate to subsidize the Hat Express as its use benefits everyo
         23                 Nov 17, 2009 12:04 AM        user fees should be high enough to cover 80% of individual services i
         24                  Nov 17, 2009 1:24 AM        The Hat Express is a community asset that all of us need as either sta
         25                  Nov 20, 2009 5:04 PM        like an hov lane or a toll bridge, use what you pay for. fair, logical and
         26                  Nov 29, 2009 3:44 AM        One caveat to my reply: I'd be more sure of my answer if I knew the
         27                  Nov 29, 2009 3:53 AM        User fees should cover 75% of golf course and marina which would in
         28                  Nov 29, 2009 7:24 PM        The assement fees curently include funds for each of the additional fe
         29                   Dec 7, 2009 5:17 PM        I think there should be a combination of user fees and assessment su
         30                  Dec 13, 2009 6:11 PM        Just as some HIC members never use the marina and bitch about the
31   Dec 20, 2009 7:30 PM   Disagree with all of these. The Marina and Golf course add to the val
32   Dec 20, 2009 7:57 PM   I believe golf andmarina should be subsidized by the community and
33   Dec 21, 2009 3:29 PM   Assessments should cover part of the costs of the services but a smal
34   Dec 27, 2009 1:50 AM   I support a balance between statement one (no fees) and statement
35   Dec 28, 2009 7:51 AM   comparmise between first and second
36   Dec 29, 2009 5:12 AM        I
                            4-2	 support a balance between statement one (no fees) and statem
37   Dec 29, 2009 5:52 PM   User fees should be set appropriately except for the ferry. I know the
                                 The majority of the community in our last survey indicated a
                                                      preference for use


                                          60.0%
                                          50.0%
                                          40.0%
                                          30.0%
                                          20.0%
                                          10.0%
                                           0.0%
                     User should be high enough that setExpress, should be set the feesto coverindividualof enough to
                        User fees, includingindividual Hat Express, should cover high enough on the cost
                              User User for shouldof Hat high enough set high enough of for
                                    fees exception be we don't need to charge high enough
             Assessments fees, with thefeesthose for services should be to be set user costs for the service plus the
                          services to pay forsuch as plus some extra and on subsidies from assessedHat
                                       things service to our and not to offset the 50% assessed
                                            both add golf and marina on subsidies from reserves
                                               themselves and not rely
                  individual services to pay for themselves reserves relycontribute to oursubsidy offundsExpress
                                                          funds




  the services, even if they do not use them. User fees should cover the majority of the costs (perhaps 75%), but they should be kept reaso
 press, should be set high enough for individual services to pay 70% of their actual costs. The additional fee should come from assessed fun
 have to pay assessments to keep the community updated. To me why should I pay for the Marina and not someone who comes on the ferry
assessments. We still should do special assessments to fund major capital improvements.
  use the golf course, I don't use the Marina, I don't use the Club House. Same type of example would be that I don't drive my neighbors new
  should be too.
or all individual services, including hat express, golf, and the marina, to be partially subsudized by property assessmsnts. (community assess
  p user fees low so people can afford to use the Marina, golf and Hat express.
  he majority of expenses for themselves (except Hat Express) but not so high as to make them inaccessible to some of our owners
 seats filled on the ferry, golf outings, moorage, etc.) means better infrastructures and greater revenue.
ed expenses in other words the work on the marina upkeep that is paid for by the special assessments should in no way be under the marin
 re should be a combination of assessments AND user fees for a lot of services, esp. ferry, golf, marina.
e I chose and the bottom one.
  information about the services supporting themselves be presented yearly for review by the membership.
60/40 if user fees are to high no one will use that item and it will go into the tank
 r of lots that can be owned by any individual or group of people to a max of say 6 or 8 lots, assessments should be raised to cover costs. An
 ase of the Hat Express or other things, but they should cover the expenses of the use of and maintenence of them.
 irst and foremost, the Hat Express provides and can provide access to the island for all property owners and is right of ownership and shoul
   both the golfcourse and the marina

o use without going in the hole. all things need to be near self supporting equal for full timers and weekenders to share costs
 s as its use benefits everyone.
80% of individual services including capital improvements
  all of us need as either standard transportation or an "as needed" alternative. We cannot do without the boat. We can sacrifice other thiin
you pay for. fair, logical and hard to argue
of my answer if I knew the cost difference of each choice. For example, I may have chosen the last block if I knew it would be in my budge
 and marina which would include capital expenditures and the rest would be paid by assessments.
 or each of the additional feed services. If this balance needs to be increased to reflect an attribute grade leval then it needs to be increased
 er fees and assessment subsidies. Even if an owner doesn't use the golf or marina, their property values are enhanced by having such serv
marina and bitch about the assesments, I never use the ferry.
 Golf course add to the value of everyone's propoerty. In most places that I know of, assessments particially support these services. If use
 ed by the community and user fees kept low enough to let everyone enjoy - not just the Rich!
  of the services but a small user fee should be implemented as well. Everyone should have to pay for the upkeep of the island but people w
e (no fees) and statement two (no assessments). The amenities of the island's recreational/residential character are an asset to and enhan

                                                          The
nt one (no fees) and statement two (no assessments). 	 amenities of the island’s recreational/residential character are an asset and enha
pt for the ferry. I know the ferry doesn't pay for itself but it is a requirement that we provide that service and if ferry fees go up that would
t they should be kept reasonable so that people are attracted to take advantage of them.
uld come from assessed funds.(Having a marina and golf course benefit everyone on the Island by enhancing the quality of life, making the
one who comes on the ferry when you go to sell your property or home it is to the benifet

don't drive my neighbors new car because I don't pay for it, therefore I don't use it. I don't use it so I don't pay for it.

ssmsnts. (community assessment for all ammenities).

ome of our owners

 no way be under the marina upkeep. There must be good records kept.




 be raised to cover costs. An owner who owns mass number of lots is keeping potential new owners who could be contributing to riding the

 ght of ownership and should be subsidized. All the money spent on the marina to provide moorage is not a right and should be recouped, g


o share costs


 We can sacrifice other thiings but not the boat--Hello . . . we live on an Island!

ew it would be in my budget to do so and would add to our reserves. Since I'm basing my opinion on strictly statements, I must go with a m

hen it needs to be increased, and that need may require the two sources together.
hanced by having such services available. They would I'm sure include those amenities on any description of their property if they decided
pport these services. If user fees had to fully fund marina and golf, no could afford to use them!

p of the island but people who use the services more than others will pay for any shortfalls in cost
r are an asset to and enhance the value of all property. Thus, there should be an assessment to all property owners for the development an

acter are an asset and enhance the value of all property. Thus, there should be an assessment to all property owners for the development a
 ferry fees go up that would put the ferry service in a critical position. There is not requirement to provide slips in the marina for an undefin
e quality of life, making the Island accessible and beautifying it. Everyone should contribute towards the general enhanced value of the Islan




be contributing to riding the ferry, playing golf etc.

t and should be recouped, generally speaking. Water service also should, generally, pay for itself, but on the other hand we can't expect the




atements, I must go with a more conservative choice.


eir property if they decided to sell.
ners for the development and maintencance of all amenities. This should include not only the ferry but also the golf course, marina, tennis

wners for the development and maintenance of all amenities. This should include not only the ferry but also the golf course, marina, tennis
n the marina for an undefined amount of boats or making the golf course first class.
enhanced value of the Island.




er hand we can't expect the current users to have to pay for all the infrastructure that was installed improperly over the years or capacity re
golf course, marina, tennis court, common beaches, picnic shelters, play areas, parking lots, roads etc. User fees are appropriate, but not t

                                                                                                        	
                                                                                                        User
golf course, marina, tennis court, common beaches, picnic shelters, play areas, parking lots, roads etc.	 fees are appropriate, but not to
over the years or capacity requirement required to upgrade the system for more users or to meet various laws.
es are appropriate, but not to the exclusion of assessment support as well. No property owner should be exempt from helping to financially

s are appropriate, but not to the exclusion of assessment support as well. No property owner should be exempt from helping to financially s
t from helping to financially support amenities that protect and enhance the value and saleability of their property simply because of the ch

from helping to financially support amenities that protect and enhance the value and saleability of their property simply because they choos
ty simply because of the choice not to use the available ammenity. In this regard, the golf course and marina should certainly have assessm

y simply because they choose not to use the available amenity. In this regard, the golf course and marina should certainly have assessmen
hould certainly have assessment support and not be totally fee reliant. They are the primary amenities that boost the value and saleability o

d certainly have assessment support and not be totally fee reliant. They are the primary amenities that boost the value and saleability of al
st the value and saleability of all property not just the property of those who use th

he value and saleability of all property not just the property of those who use th
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Currently the budget is established to subsidize approximately 38% of the
operating costs of the ferry. (When annual capital expenses are factored in
                                                    Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                      Percent        Count
I agree that a subsidy equal to about 38% of operating        66.1%              123
I believe the island should subsidize a higher                19.4%              36
I believe the island should subsidize the entire ferry        1.1%                2
I don't believe the island should subsidize any of the        14.5%              27
Other (please specify)                                                           25
                                                 answered question                     186
                                                   skipped question                     55

                                                         Other
Number        Response Date                              (please
                                                         specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 10:09 PM       More frequent ferry runs will mean greater use, which means less stra
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 4:14 PM       Rent the ferry out suach as it was proposed before. Trips to Langley,
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 5:55 PM       iT COST MY WIFE AND I (DOG) $34 TO COME TO THE ISLAND FOR
          4                   Oct 22, 2009 7:19 PM       I would like to see a decrease in child prices so that families are more
          5                   Oct 23, 2009 4:52 PM       These absurd questions are an insult.
          6                  Oct 25, 2009 10:43 PM       I think these options are not sufficient. The county has repeatedly ind
          7                  Oct 25, 2009 11:40 PM       Maybe just a smaller percentage like 25 percent not 38percent.
          8                   Oct 27, 2009 4:04 AM       Even possibly add weekly runs to other islands -- Langley, Camano, e
          9                   Oct 27, 2009 5:11 AM       I also feel that the island should actively persue using the ferry for oth
         10                   Oct 27, 2009 9:29 PM       I think the island should subsidize about 25% of the ferry operating c
         11                   Oct 28, 2009 2:50 PM       is it broken?? if not dont fix it
         12                   Oct 31, 2009 4:33 PM       I think you should have also asked the question in regards to this que
         13                   Oct 31, 2009 9:02 PM       I would like to see the Sunday morning run returned to the winter sch
         14                  Nov 15, 2009 2:06 AM        my family of six comes to visit and it is costing them $100 RT...to mu
         15                  Nov 17, 2009 1:42 AM        Runs should be "reasonably" scheduled to best meet the cost of servi
         16                  Nov 25, 2009 4:09 AM        Setting this balance of ticket price and subsidy is an art and best suite
         17                  Nov 29, 2009 7:31 AM        I think the same thing applies as in one of the other comments I mad
         18                   Dec 7, 2009 11:42 PM       the currently posted 2010 ferry schedule seems very fair & convient.
         19                   Dec 13, 2009 6:18 PM       If you use the ferry you should pay more for it. The HIC should cover
         20                   Dec 20, 2009 7:33 PM       A strong NO to #4. Ferry fees should not be fully non-subsidized
         21                   Dec 20, 2009 7:58 PM       The ferry service at $8.00 makes a trip for a family round trip hard fo
         22                   Dec 27, 2009 1:57 AM       The level of subsidy should be reviewed each budget cycle. The ferry
         23                   Dec 29, 2009 2:15 AM       The current ticket prices are appropriate. Whether that is 38 or 50 pe
         24                   Dec 29, 2009 5:20 AM            The
                                                         5-1	 level of subsidy should be reviewed each budget cycle. The fe
         25                   Dec 29, 2009 6:12 PM       We are obligated to provide ferry service. This can not go away. We
                                Currently the budget is established to subsidize approximately
                                38% of the operating costs of the ferry. (When annual capital
                               expenses are factored in the subsidy comes closer to 50%). The
                                          rest must be made up in ticket prices. The


                                                    70.0%
                                                    60.0%
                                                    50.0%
                                                    40.0%
                                                    30.0%
                                                    20.0%
                                                    10.0%
                                                     0.0%
             I believe the island equal island should of entire ferry of the ferry homeowners who want provide can
                I that don't believeshould subsidize higher percentage, is about right and the current or this could result
                      I a the island the subsidize a subsidize any cost so either lower ticket prices service and
          I agreebelieve subsidy shouldto about 38%the operating costs and thatcost and understand thatto use itmorehavein
                                           prices are appropriateand frequent circumstances
                                                            cheap under those service
                                                                    runs
                                    ticket either significantly higher ticket prices or greatly reduced services




 use, which means less strain on the marina.
d before. Trips to Langley, Wedding Receptions, Party's, etc. Advertise in local papers. Only problem is scheduling between Hat Island runs.
OME TO THE ISLAND FOR THE WEEKEND. THAT IS GETTING VERY EXPENSIVE. IT IS BECOMING ONE OF THE REASONS FOR NOT STAYIN
 s so that families are more able to afford coming over. Right now it costs us near to $75 to bring our children and a friend roundtrip.

  county has repeatedly indicated that it could provide ferry service at significant savings to the island. Te Island has been unwilling to consi
 rcent not 38percent.
 nds -- Langley, Camano, etc. for an added benefit.
ersue using the ferry for other activities. Parties, sunset cruises etc, cal generate revenue
5% of the ferry operating costs.

 stion in regards to this question whether the person answering the question uses the marina with their own boat. Also, while it would be nic
n returned to the winter schedule. Currently, if we can't make the Saturday morning run, we don't get to go over at all. Sometime we have t
 ting them $100 RT...to much!!!
 best meet the cost of service. In the winter, too few people ride the Wednesday ferry. We cannot support a tiny ridership that does noteve
sidy is an art and best suited to decision by Board and Chuck. If we set tickets much higher, will decrease ridership and increase marina use
 the other comments I made. If you want a ferry more often or don't want to pay the ticket price, then you shouldn't have bought a house
eems very fair & convient. Additional runs would most likely have fewer riders with higher fees or higher subsidy
or it. The HIC should cover only up to a max of 25% to have a ferry. If ridership goes down, then we sell th big boat and get a smaller, chea
be fully non-subsidized
 a family round trip hard for some. Let's let everyone enjoy the island. Not just the rich
 ch budget cycle. The ferry should be subsidized, as should all amenities. Boat owners may seldom use the ferry. None the less, it is impor
Whether that is 38 or 50 percent does not matter
   each budget cycle. The ferry should be subsidized, as should all amenities. Boat owners may seldom use the ferry. None the less, it is im
 This can not go away. We also need to ensure that that service is not limited any more than it is. The Sunday morning run should not hav
 g between Hat Island runs.
REASONS FOR NOT STAYING ANYMORE. tAXES ALMOST $4k, HIC $1.4k+ $500 PER YEAR + ALMOST 410k OF SPECIAL ASSEMENTS INCLU
nd a friend roundtrip.

has been unwilling to consider this idea for reasons unknown to me, although I suspect it relates to controlling access to the island.




t. Also, while it would be nice to have more runs, I think that decision has to be made in part of the costs of the runs. I fully agree with incr
 at all. Sometime we have to work Saturday but not Sunday. If there was a Sunday morning run we could come over for the day.

 y ridership that does noteven begin to cover the cost of crew or fuel. Ten people riding is not fiscally reasonable. Could it run every other
 hip and increase marina use without generating more ticket revenue. I believe the State should subsidize the ferry also (or the County)
uldn't have bought a house on Hat. These things are very clear and obvious when you are looking into coming to Hat to buy. None of the a

boat and get a smaller, cheaper to maintain and operate boat.


y. None the less, it is important to the value of all island property. The same retionale suggests that all amenities (i.e. golf course, marina,

erry. None the less, it is important to the value of all island property. The same rationale suggests that all amenities (i.e. – golf course, ma
morning run should not have been eliminated because week-end runs should be totally available. Sunday may be the only time to get to th
SPECIAL ASSEMENTS INCLUDING DIV H ROAD.


access to the island.




 runs. I fully agree with increase subsidized for the ferry, but not to add runs for only a couple of people.
 over for the day.

le. Could it run every other Wednesday? Or could it be eliminated in the winter and run on Fridays instead?
rry also (or the County)
o Hat to buy. None of the answers above really satisfy my feeling but I would agree a subsidy is ok and the ticket prices should be adjusted




es (i.e. golf course, marina, tennis court, roads etc should not be only supported by fee for use, but should have some level of support thro

 nities (i.e. – golf course, marina, tennis courts, roads etc) should not be only supported by fee for use, but should have some level of suppo
be the only time to get to the island to check property. I don't think the whole community should subsidize the Wednesday run just for groc
et prices should be adjusted annually. If they don't want to pay the ticket price, try owning their own boat.




e some level of support through the assessment of all owners.

ld have some level of support through the assessment of all owners.
Wednesday run just for grocery shopping for the few permanant residences. They can go on the week-end.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

The question of frequency of ferry runs comes up every year. There are those
who would like to see a daily ferry service and those who feel that would
                                                     Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                      Percent         Count
I like the current schedule which provides frequent,             73.7%              137
I would like to see daily service to the island (i.e.            7.5%               14
I would like to see daily service part of the year - i.e.        17.2%              32
I would like to see us reduce service to keep more               3.2%                6
Other (please specify)                                                              30
                                                      answered question                   186
                                                        skipped question                   55

                                                            Other
Number         Response Date                                (please
                                                            specify)
           1                     Oct 21, 2009 4:14 PM       Increase ticket prices and rent the ferry out.
           2                     Oct 22, 2009 5:14 PM       Providing daily ferry service (at any time of the year) would have sign
           3                     Oct 22, 2009 7:19 PM       I would possibly be in support of daily or more runs during summer o
           4                     Oct 23, 2009 4:52 PM       Please don't insult the property owners with the absurd questions.
           5                     Oct 25, 2009 9:48 PM       I would only like to add a sunday morning run in the winter. The rem
           6                    Oct 25, 2009 10:43 PM       Again, your stated consequences unfarly influence the choices. If the
           7                     Oct 26, 2009 9:41 PM       EXCEPTION: I would like an earlier Friday departure... year round som
           8                     Oct 27, 2009 4:04 AM       If we had more full time residents, then there would be more building
           9                     Oct 28, 2009 2:50 PM       full timers can use their boat
          10                     Oct 31, 2009 6:48 AM       If the ferry can't make a daily run, it would be nice to have an on-call
          11                     Oct 31, 2009 4:33 PM       It is not really fair to ask this question without any estimate of cost. S
          12                    Oct 31, 2009 10:48 PM       people need to plan their use of ferry,just like other things in life that
          13                     Nov 1, 2009 10:52 PM       The current schedule could be enhanced like running the enhanced sc
          14                      Nov 2, 2009 5:07 PM       Wish the Sunday am run could return
          15                    Nov 15, 2009 2:06 AM        We could get rid of our boat if there was daily service.
          16                    Nov 17, 2009 1:42 AM        See above -- Reduce or eliminate Wednesday run in winter months an
          17                     Nov 20, 2009 5:06 PM       want access to the island, buy slip space and personal boat
          18                     Nov 21, 2009 3:29 PM       I would like the Sunday morning run available in winter as a choice of
          19                    Nov 25, 2009 3:18 AM        I would like to see a return of providing Saturday evening and Sunday
          20                    Nov 29, 2009 3:41 AM        WE NEED TO STOP WEDSDAY RUNS. THEY ADD TO MUCH TO THE C
          21                      Dec 3, 2009 4:45 AM       Maybe not daily in the summer but some increase in service would be
          22                     Dec 9, 2009 12:09 AM       Without or reduced island subsidies
          23                     Dec 10, 2009 3:58 PM       I would like to see more runs, Friday thru Monday am, throughout the
          24                     Dec 13, 2009 6:18 PM       Get a smaller, CHEAPER overall boat and operate it more often and re
          25                     Dec 18, 2009 6:24 AM       Would like to have more options for ferry runs during the off season e
          26                     Dec 20, 2009 7:58 PM       No Daily Ferry
          27                     Dec 27, 2009 1:57 AM       I have no problem with owners having daily access. The ferry schedu
          28                     Dec 29, 2009 2:15 AM       I would be interested in considering an additional run on Mondays an
          29                     Dec 29, 2009 5:20 AM       2 I have no problem with owners having daily access. The ferry sch
          30                     Dec 29, 2009 6:12 PM       Again this question is written to quantify the boards attitude. "and th
          31                                 30-Dec-09      I woud like high season schedule year round, and make some trips to
                           The question of frequency of ferry runs comes up every year. There
                                                      are those wh
                                         80.0%
                                         70.0%
                                         60.0%
                                         50.0%
                                         40.0%
                                         30.0%
                                         20.0%
                                         10.0%
                                          0.0%
              I wouldcurrent schedule which service island (i.e. adding i.e. Mayon Monday, island people off and
                         would like to see daily to I would like to but notserviceservice to September to increase accessibility just
                                                    the frequent, year daily through keep more
           I like the I like to see daily serviceprovidespart of thesee us- reduce access to the Tuesday, Thursday the island
                      during the summer months. I realize the increased I realize the added to be made have increased ticket
            Friday morning which is not currently provided) year round. service would have costs would up by to be
                                                                prices or or increased subsid
                                           made up through ticket pricesincreased subsidies



  the year) would have significant negative effects on infrastructure, quality of life, environment, NO daily ferry service!
more runs during summer only depending on how much it cost.
 h the absurd questions.
 run in the winter. The remainder of the schedule is sufficient.
 fluence the choices. If the county provided ferry service, cost increases might not be required.
 departure... year round somewhere between 1-3pm / Especially earlier in the Winter to avoid nighttime travels to the cabin. (We usually wa
 ere would be more building going on. More building = higher property values for all of us. If this were considered, we would most likely m

  be nice to have an on-call person to make a special trip in a smaller boat. I had to pay a guy $100 to take me to the island this summer be
 out any estimate of cost. Since I was on the board when the Wednesday ferry was added and have supported the concept of it all of the ye
 ike other things in life that costs, other wise big Gov will spend the iskand broke just a gov is doing in other/most things that people thing is
ke running the enhanced schedule all year. No need for daily service however.


 ay run in winter months and move it to Friday.
nd personal boat
 ble in winter as a choice of day trip when winter weather may be bad Sat. but good Sunday.
turday evening and Sunday morning trips to the island during winter months
 Y ADD TO MUCH TO THE COSTS FOR TOO FEW PEOPLE. WED PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO SHARE THE COSTS OF A PRIVATE RUN THEMSE
ncrease in service would be nice.

Monday am, throughout the year, but especially during the entire summer.
perate it more often and reduce charter rates. Why did we need such a huge expensive boat anyway?
uns during the off season especially on Sunday

y access. The ferry schedule should be related to financial inability not to a philosophy or policy of restricting access. If ridership supports a
ditional run on Mondays and or Thursdays during the summer.
 daily access. The ferry schedule should be related to financial viability not to a philosophy or policy of restricting access. If ridership suppo
 e boards attitude. "and those who feel that would change the character of the island by encouraging more full time residents on the island
nd, and make some trips to Langely
o the cabin. (We usually walk).
ed, we would most likely move to the island full time and build an amazing home there. With a small child in school this is not possible for

 o the island this summer because I couldn't make the ferry. $100 Seemed pretty steep!
he concept of it all of the years since, but only used it one or two times, I think my support is justifiable. I can somewhat understand having
st things that people thing is free. But we will pay hard later




OF A PRIVATE RUN THEMSELVES. OR GET THERE OWN BOAT RIDES. THEY CAN RIDE ON WEEKENDS. WE SHOULD NOT SUBSIDISE PEOP




cess. If ridership supports an increase in run schedule and makes financial sense I would support it either year around or seasonally. Such

g access. If ridership supports an increase in run schedule and makes financial sense, I would support it either year around or seasonally.
time residents on the island". I expect my board to be un-biased. This seems to be impossible to do. The ferry was a commitment made l
hool this is not possible for us at this time.


omewhat understand having daily runs in the summer, but before I did that, I would consider maybe changing the Wednesday run to both T




OULD NOT SUBSIDISE PEOPLE TO MAKE A RETIREMENT COMMUNITY SUPPORTED BY OTHERS.




around or seasonally. Such should not be done if it requires more subsidy support.

year around or seasonally. Such should not be done if it requires more subsidy support.
y was a commitment made long ago when this island was established. It has to be supported before anything else. The water system is se
he Wednesday run to both Tuesday and Thursday runs. Also, another benefit would be to have a layover on the island during one of the run




se. The water system is second. Those two things are more important than golfing and bringing in more boats. No one expects ridership
island during one of the runs during the week so individuals could ride the ferry and have 1 hour to check their homes and then ride back.




. No one expects ridership to be immediate. It will come in time if we run a fully supported system.
homes and then ride back. For example the ferry leaves Everett at 8:00am and rather than leaving the island at 9:00am it leaves at 10:00a
9:00am it leaves at 10:00am. I think this would be very helpful to people that want to check houses in the winter or take over food or othe
er or take over food or other items in preparation for the weekend or someother reason.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

The number of cars in the marina parking area is also a constant issue. This
year we had to scap our old yellow bus which was used (among other things)
                                                    Response       Response
Answer Options
                                                     Percent         Count
If it is cost effective, I think this a good way to            64.7%              121
I don't think we should provide transportation to              35.3%              66
Other (please specify)                                                            32
                                                      answered question                 187
                                                        skipped question                 54

                                                           Other
Number        Response Date                                (please
                                                           specify)
          1                   Oct 20, 2009 10:58 PM        What benefit does this have for property owners that don't take the fe
          2                   Oct 20, 2009 11:43 PM        Could charge a minimal amount for the double trip each weekend
          3                    Oct 21, 2009 4:14 PM        If you use it you pay for the ride. If you don't use it you don't pay for
          4                    Oct 21, 2009 5:50 PM        Should be a small fee to offset costs. Sell TAXI tickets.
          5                    Oct 21, 2009 5:55 PM        HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF. 15 YRS AGO WE DID THIS AND HAD JUN
          6                    Oct 22, 2009 5:54 AM        I think that a bus/van service is a perk the island needs to invest in fo
          7                   Oct 22, 2009 10:22 AM        But, do this later, when we are more fiscally sound.
          8                    Oct 24, 2009 7:59 PM        I'm not sure which picture we like best -- a parking lot of old junky ca
          9                    Oct 25, 2009 3:25 PM        I never rode the bus, so I don't know if there was a charge for the se
         10                    Oct 25, 2009 9:48 PM        Vehicles that are not used for more than 30 days should be prohibited
         11                    Oct 26, 2009 9:41 PM        *** Very much so!! *** We would like a Van.
         12                    Oct 27, 2009 5:11 AM        I would love to keep my truck at my property during the winter month
         13                    Oct 27, 2009 5:27 AM        In my self intertest, the van would need to be able to go up and down
         14                    Oct 27, 2009 7:03 PM        If transportation to a home is provided, then I would like to see trans
         15                    Oct 28, 2009 2:50 PM        ban all cars and have a community fleet
         16                    Oct 31, 2009 3:19 AM        What is provided for people who have road access should also be pro
         17                    Oct 31, 2009 4:33 PM        This is the one hot button I have. Providing parking in the marina is n
         18                    Oct 31, 2009 9:02 PM        Maybe charge .50 or $1 per person?
         19                   Oct 31, 2009 10:48 PM        like anything there are costs, but whether or not car on island its grea
         20                    Nov 14, 2009 1:20 AM        Island could have three "Courtesy Cars" for 15 minute loaner periods
         21                   Nov 17, 2009 12:14 AM        we should limit marina to 75 cars by charging for parking spaces and
         22                    Nov 17, 2009 1:42 AM        Some owners have NO vehicle on the island. The cost of getting a ve
         23                    Nov 29, 2009 3:41 AM        WATER ACCESS ONLY LOTS DON'T NEED THERE OWN CAR WITH A B
         24                    Nov 29, 2009 7:31 AM        99% of the time a person could get a ride to their property. Getting a
         25                    Dec 1, 2009 10:51 PM        If this service is provided, it should have it's own user fee.
         26                    Dec 7, 2009 11:42 PM        with the marina expansion project we will lose a large parking area. L
         27                     Dec 9, 2009 5:42 PM        It's also evidence of a commitment to a "green" community.
         28                    Dec 10, 2009 3:58 PM        Paid for on a user-fee basis
         29                    Dec 13, 2009 6:18 PM        Vans are cheap now.For $2500 we can get a nice one and any of the
         30                    Dec 20, 2009 7:33 PM        How often is this service used by residents?
         31                    Dec 29, 2009 2:15 AM        I note there are many cars in the marina that havent been moved in a
         32                    Dec 29, 2009 6:12 PM        Just like most of the rest of the world. I believe public transportation
                              The number of cars in the marina parking area is also a constant


                                                                                      If it is cost effective, I think this
                                                                                      a good way to encourage people
                                                                                      to park their cars at home rather
                                                                                      than in the marina when they
                                                                                      are off the island.


                                                                                      I don't think we should provide
                                                                                      transportation to properties
                                                                                      from the ferry. It's an
                                                                                      unnecessary expense




 wners that don't take the ferry?
 uble trip each weekend
 n't use it you don't pay for it.

WE DID THIS AND HAD JUNK CARS ALL OVER THE ISLAND. BRING BACK THE BUS SERVICE
 island needs to invest in for convenience, but we should not expect it to keep people from parking in the marina unless there is a reliable w

   parking lot of old junky cars at the marina, or an island full of clunkers in front of each lot. At least now the mess is concentrated at the m
  re was a charge for the service.
 0 days should be prohibited from parking at the marina. If that means the island needs a small van to get one member of the arriving fami

rty during the winter months when I am not there.
 be able to go up and down steep hills and I would use it most of the time!!
en I would like to see transportation provided from marina to golf for those with water access only, that park their boats at marina and wa

  access should also be provided for people who don't.
g parking in the marina is not a right. Many of these cars may only move once per year, if that. I definitely think we should have a parking fe

 or not car on island its greal to hall groups or larger familys, ? reseverations and fees should be looked at
 r 15 minute loaner periods so the lot owner can get to their property where their vehicle is. (A common service at marinas in the southeast
  ng for parking spaces and then providing free transportion to lots with bus
 d. The cost of getting a vehicle over to Hat on the Elsie is so high that many will try to avoid the process or be unable to pay the fee. That
 THERE OWN CAR WITH A BUS
 to their property. Getting a ride back to the ferry is another subject but people are very willing to help each other so ask the person who ga
 s own user fee.
  ose a large parking area. Lets encourage golf carts. Many vehicles have not moved in the parking lot, if they don't move in a year, they sh
 reen" community.

  a nice one and any of the current employees can give people rides. GO FOR IT!

 hat havent been moved in a long, long time. Has the island considered a restriction on parking (three months?) without moving a car.
 elieve public transportation should be supported.
a unless there is a reliable way to count on use of the transportation.

ess is concentrated at the marina...

member of the arriving family up to their vehicle so they can return for their party and supplies, than that should be done. The Island vehic




eir boats at marina and walk up hill to golf. That would be a nice service.


 we should have a parking fee for those that want to park in the marina. I also think we should consider having island top parking at a reduc


at marinas in the southeast.)

unable to pay the fee. That makes it an extrodinay burden on some. Since we have to carry on and off everything, walking is out of the qu

er so ask the person who gave you a ride up the hill if they would be willing to come get you.

on't move in a year, they shouldn;'t be there. Have a tow truck to move to property.




 without moving a car.
 be done. The Island vehicle would not be there to tranport their cargo and full party.




sland top parking at a reduced price. We should also consider having a covered area where golf carts, four wheelers or other similar small v




hing, walking is out of the question. You cannot stay days and physically carry up the hill all needs. What was the demand for the bus? If
elers or other similar small vehicles could be parked and those owners could use that to get back and forth to their homes. This could also h




he demand for the bus? If we had some figures to look at a decision could be better made.
eir homes. This could also have a fee to help cover the cost of the construction.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

The board has considered creating a long term parking spot away from the
marina as a means to get long term parking out of the marina. This would
                                                   Response      Response
Answer Options
                                                    Percent         Count
I would take advantage of a long term parking area        18.3%              33
I would take advantage of a long term parking area        33.3%              60
I would not take advantage of a long term parking         31.1%              56
I don't park a car in the marina now when I am away       17.8%              32
Other (please specify)                                                       33
                                                answered question                 180
                                                  skipped question                 61

                                                      Other
Number        Response Date                           (please
                                                      specify)
          1                 Oct 20, 2009 10:58 PM     This wouldn't benefit the property owners that have their own boats.
          2                  Oct 21, 2009 4:14 PM     I have no vehicle, doesn't matter to me.
          3                  Oct 21, 2009 4:17 PM     Long tem parking should be on their own property.
          4                  Oct 21, 2009 4:20 PM     None of these answers apply to us. If we intend to be gone for a per
          5                  Oct 21, 2009 5:55 PM     rEALLY, PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON THE ISLAND NO PROBLEM THE MARI
          6                  Oct 21, 2009 6:39 PM     I would not use long term parking as I am never away from the island
          7                  Oct 22, 2009 5:14 PM     If we were gone for longer periods of time rather than being here alm
          8                  Oct 22, 2009 7:45 PM     A well secured, well maintained, sheltered area.
          9                 Oct 22, 2009 10:59 PM     What is considered long term?
         10                  Oct 23, 2009 3:13 AM     Find a way to remove vehicles that have not been used for a certain l
         11                  Oct 25, 2009 5:05 PM     The Island needs Boat Trailer Storage.
         12                  Oct 27, 2009 5:11 AM     My answer is somewhat unsure...where would this parking be? Natur
         13                  Oct 27, 2009 5:27 AM     WE come all year.. off and on..need car or some kind of transportatio
         14                  Oct 27, 2009 7:03 PM     we have water access only, so this does not apply.
         15                  Oct 27, 2009 8:24 PM     I think that owners should not be allowed to park their cars in the ma
         16                  Oct 27, 2009 9:29 PM     I would leave my vehicle in the long term parking area during the win
         17                  Oct 28, 2009 2:50 PM     these boots were made for walkin
         18                  Oct 28, 2009 6:34 PM     Where on the island would you park vehicles so they are not an eye s
         19                  Oct 29, 2009 8:41 PM     i think if someone is gone more thank two weeks, they must park at t
         20                  Oct 31, 2009 4:33 PM     I would charge a fee for the marina. That will reduce parking conside
         21                  Oct 31, 2009 9:02 PM     I think the previous solution (community owned van or bus) is a bette
         22                 Oct 31, 2009 10:48 PM     most want it quick and simple-fast to load and unload, not to spend a
         23                   Nov 2, 2009 5:07 PM     We visit year round frequently
         24                 Nov 17, 2009 1:42 AM      Goes back to the van/bus issue.
         25                 Nov 25, 2009 2:48 AM      Ever think about environmental impact of having cars on the island at
         26                 Nov 29, 2009 3:41 AM      PARK YOUR CAR IN YOUR OWN LOT IF YOU HAVE BUS TRANSPORTA
         27                 Nov 29, 2009 7:31 AM      If transportation were provided to your house year round, more peop
         28                   Dec 1, 2009 6:08 AM     I would rather have people park at their homes and be transported as
         29                   Dec 2, 2009 9:13 PM     If it became necessary, I would keep my car at the house and walk fr
         30                  Dec 9, 2009 12:09 AM     Doesn't apply to us at this time.
         31                  Dec 13, 2009 6:18 PM     Where?
32   Dec 29, 2009 2:15 AM I think this is a good idea, but I am on the island several times a mon
33   Dec 29, 2009 6:12 PM I think property owners should leave their cars at home and catch a r
                             The board has considered creating a long term parking spot away
                                   from the marina as a means to get long term parking


                                    35.0%
                                    30.0%
                                    25.0%
                                    20.0%
                                    15.0%
                                    10.0%
                                     5.0%
                                     0.0%
           I wouldI advantage take advantageparking area area away frommarinafrom only marina awaywould the islandto park
                    would not of a of a term ofIa parking away from area away but the
                                                   long term parking the the marina           am and from continue
       I would take take advantage long long term don't park a car in the marina now whenifI transportation to and
                                                     my car in the provided
                                            from the marina were marina when I am away




that have their own boats.


ntend to be gone for a period of time, we will park our car on our lot and ask a friend to give us a ride to the marina. When we return, we
D NO PROBLEM THE MARINA PARKING IS OURS. PART TIMERS YOU LOSE. GO TO PARKING LOT A. HOW ABOUT LETTING FOLKS HAVE A
never away from the island for more than a few weeks. Cars that remain in the marina for more than 4 weeks should take advantage of lon
rather than being here almost weekly.


ot been used for a certain length of time or are obviously not driveable.

 uld this parking be? Naturally, if it is at the top of the island, I should hope some kind of transportation would be available. This feeds into
 some kind of transportation to haul our stuff

 o park their cars in the marina if gone from the island for more than 2 weeks at one time
parking area during the winter months when I rarely come to the island.

es so they are not an eye sore to the adjacent property owner. Would you like to have a parking lot next to your house?
weeks, they must park at their lot. there is no rason they cannot get a ride when they leave.
will reduce parking considerably. We are planning on spending millions of dollars on our marina and it has and still looks like a damn junk ya
wned van or bus) is a better one.
and unload, not to spend a longer time


having cars on the island at all?
 U HAVE BUS TRANSPORTATION. DON'T NEED ANOTHER LOT. JUST PARK AT YOUR HOUSE.
use year round, more people might consider it. If you bring your own boat over then a ride to your lot is more difficult so we leave our car a
omes and be transported as suggested in the earlier question. It is such a sn]mall island that another long term parking lot seems unnecess
ar at the house and walk from the marina to the house. I sometimes do this now, but most of the time, the car is left at the marina.
 island several times a month.
cars at home and catch a ride on the island "bus" to the marina. Why not charge a small fee to compensate for gas and useage.
arina. When we return, we will again request a ride to our home.
UT LETTING FOLKS HAVE A GOLF CART IN THE MARINA. AT SOME POINT THE ISLAND CAN'T HANDLE MORE CARS. GOLF CARTS ARE THE
hould take advantage of long term parking.




be available. This feeds into the comments I made on the previous question.




ill looks like a damn junk yard.




ifficult so we leave our car at the marina rather than arranging to leave it at home. I am very opposed to creating long term parking away
parking lot seems unnecessary,
is left at the marina.
gas and useage.
ARS. GOLF CARTS ARE THE ANSWER. MANY COMMUNITIES HAVE GONE TO THIS. BETTER FOR THE ENVIRO.LESS FUEL EXPENSE ON THE




ng long term parking away from the marina. Park at your lot for gosh sakes.
ESS FUEL EXPENSE ON THE ISLAND. EASIER ON ROADS. THERE IS NO DOWN SIDE.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Please identify which statement below most closely matches your beliefs
regarding rentals on Hat Island
                                                   Response     Response
Answer Options
                                                    Percent        Count
I believe we should ban all rentals on Hat Island             6.3%                12
I believe we should restrict rentals only to other Hat        35.1%               67
I believe we should allow limited outside rentals so          20.4%               39
I believe we should allow rentals on the island with          25.1%               48
I believe we should allow rentals on the island with no       11.5%               22
I have no opinion on this issue                               2.6%                 5
Other (please specify)                                                            28
                                                   answered question                   191
                                                     skipped question                   50

                                                          Other
Number        Response Date                               (please
                                                          specify)
          1                   Oct 20, 2009 11:06 PM       As with renters on the mainland-they don't show as much respect sinc
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 12:42 AM       we could also agree with number 4.
          3                    Oct 21, 2009 4:54 PM       I agree with this statement 100%.You don't pay the taxes on my prop
          4                    Oct 21, 2009 6:46 PM       A Hat island home should never be considered a "rental property". If
          5                   Oct 22, 2009 10:25 AM       All or none, otherwise there will always be variable interpretations an
          6                    Oct 22, 2009 5:20 PM       Long term rentals only with requirements that renters fall under all ot
          7                   Oct 22, 2009 10:11 PM       long term only. Such as monthly.
          8                    Oct 24, 2009 8:09 PM       Long-term rentals are OK (over a month, for instance), but we are str
          9                   Oct 25, 2009 10:46 PM       people's beliefs on this only matter to the extent legally relevant.
         10                    Oct 26, 2009 6:17 PM       Long term rentals only - and approval by the board. Screening should
         11                    Oct 26, 2009 9:52 PM       SHORT TERM: Friends and Family of the owners.I think if you adverti
         12                    Oct 27, 2009 5:31 AM       I really don't care, however, I will not rent my cabin. Someone I know
         13                    Oct 28, 2009 2:59 PM       options people, options. why box yourself in
         14                    Oct 31, 2009 3:27 AM       Owners must accept responsiblitiy for any actions of their renters.
         15                   Oct 31, 2009 11:10 PM       landloards or shorttime rentals, some one needs to be responsoble fo
         16                    Nov 16, 2009 5:44 AM       Outside rentals only on a limited basis.
         17                    Nov 17, 2009 1:54 AM       Rent only the principal residence for whatever reason. No multiple re
         18                    Nov 21, 2009 3:43 PM       To compensate the community for the less-than-private aspect of ren
         19                    Nov 25, 2009 4:12 AM       I believe in reasonable rental restrictions but I doubt we have the aut
         20                    Nov 29, 2009 3:57 AM       YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO RENT BUT NOT SO IT BECOMES A BUSINE
         21                    Nov 29, 2009 7:34 PM       yet
         22                    Dec 1, 2009 11:04 PM       Most communities now charge a room/vacation rental tax on vacation
         23                     Dec 2, 2009 9:32 PM       I'm generally against renting, but I would like to be able to let a frien
         24                    Dec 9, 2009 12:19 AM       Property owners should remain responsible for actions of all types of
         25                    Dec 13, 2009 6:22 PM       Is it really a problem? or does it just bother a few people?If somebod
         26                    Dec 27, 2009 2:11 AM       reasonable rental policies and fees should be in place to allow rental o
         27                    Dec 29, 2009 2:22 AM       I would likely not oppose long term rentals - rental over 3 months.
         28                    Dec 29, 2009 5:35 AM       Reasonable rental policies and fees should be in place to allow rental
                           Please identify which statement below most closely matches your
                                         beliefs regarding rentals on Hat Island


                 40.0%
                 35.0%
                 30.0%
                 25.0%
                 20.0%
                 15.0%
                 10.0%
                  5.0%
                  0.0%




                                                                                    island with no
                            rentals on Hat




                                                                                    rentals on the
                                                       limited outside
                            should ban all




                                                                                     restrictions…
                                                        owners can…




                                                                                     should allow
                                                                                     I believe we
                             I believe we




                                                         should allow
                                                         I believe we


                                                           rentals so
                                Island




 show as much respect since it's not their neighborhood.

t pay the taxes on my property, you don't own my property therefore don't tell me what I can and cannot do with my property.
red a "rental property". If you can't afford to own it you should not have bought it.
variable interpretations and challenges of reinforcement.
hat renters fall under all other rules/regulations, and are subject to removal for repeat violations.

or instance), but we are strongly opposed to allowing weekend/short-term rentals.
extent legally relevant.
he board. Screening should be done similar to what most Property Management Co.s do. Credit, Criminal, Rental History. Fee is only about $
wners.I think if you advertise your cabin globally ... newsprint / online etc.. it is no differenct than being a commerical business. Which I be
 my cabin. Someone I know may use it or maybe an item in an auction, but now for rental income.

actions of their renters.
needs to be responsoble fo the letting people know what the rules and what is ecepted of same when on island and should have some respo

ver reason. No multiple rentals for one owner as a commercial venture. Too little control. Too little lack of responsibility. Too much dema
-than-private aspect of renting to "strangers", the owner could be "taxed" a User Fee, a percentage of the rent.
ut I doubt we have the authority to do that from our documents
 SO IT BECOMES A BUSINESS ESPECIALITY WITH MULITPLE PROPRETIES.

ation rental tax on vacation rentals. If the island is unable to stop the vacation rentals from happening, there needs to be a large tax/fee et
ike to be able to let a friend stay in my house on occasion without the requirement that I be with them all the time. I would be willing to ac
  for actions of all types of renters.
r a few people?If somebody has a big investment in rental properties this becomes a legal issue.Didn't we already get burned on this and so
be in place to allow rental on a weekly basis for a limited number of weeks and also longer term leases. These could reasonably restrict ren
 - rental over 3 months.
 be in place to allow rental on a weekly basis for a limited number of weeks and also longer term leases. These could reasonably restrict ren
 th my property.




 History. Fee is only about $40. A lease should be wriiten up and enforced.
merical business. Which I belive is not allowed on the island. Vacation Rental Rates are higher than housing rates.LONG TERM: Rentals mont




and should have some responsibility when there is a real problem

ponsibility. Too much demand on resources--water sewage issues.




eds to be a large tax/fee etc to provide for the additional security and safety of the island.
me. I would be willing to accept responsibility for their actions while on the island. I definitely don't want unlimited renting and don't really

dy get burned on this and some lawyer got our $$$?
could reasonably restrict rentals of family size homes to groups, clubs, corporations, organizations or multi family groups.

 could reasonably restrict rental of family size homes to groups, clubs, corporations, organizations or multi-family groups.
s.LONG TERM: Rentals month to month can be advertised, to offset owers property costs. A live-in tennant tends to be more respectful to th




ited renting and don't really see a need for limited renting.
s to be more respectful to their environment than a vacationer.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Current rental rules regarding length of stay and frequency of rentals

                                                         Strongly
Answer Options                                                           Mildly Agree      No Opinion
                                                          Agree
Only rentals of 30 days or more are allowed                   36               16               15
Rentals of 29 days or less are not allowed                    34               10               13
Each owner is allowed only up to two separate rental          31               20               26
However, property may be rented more than two                 59               30               21
Other (please specify)
                                                                                                                     answer
                                                                                                                       skipp

                                                       Other
Number        Response Date                            (please
                                                       specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 11:24 PM     Rentals should be allowed to provide island owners the ability to cont
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 5:35 AM     I like the ides of a rental being of some duration like a full week or m
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 4:21 PM     Property owner should include guests. People have had family reunio
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 4:54 PM     Stay out of the rental business, you have way to many other things to
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 6:46 PM     Rentals periods should not be applied if the renter is an owner, guest
          6                  Oct 21, 2009 11:40 PM     Its not up to the Government to tell me what i can or what I can't do
          7                  Oct 22, 2009 10:25 AM     No rentals, all the time!
          8                   Oct 24, 2009 8:09 PM     Stipulations must be in place regarding the upkeep of rental property,
          9                   Oct 25, 2009 3:19 AM     rent to whom i want for as long as i want no restrictions!!
         10                   Oct 25, 2009 3:34 PM     Hat Island property owners may not sub-let.
         11                   Oct 25, 2009 6:10 PM     No rentals at all. Look at the administrative burden suggested just by
         12                   Oct 26, 2009 9:52 PM     Long Term:Short Term:There seems to me, to be be two differnt issu
         13                   Oct 27, 2009 1:15 AM     I do not like renters except to other owners.
         14                   Oct 27, 2009 4:10 AM     The question is how exclusive do we want to be? Could there be a re
         15                   Oct 27, 2009 5:31 AM     I am not familiar with the rental rules.
         16                   Oct 27, 2009 8:26 PM     No rentals!!!
         17                   Oct 28, 2009 2:59 PM     why the fear of rentals, are they going to take over, really
         18                   Oct 31, 2009 3:27 AM     The community breaks some of these rules with thier rental of the ma
         19                   Oct 31, 2009 4:54 PM     I don't have time to think this carefully.
         20                  Oct 31, 2009 11:10 PM     ? yearly rentals. i do not think time is the main issue but how things
         21                   Nov 1, 2009 10:56 PM     I oppose all rentals
         22                    Nov 2, 2009 9:50 PM     the more restrictive the better
         23                   Nov 14, 2009 1:25 AM     Island should not govern the use of property private other than when
         24                   Nov 25, 2009 2:51 AM     Private property rights! Stay out of this - this is not your kingdom!
         25                   Nov 29, 2009 3:57 AM     DO ANYTHING YOU WANT BUT NOT TO BECOME A FULL TIME BUSIN
         26                   Nov 29, 2009 7:34 PM     I have no opinion on this issue yet.
         27                    Dec 1, 2009 6:21 AM     Rental periods could be as short as two weeks.
         28                    Dec 3, 2009 4:52 AM     I believe we should allow vacation rentals or long term rentals with so
         29                   Dec 8, 2009 10:01 PM     No opinion
         30                   Dec 13, 2009 6:22 PM     Are we gonna open another can of worms here?
         31                   Dec 18, 2009 6:36 AM     Lines 1 and 2 have the same meaning
32   Dec 27, 2009 2:11 AM These rules seems promulgated to so govern rentals that they effect
33   Dec 29, 2009 5:35 AM These rules seems promulgated to so govern rentals that they effectiv
34   Dec 29, 2009 6:22 PM What? You've already decided on limited rentals
                                                                                         Current rental rules regarding length of stay a
                                                                                                                     rentals


                                                                                200
                                                                                180
                  Mildly          Strongly          Response                    160
                 Disagree         Disagree            Count                     140
                                                                                120
                     31               74              172                       100
                                                                                 80
                     27               84              168                        60
                                                                                 40
                     14               77              168                        20
                      5               54              169                         0
                                                      34                      property may allowed only up than separate
                                                                                 of 30 days or more less to two
                                                                     Only rentalsRentals is be rentedare allowed two times rental periods p
                                                                    However, Each ownerof 29 days or moreare not allowed per year if rented
                          answered question                 179
                            skipped question                 62




 island owners the ability to continue to own property on the island with the current economic circumstances. Review again when economic
me duration like a full week or more-not daily.
 . People have had family reunions on the Island and I think that's wonderful! In that case, 30 days is silly.
 ave way to many other things to be running on the Island like the ferry, marina and golf course.
  if the renter is an owner, guest, or family.
me what i can or what I can't do with my property! So long as I am responsible for it..

ng the upkeep of rental property, and the requirement that renters follow Island regulations (i.e. dogs, ATMs, fireworks, etc.).
want no restrictions!!

 rative burden suggested just by the nature of question #2.
to me, to be be two differnt issues here.

want to be? Could there be a rental contract that discusses the 'rules' of the island to renters who aren't Hat Island owners? (maybe there


g to take over, really
 rules with thier rental of the marina apartment.

 s the main issue but how things are handled during term and island regs should control all


roperty private other than when it affects the overall community in terms of health and safety. If renters misbehave-owners get fined.
his - this is not your kingdom!
TO BECOME A FULL TIME BUSINESS


ntals or long term rentals with some rules that protect safety on the Island.
o govern rentals that they effectively eliminate most classes of rental and favor only certain circumstances. It doesn't seem appropriate to "
 govern rentals that they effectively eliminate most classes of rental and favor only certain circumstances. It doesn’t seem appropriate to “a
 les regarding length of stay and frequency of
            rentals




                                               Strongly Agree
                                               Mildly Agree
                                               No Opinion

  to two separate
 than two times rental periods per year        Mildly Disagree
are not allowed per year if rented to another Hat Island property owner
                                               Strongly Disagree




es. Review again when economic conditions improve. Help island owners preserve their assets during these difficult times!




Ms, fireworks, etc.).




Hat Island owners? (maybe there already is) Can we really police this?




misbehave-owners get fined.
 It doesn't seem appropriate to "allow" rentals only under terms that are so restrictive that they essentially "disallow" such rentals.
It doesn’t seem appropriate to “allow” rentals only under terms that are so restrictive that they essentially “disallow” such rentals.
allow" such rentals.
llow” such rentals.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Current rental rules regarding fees and liabilities

                                                          Strongly
Answer Options                                                            Mildly Agree      No Opinion
                                                           Agree
Each tenant family must pay a user fee to HICI equal          43                22               18
Tenants must pay guest rates for moorage                      119               26                7
Both owners and their renters will be held liable for         153               10                4
Property owners wanting to rent are required to have          85                23               19
Other (please specify)
                                                                                                                      answer
                                                                                                                        skipp

                                                        Other
Number        Response Date                             (please
                                                        specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 11:24 PM      Liability insurance should be left to each owner to decide.
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 5:35 AM      The user fee idea makes sense in principle but I don't know how you'
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 4:09 PM      Renters should pay guest rates for all services. We should consider a
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 4:21 PM      If I rent my house to my neighbor (for a reunion) rental insurance wo
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 4:25 PM      A few is appropriate. The full annual HICI fee is excessive.
          6                   Oct 21, 2009 4:54 PM      Our cabi is in division U so we wouldn't use the marina or facilities an
          7                   Oct 21, 2009 8:05 PM      Believe that if an user fee is charged, it should be a percentage of the
          8                   Oct 22, 2009 5:57 AM      The first one is a bit whacky. Why would someone renting for one nig
          9                  Oct 22, 2009 10:25 AM      No rentals, so these are unnecessary.
         10                   Oct 23, 2009 5:00 PM      I beleive renters should not be allowed. I have seen the debris, garb
         11                   Oct 25, 2009 6:10 PM      No rentals at all. Look at the administrative burden suggested just by
         12                   Oct 26, 2009 9:52 PM      A)It should be pro-rated for the time they are using the island resourc
         13                   Oct 27, 2009 1:15 AM      See above - rent only to other island owners.
         14                   Oct 27, 2009 4:10 AM      With the 1st one, we could use that as a security deposit of sorts in c
         15                   Oct 27, 2009 5:31 AM      No opinion.
         16                   Oct 27, 2009 7:16 PM      I think the property owner should be responsible for renters and any
         17                   Oct 27, 2009 8:26 PM      No Rentals!!!
         18                   Oct 28, 2009 2:59 PM      need more specifics, but it sounds a little over the top, are we so righ
         19                   Oct 31, 2009 4:54 PM      You are asking questions without providing specifics as to cost of the
         20                   Oct 31, 2009 9:15 PM      The owner is already paying the annual assessment for thier lot. I do
         21                  Oct 31, 2009 11:10 PM      item 1 tenant or onwer need to pay what is due
         22                   Nov 1, 2009 10:56 PM      I oppose rentals.
         23                    Nov 2, 2009 9:50 PM      the more restrictive the better
         24                    Nov 4, 2009 1:21 AM      would renters use more island resources than the owners? why an ad
         25                   Nov 17, 2009 1:54 AM      #1 is certainly a "time" factor. How long is the tenant there? Would
         26                   Nov 25, 2009 2:51 AM      Just treat rentals according to Landlord Tenant regulations of Washing
         27                   Nov 25, 2009 4:12 AM      On liability, I think we can only hold responsible someone who causes
         28                   Nov 29, 2009 7:34 PM      I have no opinion on this issue yet.
         29                    Dec 1, 2009 3:47 PM      no renters!
         30                   Dec 8, 2009 10:01 PM      No opinion
         31                   Dec 8, 2009 10:47 PM      The payment of a user fee only makes sense for long-term rentals. W
32   Dec 13, 2009 11:20 PM   Since we (the onwers) don't use moorage ever, I think if we rented lo
33    Dec 20, 2009 7:37 PM   I think homeowners should be able to let any relatives and friends use
34    Dec 27, 2009 2:11 AM   The above comments on 6-2 apply to 6-3 as well. It seems unreason
35    Dec 28, 2009 7:57 PM   I've rented other units in developments around the country and restri
36    Dec 29, 2009 5:35 AM   The above comments on #6-2 apply to #6-3 as well. It seems unrea
                                                                                                    Current rental rules regarding fees an

                                                                                                                  200
                                                                                                                  180
                                                                                                                  160
                  Mildly         Strongly         Response                                                        140
                                                                                                                  120
                 Disagree        Disagree           Count                                                         100
                                                                                                                   80
                    28               56               167                                                          60
                                                                                                                   40
                     5               14               171                                                          20
                     2                8               177                                                           0
                    14               33                                                               be equal to a compliance insuranc
                                                                  Both owners and their rent are required must pay annual HICI annual a
                                                             Property owners wanting to renters toTenants to have forguest rates for moora
                                                      174 Each tenant family must pay a user fee willHICIheld liabletherental liabilitywith islan
                                                      36
                         answered question                 178
                           skipped question                 63




ach owner to decide.
nciple but I don't know how you'd determine what that amount should be.
  services. We should consider and rental fee that is payable by the owner when they register (as required) any rental.
or a reunion) rental insurance would be a barrier and a nuisance. We're talking about one week out of one year.
  HICI fee is excessive.
n't use the marina or facilities anyway.
  it should be a percentage of the annual assessment based upon the length of stay.
 ould someone renting for one night be responsible for a year's assesments?

ed. I have seen the debris, garbage and damage done to the beaches on the island by renters. There is not way to enforce the rules.
 rative burden suggested just by the nature of question #3.
 they are using the island resources.B) Not if they are paying a Usage Fee alreadyC) Aboslutely... and owners are responsible for their guest

 s a security deposit of sorts in case of damage to island property or common areas.

 responsible for renters and any damage to the hat island community should come down on the property owner.

 ittle over the top, are we so righteous that we fear renter?
viding specifics as to cost of the insurance or the availability. I would also think that homeowners insurance may provides some coverage fo
ual assessment for thier lot. I do not believe the tenant should be responsible for assessments but should pay user fees for golf and moorag




ces than the owners? why an additional fee?
ong is the tenant there? Would we charge those using the Marina apartment the same? Is it fair to do anything else????
rd Tenant regulations of Washington State
esponsible someone who causes damage - that's Washington law - or their parents.




 s sense for long-term rentals. What is the difference between a frequently/full-time owner occupied property and one with the same or less
 rage ever, I think if we rented long term 6-12 months and beyond, it would be fair to have our renters be able to "leverage our owner moo
o let any relatives and friends use their home. I think it would nice to rent their home to workers (they may need the same privilege one da
  6-3 as well. It seems unreasonable to charge a tenant a fee equal to the annual assessment - thus collecting twice - or more on the same
 ts around the country and restrictions here are the most invasive and punitive.
to #6-3 as well. It seems unreasonable to charge a tenant a fee equal to the annual assessment – thus collecting twice – or more on the sa
rental rules regarding fees and liabilities




                                                       Strongly Agree
                                                       Mildly Agree
                                                       No Opinion
squal topay guest rates for moorage rules and damages islandas an additional
  to have for annual HICI annual assessment must of to common areas.
   must a compliance insurance                                  HICI resources
eld liabletherental liabilitywith island policy and for uselistMildly Disagree

                                                       Strongly Disagree




ot way to enforce the rules.

ers are responsible for their guests behaviors.D) Absolutley




e may provides some coverage for what ever concerns HICI has.
 ay user fees for golf and moorage at the guest rate unless they own a lot themselves.




ything else????




rty and one with the same or less time used by renters?
able to "leverage our owner moorage rate" as long as there was only one of us using moorage during that time period.Rental liability, yes, H
y need the same privilege one day). I'm against renting to anyone the homeowner doesn't know for any time period because I know there
ting twice - or more on the same property. If a renter uses the owners boat as part of the rental arrangement there should be no added fe

ollecting twice – or more on the same property. If a renter uses the owner’s boat as part of a rental arrangement there should be no added
period.Rental liability, yes, HICI additionally insured I'm not sure about. It sounds reasonable but I'd need to know more about what that m
eriod because I know there has been significant damage in the past from renters that damaged the golf course and beaches with 4 wheels
here should be no added fee. If they bring their own boat then guest moorage should apply. Regarding insurance, there should not be rul

                                                                                              	
                                                                                              Regarding insurance, there should not be ru
nt there should be no added fee. If they bring their own boat then guest moorage should apply.	
ow more about what that might mean.
and beaches with 4 wheels cus they paid and "just didn't care" about their impact.
nce, there should not be rules for renters that are put in place to effectively discourage rentals.

ance, there should not be rules for renters that are put in place to effectively discourage rentals.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Current rental rules regarding registration requirements and tenant restrictions

                                                           Strongly
Answer Options                                                            Mildly Agree      No Opinion
                                                            Agree
Property owners must notify the island office before           68               31               12
Properties may be rented to individuals or families            90               28               11
Maximum occupancy for a rental, including children, is         90               34               16
Tenants are required to register with HIC and sign the         85               33               12
Tenants are not allowed to sublet without permission           115              14                8
No unregistered overnight guests of a tenant are               61               26               20
No pets belonging to renters or their guests are               65               26               16
Other (please specify)
                                                                                                                      answer
                                                                                                                        skipp

                                                         Other
Number        Response Date                              (please
                                                         specify)
          1                  Oct 20, 2009 11:06 PM       Maximum capacity should depend on the size of the house and prope
          2                   Oct 21, 2009 5:35 AM       10 people is too many.
          3                   Oct 21, 2009 4:54 PM       HIC is not in the business to be telling owners what and not what to d
          4                   Oct 21, 2009 5:55 PM       Where did the number 10 people come from? Consider water usage.
          5                   Oct 21, 2009 8:05 PM       Thinking that 10 people is about 5 to many.
          6                  Oct 22, 2009 10:25 AM       Keep it simple...no rentals.
          7                  Oct 22, 2009 11:09 PM       10 people in one house is too many!!No sublets...
          8                   Oct 23, 2009 5:00 PM       No renters allowed! The risk is too great to those that have homes on
          9                   Oct 24, 2009 8:09 PM       Excellent rental rules!
         10                   Oct 25, 2009 6:10 PM       No rentals at all. Look at the administrative burden suggested just by
         11                   Oct 27, 2009 1:15 AM       See above!!!
         12                   Oct 27, 2009 4:10 AM       I think this would depend on the home owner.
         13                   Oct 27, 2009 1:25 PM       I think the max. # of people should be reduced. guests/renters routin
         14                   Oct 27, 2009 8:26 PM       No Rentals!!!
         15                   Oct 28, 2009 2:59 PM       again why the fear? options people, options
         16                   Oct 29, 2009 8:46 PM       think there should be a maximum of a lesser amount--10 is too many
         17                   Oct 31, 2009 4:54 PM       Again the questions are difficult. Someone with a one bedroom cabin
         18                   Oct 31, 2009 7:10 PM       should be no more than 6
         19                    Nov 2, 2009 9:50 PM       the more restrictive the better
         20                   Nov 14, 2009 1:25 AM       Fine the owners for violating rules and keep the island out of the man
         21                   Nov 15, 2009 2:12 AM       I think notifing the island after the agreement is signed is enough.
         22                   Nov 17, 2009 1:54 AM       TEN!!! people. What residence has the septic system in place to take
         23                   Nov 25, 2009 2:51 AM       Not your right!
         24                   Nov 29, 2009 7:34 PM       I have no opinion on this issue yet.
         25                    Dec 8, 2009 9:14 PM       I don't believe in rentals
         26                   Dec 8, 2009 10:01 PM       No opinion
         27                   Dec 8, 2009 10:47 PM       Agree with the pet statement only as it applies to short-term renters a
         28                    Dec 9, 2009 5:46 PM       8 or less people
29   Dec 13, 2009 11:20 PM   Would    want to see the HICI Rental terms agreement before Strongly
30    Dec 27, 2009 2:11 AM   Again,   reasonable rules and fees should govern. Registration of renta
31    Dec 28, 2009 7:57 PM   Again,   unnessarily restrictive and far to wide reaching.
32    Dec 29, 2009 5:35 AM   Again,   reasonable rules and fees should govern. Registration of renta
                                                                              Current rental rules regarding registration requiremen
                                                                                                    tenant restrictions


                                                                      200
                 Mildly          Strongly       Response              180
                Disagree         Disagree         Count               160
                                                                      140
                    23                 40           174               120
                    16                 27           172               100
                                                                       80
                    10                 25           175                60
                    12                 31           173                40
                                                                       20
                    12                 24           173                 0
                    20                 43           170




                                                                                             occupancy…




                                                                                                             not allowed…
                                                                             owners…
                                                                             Property




                                                                                              Maximum




                                                                                                              Tenants are
                    26                 40           173
                                                    32
                         answered question                177
                           skipped question                64




 the size of the house and property.

g owners what and not what to do. Stay out of the rental business.
me from? Consider water usage.


No sublets...
reat to those that have homes on the beaches.

 rative burden suggested just by the nature of question #4.


 e reduced. guests/renters routinely break rules regarding pets and have pets with them.


a lesser amount--10 is too many.
eone with a one bedroom cabin shouldn't have 10 people. Someone with a four bedroom house is different. Also renting a house for a week


d keep the island out of the management process. Let the owners be responsible for the renter's actions. The island enforces violations by
reement is signed is enough.
he septic system in place to take care of the water/sewer needs of 10 people? NO------WAY TOO MANY! Common sense has to be a facto




 it applies to short-term renters and of course guests. Someone renting for consecutive months should be allowed pets.
 rms agreement before Strongly Agreeing.
uld govern. Registration of rentals with the HICI office and knowledge of and compliance to the HICI policies and procedures and applicable
to wide reaching.
uld govern. Registration of rental with the HICI office and knowledge of and compliance to HICI policies and procedures and applicable fee
rding registration requirements and
ant restrictions



                                  Strongly Agree
                                  Mildly Agree
                                  No Opinion
                                  Mildly Disagree
                                  Strongly Disagree
                     belonging…
                       No pets




t. Also renting a house for a weekend or a week at 10 people is a lot different than a month or longer.


 The island enforces violations by fining the owners.

Common sense has to be a factor! Limit the numbers to septic/drainfield capability!




allowed pets.
ies and procedures and applicable fees are certainly appropriate.

nd procedures and applicable fees are certainly appropriate.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

Current rules regarding guests of owners

                                                           Strongly
Answer Options                                                             Mildly Agree      No Opinion
                                                            Agree
Rental rules do not apply to guests of owners                  110               29                8
Owners should notify HICI if there are guests at their         61                41                4
No pets belonging to guests of owners are allowed on           56                21               16
Owners and their guests will be held liable for                158               17                2
Other (please specify)
                                                                                                                       answer
                                                                                                                         skipp

                                                         Other
Number        Response Date                              (please
                                                         specify)
          1                   Oct 21, 2009 4:54 PM       HIC needs to be very careful the way they word things such as what c
          2                   Oct 22, 2009 7:23 PM       Guests should be able to bring their pet as long as they follow all islan
          3                   Oct 23, 2009 5:00 PM       The term 'guests' shold not include family memebers. Why should fam
          4                   Oct 25, 2009 3:34 PM       Why no guest pets? Someone needs to tell me what the reason is for
          5                   Oct 27, 2009 1:25 PM       frequently, guests bring pets to island (see this on the ferry, see this
          6                   Oct 27, 2009 8:26 PM       No rentals!!!
          7                   Oct 28, 2009 2:59 PM       why the need to control? why the fear of outsider?
          8                   Oct 31, 2009 4:54 PM       If you had a system for notifying the island of guests, thats great. I w
          9                    Nov 2, 2009 9:50 PM       the more restrictive the better
         10                   Nov 12, 2009 8:38 PM       Owners need to be responsible for guest and follow Island rules.
         11                   Nov 25, 2009 2:51 AM       Also not applicable. See the "not your kingdom" remark
         12                   Nov 25, 2009 4:12 AM       Don't think we can do that (hold owners and their guests liable for co
         13                   Nov 29, 2009 7:34 PM       I have no opinion on this issue yet.
         14                   Dec 8, 2009 10:01 PM       No opinion
         15                   Dec 29, 2009 2:22 AM       I wish there was a way to enforce the no pet rule - especially on the f
                                                                                                              Current rules regarding gue

                                                                                200
                                                                                180
                                                                                160
                                                                                140
                  Mildly           Strongly      Response                       120
                                                                                100
                 Disagree          Disagree        Count                         80
                                                                                 60
                                                                                 40
                     12                21            179                         20
                                                                                  0
                     30                42            178
                     33                54            180                              Rental rules do not Owners should
                      0                 3            180                              apply to guests of notify HICI if there
                                                                                           owners        are guests at their
                                                     15
                                                                                                           property when
                          answered question                184
                                                                                                          they are not on
                            skipped question                57
                                                                                                              the island




 they word things such as what can and cannot happen ON HAT ISLAND. They use the term ON THE ISLAND as if they own it. The HIC doe
pet as long as they follow all island & ferry rules.
 mily memebers. Why should family and/or guests have to board their animals when coming to the island.
 to tell me what the reason is for this idea.
d (see this on the ferry, see this on the island)

r of outsider?
island of guests, thats great. I would do so in order to let you know they are suppose to be there. Animals is different. If my son wanted to

uest and follow Island rules.
 r kingdom" remark
 ers and their guests liable for compliance) under Washington law


e no pet rule - especially on the ferry.
  Current rules regarding guests of owners




                                                               Strongly Agree
                                                               Mildly Agree
 Owners should No pets belonging Owners and their              No Opinion
otify HICI if there   to guests of  guests will be held        Mildly Disagree
re guests at their    owners are         liable for
 property when      allowed on this  compliance with           Strongly Disagree
they are not on          island      island rules and
    the island                          damages to
                                      common areas



ND as if they own it. The HIC does not own Hat Island. There are a lot of lots, cabins, families etc. that are not affiliated with HIC in any wa




 is different. If my son wanted to bring his dog and he kept him properly, I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with owners b
affiliated with HIC in any way. There are property owners on this Island that own their own places completley separate in every way possibl




ve a problem with owners being responsible, at least in part to what a guest does. I understand somewhat the logic, but I think it is more d
parate in every way possible from HIC. HIC always speaks as if they are the sole owners of this entire Island and that is a very untrue state




ogic, but I think it is more dependent on the circumstances.
d that is a very untrue statement. One of these days HIC is going to get themselves involved in a lawsuit over comments such as this.
omments such as this.
Hat Island Community Survey 2010

What additional information would you like to provide to the
board?
                                                   Response
Answer Options
                                                     Count
                                                         60
                              answered question                60
                                skipped question              181

                                                   Response
Number        Response Date
                                                   Text
          1               Oct 20, 2009 10:06 PM    The island should allow a small convenience store to be built and ope
          2               Oct 21, 2009 12:44 AM    Thank you for compiling this survey--it obviously took a lot of time an
          3               Oct 21, 2009 12:56 AM    Thank you very much for your precious time and dedication to Hat Isl
          4                Oct 21, 2009 1:32 AM    Island owners should have more involvement on decisions made by H
          5                Oct 21, 2009 3:29 PM    Your survey is strongly worded to agree with your current rules.
          6                Oct 21, 2009 4:25 PM    I would like to thank the board for their service. Also, I feel that Chu
          7                Oct 21, 2009 5:04 PM    The majority of the people on or near the south end of the Island suc
          8                Oct 21, 2009 6:01 PM    THE WORLD HAS CAHNGED AND WE SEEM TO BE HEADED DOWN TH
          9                Oct 21, 2009 6:44 PM    The board shold make as few rules as are necessary to preserve the r
         10               Oct 21, 2009 11:50 PM    Start a Community store and that would offset alot of these problems
         11               Oct 21, 2009 11:58 PM    We would hope rules are stressed to frequent and new renters.
         12               Oct 22, 2009 10:26 AM    Thanks for your efforts, and good luck sorting things out, now, always
         13                Oct 22, 2009 5:21 PM    NO DAILY FERRY SERVICE -- EVER!
         14                Oct 22, 2009 7:23 PM    Thanks for all the time & work you all put in! Great Job!
         15               Oct 22, 2009 11:10 PM    Please enforce the under age driving regs.
         16                Oct 23, 2009 5:02 PM    The current Board appears to be a responsible Board. I am concerne
         17                Oct 23, 2009 7:45 PM    lower costs and fairness for all property owners. Access to all properti
         18                Oct 24, 2009 8:12 PM    Keep up the good work! We believe the island is changing for the be
         19                Oct 25, 2009 3:26 AM    make things more understandable in PLAIN simple english. when you
         20                Oct 25, 2009 3:35 PM    Every problem or negative incident that someone sees does not have
         21                Oct 25, 2009 9:58 PM    The current rental rules need to be kept. Short term rentals by partie
         22               Oct 25, 2009 10:37 PM    Keep up the good work!
         23               Oct 25, 2009 10:47 PM    I think this survey is seriousy flawed and thus a large waste of my tim
         24               Oct 25, 2009 10:54 PM    The new marina assessment is BRUTAL and has forced me to put my
         25                Oct 26, 2009 6:19 PM    I think a small sign on the ferry reminding people to keep their childre
         26                Oct 26, 2009 9:46 PM    keep things simple ! More rules do not add value. Keep with the basi
         27                Oct 27, 2009 4:11 AM    I think you are doing a wonderful job. It can't be an easy task to bala
         28                Oct 27, 2009 5:32 AM    YOu all are doing a great service to the island..thank you!
         29                Oct 27, 2009 8:32 PM    I strongly feel that a boat owner that has paid annual moorage should
         30                Oct 27, 2009 9:36 PM    I do not like the idea of the Island manager or anyone else on the Isla
         31                Oct 27, 2009 9:40 PM    None
         32                Oct 28, 2009 3:04 PM    keep the crooked real estate agents who bought the ****** ***** o
         33                Oct 29, 2009 8:49 PM    feel all hat island owners should have access to beaches, with the abi
         34                Oct 31, 2009 6:55 AM    With the real estate market still in flux. We need to market the island
         35               Oct 31, 2009 11:15 PM    what a great place, like going 5 hrs away. keep it a place for afordabl
         36                Nov 1, 2009 10:57 PM    I think the island should encourage multiple lot ownership by reducing
37     Nov 2, 2009 5:16 PM    Would like to see Snohomish County dog leash laws on Hat Island. Al
38     Nov 2, 2009 9:50 PM    I trust the board to make wise decisions regarding the management o
39     Nov 3, 2009 1:10 AM    stop raising user fees!!! This is not the time to strap our lot owners. F
40    Nov 12, 2009 8:39 PM    Employees need to follow pet rules
41    Nov 14, 2009 1:29 AM    The philosophy of the board on governing the behavior of owners and
42    Nov 17, 2009 1:56 AM    I believe the issue did not pass because there was WAY TOO Much to
43    Nov 25, 2009 2:51 AM    I am tired of you all ruling the island for your own benefit. It is obvio
44    Nov 25, 2009 2:57 AM    I am a boat access only owner
45    Nov 29, 2009 7:35 AM    I would like to thank each and every one of you for running for the bo
46    Nov 29, 2009 7:35 PM    You have our support...
47    Dec 1, 2009 11:11 PM    The board is doing an excellent job especially in the current condition
48     Dec 2, 2009 9:34 PM    I don't have any additional information -- I'd just like to say "thank yo
49    Dec 8, 2009 10:48 PM    Thank you for the opportunity and reminders to complete this survey.
50     Dec 9, 2009 1:40 AM    This is not your property it is our property
51   Dec 10, 2009 12:02 AM    Payment for playing golf for owners and any others associated with th
52    Dec 13, 2009 6:27 PM    Why all the politics recently?Do we really need all the rules and regs a
53   Dec 13, 2009 11:21 PM    Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on these important qu
54    Dec 14, 2009 6:51 AM    Thank you for your hard work, it helps to make Hat Island A great pla
55    Dec 20, 2009 7:40 PM    My brother and I have owned our losts for about 20 years. We don't
56    Dec 20, 2009 8:01 PM    I want the board to take a look at the ugly piles of logs and debris on
57    Dec 27, 2009 2:13 AM    There is no reference to the "architectural committee" or to building,
58    Dec 29, 2009 2:23 AM    Thanks for all your hard work.
59    Dec 29, 2009 5:39 AM    Additional comments: There is no reference to the “architectural com
60    Dec 29, 2009 6:32 PM    I think a lot of the problems we have is that Hat Island is becoming k
61                30-Dec-09   The preference of user fees over assessments we believe is short sigh
62                30-Dec-09   The growth of constructed homes on the island, unabated, poses sign
63                   30-Dec   Something has to be done about the rabbits!
64                   30-Dec   We are disappointed in the fact that we are no longer a caring commu
65                   30-Dec   We realize that it takes money to run the community, but we seem to
66                   30-Dec   The owners that are full time residents and are in financial trouble sho
67                   30-Dec   In regard to the By-law changes. I feel the best way is to put each it
68                   30-Dec   Everett Moorage: why is the Elsie M parked closest to the up ramp.
69                   30-Dec   Everett parking: why are those that pay the $25 more parked way ba
70                   30-Dec   For those who work Saturdays it would be nice to have a Sunday run
71                   30-Dec   I know a lot of these rules are not being enforced now. So if we add
72                   30-Dec   Tax reduction - somehow lower our property taxes
 nience store to be built and operated on the island -- see Chuck Bright for building ideas and plans
it obviously took a lot of time and effort.Wayne and Carolyn Hansen---N15
us time and dedication to Hat Island.
 lvement on decisions made by HIC and the board. I do not feel we should be heavily regulated on the island and if a problem arises, discus
 ee with your current rules.
eir service. Also, I feel that Chuck is a tremendous asset to the community and I thank him for his good work and professionalism. I cringe
r the south end of the Island such as Division "U" ONLY WANT WATER, period !!!Our personal family has been going to Hat Island since 193
  SEEM TO BE HEADED DOWN THE SAME ROAD JUST LIKE OUR LOCAL STATE & FED GOV ARE.
s are necessary to preserve the rural and scenic nature of the island. Owners should be allowed wide latitude in the use of their property c
uld offset alot of these problems with assessments. It's common sense, the economy doesn't support the continuation of constantly raising
 frequent and new renters.
k sorting things out, now, always!

  put in! Great Job!

sponsible Board. I am concerned with giving future Board's too much power. We are becomming very over-regulated.
rty owners. Access to all properties if charging the same assessments.
the island is changing for the better and appreciate the work of the Board and Island Manager in facilitating this process.
 PLAIN simple english. when you wish to change things. when you start using Lawyerees language you give the feeling that you are trying to
 at someone sees does not have to result in a new regulation.
ept. Short term rentals by parties with no stake in the island will destroy the private character of the island and cause serious damage to ou

and thus a large waste of my time.
AL and has forced me to put my lot up for sale at nearly a give-away price.
nding people to keep their children under control while the boat is under way would be a good idea. Also, treat the seat cushions kindly!
ot add value. Keep with the basics
 . It can't be an easy task to balance the beliefs of the owners who have been here for decades and those who are just arriving. I take prid
he island..thank you!
  has paid annual moorage should be allowed to leave their boat in the marina for 2 weeks maximum when not on the island instead of a m
anager or anyone else on the Island to have "enforcement powers" to cite or enforce island rules, such as helmet laws, speed limits, etc.

who bought the ****** ***** off the board and lets not become a police state.
  access to beaches, with the ability to walk aroung or drive around. we all own some beach front property and thus should have access to t
 x. We need to market the island. This can include an Open Island similar to an Open House. I exchanged a few brief emails with Jon Rypdh
 way. keep it a place for afordable family and seniors. not to fancy or to much development to fast. JUST THE BEST PLACE TO BE. THANKS
multiple lot ownership by reducing assessments for owners of multiple lots. The island should also consider purchasing lots for green space.
dog leash laws on Hat Island. All dogs should be on a leash and under the control of the owner when off of their property. Don't like rentals
ons regarding the management of island issues for all of us. I am in favor of continuing to invest in our resources, establishing and enforcin
e time to strap our lot owners. Fix only what is needed. Stop spending money!!!

rning the behavior of owners and their guests/renters should be one of vigilant enforcement of the rules, by assessing fines for violations. N
use there was WAY TOO Much to swallow in one bite. Perhaps block like items together. Vote on each catagory. You will get passage on s
 for your own benefit. It is obvious and disgusting. Back off and let private property rights abide with Washington State rules

one of you for running for the board and doing such a fantastic job.

specially in the current conditions. Just maintaining afloat today can be a difficult task. Security, safety and the preservation of our environ
n -- I'd just like to say "thank you" for all that you do for the island and the property owners!
minders to complete this survey. However, this took one hour to complete.

and any others associated with the owner ( family/ guests)
  ally need all the rules and regs and legal stuff?Has there been felonies committed on the island that we don't know about?Can't we just Get
vide input on these important questions!
 s to make Hat Island A great place !
 ts for about 20 years. We don't have a house so the assessments are pretty expensive for us, but it's such a special place, we continue to p
e ugly piles of logs and debris on the island. I feel that the person or company responsible for this mess should have to clean them up. I fee
 tural committee" or to building, development or architectural requirements. The manner in which the island develops visually affects all ow

ference to the “architectural committee” or to building, development or architectural requirements. The manner in which the island develop
 is that Hat Island is becoming known as party center. If we could encourage more family functions to create an attitude of a typical neighb
essments we believe is short sighted. All members and their property values benefit from the marina, golf course, ferry, etc. Whether or no
 the island, unabated, poses significant strains on our infrastructure and services. One vialbe solution is to allow ownership of multiple lots w

we are no longer a caring community. Have we forgotten that are a very small community and that is the reason that most of us bought he
  the community, but we seem to be spending it on things that can wait until the economy turns around. We have money to put cement on
ts and are in financial trouble should not have their water turned off or denied access to the island. That is completely wrong. Yes, the com
eel the best way is to put each item up separately
 parked closest to the up ramp. If the Hat Express was close it would save all passengers approximately 75' of walking
pay the $25 more parked way back in the rear
 ld be nice to have a Sunday run in the winter months, even if it is once or twice a month.
 ing enforced now. So if we add more rles, how are they going to be enforce - ie. Guests with dogs on the island
  roperty taxes
nd if a problem arises, discuss it and suggest changes if necessary at that time.

nd professionalism. I cringe at some of the abuse I see directed at the Island's leadership, who are obviously doing their best and acting in
oing to Hat Island since 1934 and it's been great and a lot of fun. Water is nice for sanitary and fire concerns. The rest of the things such as

n the use of their property consistent with conservation of island health, safety, and preservation of natural beauty.
uation of constantly raising assessments. We all want a nice place to go(Hat Isl.) but I didn't buy my properties out there to have my usage




feeling that you are trying to get something passed that we the property owners don't or won't like.

 cause serious damage to our fragile environment. It could also introduce an element of crime as outsiders see that they may have opportu




he seat cushions kindly!

are just arriving. I take pride in being an owner on Hat Island, and I applaud the work you all are doing to keep our island the friendly and

on the island instead of a maximum of 5 days before being fined. This allows for a vacation without having to pay moorage somewhere else
 t laws, speed limits, etc.


 hus should have access to the beaches, not just beachfront owners.
 brief emails with Jon Rypdhal regarding this but we both agreed it was a difficult marketing campaign.
EST PLACE TO BE. THANKS FOR ALL THAT PUT IN THEIR TIME AND DREAMS
hasing lots for green space.
r property. Don't like rentals because they can reduce the quality of life on the Island. Don't like 4 wheelers zipping around the island. Would
es, establishing and enforcing rules to ensure the safety of all and limiting rental privileges.


essing fines for violations. Not the enactment of proactive regulations of notifications which will be ignored anyway.
 . You will get passage on some, but maybe not all.
on State rules




 preservation of our environment and wildlife are most important in my opinion.




now about?Can't we just Get Along? We have managed for 45+ years. Where are we going now, and why?


ecial place, we continue to pay. It's "rusticness" is part of the charm. All of the Hat Island employees have gone the extra mile to accomod
have to clean them up. I feel tht these piles are not only a blight but are danger for injury and fire.
velops visually affects all owners. While I believe the island CC&R's should not be overly restrictive of owner rights, some requirement of de

 in which the island develops visually affects all owners. While I believe the island CC & R’s should not be overly restrictive of owner rights,
n attitude of a typical neighborhood that might decrease the unruleyness that happens around here. I would like to see the board encourage
e, ferry, etc. Whether or not they use a particular service. Our assessments are among the lowest, if not the lowest of any island commun
 ownership of multiple lots with one home to pay one set of general assessments.

n that most of us bought here? We do not like the same regulations that a big city has.
ve money to put cement on the Golf course and pay members $500 per hole to improve it. Instead we should save and spend on repairs an
pletely wrong. Yes, the community should put a lien on the property until the debt is paid
oing their best and acting in good faith. No one on the island should have an us v. them mentality - the board is "us".
he rest of the things such as the Marina, Golf Course, Club House etc. etc. we do not use, ever. Something needs to be done about all these


out there to have my usage of them be determined by someone with a differing opinion of how I can use my property. So long as I'm respo




that they may have opportunities on an island with no police.




 our island the friendly and safe community it has been in the past.

ay moorage somewhere else for those 2 wks (some people do not have truck or trailer to pull boat out of water) and still keeps someone fro
ng around the island. Would like to keep kids from driving around on them.




e the extra mile to accomodate ourrequests and little problems. I'm OK with an off-beach parking are as long as there is bus to that area (w

hts, some requirement of development and maintenance is appropriate.

y restrictive of owner rights, some requirement of development and maintenance is appropriate.
 to see the board encourage more community fuctions. I was told that community functions are limited so that more folks would be encour
 west of any island community in Puget Sound. "All ships use together" and the use of general assessments should reflect that wise sentime




ave and spend on repairs and things that are necessary
s to be done about all these assessments such as the division H retaining wall assessment, the two marina assessments and so forth. We d


operty. So long as I'm responsible and paid up and an Law obiding American citizen the board shouldn't have a say on my usage of MY land




and still keeps someone from useing the marina slip for long term storage.
s there is bus to that area (with jumper cables). Improvemnts to th golf course over the years have been great! The picnic shelter is nice (




more folks would be encouraged to join the Yacht Club. I think the Yacht Club is a very good organization with very good people and contr
uld reflect that wise sentiment
ssments and so forth. We do not use them we should not have to pay for them. Maybe us on the south end of the Island should propose a


say on my usage of MY land! A community store is the ANSWER for buget shortcomings! Not my wallet....with respect
 The picnic shelter is nice (the big fire place is shot). I love Hat Island and love to show it to my friends!




very good people and contributes a lot to this island. I also think it's more of an adult club, which is OK. Healthy neighborhoods don't pros
he Island should propose a special assessment to build a new marina on our end for our use and have the entire Island pay for it, maybe w
hy neighborhoods don't prosper and grow without families.
e Island pay for it, maybe we want a new picnic area built and the entire HIC community should pay for that too with no access to it for any
with no access to it for anyone to use it except us. HIC is being very, very unfair abouit all this special assessment stuff and I think it needs
ent stuff and I think it needs to be seriously thought about in the very near future. It would be

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:66
posted:11/14/2010
language:English
pages:258
Description: Yard Maintenence in Rental Agreement document sample