From valerie at vanngroup.com Thu Oct 2 12:14:36 2008 From: valerie at vanngroup.com (Valerie Vann) Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 12:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [OldNorthBoard] including 400 block of D In-Reply-To: References: <48E3D82F.3D04DA2A@vanngroup.com> Message-ID: <11185.72.251.93.37.1222974876.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> Well, the $5 membership fee now is optional, because the policy has been that all residents, owners and businesses within the current ONDNA boundary are automatically members. If associates want to "contribute" their $5/yr like the rest of us, why not? Or have we only been delivering agendas and notices to those who have paid up? I assumed communications went to everybody in the association neighborhood. I asked for this to be on the agenda until we get it resolved one way or the other, so these details can be discussed then. Valerie =========== > Would we charge a membership fee? > > Sheryl > > On Oct 1, 2008, at 1:06 PM, Valerie Vann wrote: > >> Board, >> >> What I propose for discussion is a bylaws >> amendment to include >> (1) the North side of >> 7th Street between the RR and B Street >> within Old North Davis (full membership), >> >> and >> >> (2) a non-voting (i.e. non-Board eligible) >> Associate Membership for >> residents (only) within the adjacent areas of the >> Conservation District not covered by other >> neighborhood associations. (This would mainly >> pick up residents in the Downtown between >> 5th and the RR.) >> >> Valerie >> ---- >> Valerie Vann >> valerie at vanngroup.com >> >> >> >> sheryl lynn gerety wrote: >>> >>> Board, >>> >>> While we might for good reasons hesitate to invite membership from >>> non- >>> residents, we might consider -- for the quicker relief of our D >>> Street >>> neighbors from the dysfunctional homeless population prowling their >>> yards -- forming a Neighborhood Watch program with them? >>> >>> If this doesn't strike you as totally unworkable I might try to meet >>> with the NW coordinator to see how this all works. It takes some >>> patrolling by neighbors, but I think we are already to some extent >>> engaged in that as the numbers of seriously ill folk rise. Plus even >>> a little training is a good thing. It is obvious to me from one >>> meeting and Paul's account of the fist fight at Grace House yesterday >>> (Thurdsay 25 November) that Grace House staff has not been adequately >>> trained to deal with criminal behavior, if trained at all. Plus so >>> long as they remain part of the services offered they could be put on >>> notice that they need to be part of our Watch program. >>> >>> If you like, we might take this up at the next Board Meeting. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Sheryl >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ondboard mailing list >>> ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard >> _______________________________________________ >> ondboard mailing list >> ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard > > From dequickert at omsoft.com Thu Oct 2 15:11:27 2008 From: dequickert at omsoft.com (Dan Quickert) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:11:27 -0700 Subject: [OldNorthBoard] including 400 block of D In-Reply-To: <48E3D82F.3D04DA2A@vanngroup.com> References: <48E3D82F.3D04DA2A@vanngroup.com> Message-ID: <48E5470F.7070808@omsoft.com> 7th street is dominated (numerically) by residents of multi-unit dwellings (apartments). That is why (in part) that area was not originally included. We could easily get into a situation where an apartment owner could 'ask' tenants to join and push for something we would not want. Remember the B Street "Visioning" processes. If North 7th is included, we might want to consider limiting memberships: to *owners* of multi-units; or to residents with x years residency; or to residents/owners of single- or double-units only. I would prefer the latter restriction. Dan Q On 10/01/08 1:06 PM, Valerie Vann wrote: > Board, > > What I propose for discussion is a bylaws > amendment to include > (1) the North side of > 7th Street between the RR and B Street > within Old North Davis (full membership), > > and > > (2) a non-voting (i.e. non-Board eligible) > Associate Membership for > residents (only) within the adjacent areas of the > Conservation District not covered by other > neighborhood associations. (This would mainly > pick up residents in the Downtown between > 5th and the RR.) > > Valerie > ---- > Valerie Vann > valerie at vanngroup.com > > > > sheryl lynn gerety wrote: >> Board, >> >> While we might for good reasons hesitate to invite membership from non- >> residents, we might consider -- for the quicker relief of our D Street >> neighbors from the dysfunctional homeless population prowling their >> yards -- forming a Neighborhood Watch program with them? >> >> If this doesn't strike you as totally unworkable I might try to meet >> with the NW coordinator to see how this all works. It takes some >> patrolling by neighbors, but I think we are already to some extent >> engaged in that as the numbers of seriously ill folk rise. Plus even >> a little training is a good thing. It is obvious to me from one >> meeting and Paul's account of the fist fight at Grace House yesterday >> (Thurdsay 25 November) that Grace House staff has not been adequately >> trained to deal with criminal behavior, if trained at all. Plus so >> long as they remain part of the services offered they could be put on >> notice that they need to be part of our Watch program. >> >> If you like, we might take this up at the next Board Meeting. >> >> Regards, >> Sheryl >> _______________________________________________ >> ondboard mailing list >> ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard > _______________________________________________ > ondboard mailing list > ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard > > From valerie at vanngroup.com Thu Oct 2 19:15:31 2008 From: valerie at vanngroup.com (Valerie Vann) Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 19:15:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [OldNorthBoard] including 400 block of D In-Reply-To: <48E5470F.7070808@omsoft.com> References: <48E3D82F.3D04DA2A@vanngroup.com> <48E5470F.7070808@omsoft.com> Message-ID: <6334.72.251.92.69.1223000131.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> We can discuss all these fine tuning aspects at the next meeting, although my bet is that if any landlord attempted to get all renters to do something on the landlord's behalf, they'd ignore (or worse), or ignore the whole business, as most of the renters in Old North seem to do currently. In my experience, landlords and tenants are not natural allies, and especially when the tenants are students. Also, if the additions are going to be on the same footing as the rest of us, all residents, owners & businesses are automatically members of ONDNA; the tenants could be asked to be ACTIVE, but not to join - same situation we've got now. Valerie PS another reason North side 7th wasn't originally included is that the City left it out of the Conservation District, and hence out of the recommended area for the Historic District. The latter made no sense from a historic viewpoint, at least for the surviving R1 lots, as that area was developed essentially the same time and by the same developer (Bower) as the blocks between 6th & 7th. In my paper for the ON Board on the subject of forming an Old North Davis Historic District, I recommended that selected sections of the north side of 7th between C and G be included in the proposed historic district. (The 500 block of G was also left out of the City's historic district proposal, also for no good historic reason; it was also not surveyed.) ============ > 7th street is dominated (numerically) by residents of multi-unit dwellings > (apartments). That is why (in part) that area was not originally included. > We could easily get into a situation where an apartment owner could 'ask' > tenants to join and push for something we would not want. Remember the B > Street "Visioning" processes. > > If North 7th is included, we might want to consider limiting memberships: > to *owners* of multi-units; or to residents with x years residency; or to > residents/owners of single- or double-units only. I would prefer the > latter restriction. > > Dan Q > > > On 10/01/08 1:06 PM, Valerie Vann wrote: >> Board, >> >> What I propose for discussion is a bylaws >> amendment to include >> (1) the North side of >> 7th Street between the RR and B Street >> within Old North Davis (full membership), >> >> and >> >> (2) a non-voting (i.e. non-Board eligible) >> Associate Membership for >> residents (only) within the adjacent areas of the >> Conservation District not covered by other >> neighborhood associations. (This would mainly >> pick up residents in the Downtown between >> 5th and the RR.) >> >> Valerie >> ---- >> Valerie Vann >> valerie at vanngroup.com >> >> >> >> sheryl lynn gerety wrote: >>> Board, >>> >>> While we might for good reasons hesitate to invite membership from non- >>> residents, we might consider -- for the quicker relief of our D Street >>> neighbors from the dysfunctional homeless population prowling their >>> yards -- forming a Neighborhood Watch program with them? >>> >>> If this doesn't strike you as totally unworkable I might try to meet >>> with the NW coordinator to see how this all works. It takes some >>> patrolling by neighbors, but I think we are already to some extent >>> engaged in that as the numbers of seriously ill folk rise. Plus even >>> a little training is a good thing. It is obvious to me from one >>> meeting and Paul's account of the fist fight at Grace House yesterday >>> (Thurdsay 25 November) that Grace House staff has not been adequately >>> trained to deal with criminal behavior, if trained at all. Plus so >>> long as they remain part of the services offered they could be put on >>> notice that they need to be part of our Watch program. >>> >>> If you like, we might take this up at the next Board Meeting. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Sheryl >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ondboard mailing list >>> ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard >> _______________________________________________ >> ondboard mailing list >> ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard >> >> > > From awillson at pacbell.net Thu Oct 2 19:51:50 2008 From: awillson at pacbell.net (angela) Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 19:51:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [OldNorthBoard] including 400 block of D In-Reply-To: <6334.72.251.92.69.1223000131.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> Message-ID: <688109.93902.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> that was the original feeling.. but I don't really think the renters (mostly students)...give a hoot about much that we do... and as far as I can see other than voting for officers we have not done much if any voting... ? angela --- On Thu, 10/2/08, Valerie Vann wrote: From: Valerie Vann Subject: Re: [OldNorthBoard] including 400 block of D To: "Dan Quickert" Cc: "Old North Board" , "Paul Schrupp" Date: Thursday, October 2, 2008, 7:15 PM We can discuss all these fine tuning aspects at the next meeting, although my bet is that if any landlord attempted to get all renters to do something on the landlord's behalf, they'd ignore (or worse), or ignore the whole business, as most of the renters in Old North seem to do currently. In my experience, landlords and tenants are not natural allies, and especially when the tenants are students. Also, if the additions are going to be on the same footing as the rest of us, all residents, owners & businesses are automatically members of ONDNA; the tenants could be asked to be ACTIVE, but not to join - same situation we've got now. Valerie PS another reason North side 7th wasn't originally included is that the City left it out of the Conservation District, and hence out of the recommended area for the Historic District. The latter made no sense from a historic viewpoint, at least for the surviving R1 lots, as that area was developed essentially the same time and by the same developer (Bower) as the blocks between 6th & 7th. In my paper for the ON Board on the subject of forming an Old North Davis Historic District, I recommended that selected sections of the north side of 7th between C and G be included in the proposed historic district. (The 500 block of G was also left out of the City's historic district proposal, also for no good historic reason; it was also not surveyed.) ============ > 7th street is dominated (numerically) by residents of multi-unit dwellings > (apartments). That is why (in part) that area was not originally included. > We could easily get into a situation where an apartment owner could 'ask' > tenants to join and push for something we would not want. Remember the B > Street "Visioning" processes. > > If North 7th is included, we might want to consider limiting memberships: > to *owners* of multi-units; or to residents with x years residency; or to > residents/owners of single- or double-units only. I would prefer the > latter restriction. > > Dan Q > > > On 10/01/08 1:06 PM, Valerie Vann wrote: >> Board, >> >> What I propose for discussion is a bylaws >> amendment to include >> (1) the North side of >> 7th Street between the RR and B Street >> within Old North Davis (full membership), >> >> and >> >> (2) a non-voting (i.e. non-Board eligible) >> Associate Membership for >> residents (only) within the adjacent areas of the >> Conservation District not covered by other >> neighborhood associations. (This would mainly >> pick up residents in the Downtown between >> 5th and the RR.) >> >> Valerie >> ---- >> Valerie Vann >> valerie at vanngroup.com >> >> >> >> sheryl lynn gerety wrote: >>> Board, >>> >>> While we might for good reasons hesitate to invite membership from non- >>> residents, we might consider -- for the quicker relief of our D Street >>> neighbors from the dysfunctional homeless population prowling their >>> yards -- forming a Neighborhood Watch program with them? >>> >>> If this doesn't strike you as totally unworkable I might try to meet >>> with the NW coordinator to see how this all works. It takes some >>> patrolling by neighbors, but I think we are already to some extent >>> engaged in that as the numbers of seriously ill folk rise. Plus even >>> a little training is a good thing. It is obvious to me from one >>> meeting and Paul's account of the fist fight at Grace House yesterday >>> (Thurdsay 25 November) that Grace House staff has not been adequately >>> trained to deal with criminal behavior, if trained at all. Plus so >>> long as they remain part of the services offered they could be put on >>> notice that they need to be part of our Watch program. >>> >>> If you like, we might take this up at the next Board Meeting. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Sheryl >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ondboard mailing list >>> ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard >> _______________________________________________ >> ondboard mailing list >> ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard >> >> > > _______________________________________________ ondboard mailing list ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/ondboard/attachments/20081002/0e32d6fa/attachment-0001.html From dequickert at omsoft.com Thu Oct 2 21:27:49 2008 From: dequickert at omsoft.com (Dan Quickert) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 21:27:49 -0700 Subject: [OldNorthBoard] including 400 block of D In-Reply-To: <688109.93902.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <688109.93902.qm@web81504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <48E59F45.7050607@omsoft.com> Valerie said: > all residents, owners & businesses are > automatically members of ONDNA No, not unless the original bylaws have been amended. The bylaws state that membership "shall be open to all neighborhood residents,..." etc. They are eligible, but not automatically members. Dan Q On 10/02/08 7:51 PM, angela wrote: > that was the original feeling.. but I don't really think the renters > (mostly students)...give a hoot about much that we do... and as far as I > can see other than voting for officers we have not done much if any > voting... > > angela > > --- On *Thu, 10/2/08, Valerie Vann //* wrote: > > From: Valerie Vann > Subject: Re: [OldNorthBoard] including 400 block of D > To: "Dan Quickert" > Cc: "Old North Board" , "Paul > Schrupp" > Date: Thursday, October 2, 2008, 7:15 PM > > We can discuss all these fine tuning aspects at the next meeting, > although my bet is that if any landlord attempted to get all > renters to do something on the landlord's behalf, they'd ignore > (or worse), or ignore the whole business, as most of the renters > in Old North seem to do currently. In my experience, landlords > and tenants are not natural allies, and especially when the > tenants are students. > > Also, if the additions are going to be on the same footing > as the rest of us, all residents, owners & businesses are > automatically members of ONDNA; the tenants could be asked > to be ACTIVE, but not to join - same situation we've got > now. > > Valerie > > PS another reason North side 7th wasn't originally included is > that the City left it out of the Conservation District, and > hence out of the recommended area for the Historic District. > > The latter made no sense from a historic viewpoint, at least > for the surviving R1 lots, as that area was developed essentially > the same time and by the same developer (Bower) as the blocks > between 6th & 7th. > > In my paper for the ON Board on the subject of forming an > Old North Davis Historic District, I recommended that selected > sections of the north side of 7th between C and G be included > in the proposed historic district. (The 500 block of G was > also left out of the City's historic district proposal, also > for no good historic reason; it was also not surveyed.) > > ============ > > > 7th street is dominated (numerically) by residents of multi-unit dwellings > > (apartments). That is why (in part) that area was not originally included. > > We could easily get into a situation where an apartment owner could > 'ask' > > tenants to join and push for something we would not want. Remember the B > > Street "Visioning" processes. > > > > If North 7th is included, we might want to consider limiting memberships: > > to *owners* of multi-units; or to residents with x years residency; or to > > residents/owners of single- or double-units only. I would prefer the > > latter restriction. > > > > Dan Q > > > > > > On 10/01/08 1:06 PM, Valerie Vann wrote: > >> Board, > >> > >> What I propose for discussion is a bylaws > >> amendment to include > >> (1) the North side of > >> 7th Street between the RR and B Street > >> within Old North Davis (full membership), > >> > >> and > >> > >> (2) a non-voting (i.e. non-Board eligible) > >> Associate Membership for > >> residents (only) within the adjacent areas of the > >> Conservation District not covered by other > >> neighborhood associations. (This would mainly > >> pick up residents in the Downtown between > >> 5th and the RR.) > >> > >> Valerie > >> ---- > >> Valerie Vann > >> valerie at vanngroup.com > >> > >> > >> > >> sheryl lynn gerety wrote: > >>> Board, > >>> > >>> While we might for good reasons hesitate to invite membership from > non- > >>> residents, we might consider -- for the quicker relief of our D > Street > >>> neighbors from the dysfunctional homeless population prowling > their > >>> yards -- forming a Neighborhood Watch program with them? > >>> > >>> If this doesn't strike you as totally unworkable I might try > to meet > >>> with the NW coordinator to see how this all works. It takes some > >>> patrolling by neighbors, but I think we are already to some extent > >>> engaged in that as the numbers of seriously ill folk rise. Plus > even > >>> a little training is a good thing. It is obvious to me from one > >>> meeting and Paul's account of the fist fight at Grace House > yesterday > >>> (Thurdsay 25 November) that Grace House staff has not been > adequately > >>> trained to deal with criminal behavior, if trained at all. Plus > so > >>> long as they remain part of the services offered they could be put > on > >>> notice that they need to be part of our Watch program. > >>> > >>> If you like, we might take this up at the next Board Meeting. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Sheryl > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> ondboard mailing list > >>> ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > >>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ondboard mailing list > >> ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard > >> > >> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ondboard mailing list > ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ondboard mailing list > ondboard at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/ondboard