Cardinal Management Group is our new management company located at 4330 Prince William Pkwy, Suite 201, Woodbridge VA 22192.
Tom Markell, Community Manager, is available at (703) 565-5009. Nicole Tavano, his assistant, is available at (703) 565-5007. David York, Accounting, is available at (703) 565-5301.
The condominium website is http://southamptoncondominium.com/
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Decal required in "RESERVED" space only
The January 9, 2013 letter from the Community Manager regarding new parking stickers states, "If you fail to meet this deadline your vehicle may be towed." The deadline is January 31, 2013.
We sought clarification from Nicole Tavano, administrative assistant, and received confirmation that stickers are required only for "RESERVED" spaces — as they have been since the parking plan was first established.
We sought clarification from Nicole Tavano, administrative assistant, and received confirmation that stickers are required only for "RESERVED" spaces — as they have been since the parking plan was first established.
Sunday, December 30, 2012
Retroactive collection of 'unassessed condominium fees'
Letter to Management company
Mr. Markell:
I have carefully reviewed your letter of December 20, 2012 and the enclosed tables. I note that the budget calls for the cited 3.43% increase in condominium fees over last year. I also note that the letter states that "the increase will go into effect beginning in February and last through October." The statement is incorrect and, thus, misleading to the Owners.
Based on the Assessment Breakout Schedule, the 3.43% increase will be collected over the last 8 months of FY13 (Feb. to Sept.) but the actual increase went into effect beginning October 2012. In truth, the HOA is making retroactive collections over the final 8 months of the FY. (Does the HOA have the authority or power to charge and collect fees retroactively?)
For example, if a 3.43% increase became effective on February 1, Type a unit owners would pay $352 per month, not $355. The extra fee is to retroactively collect the increase from October 2012 to January 2013.
I realize that this may be a small dollar point in the scheme of things, but accounting accuracy is required when fiduciaries are handling other people's $1,030,292.
On behalf of my fellow owners, I would appreciate a prompt correction to the letter of December 20, 2012, as to the commencement date of the increase. Further, I would appreciate the Board looking into whether or not it may retroactively collect previously unassessed condominium fees.
Thank you.
Steven Levine
Owner: 1729B South Hayes St.
2631 S. Grant Street
Arlington, VA 22202
Mr. Markell:
I have carefully reviewed your letter of December 20, 2012 and the enclosed tables. I note that the budget calls for the cited 3.43% increase in condominium fees over last year. I also note that the letter states that "the increase will go into effect beginning in February and last through October." The statement is incorrect and, thus, misleading to the Owners.
Based on the Assessment Breakout Schedule, the 3.43% increase will be collected over the last 8 months of FY13 (Feb. to Sept.) but the actual increase went into effect beginning October 2012. In truth, the HOA is making retroactive collections over the final 8 months of the FY. (Does the HOA have the authority or power to charge and collect fees retroactively?)
For example, if a 3.43% increase became effective on February 1, Type a unit owners would pay $352 per month, not $355. The extra fee is to retroactively collect the increase from October 2012 to January 2013.
I realize that this may be a small dollar point in the scheme of things, but accounting accuracy is required when fiduciaries are handling other people's $1,030,292.
On behalf of my fellow owners, I would appreciate a prompt correction to the letter of December 20, 2012, as to the commencement date of the increase. Further, I would appreciate the Board looking into whether or not it may retroactively collect previously unassessed condominium fees.
Thank you.
Steven Levine
Owner: 1729B South Hayes St.
2631 S. Grant Street
Arlington, VA 22202
Friday, September 21, 2012
A more cost-effective and equitable parking plan
We can cut costs and have a parking plan that's more fair and easier to enforce.
Issue each unit one parking permit, for the RESERVED spaces only, to hang from their rear-view mirror. It would have the unit number on both sides in bold letters about an inch tall.
I was at an apartment complex in Herndon today that does this. They use a plastic permit about the size of a cell phone.
Currently each of the 220 units have an assigned space, and are allotted two stickers each to park in the 68 unassigned (RESERVED) spaces — no sticker is required for owners (and whoever they permit) to park in their assigned space.
The problem is that this plan can have 440 cars competing for 68 RESERVED spaces. It’s also costly to administer.
Issue one movable permit, bearing the owner’s unit number, to each owner. The owner, or his guests, may then use this permit to park in any RESERVED space.
This proposal would not change the use of assigned spaces, but there would then be 220 cars (instead of 440 cars) competing for the 68 RESERVED spaces.
It would reduce administration costs because each owner gets one permit with their unit number (no need for street names since unit numbers do not duplicate).
The management agent would not have to track who has what permit. Parking enforcers would need only to see if cars in RESERVED spaces have the movable permit. Unit owners would not have the hassle of sending registration information to the management agent.
If an owner loses the pass, do what Arlington County does, issue a new permit at the beginning of the next year.
Issue each unit one parking permit, for the RESERVED spaces only, to hang from their rear-view mirror. It would have the unit number on both sides in bold letters about an inch tall.
I was at an apartment complex in Herndon today that does this. They use a plastic permit about the size of a cell phone.
Currently each of the 220 units have an assigned space, and are allotted two stickers each to park in the 68 unassigned (RESERVED) spaces — no sticker is required for owners (and whoever they permit) to park in their assigned space.
The problem is that this plan can have 440 cars competing for 68 RESERVED spaces. It’s also costly to administer.
Issue one movable permit, bearing the owner’s unit number, to each owner. The owner, or his guests, may then use this permit to park in any RESERVED space.
This proposal would not change the use of assigned spaces, but there would then be 220 cars (instead of 440 cars) competing for the 68 RESERVED spaces.
It would reduce administration costs because each owner gets one permit with their unit number (no need for street names since unit numbers do not duplicate).
The management agent would not have to track who has what permit. Parking enforcers would need only to see if cars in RESERVED spaces have the movable permit. Unit owners would not have the hassle of sending registration information to the management agent.
If an owner loses the pass, do what Arlington County does, issue a new permit at the beginning of the next year.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Color, satellite photo of neighborhood
To view a color, satellite photo of the neighborhood, plug in the address at http://neighbors.whitepages.com/
Thursday, June 21, 2012
No response to window replacement request
On March 6, 2012 we submitted the required information to Steve Peacock (CMS) seeking approval to replace windows. We stated, that time is of the essence so that we don't lose the 40% discount we've been offered.
Since we have not received any decision within the required 90 days, "approval will not be required and this ARTICLE will be deemed to have been fully complied with." — Bylaws, Article XI
Timeline
December 24, 2011 — Letter from Sentry Management listing Steve Peacock, Community Manager
March 6, 2012 — Request (with plans and specifications) to Steve Peacock re. Replacement of windows and sliding glass door
March 6, 2012 — Corrected request (with plans and specifications) to Steve Peacock re. Replacement of windows and sliding glass door
April 30, 2012 — Letter from Sentry Management listing Peter Ordonez, Community Manager
June 6, 2012 — 90 day period for decision by the Board of Directors expires
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Is anyone enforcing the bylaws?
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Saturday, March 17, 2012
CLEAR Internet: excellent to painfully slow
Back in June 2010 we reported on CLEAR's Internet service. For the most part it was excellent, and reasonably priced. It's still reasonably priced, but it now ranges from excellent to painfully slow.
With download speeds often below one MB/sec, it's impossible to watch Netflix like CLEAR's banners proclaimed in June 2010.
Posted to YELP
With download speeds often below one MB/sec, it's impossible to watch Netflix like CLEAR's banners proclaimed in June 2010.
Posted to YELP
UPDATE April 25, 2012 — For the past month, download speeds have been consistently excellent, i.e. between 9 and 10 MB/sec.
Friday, March 2, 2012
Architectural control
According to Benny L Kass, attorney and columnist for the Washington Post, the following will be valid defenses by a unit owner when the board tries to seek enforcement of the architectural standards:
· Arbitrary and capricious actions have been taken. The architectural standards must be applied fairly and consistently, across the board and in good faith. They cannot be selectively enforced. It is improper for a board or its architectural review committee to pick and choose the enforcement of the covenants.
· Delays, or "laches," have occurred. This means that the board has permitted a lengthy time to elapse before taking action against a unit owner. For example, one court has ruled that a board's six-month delay in filing suit against an unauthorized fence barred the board from enforcing the covenants. If a unit owner is in violation of the architectural standards, or at least the board believes there is a violation, the board must begin prompt action to assure compliance.
· A waiver has been granted to another owner. Basically, if the board fails to enforce a covenant in the case of one homeowner, it may be prohibited from enforcing the same standards against another homeowner in a similar situation.
According to the Condominium Act, § 55-79.80:2, the "unit owners' association shall have the power, to . . . assess charges against any unit owner for any violation of the condominium instruments or of the rules or regulations promulgated pursuant thereto . . . [C]harges so assessed shall not exceed $50 for a single offense, or $10 per diem for any offense of a continuing nature, and shall be treated as an assessment against such unit owner's condominium unit for the purpose of § 55-79.84. However, the total charges for any offense of a continuing nature shall not be assessed for a period exceeding 90 days."
"Before any such suspension or charges may be imposed, the unit owner shall be given an opportunity to be heard and to be represented by counsel before the executive organ or such other tribunal as the condominium instruments or rules duly adopted pursuant thereto specify."
· Arbitrary and capricious actions have been taken. The architectural standards must be applied fairly and consistently, across the board and in good faith. They cannot be selectively enforced. It is improper for a board or its architectural review committee to pick and choose the enforcement of the covenants.
· Delays, or "laches," have occurred. This means that the board has permitted a lengthy time to elapse before taking action against a unit owner. For example, one court has ruled that a board's six-month delay in filing suit against an unauthorized fence barred the board from enforcing the covenants. If a unit owner is in violation of the architectural standards, or at least the board believes there is a violation, the board must begin prompt action to assure compliance.
· A waiver has been granted to another owner. Basically, if the board fails to enforce a covenant in the case of one homeowner, it may be prohibited from enforcing the same standards against another homeowner in a similar situation.
According to the Condominium Act, § 55-79.80:2, the "unit owners' association shall have the power, to . . . assess charges against any unit owner for any violation of the condominium instruments or of the rules or regulations promulgated pursuant thereto . . . [C]harges so assessed shall not exceed $50 for a single offense, or $10 per diem for any offense of a continuing nature, and shall be treated as an assessment against such unit owner's condominium unit for the purpose of § 55-79.84. However, the total charges for any offense of a continuing nature shall not be assessed for a period exceeding 90 days."
"Before any such suspension or charges may be imposed, the unit owner shall be given an opportunity to be heard and to be represented by counsel before the executive organ or such other tribunal as the condominium instruments or rules duly adopted pursuant thereto specify."
Friday, February 17, 2012
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Roof colors: good, bad, ugly
Does having different color schemes comply with the Condominium Declaration? Declaration Article XI.B, requires "a uniform plan for the development and operation of the Condominium."
At the very least, the Board could have polled Association members as to whether or not they would like a uniform color scheme throughout Southampton.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Is this any way to run an election?
We received a letter from the management agent informing us of the October 13 Annual Meeting, and a proxy form for electing homeowners to serve on the Board of Directors. Just one problem: How does one complete a proxy form when there's no information on the number of vacancies on the Board, and a listing of candidates?
Monday, June 13, 2011
Doesn't the red door look better?
The condominium documents require uniform rules for the operation of the condominium.
Presumably, what one owner is permitted to do, others may not be prohibited from doing — this door sets a precedent for the red door.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Nice door. Can we have one like it?
More on architectural control.
If you wish to comment, note rule at top of page: "Comments must include a name, email address, and unit number."
Monday, April 11, 2011
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Trimming trees on the building side only?
Spoke to one of the tree trimmers. He said he was told to trim trees on the building side only. Does this make sense?
It does, if you're going to trim a few branches. It doesn't, if you're going to chop off one side of the tree like these guys did.
Here's a nicely pruned Crepe Myrtles.
It does, if you're going to trim a few branches. It doesn't, if you're going to chop off one side of the tree like these guys did.
Here's a nicely pruned Crepe Myrtles.
Monday, February 14, 2011
Monday, January 3, 2011
Monday, November 15, 2010
Who's on the Board now
Anny Wong (658-B), sh22202@hotmail.com — President
Bernard Alter (1661-B), bjalter@hotmail.com — Vice President
Mike Pickford (1645-A) — Treasurer
Carlos Vasquez (726-A), sh22202@gmail.com — Secretary
Duff McCully (656-A), rdmccully@comcst.net
Joe Smith (654-B), joesmith@mris.com
Gene Tighe (618-B), eftighe@verizon.net
Bernard Alter (1661-B), bjalter@hotmail.com — Vice President
Mike Pickford (1645-A) — Treasurer
Carlos Vasquez (726-A), sh22202@gmail.com — Secretary
Duff McCully (656-A), rdmccully@comcst.net
Joe Smith (654-B), joesmith@mris.com
Gene Tighe (618-B), eftighe@verizon.net
Friday, October 15, 2010
How is landscaping prioritized?
Last winter did a lot of damage, but the damage in these pictures — all from the limited common area at 1705, 1707 S Hayes St — was done over several years.
There used to be a tall bush here — reaching the railing.
There used to be a tall bush here — reaching the railing.
There were two bushes here. Now we have the remnants of one, a creeper planted by a tenant, weeds, and a tree that was supposed to replace a dead tree on the other side of the steps.
These were two healthy bushes.
Some areas of the condominium seem to be well maintained. Others are neglected. How is landscaping being prioritized? Is anyone inspecting what's done?
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Board lowers bar for election fraud
On October 1, 2010, CMS sent a letter informing homeowners that they "may send in the proxy without it being witnessed by another unit owner." This is an invitation for fraud.
Proxies must have controls to assure that they're not misused. The proxies I receive for my stock holdings have my name, address, the number of shares held, etc., and they are submitted to a third party — not a management agent whose contract depends on good relations with the Board.
The color-coded proxies we received represented different amounts of voting rights. If the Board wanted to do away with witness requirements, they could easily have mailed out proxies with the unit owners' name, address, and voting percentage printed on the proxy.
Proxies must have controls to assure that they're not misused. The proxies I receive for my stock holdings have my name, address, the number of shares held, etc., and they are submitted to a third party — not a management agent whose contract depends on good relations with the Board.
The color-coded proxies we received represented different amounts of voting rights. If the Board wanted to do away with witness requirements, they could easily have mailed out proxies with the unit owners' name, address, and voting percentage printed on the proxy.
Installed Apple TV, considering dropping DirecTV
Installed Apple TV yesterday, and I'm considering dropping DirecTV.
Apple TV runs off the Internet, and you pay $99 to purchase it — no monthly fees. Depending on your needs, this may be all you need.
Apple TV runs off the Internet, and you pay $99 to purchase it — no monthly fees. Depending on your needs, this may be all you need.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
What is the legal basis for a 'door prize'?
A "door prize" — waiver of a month's condo fee — is being offered for attending the annual meeting. We find no legal basis for this offer.
What's next? Move in expenses? Southampton is not an apartment house. The Board is required to abide by the condominium documents.
What's next? Move in expenses? Southampton is not an apartment house. The Board is required to abide by the condominium documents.
Friday, September 24, 2010
Who is up for election?
The notice for the October 14 meeting of the Association includes a proxy form but does not list the candidates for the Board of Directors.
Owners are asked to check one of three boxes. Box C requires the proxy holder to cast votes for the person selected by the unit owner. There are no candidates listed, and there's no blank to write in one's selection.
Owners are asked to check one of three boxes. Box C requires the proxy holder to cast votes for the person selected by the unit owner. There are no candidates listed, and there's no blank to write in one's selection.
Friday, July 30, 2010
For sale, rent, etc
Have something to sell, rent, etc.? Just add your comment with name and contact information.
Older listings
Older listings
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Room rentals by the day at Southampton?
Jeff@NOVASublets.com has "advertised: "Available this Friday and Saturday for only $50/night. . . . Normal rate is: $70/night or $400/week."
Bylaws, Article X Use Restrictions, Section 3 prohibits this.
Bylaws, Article X Use Restrictions, Section 3 prohibits this.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Why isn't the Board taking care of plants in limited common areas?
Plants, patios, steps in the limited common areas used to be the responsibility of individual homeowners. But then the Board changed the Bylaws (arguably in an unlawful manner, and without budgeting for the change) to make these the responsibility of the Association. Now it's not clear who is responsible for maintaining these.
I talked today to the folks who were trimming a tree overhanging my steps and car. He trimmed the tree over the sidewalk, but said his contract did not permit him to go into the limited common areas to trim that portion of the tree. He also said that's why they hadn't mulched the limited common area.
Why isn't the Board taking care of plants in limited common areas?
I talked today to the folks who were trimming a tree overhanging my steps and car. He trimmed the tree over the sidewalk, but said his contract did not permit him to go into the limited common areas to trim that portion of the tree. He also said that's why they hadn't mulched the limited common area.
Why isn't the Board taking care of plants in limited common areas?
Monday, June 14, 2010
WiMAX now available in our area
I placed my order on Friday, June 18, received the CLEAR modem on Monday, and connected to the Internet in minutes.
With Verizon I was getting 1500 kbps downloads, and 375 kbps uploads. Here's what I'm getting on CLEAR.
BEST so far: Download Speed: 5528 kbps (691 KB/sec transfer rate); Upload Speed: 823 kbps (102.9 KB/sec transfer rate).
WORST so far: Download Speed: 2925 kbps (365.6 KB/sec transfer rate); Upload Speed: 154 kbps (19.3 KB/sec transfer rate).
The best I could get from Verizon DSL: Download Speed: 1529 kbps (191.1 KB/sec transfer rate); Upload Speed: 380 kbps (47.5 KB/sec transfer rate).
WiMAX competitor LTE (Long Term Evolution) is expected to be deployed next year, and appears to be the 4G favorite.
If you're looking for unlimited broadband at a reasonable price, check out CLEAR. It's now available in our area — see coverage map. Email Alan Hewitt at alan.hewitt@clearwire.com and tell him that Enver Masud referred you to him.
PS Here are test results from SpeedTest.net:
Friday, May 14, 2010
CMS property manager accused of embezzling $365,000
An Alexandria woman who worked as an agent for a Fairfax County property management company has been arrested for allegedly embezzling $365,000 from the account of an Alexandria apartment complex.
Wendy R. West, 35, was a management agent for Control Management Systems & Services Inc., . . .
Wendy R. West, 35, was a management agent for Control Management Systems & Services Inc., . . .
Saturday, May 8, 2010
A more equitable and cost-effective parking plan?
Currently each of the 220 units have an assigned space, and are allotted two stickers each to park in the 68 unassigned spaces — no sticker is required for owners (and whoever they permit) to park in their assigned space.
The problem is that this plan potentially has 440 cars competing for 68 unassigned spaces. It’s also costly to administer.
Here’s a proposal for providing more equitable, and cost effective, access to the unassigned spaces.
Issue one movable pass, bearing the owner’s unit number, to each owner. The owner, or his guests, may then use this pass to park in any unassigned space.
This proposal would not change the use of assigned spaces, but there would then be 220 cars (instead of 440 cars) competing for the 68 unassigned spaces.
It would reduce administration costs because each owner gets one pass with their unit number (no need for street names since unit numbers do not duplicate).
The management agent would not have to track who has what pass. Parking enforcers would need only to see if cars in unassigned spaces have the movable pass.
The problem is that this plan potentially has 440 cars competing for 68 unassigned spaces. It’s also costly to administer.
Here’s a proposal for providing more equitable, and cost effective, access to the unassigned spaces.
Issue one movable pass, bearing the owner’s unit number, to each owner. The owner, or his guests, may then use this pass to park in any unassigned space.
This proposal would not change the use of assigned spaces, but there would then be 220 cars (instead of 440 cars) competing for the 68 unassigned spaces.
It would reduce administration costs because each owner gets one pass with their unit number (no need for street names since unit numbers do not duplicate).
The management agent would not have to track who has what pass. Parking enforcers would need only to see if cars in unassigned spaces have the movable pass.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Southampton Board ignoring § 55-79.75:1 Virginia Condominium Act
For 7 years, the Southampton Board has ignored § 55-79.75:1 Virginia Condominium Act regarding distribution of information by members. Specifically:
A. The executive organ shall establish a reasonable, effective, and free method, appropriate to the size and nature of the condominium, for unit owners to communicate among themselves and with the executive organ regarding any matter concerning the unit owners' association.
B. Except as otherwise provided in the condominium instruments, the executive organ shall not require prior approval of the dissemination or content of any material regarding any matter concerning the unit owners' association.
We expected better from the new Board.
A. The executive organ shall establish a reasonable, effective, and free method, appropriate to the size and nature of the condominium, for unit owners to communicate among themselves and with the executive organ regarding any matter concerning the unit owners' association.
B. Except as otherwise provided in the condominium instruments, the executive organ shall not require prior approval of the dissemination or content of any material regarding any matter concerning the unit owners' association.
We expected better from the new Board.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Sky Broadband offers 20 Mbps service; Verizon 1.5 Mbps
Sky Broadband customers who enjoy internet as part of their TV and phone packages will have their connection speeds boosted up to 20 Mbps. The maximum available from Verizon in Southampton is 1.5 Mbps.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
FCC rules regulate satellite dishes in community associations
In January 2006, a non-penetrating antenna mount was shown to several Board members, and installed by a homeowner. Refer to your Homeowner's Manual, and the FCC Information Sheet, for more information.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Friday, February 5, 2010
Why do we have this blog?
Why do we have this independent, homeowner-moderated blog? Several reasons:
ONE, for several years, despite being asked to do so, the Board has failed to comply with Code of Virginia, § 55-79.75:1 Distribution of information by members.
TWO, cover up of a check drawn from Southampton funds given to Handley (Treasurer) while she and Thompson (President) were awaiting trial on a charge of grand larceny.
THREE, on two occasions (2001, 2008) this moderator's statement was not included among the candidate statements in the election package sent to homeowners. To my knowledge, no other candidate's statement has ever been excluded from the election package. No legal justification was provided.
FOUR, repeated and continuing failure of the Board to comply with the Code of Virginia § 55-79.75 Meetings of unit owners' associations and executive organ — Sections B and C.
ONE, for several years, despite being asked to do so, the Board has failed to comply with Code of Virginia, § 55-79.75:1 Distribution of information by members.
A. The executive organ shall establish a reasonable, effective, and free method, appropriate to the size and nature of the condominium, for unit owners to communicate among themselves and with the executive organ regarding any matter concerning the unit owners' association.
B. Except as otherwise provided in the condominium instruments, the executive organ shall not require prior approval of the dissemination or content of any material regarding any matter concerning the unit owners' association.
TWO, cover up of a check drawn from Southampton funds given to Handley (Treasurer) while she and Thompson (President) were awaiting trial on a charge of grand larceny.
THREE, on two occasions (2001, 2008) this moderator's statement was not included among the candidate statements in the election package sent to homeowners. To my knowledge, no other candidate's statement has ever been excluded from the election package. No legal justification was provided.
FOUR, repeated and continuing failure of the Board to comply with the Code of Virginia § 55-79.75 Meetings of unit owners' associations and executive organ — Sections B and C.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Contacting members of the Board of Directors
All seven members of the Board of Directors may be contacted by emailing shchoa@gmail.com. Doing so will also put you on the Board's mailing list* for the Board to contact you.
The current Board of Directors:
Anny Wong (President) — sh22202@hotmail.com
Robert Dogan (Vice President) — rdogan@aol.com
Carlos Vasquez (Secretary) — cvdoj@hotmail.com
Michael Pickford (Treasurer) — mikeandcol@gmail.com
Duff McCully — rdmcully@comcast.net
Joe Smith — joesmith@mris.net
Jess Watkins — ghostwnd@verizon.net
The CMS contact is Steve Peacock — speacock@cmsserv.com.
*Questions:
(1) Who owns this mailing list? The Board or the Association? If it is the latter, the list is available to all homeowners on demand. If it is the former, why is the Board using Association funds to build the list? The list was promoted in The Southampton Herald, January 2010, mailed to homeowners at the Association's expense.
(2) Are the mailings part of Association records many of which are by law available to all homeowners? Where are these records stored, and what is the procedure for viewing them?
(3) Does the Board authorize each email? Is this authorization included in the minutes of Board meetings? Individual directors have no authority to direct homeowners to do anything?
The current Board of Directors:
Anny Wong (President) — sh22202@hotmail.com
Robert Dogan (Vice President) — rdogan@aol.com
Carlos Vasquez (Secretary) — cvdoj@hotmail.com
Michael Pickford (Treasurer) — mikeandcol@gmail.com
Duff McCully — rdmcully@comcast.net
Joe Smith — joesmith@mris.net
Jess Watkins — ghostwnd@verizon.net
The CMS contact is Steve Peacock — speacock@cmsserv.com.
*Questions:
(1) Who owns this mailing list? The Board or the Association? If it is the latter, the list is available to all homeowners on demand. If it is the former, why is the Board using Association funds to build the list? The list was promoted in The Southampton Herald, January 2010, mailed to homeowners at the Association's expense.
(2) Are the mailings part of Association records many of which are by law available to all homeowners? Where are these records stored, and what is the procedure for viewing them?
(3) Does the Board authorize each email? Is this authorization included in the minutes of Board meetings? Individual directors have no authority to direct homeowners to do anything?
Monday, January 18, 2010
Phones working—for now
Verizon informed a Southampton resident: "The number you are reporting is part of an outage. The estimated restoration time for this outage is 2/1/2010 9:00 PM." . . . but phones started working before noon on January 18.
The outage began on the morning of January 9. We were told service would be restored on January 12, then January 14, then January 18, then February 1 !!!
If you are still without service — some are, call the Customer Care and Escalation Office (1-877-815-8494) and let them know your phone is still out.
The outage began on the morning of January 9. We were told service would be restored on January 12, then January 14, then January 18, then February 1 !!!
If you are still without service — some are, call the Customer Care and Escalation Office (1-877-815-8494) and let them know your phone is still out.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Verizon outage update
Cynthia Kellams reports: A number of residents in the Arlington Ridge and Aurora Highlands neighborhoods of Arlington (including Southampton) have been without Verizon landline service for many days ... and, in some cases, weeks. Initially it was reported the outage was due to four cables being cut on Columbia Pike over a week ago. The vast majority of lines affected in that incident have been restored. Last night (1/15) Verizon alerted the County's Office of Emergency Management they'd discovered problems with another much older cable that affects approximately 160 phone lines. Repairs are being made and service is expected to be restored by 9 pm Monday, January 18. If you are still without service and have not already reported your outage to Verizon, do so by calling 1-800-837-4966. If it's still out on Monday, call their Customer Care and Escalation Office at 1-877-815-8494 to register a complaint and request repair. A real person typically answers the second number, but that office in only open during regular business hours Monday through Friday. If you hope to receive any relief on your next Verizon bill, it's important you report your problem and its duration.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Verizon phone, Internet outage in Arlington, Virginia expected to be repaired after NINE days
Our Verizon phone and Internet service has been out since the morning of Saturday, January 9.
We were told it would be restored by the following Tuesday, that was changed to Thursday, and now Verizon is saying it will be Monday evening — making it 9 days (if it gets done then).
We're not out in the boondocks, we're in the shadow of the Pentagon, and the weather has been quite nice lately.
And we don't see any Verizon crews in our neighborhood.
We were told it would be restored by the following Tuesday, that was changed to Thursday, and now Verizon is saying it will be Monday evening — making it 9 days (if it gets done then).
We're not out in the boondocks, we're in the shadow of the Pentagon, and the weather has been quite nice lately.
And we don't see any Verizon crews in our neighborhood.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Is your Verizon landline working?
Several residents of Southampton have reported that their Verizon landline and DSL have not been working since Saturday morning. Initially, Verizon said service would be restored by Tuesday night. Now we're hearing that has been moved to Thursday night.
Let us know how you're doing, and if you learn anything new.
Let us know how you're doing, and if you learn anything new.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Board Chairman Conforti flouting county code
Despite being handed a notice by Arlington County Fire Marshalls, Board Chairman Conforti still has a grill on his patio, He's not alone. Several homeowners have yet to remove their charcoal or gas grills.
Friday, August 21, 2009
Barbecue grills: Fire Marshalls hand notice to Board Chairman
Having ignored the issue brought to his attention by a concerned homeowner, two Arlington County Fire Marshalls handed a notice to Board Chairman Conforti at the August 13 meeting of the Board of Directors.
Virginia law and Arlington County code (page 21) prohibit the use and/or storage of charcoal and gas grills within 15 feet of the building. Electric grills are permitted.
Penalties (page 6) for non-compliance can be as much as $2500 and/or one year imprisonment. "Each day that a violation continues after service of notice, as provided for in the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code, shall be deemed a separate offense."
Non-compliance could also cause our insurance rates to increase, and/or a denial of reimbursement in case of fire.
Virginia law and Arlington County code (page 21) prohibit the use and/or storage of charcoal and gas grills within 15 feet of the building. Electric grills are permitted.
Penalties (page 6) for non-compliance can be as much as $2500 and/or one year imprisonment. "Each day that a violation continues after service of notice, as provided for in the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code, shall be deemed a separate offense."
Non-compliance could also cause our insurance rates to increase, and/or a denial of reimbursement in case of fire.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
My experience with HP Chat Support
Enver Masud : HP Photosmart C4250, Serial No MY75NFN0XX Mac OS X 10.5.6: Alignment failed - fails to detect alignment page. Repeated procedure specified at your site. Using black cartridge only.
[An agent will be with you shortly.]
[You are now chatting with BRAY_Bidhubhusan .]
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Welcome to HP Total Care for Printer support. My name is Bidhu. Please give me a few moments while I review your issue description.
Enver Masud : ... actually color cartridge is out of ink. I don't need it.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : May I know the Model number and Serial number of your Printer?
Enver Masud : It is in the first line of my message
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, Okay , I got it.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Thank you for the information.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, Could you please elaborate the issue, so that I would assist you better.
Enver Masud : The message I get in the printer LCD is "failed to detect alignment page"
BRAY_Bidhubhusan :
Enver, It is Okay.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, could you please tell me when did you get the message ? I mean what you are trying to do ?
Enver Masud : What is OK?
Enver Masud : I got the message a few days after I replaced the black cartridge.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, Whether the message 'Alignment failed ' displays on the product control panel?
Enver Masud : yes
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, I am going to provide you a link. Just follow the steps given in the page. I think this will resolve your issue.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c01637692&cc=us&lc=en&dlc=en&product=3300221
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Here is the link.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver Let me know are you comfortable to open the link ?
Enver Masud : I've already done this 3 times before contacting HP.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, could you please tell me which Operating system you are using ?
Enver Masud : It's in the first line of this chat - Mac OS X 10.5.6
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Okay.BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, This was the best solution which I have given. Since you are using mac operating system.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : I apologize for the inconvenience caused for you; we do not offer Chat support for the Macintosh operating system. However, we do offer e-mail and phone support. Please visit the Web site listed below for e-mail support.
http://h20180.www2.hp.com/apps/Nav?h_pagetype=email&h_lang=en&h_cc=us&h_product=236252&lc=en&cc=us
For phone support please call 1-800-474-6836. Business hours are Monday through Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Mountain Time.
NOTE: Out of warranty products may require a fee.
[One can read the above in about a minute, but online this exchange wasted about 30 minutes of my time. Given that I opened the chat with all needed information, HP support should have given me their final answer immediately.]
[An agent will be with you shortly.]
[You are now chatting with BRAY_Bidhubhusan .]
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Welcome to HP Total Care for Printer support. My name is Bidhu. Please give me a few moments while I review your issue description.
Enver Masud : ... actually color cartridge is out of ink. I don't need it.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : May I know the Model number and Serial number of your Printer?
Enver Masud : It is in the first line of my message
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, Okay , I got it.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Thank you for the information.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, Could you please elaborate the issue, so that I would assist you better.
Enver Masud : The message I get in the printer LCD is "failed to detect alignment page"
BRAY_Bidhubhusan :
Enver, It is Okay.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, could you please tell me when did you get the message ? I mean what you are trying to do ?
Enver Masud : What is OK?
Enver Masud : I got the message a few days after I replaced the black cartridge.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, Whether the message 'Alignment failed ' displays on the product control panel?
Enver Masud : yes
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, I am going to provide you a link. Just follow the steps given in the page. I think this will resolve your issue.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c01637692&cc=us&lc=en&dlc=en&product=3300221
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Here is the link.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver Let me know are you comfortable to open the link ?
Enver Masud : I've already done this 3 times before contacting HP.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, could you please tell me which Operating system you are using ?
Enver Masud : It's in the first line of this chat - Mac OS X 10.5.6
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Okay.BRAY_Bidhubhusan : Enver, This was the best solution which I have given. Since you are using mac operating system.
BRAY_Bidhubhusan : I apologize for the inconvenience caused for you; we do not offer Chat support for the Macintosh operating system. However, we do offer e-mail and phone support. Please visit the Web site listed below for e-mail support.
http://h20180.www2.hp.com/apps/Nav?h_pagetype=email&h_lang=en&h_cc=us&h_product=236252&lc=en&cc=us
For phone support please call 1-800-474-6836. Business hours are Monday through Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Mountain Time.
NOTE: Out of warranty products may require a fee.
[One can read the above in about a minute, but online this exchange wasted about 30 minutes of my time. Given that I opened the chat with all needed information, HP support should have given me their final answer immediately.]
Monday, January 5, 2009
Condominium resale packages found deficient
"A recent sales contract for a Southampton [unit ] was declared null and void by the Purchaser," says Southampton board member Joe Smith. Joe "was told that a primary reason for the action was the poor quality of the Condominium Resale Certificate package."
Joe has detailed the specifics in a 5-page document, and has asked that this issue be placed on the agenda for the next Board meeting
Joe has detailed the specifics in a 5-page document, and has asked that this issue be placed on the agenda for the next Board meeting
Friday, October 10, 2008
Think hard before changing the bylaws
There have been two changes to Southampton bylaws, and the results are not positive.
The first changed the bylaw limiting residents to one small cat or dog to any number of pets of any size — provided they did not disturb others. Lately, there has been an attempt to enforce the old bylaw. Of course this cannot be done without another bylaw change.
The second change had to do with the patios on lower units, and steps to upper units, which used to be the responsibility of individual unit owners (or both when shared). The Board had the authority to bill unit owners and perform the work if the unit owner did not.
Under the new bylaw the patios and stairs became the responsibility of the Association, but little or no consideration was given to what this would cost. The result: deferred maintenance, plundering from other budget items, and a condominium not as well maintained as it used to be.
The second change in bylaw was done in violation of the Virginia Condominium Act § 55-79.71.E which requires that "100 percent of the unit owners" agree to changing "the liability for common expenses".
Now it appears that more bylaw changes have been proposed. Of course, the Association's attorney would like to change the bylaws — it adds to his billings.
The first changed the bylaw limiting residents to one small cat or dog to any number of pets of any size — provided they did not disturb others. Lately, there has been an attempt to enforce the old bylaw. Of course this cannot be done without another bylaw change.
The second change had to do with the patios on lower units, and steps to upper units, which used to be the responsibility of individual unit owners (or both when shared). The Board had the authority to bill unit owners and perform the work if the unit owner did not.
Under the new bylaw the patios and stairs became the responsibility of the Association, but little or no consideration was given to what this would cost. The result: deferred maintenance, plundering from other budget items, and a condominium not as well maintained as it used to be.
The second change in bylaw was done in violation of the Virginia Condominium Act § 55-79.71.E which requires that "100 percent of the unit owners" agree to changing "the liability for common expenses".
Now it appears that more bylaw changes have been proposed. Of course, the Association's attorney would like to change the bylaws — it adds to his billings.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Southampton election a sham?
TO BE HAND DELIVERED AT 2008 ANNUAL MEETING
To: The Board of Directors, Southampton Condominium
My candidate statement below (reformatted to save paper) was submitted on time, and in the requested format to CMS. Its receipt was acknowledged by CMS’ Yolande Nanji. However, it was not included in the election package mailed to homeowners, and my name was not included on the proxy form.
The Association Secretary, under whose signature the election package was mailed, has not responded to my inquiry regarding this omission.
It is my understanding that this issue was not decided at a meeting of the Board, (1) who made the decision to exclude my statement from the election package, and (2) please cite the legal authority for this decision.
A Southampton election that excludes any Southampton homeowner without a legally supportable cause, is not valid.
ENVER MASUD
Engineering Management Consultant, Southampton Blogger
At the 2007 Annual Meeting, following the biggest voter turnout in Southampton history, the Southampton president and secretary were voted off the Board of Directors — they had withdrawn $8885 to defend themselves against charges of grand larceny. One would have thought that the new Board would rectify the matter. This has not been the case.
The new Board chair Conforti has refused to even hear witnesses in this matter (in which he may have a conflict of interest), and he has been supported by the other Board members who were on the Board at the time the $8885 was appropriated. Here is a summary of the facts:
• Julie Carole Handley, former Association Secretary, secretly received three checks from Association funds totaling $8885 for the legal defense of herself and Linda K. Thompson, former Association Chair, for their conduct on October 1, 2005.
• The first check to Handley for $3000 was paid out by CMS without any invoice, claim, or decision recorded in the minutes — the Secretary's responsibility — of Board meetings, and before their trial.
• The second check to Handley for $4085 was paid out by CMS without an invoice or claim to the association, or decision recorded in the minutes of Board meetings.
• The third check to Handley for $1800 was paid out by CMS without any recorded claim from Thompson and/or Handley, and without the “substance” of the Board's decision “reasonably identified” as required by the Virginia Condominium Act, §55-79.75.C.
• Southampton insurance carrier, Travelers, turned down the association's claim for “legal defense of two board members” Handley and Thompson.
• The minutes of Board meetings contain no record of a determination under Southampton Bylaws, Article VII, Section 1, that on October 1, 2005 Handley and Thompson, either did or did not, engage in “individual willful misconduct or bad faith”.
• Six witnesses presented statements that rebut Handley and Thompson's claim that, on October 1, 2005, they were carrying out their duties (removing trash) as members of the Board.
The Virginia Condominium Act, §55-79.75.C states: “No contract, motion or other action adopted, passed or agreed to in executive session shall become effective unless the executive organ or subcommittee or other committee thereof, following the executive session, reconvenes in open meeting and takes a vote on such contract, motion or other action which shall have its substance reasonably identified in the open meeting.”
At the 2007 Annual Meeting, Southampton Counsel Mercer stated that he advised the Board to pay Thompson and Handley after a “Not Guilty” verdict. The record shows that the first check to Thompson and Handley was paid on August 17, 2006 — before their trial on October 19, 2006.
However, the criteria for reimbursement is not whether Thompson and Handley were found guilty or not guilty, but whether they did or did not, engage in "individual willful misconduct or bad faith" (Southampton Bylaws, Article VII, Section 1). This decision is not recorded in the minutes.
This decision requires hearing from witnesses which the Board refuses to do, we still haven’t received the annual audit report, and if Thompson and Handley’s version of what happened on October 1, 2005 is different from that of the witnesses, we may even be looking at a case of fraud — a criminal offense.
If you’re interested in getting to the bottom of this matter, and recovering the $8885, please copy or cut out the statement below, sign, it print your name and address (joint owners must both sign), and return it to Enver Masud, 1707B S Hayes St., Arlington, VA 22202.
********************************
THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITION:
Within 60 days the Board of Directors, Southampton Condominium, shall convene in open session to (1) hear Julie Carole Handley’s and Linda K. Thompson’s claim, (2) obtain testimony of witnesses and others who have knowledge of these matters; (3) permit Association members to question participants, and (4) determine, based on the hearing record (a transcript shall be made available to Condominium owners), whether or not Handley and Thompson's conduct on October 1, 2005 constitutes "individual willful misconduct or bad faith" for which the Association is not liable.
Printed Name Signature Date
Spouse’s Name Spouse’s Signature Unit Number
********************************
For details see http://sh22202.blogspot.com/ and join our mailing list — email enver.masud@gmail.com.
Additionally, I believe we need a Board that is responsive to our needs, whose operations are transparent and lawful, which is mindful of its fiduciary duty to the owners, and which represents a broad range of knowledge and experience.
With your support we can achieve these goals. The following changes in the operation of Southampton Condominium will help us move toward them:
• If an Annual Meeting cannot be organized for lack of a quorum, the meeting will be adjourned as permitted in the Bylaws Article IV, Section 6. This option has been used in the past — the current Board has not exercised this option to obtain a quorum.
• Establish an Elections Committee to encourage participation and assure fairness. One suggestion is a “Meet the Candidates” event, held about one week before Annual Meetings, where candidates are given sufficient time to informally answer questions.
• Establish a Condominium Service Request Book (or online file), available for viewing by all homeowners, which tracks the status of service requests by members. This was a part of the management contract when the Condominium was established. Issues that cannot be resolved by the Management Agent should be placed on the agenda for the next Board meeting.
VOTE ONLY FOR YOUR TOP CHOICES
CASTING MORE VOTES WORKS AGAINST YOUR TOP CHOICES
IF YOU CAN’T COME TO THE ANNUAL MEETING, SEND YOUR PROXY TO
ENVER MASUD, 1707B S. HAYES ST., ARLINGTON, VA 22202
To: The Board of Directors, Southampton Condominium
My candidate statement below (reformatted to save paper) was submitted on time, and in the requested format to CMS. Its receipt was acknowledged by CMS’ Yolande Nanji. However, it was not included in the election package mailed to homeowners, and my name was not included on the proxy form.
The Association Secretary, under whose signature the election package was mailed, has not responded to my inquiry regarding this omission.
It is my understanding that this issue was not decided at a meeting of the Board, (1) who made the decision to exclude my statement from the election package, and (2) please cite the legal authority for this decision.
A Southampton election that excludes any Southampton homeowner without a legally supportable cause, is not valid.
Engineering Management Consultant, Southampton Blogger
At the 2007 Annual Meeting, following the biggest voter turnout in Southampton history, the Southampton president and secretary were voted off the Board of Directors — they had withdrawn $8885 to defend themselves against charges of grand larceny. One would have thought that the new Board would rectify the matter. This has not been the case.
The new Board chair Conforti has refused to even hear witnesses in this matter (in which he may have a conflict of interest), and he has been supported by the other Board members who were on the Board at the time the $8885 was appropriated. Here is a summary of the facts:
• Julie Carole Handley, former Association Secretary, secretly received three checks from Association funds totaling $8885 for the legal defense of herself and Linda K. Thompson, former Association Chair, for their conduct on October 1, 2005.
• The first check to Handley for $3000 was paid out by CMS without any invoice, claim, or decision recorded in the minutes — the Secretary's responsibility — of Board meetings, and before their trial.
• The second check to Handley for $4085 was paid out by CMS without an invoice or claim to the association, or decision recorded in the minutes of Board meetings.
• The third check to Handley for $1800 was paid out by CMS without any recorded claim from Thompson and/or Handley, and without the “substance” of the Board's decision “reasonably identified” as required by the Virginia Condominium Act, §55-79.75.C.
• Southampton insurance carrier, Travelers, turned down the association's claim for “legal defense of two board members” Handley and Thompson.
• The minutes of Board meetings contain no record of a determination under Southampton Bylaws, Article VII, Section 1, that on October 1, 2005 Handley and Thompson, either did or did not, engage in “individual willful misconduct or bad faith”.
• Six witnesses presented statements that rebut Handley and Thompson's claim that, on October 1, 2005, they were carrying out their duties (removing trash) as members of the Board.
The Virginia Condominium Act, §55-79.75.C states: “No contract, motion or other action adopted, passed or agreed to in executive session shall become effective unless the executive organ or subcommittee or other committee thereof, following the executive session, reconvenes in open meeting and takes a vote on such contract, motion or other action which shall have its substance reasonably identified in the open meeting.”
At the 2007 Annual Meeting, Southampton Counsel Mercer stated that he advised the Board to pay Thompson and Handley after a “Not Guilty” verdict. The record shows that the first check to Thompson and Handley was paid on August 17, 2006 — before their trial on October 19, 2006.
However, the criteria for reimbursement is not whether Thompson and Handley were found guilty or not guilty, but whether they did or did not, engage in "individual willful misconduct or bad faith" (Southampton Bylaws, Article VII, Section 1). This decision is not recorded in the minutes.
This decision requires hearing from witnesses which the Board refuses to do, we still haven’t received the annual audit report, and if Thompson and Handley’s version of what happened on October 1, 2005 is different from that of the witnesses, we may even be looking at a case of fraud — a criminal offense.
If you’re interested in getting to the bottom of this matter, and recovering the $8885, please copy or cut out the statement below, sign, it print your name and address (joint owners must both sign), and return it to Enver Masud, 1707B S Hayes St., Arlington, VA 22202.
********************************
THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITION:
Within 60 days the Board of Directors, Southampton Condominium, shall convene in open session to (1) hear Julie Carole Handley’s and Linda K. Thompson’s claim, (2) obtain testimony of witnesses and others who have knowledge of these matters; (3) permit Association members to question participants, and (4) determine, based on the hearing record (a transcript shall be made available to Condominium owners), whether or not Handley and Thompson's conduct on October 1, 2005 constitutes "individual willful misconduct or bad faith" for which the Association is not liable.
Printed Name Signature Date
Spouse’s Name Spouse’s Signature Unit Number
********************************
For details see http://sh22202.blogspot.com/ and join our mailing list — email enver.masud@gmail.com.
Additionally, I believe we need a Board that is responsive to our needs, whose operations are transparent and lawful, which is mindful of its fiduciary duty to the owners, and which represents a broad range of knowledge and experience.
With your support we can achieve these goals. The following changes in the operation of Southampton Condominium will help us move toward them:
• If an Annual Meeting cannot be organized for lack of a quorum, the meeting will be adjourned as permitted in the Bylaws Article IV, Section 6. This option has been used in the past — the current Board has not exercised this option to obtain a quorum.
• Establish an Elections Committee to encourage participation and assure fairness. One suggestion is a “Meet the Candidates” event, held about one week before Annual Meetings, where candidates are given sufficient time to informally answer questions.
• Establish a Condominium Service Request Book (or online file), available for viewing by all homeowners, which tracks the status of service requests by members. This was a part of the management contract when the Condominium was established. Issues that cannot be resolved by the Management Agent should be placed on the agenda for the next Board meeting.
CASTING MORE VOTES WORKS AGAINST YOUR TOP CHOICES
IF YOU CAN’T COME TO THE ANNUAL MEETING, SEND YOUR PROXY TO
ENVER MASUD, 1707B S. HAYES ST., ARLINGTON, VA 22202
Friday, September 19, 2008
Candidate excluded from election
My letter to Jess Watkins, Association Secretary, regarding the omission of my candidate statement follows:
I just received the proxy forms and candidate statements from CMS. My statement is not in the package, and my name is not on the proxy form.
My candidate statement was submitted in the form requested, and on time.
Please cite the Association's legal authority (Condominium Act, Declaration, Bylaw, etc.) that justifies the removal of my name from the list of candidates.
Enver Masud
1707B South Hayes St.
Arlington, VA 22202
I just received the proxy forms and candidate statements from CMS. My statement is not in the package, and my name is not on the proxy form.
My candidate statement was submitted in the form requested, and on time.
Please cite the Association's legal authority (Condominium Act, Declaration, Bylaw, etc.) that justifies the removal of my name from the list of candidates.
Enver Masud
1707B South Hayes St.
Arlington, VA 22202
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
