Recap: LCC Board Meeting, October 20, 2026
The short version
October's board meeting ran about two hours, and members talked more than usual: in two comment periods and, a few times, in the middle of the meeting itself. The thread running through the night was the 14-day notice rule. A member opened by asking the board to follow it. The board applied this to its own agenda, leading to a discussion about how to best support new lake committee initiatives.
Also: the data policy was postponed again, the ACC gained a second board member for approvals, the board approved the management company's compliance recommendations, and microphones stayed off for members during executive session.
The rule that cut both ways
Community comment opened right after the board approved September's board meeting minutes. The first member to speak asked the board to look again at one decision in those minutes: putting the technology committee on hiatus. That decision came from a motion from the floor, with no notice to the membership. The member cited RCW 64.90.445, the same state law the board uses for its meeting rules. Under subsection (2)(f), board meetings need at least 14 days' notice stating the time, date, place and agenda.
Later, the rule came up from the other direction. A member from the lake committee asked when to bring items forward so street cleaning initiatives could begin. The board expressed that RCWs bound them to a 14 day notice requirement to approve the funds.
So in one evening, the notice rule was raised by a member asking the board to slow down, and applied by the board to an item members wanted to speed up. That is what a consistent rule looks like, and it is why the technology committee question still matters: the same standard would apply to that floor motion. Strictly, the statute requires the notice to state the agenda and allow members a meaningful opportunity to comment before a vote. This application is consistent with the board's community comment rules and the intent of open meeting laws.
The lake committee didn't leave empty-handed. The board took street cleaning as an information item and came back to it later. During the second comment period, a member suggested a special meeting to approve the lake committee's funds in one step. The board's answer was that committees can already use their own budget funds. That was a consensus, not a vote, so nothing new was adopted.
A finance committee member reported that they are currently looking at developing policies for committee spending and tracking, as those policies have not yet been established.
A hand raised at the right moment
During the common areas manager's report, the manager mentioned something he was working on. A member raised his hand. The president called on the member to speak.
The secretary objected. Under a policy set in January, over the objections of members present, members do not join discussion during the meeting. The president recognized the member anyway, and the member offered help to the contractor.
It was a small moment. The meeting ran two hours. Had the member waited for the comment period, or sent an email the next day, the moment and maybe the offer would have passed.
Hands went up at other points too, including during the disaster plan when members briefly touched on the new Street Team initiative from the Lake and Security committees. This is a neighborhood watch, communication, and cleanup initiative following best practice recommendations for security, organization, and emergency preparedness.
State law sets a floor for owner comment: at least 15 minutes at the start of each meeting, with at least 90 seconds per owner, before the board votes (RCW 64.90.445(2)(e)). Anything beyond that floor is board policy and a decision in meeting design.
Also during comment
A member submitted written comments on the organization chart draft and the data privacy policy, both of which came up later in the meeting.
Another member raised newsletter printing costs. The advertising contracts require the association to print black and white copies for every household at least quarterly, through August of next year. Each new annual contract extends that commitment, so the printing question is really a contract question, and one to look at before the next renewal.
A board member submitted a letter as correspondence and asked that it be read aloud; he reminded the board several times to take correspondence before it moved on. The letter said board members may have worked on the president's newsletter message together, but the president added wording of his own, and the writer did not approve of using the newsletter to disparage a neighbor or their motives.
Also on the agenda
Announcements: the LCC website has been updated to include election information. A prototype of a new locking mechanism for the West Park gate was reported; the current lock has had problems this year.
Data policy: the board postponed a decision pending further review. It has postponed the policy at each meeting since July. The board noted that written comments from a member arrived late and that they would need time to incorporate the recommendations.
Organization chart draft: the board reviewed the LCC organization draft. Comments on it also arrived late. The outcome is pending the minutes.
Annual meeting: the board discussed how the annual meeting will run.
ACC composition: the ACC exercises the powers of the board, and its decisions require an additional board member. A board member volunteered for that role and will make ACC approvals alongside the existing member.
Traffic islands and streetlights: the board discussed trimming trees around the islands so the city utility can reach the streetlights, and asked each group to maintain its own islands. This will be easier with street teams that the lake and security committees are developing together, an initiative that came up in the disaster plan discussion.
Newsletter printing: the board discussed printing costs in relation to page length. Printing remains required under the advertising contracts.
Behind the closed door
The board expected about an hour in executive session for the posted topics: personnel issues, management company compliance recommendations. It opened community comment early before going in.
A member asked whether attendees could keep microphones and cameras on while they waited, so neighbors could talk to each other. Microphones have been off during executive session since May.
One board member supported the request, noting that people at an in-person meeting can talk while they wait. The secretary replied by stating that board meetings are not community events, and that some members had texted her that they did not want microphones on. Five members then raised their hands during comment, though they were not recognized by the president.
Members with a direct line to board directors had the privilege of not only being heard, but of having their requests take precedence.
Coming out of executive session, the board announced it had updated job descriptions for contractors. A member pointed out that this was not a topic for executive session. The board agreed but did not elaborate; the president said details would come later. State law allows executive sessions for personnel matters (not job description adjustment) but bars any final vote or action inside them, and every vote must be recorded in the minutes (RCW 64.90.445(2)(a), (2)(b) and (4)).
The board then voted to approve the management company's compliance recommendations, which were on the agenda, and adjourned.
Comments