|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 14, 2016 6:01:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Oct 14, 2016 14:09:35 GMT -5
You Have Been Hoodwinked Baby...
"Now, What Are You Going To Do About It?"
16RC 
|
|
|
|
Post by pestcontrol on Oct 15, 2016 7:50:11 GMT -5
Is it possible that there is even more on the agenda than simply meets the eye? Word has it a Board member will be resigning due to health problems allowing the SLohA Board to appoint someone. Recommendation: Rikki Cater of 6 Stonefly would be my choice. How about it Board? |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 19, 2016 10:08:25 GMT -5
KCNetwork's Internet Towers--which the Board continues to refer to as SLohA's towers--was discussed vaguely and uncertainly.
Bottom Line: There is NO contract/lease agreement between SLohA and KCNetwork. This was only alluded to by a board resolution to adopt such a contract when all the I's are dotted and the T's are crossed. This punctuating exercise has been going on for over a year.
The Board essentially unanimously passed a motion to adopt a contract when it was available. This is also called a "board resolution" and is non-binding in a legal arena.
( A new restriction on the use of common property ie KCNetwork's occupation of our common property with its private commercial activity and business equipment is not possible, per Covenants (which may or may not come into play).A contract which burdens owners with a NEW financial obligation requires a vote of Members per Bylaws. Members also have the right to vote the contract out at the meeting following the one in which the contract was actually entered into per FS720 and/or legally cH allenge it as "unfair" under FS617. The Motion serves only to state an intention of THIS board. Of course, FS720 may be moot if revitalization is reversed by the courts.)
Only a few terms were mentioned; the towers on SLohA property are for the exclusive use of KCNetwork, though Owners can contract with anyone they like such as Hughes, Exceede, Frontier and perhaps Highlander. There were two owner comments on this subject.
We would continue to get hotspot at the Clubhouse and the previously closed hotspot at the H all would be reopened. It was unclear to me if that was going to require an annual fee and password for that service but I suspect that it would. One would not have to be an active or participating member of CHUG to sign up for hotspot; only pay the $10. SLohA would continue to get "free" internet".
There was no mention of SLohA being compensated for allowing stab's equipment to occupy our common property. An office internet connection and a hotspot is not a fair quid pro quo. Land leases for towers involve thousands of dollars in other public and private arenas.
The Lease/contract would make KCNetwork solely liable under its own insurance policy for any damage done to SLohA premises by its equipment. Board stated that documentation of terms is pending; part of the i's and t's, I suppose. I also suspect this is the sticking point. (SLohA also maintains that it is covered under its umbrella policy, but my reading of the actual policy suggests otherwise. Even it were covered, a claim would probably result in non-renewal or price hikes as happened with our other insurances like D & O after SLohA lost its lawsuits.)
ANY future contract records request for the Lease/Contract should also request all documentation referenced in the terms, ie. stab's insurance policy.
Said lease would be for 5 years.
No one else can put an antenna on KCNetwork's towers except KCNetwork.
The only change here is a change in communicating a "done-deal" perception among the Owners. Very little new information was released, except for the liability provision and specified lease term. Other provisions mentioned were what happens in the event the KCNet ceases to operate.
Stay tuned for update next year!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Oct 19, 2016 10:44:34 GMT -5
Just More of The Same Old Crap in a Different Flavor !
It is no wonder Board Meeting attendance is less then 5% of SLR's population...
16RC
|
|
Expose
Pilgrim
"Always Seek The Truth"
Posts: 43
|
Post by Expose on Oct 19, 2016 21:12:50 GMT -5
Why Give KCNetwork This Sweet Heart Deal !
It Smells So Bad...
It Does Not Matter How You Sugar Coat This Deal, It Still Reeks Of A Insider Deal.
Do You Remember This Open Forum Meeting?
(quote)
July 24, 2015 Open Forum Meeting ...
Part 2 of the Meeting; HighlanderData responses in BLUE
Index 18:52
Is there any written document of any kind that says S-bag owns the towers? That's what I'd like to know.
I'd like to know that. If S-bag owns the towers-I've asked that question, it is up to y'all to make the decision...
I think we should know if S-bag owns the towers or does stab own the towers? Now we have board members here who should be able to answer that question I would think.
Brnd: It's been answered several times, Chrly. S-bag does own the towers. They were given to S-bag. He is drawing up documents now because people requested it and we couldn't find it. We'll get documents.
So if he decides to pull out , the towers stay here.
Brnd: Exactly. He owns the equipment on the towers.
I was just looking through this (stab's CHUG post) and I saw it somewhere and yes apparently he says he did give the towers to S-bag but he also retained an exclusive right to keep everyone else off of them. So you couldn't allow me on your towers. I just saw that in here somewhere
But there's no paperwork...
Bracewell reads from stab's CHUG post:
“To make these expenditures, KCNet required first right of refusal for any other devices on these towers due to potential inter radio interference issues and a need to keep the wind load on a tower under control...
And where's the paperwork?
I think the FCC would have...
No, the FCC doesn't touch these. A privately-owned tower like this, FCC doesn't touch, under 200' the FAA doesn't care and if there is no FCC licensed gear they don't care.
Then you couldn't use the towers?
No, according to Bb...
According to this, it would be a S-bag call.
No No not according to what you just said. If he doesn't have that written somewhere...
He put the dollar up and as far as we know he owns the towers and if he hasn't given them, we don't have any documentation and if he does have the documentation then he's gonna write that in there.
The way I understand it you are proposing to come in a provide the same service for the same price
Yes
How long will that price be locked in?
Prices are not locked for me or him or anyone...
(Side discussion about the nature of business and that the internet market seems to have established a market price where all providers, to stay competitive, are offering very similar prices for similar service to operate effectively and long term)
And, as an engineer with Brighthouse, I can tell you that Brighthouse will not compete with Coast—it's a handshake agreement where you can't have two cable providers in the same system. They will fight Verizon FIOS
I had a thought and it just disappeared...laughter
AT&T will never come in here. They have a very Sm all package 5mgb with limits. They don't have any plant and the plant is needed for cable above and under ground. AT& T has no plant in Polk County. It is Brighthouse, Coast and Verizon. Brighthouse has current analog service in Walk in Water, Nalcrest and that area but there is no two-way communication and it cannot carry high speed internet or TV.
There's rumblings that they are already pulling permits to upgrade that and I can't get a straight answer out of them—even from friends because it affects property prices like an insider trader deal like if they told me they were upgrading in 6 months, I could start buying property and causes property value to go up.
Visitor from South Shore:
Kay c has been down a LOT lately and they put up two towers and they're just stuck in the ground and they said they were going to be put in cement but so far they Hayvn't been and we're at a loss as to why it keeps going out. Do you come over into South Shore?
Yes.
For the same price? Visitor discusses pricing package currently and discusses her Vonage phone service that she wants to keep and wants to know if HighlanderData system will work with Vonage phones.
Yes, I just installed 4 Vonage phones last night in Babson Park and they work like a champ.
As far as the towers in the ground, I would be scared to get on a tower like that. I've climbed 200' towers but …
They are in the middle of the driveway entrance
OK, yes, I noticed them tonight when I pulled out of the gas station.
Does anyone know if Bb stab pays anything to S-bag?
Brnd; No but the internet service at the office and the cameras are free.
Sounds pretty inexpensive to me.
That ain't much.
I'll do that deal. <laughter> Seriously, if I could get my foot in the door I would provide free office internet if I could put my antennas on your house for free..<more laughter>
Brnd: He also provides a hot spot at clubhouse
We have hot spots all over the place out here...
Can you use the large tower just outside the park on SR60?
The large commercial tower space is highly sought after and very expensive; for me to put my gear on that tower would cost $5-8K a month—just for the tower rental. I am a one man business and cannot carry cost of commercial rental. That's why I put up a minimum number of towers to efficiently service my customers.
What happens to service if you or stab dies?
If the fiber goes to his home, then someone would have to buy his home and continue to run the business from his home. I have a daughter who is en engineering student but there is no guarantee she will want the business.
That's why he (stab) wants the beach house tower.
Fiber feed is not something you can just unplug and move, it is extremely expensive.
If Bb stab's house berns down, southeast Polk county and NONE of his customers will have internet service until the house and the servers are rebuilt and replaced.
The advantage I have is, if I were run over by a car, I am in a commercial location and a commercial business. Any person with technical knowledge could come in an take over the operation and wouldn't have to buy someone's home.
I think that is why he wants to move the tower to the beach house
You still have the problem of fiber feed from the house to the Beach; I have a hard time believing that Level 3 put fiber in your home; that would be against every rule in the book.
His wife lives there would take over his business and then his son in law.
If he gave the towers to the resort he's not stupid and would not let anyone just come and use use them. I think that has to be checked out further.
Of course. In a worse case scenario, I'll start footing the bill and put up a tower at your house if you say OK and give me permission to put up a 50' tower on your personal property. You let me do that and I'll give you free internet and I'll start serving all your neighbors. That's what I'm doing in a lot of places now.
What I would interpret by one of the statements is the towers were not free; they were put up with conditions of returns on investment with the towers and claiming exclusive right--and claiming he gave them to us he didn't give them to us! He allowed us to put them up there and no one else can use them without his approval.
That's what it sounds like to me.
Brnd: Where did you get that from?
The antennas on the towers still belong to Bb
That's what he wrote in his document.
There no more room on those towers..
There are towers here that I would not climb-you couldn't pay me enough to climb one of those tower.
If you put up towers in S-bag, you would probably want that kind of arrangement too (lock down towers). The towers would be for your use only.
Not necessarily. I have been in business a long time. I welcome competition. If someone can do it better than me –more power to ya buddy! I would lock my tower down safety-wise. I would lock my tower down once we hit the maximum wind load-we're done. That's where my break point would be.
Does anyone know if any of the board members have financial involvement in Bb stab's business?
I don't know the answer to that one. I am a sole proprietorship.
<Noisy scuffling heard>
Gary took mic: That is not an issue here; the Board's financial involvement with Kay c is an internal matter and the purpose of this meeting is not to find out about individual financial matters. It is to discuss the possibility of having competition in S-bag. There are at least two things that can happen with competition; The quality of service goes UP and the price of service goes DOWN. That's the name of the game! There is a 3rd possibility—a coalition between the two competitors.
Index 34:02
(end quote)
|
|
|
|
Post by jimherbst on Oct 19, 2016 22:07:30 GMT -5
To me, negotiating a lease agreement with KCNET is putting the cart before the horse. There is agreement on all sides that those towers located on SLohA property belong to SLohA. So before we enter into a lease agreement with any ISP, we should first circulate a Request For Proposals to find out who else would be interested in leasing those towers from us and what would they offer us for the exclusive use of our towers. Of course, KCNET would also be invited to submit a written proposal.
For the record, the City of Lake Wales receives a total annual payment of $198,000 from the five cellular companies in the area in exchange for the privilege of mounting their broadcast antennae on the City's two water towers. I did some checking among former colleagues regarding how these lease payments are calculated. From what I have learned, the typical lease payment is between 5% and 10% of the cellular carrier's monthly gross revenue. So, let's say that an ISP like KCNET has 2,000 customers at $50 per month, per customer. Let's also assume that this hypothetical ISP's customer base consists mainly of part-time residents whose subscriptions to the ISP are for only five months per year. If we do the math, SLohA would receive a tower lease payment of between $5,000 and $10,000 per month, or between $25,000 and $50,000 for a season.
Given the potential to offset our HOA fees by such a significant source of revenue, wouldn't it be prudent to at least find out if anyone else might be interested in leasing our towers?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Oct 19, 2016 22:55:21 GMT -5
With this amount of money involved, it sure makes one wonder about any back-room deals. We have been deceived since day one. How could anyone in their right mind trust any of the players in this organization. The residents have never had a say in this cunning take over of our common property. Jm I like your idea...
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 20, 2016 14:16:38 GMT -5
Summary of Board Meeting: audio link: 2016 Oct BOD MeetingFirst, the board did not summon the Sheriff for police presence/protection. No corrections or additions to the Agenda. Minutes from last BOD meeting approved. Manager says people were crossing into SLohA property so to maintain SLohA privacy a fence was erected. In the course of that job, they removed 2 trees. Water infiltration data is nearly complete. Spa resurfacing starts tomorrow. Followup communication from Mr Henry concerning towers: - Internet tower height can be extended to 100' according to land modification -No difference between an active and inactive tower; the cost of insurance is the same. -SLohA assumes all liability if towers fall or do damage which is covered under current policy without additional payment. -S-bag paid the permit fees ($400) for the towers erected by stab -No SLohA man hours expended during this fiscal year on the towers, but in the past, man hours have been spent on tower stabilization, guy wires etc. Utility companies have been notified about the deplorable condition of their boxes on our property. President: assumes bigger crowd at meeting (he is on teleconference and cannot see about 30 people and 4 directors. said Pet er just had surgery but is attending by phone and Frns's wife just had major surgery and he will not be returning until after Christmas. Says he must appoint chairman to Election Committee by Nov 1; appointed T Roof. S u e Beagle, who puts the S-bag Express together for the past 17 years, will retire that job after this year. V Pres. Gave a weather report and welcome committee report. Several new owners and many not yet in the park for the season. 7 new homes came into the park. Secretary Correspondence: 3 letters: Owner: Wants Board to reverse its denial of the hot dog wagon for the applicants. They will donate 20% of sales revenue to SLR Clubs and will not compete with hot dog social. Secretary said that she had just been handed all applicable permits and commercial insurance documentation by the the Applicants that very morning. Owner: Reconsider letting the hot dog brothers sell hot dogs during the season. Owner: Raise CH temp to 78 degrees in the evening during activities. It is freezing. They have been begging and complaining about how cold it is and no one will listen or do anything. Temps are set on 71 degrees and that is too cold; most people play cards wearing jackets and shiver. There is no access in CH to adjust the temps. Chap indicated that some change had been made but it is inadequate and must follow up. The temps need to be adjusted EVERY evening except perhaps for Line Dancing. Treasurer: Mumbles and barely audible. Rattles off large numbers followed by "overbudget" in most categories. President comments that SLohA continues to address defend owners against expenses in the legal area but as of now, there are no updates and they are continuing to await decisions. Ongoing Business : Per Chap; plant manager position will have completed job description by Oct 21, Boyd will be 2nd in command. SLohA will advertise position to the outside world in Nov and they intend to hire a new Plant Manager by Dec 1. New Business: The KCNET DEAL. Proposed agreement not described with much specificity and summarized on a separate post. The action taken at the meeting was described as "BOD must approve moving forward with finalizing the agreement between Bb stab and the attorneys." Committees: President gave Board a list of 7 Standing Committees that he wants. He is looking for people to handle the Sound system which overfalls the Communication/Technology Committees and these have had no formal operation for 1 1/2 years. He wants different handling this year with two purposes: 1- Describe the Committee Mandate ie the Job Description and 2- to communicate availability of committees to ALL owners who apply. States that we need to replace older folks with new generation of younger people to take responsibility. Committees will consist of applicants and appointees T Roof commented about the crucial nature of the Governing Documents Committee which was vital to moving forward post-revitalization. He said he wants to be assured that the board understands need for a wide diversity of opinion and that the Committee might have "a very different look" that the typical committee. leery agreed SLohA is in limbo with Governing Documents and that Bingo was a state-regulated activity overseen by a Committee/Board Member. Owner Comments: Owner: Are CH and MH continuing WIFI? Not one seemed to know a definitive answer but Chap "thought" that wifi was available in both. Here's an editorial update: NO SIGNAL available to CHUG members in Memorial H all, but there is an open signal in Clubhouse. I know. I just tried it and am using the CH signal now.
Owner: Is there any other internet service allowed in community besides KCNet?
leery answers there are many internet providers with service and fees comparable to KCNet and owners are not required to get their service from KCNet.
Owner: Offers that Frontier sent a letter offering internet service for $34.99 and last year, a guest who she did not recall the name of said that he could offer service to Saddlebag (ed. if stab would allow him to use His/Our tower.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Dick Tracy on Oct 20, 2016 19:22:52 GMT -5
(quote)
Manager says people were crossing into SLohA property so to maintain SLohA privacy a fence was erected.
In the course of that job, they removed 2 trees. (end quote)
What is Chap taking about when he addresses the fence. Are we are all talking about the Front Property Corner and extending the fence.
Jhn and friends erected a fence then 3/4 days later someone removed said fence, so our neighbors have access to their new proposed home near the front entrance to SLR.
It looks like Chap maybe a little confused or is it me?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 23, 2016 13:00:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 23, 2016 13:02:12 GMT -5
As more and more of our seasonal residents return, S-bag will be running at full speed again. Several of the clubs have already posted upcoming events on the website. The Women’s Club will be holding their first meeting on Nov., 4th. and other activities will be following soon thereafter.
All us are looking forward to being reunited with our S-bag neighbors and to enjoying sunny days in the community that we love.
leery
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 23, 2016 13:03:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 23, 2016 13:05:02 GMT -5
|
|
GTO
Addict
Life is Tough ! It's even tougher when you're stupid ! Jhn Wayne J ohn Wayne
Posts: 198
|
Post by GTO on Oct 25, 2016 20:56:54 GMT -5
Dick Tracy, you are correct, Jhn and friends did erect a fence to the far property corner. Then Jhn did a about face, 20 hrs later the fence was moved back 50 ft.
Most residents did not see the quick retreat of the 6 ft. fence.
Just imagine The Ledger Headline, S-bag Lake Resort Extends Property Fence, Blocks Access to those new neighbors on S-bag Lake Road.
Great PR, just as bad as Cross Burning in Front Yard of those people living on Silverside.
Old white man mentality.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimherbst on Oct 26, 2016 12:42:50 GMT -5
I don't know about Polk County's building code but, up North, one needs a permit to erect a six foot boundary fence. Moreover, the permit application must be accompanied by a boundary survey.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 31, 2017 11:58:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 31, 2017 12:08:38 GMT -5
AFter I posted, I got an immediate email that the Oct 2016 Minutes were not posted on the forum. I had inadvertantly overlooked the real minutes thinking the owner update was "it". My bad.
This post refutes the Minutes: I call them a LIE! And I will tell you why.
The motion stated approval for a CONTRACT agreed by "our" attorney and Bb stab. There was NO contract involving either the Attorney or Bb stab. The Attorney was not identified. Who was the attorney purportedly agreeing to the contract on behalf of SLohA?
The other party in the false motion, Bb stab, is a convicted felon of bank fraud is not likely to be fronting any more companies and showing income since he had millions in restitution to pay. In any case, his name is not present on Annual Filings or the Articles of Incorporation for KCNetwork. If one were not aware of the history of this scam, they would ask "Who is Bb stab"?
The contract was signed months after the false Motion. The eventual "contract" was between leery listerine and Virginia stab and executed Dec 6, 2016--almost two months after the true purpose discussed at the meeting AND qualified by phone by Toneesha Shroeder ie to "continue to followup lease negotiations". You cannot vote on a contract in October that did not exist until Dec 2016. The discussion AND vote was a resolution to continue to follow up on developing the Lease Agreement.
Don't believe me. Listen to the audio.
There has never been a ratification of the contract between leery listerine and Virginia stab.
Shortly after my initial post on this, I was cH allenged by a board member. I told him I was there and I heard all the discussion on this issue. I recorded audio and reviewed it before I summarized the meeting on this forum. I told him to review the audio posted on this thread. The audio is clear. Toneesha's clarification of the purpose of the motion was clear. In fact, Toneesha emphasized that this was NOT a vote on a contract! Jnsn's false motion does not reflect the reality of what was discussed in the meeting. The facts are there and they are unalterable.
The Minutes are a LIE. There is no approved contract between SLohA and KCNetwork. I never heard back from the Board director.
Members are again being deceived by the Board and aided by unnamed attorneys and fellow member Bb stab.
|
|
|
|
Post by AnonEnvironmentalist on May 31, 2017 15:48:41 GMT -5
The previous post of admin begs the questions:
Did these board members do illegal things?
Can these board members be re-called or impeached?
Can these board members be charged with a crime?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 1, 2017 20:37:34 GMT -5
anonenvironmentalist posted"
1. Unknown. Evidence suggests at least "unethical".
2. Recalled YES. 10% of Members sign petition to recall. That is 79 owners. 50%+ members must affirm recall.
3. It is more likely that SLohA will be charged with a crime if one (or more) has been committed and it is brought to the State's Attorney Office for prosecution.
New condo reforms will be operational on July 1 this year and calls for criminal penalties against corporate players and directors who engage in various Corporate Malfeasance. There are many other condo changes which will penalize bad actor board directors which are likely to be introduced in the next Legislative session for HOA's.
|
|
